Contents:   1.  A little Antisemitism
                    2. Legal Corruption in New York
                    3. Obscure profits of Christs Passion
                    4. Was Hitler Jewish?
                    5. Zundel is no champion of civil rights
                    6. Dialectical thinking
                    7. The Unmentionable Source of Terrorism 
                    8. Nazi writer may have created Nabokov's Lolita
                    9. US flags down in Iraq



For Immediate Release

March 22, 2004


Mr. President:

My attention has been drawn to a quote from Jay Lefkowitz, your Deputy
Assistant for Domestic Policy. The quote attributed to Lefkowitz is, "Deep down, I
believe that a little anti-Semitism is good for the Jews-reminds us who we are".

Following the same logic one might say a little Cancer is good for
people-reminds them how good it is to be healthy.

If as reported, this Lefkowitz quote from the magazine section of the New
York Times is correct, it would seem this man, with the twisted logic, is a poor
choice for a Presidential Advisor.

Mr. President, it is time for a change.


David L. Israel
1200 Mira Mar suite1001

Medford, Oregon 97504
To remove Jay Lefkowitz:


Or e-mail the President:

Read his quote to the New York Times:

"Deep down, I believe that a little anti-Semitism is a good thing for the
Jews - reminds us who we are." --Jay Lefkowitz (NYT Magazine. 12 F. 1995, 65) Jay
Lefkowitz is now Deputy assistant to the President for Domestic Policy. A
sick man! Don't you think?
Israel Raiding the U.S. Treasury
With friends like Israel, who needs enemies?

By Ronald Forthofer
The author Ronald Forthofer, Ph.D. visited Israel/Palestine twice. He is a
retired professor and was a Green Party candidate for Congress from Colorado in
2000 and for Governor of Colorado in 2002.
February 16, 2003

Like a thief in the night, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is planning a
raid on the U.S. Treasury to the tune of $12 to $14 billion.
Read on:

Peace is patriotic!
Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
253 West 72nd street #1711
New York, NY 10023
Available for Talk-Radio interviews 24hours 212-787-7891
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, 20 March 2004 02:16

Subject: Press Release

Oath Coordinator Resigns: Corruption In Courts Is Too Entrenched

Calls For A Federal Investigation

 Chestertown, New York- The coordinator for the New York State Oath of Office Project June Maxam, tearfully confided yesterday (March 18) that she has resigned from her investigations into the explosive judicial scandal rocking New York courts.

   “Something happened to me yesterday, it's like a piece was taken out of me, it's physical, it's like I had a stroke or shock, I am in just a state of total disbelief not only that the court totally disregarded the truth but obviously wasn't interested in the truth.

    Maxam is responsible for uncovering nearly 82 percent of judges across New York who are violating the state Constitution and New York State law for failing to file their oath and or undertaking as mandated. “The situation in our courts extends beyond those in non-compliance and right smack into corruption so wide-spread there must be a federal investigation.” Maxam continued.

   “When you have solid proof of falsified transcripts and a judge and a DA who refuses to act upon it …allows this, New York has a major problem.” Maxam was appealing a four year-old harassment conviction before Glens Falls City Court Judge Tarentino.

   After a two-year delay in violation of three court orders, whe court stenographer Jayme Harvey finally produced the transcripts needed for the appeal, Maxam found that they had been falsified and could prove it by an unedited tape recording of the proceedings in question.

    But Tarantino refused to listen to the tape, refused to compare the actual transcript with the falsified transcripts and allowed the falsfied transcripts to serve as the official record.

“Tarentino isn’t even in office, nor is the special prosecutor, Gary Hobbs and Hobbs even filed a false statement with the Warren COunty District Attorney's office claiming he had filed an oath when the county clerk has certified he did not" Maxam lamented.

   “The issue here isn’t about me. Everyday I get calls from all over New York from people so extorted by our courts begging me to help expose the corruption. What they fail to understand is my investigative journalism has cost me the ability to regularly publish my paper, my advertisers were threatened with being burned out and now its gone on to the level of harassing my 86 year-old father, all in an effort to stop me from exposing the corruption. If that’s not illegal what is?  That is a total abuse and corruption of the judicial system.” 

   Maxam says that even lawyers are too afraid of the current system to act, “Judges in New York are allowed to violate our laws and lawyers are too fearful to speak-up…our Attorney General could care less that judges wield power that overextends their authority. Where is Chief Justice Judith Kaye? Does it matter to her that her fellow justices are violating not just public officers law, but trashing both our state and federal Constitutions…apparently not.”

   Ms. Maxam’s activism to force compliance by officials has as she stated, “Put me in personal danger and I face four years in jail after having already been illegally incarcerated four times because officials willfully ignore the Bill of Rights.” When asked if she believed giving up her crusade would alleviate her legal problems, Maxam emphatically stated. “Oh, for certain. I’m a threat to their power base. They must shut me up because I have exposed them for what they are … imposters and gangsters in black robes.”

   The findings of Maxam’s investigation was hand delivered to Attorney General Spitzer who as of this date has not commented nor apparently acted to reform our justice system.

June Maxam


LUKE 11:52 "Woe unto you, lawyers!"


Judicial Reform Investigations

To unsubscribe, reply to email

----- Original Message -----
To: readers
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 6:02 AM
Subject: [shamireaders] Obscure profits of Christ's "Passion"

(Always shocking, paradoxical, never boring nor politically correct, Marek G., this latter day Marcion, explores unexpected angles of the Passion. Forwarded but not endorsed - ISH) 
Obscure profits of Christs Passion

(Imitatio Judeorum and Its Glorious Results)

Marek Glogoczowski (


The release of the film “Passion” of Mel Gibson, at the end of February this year, was preceded by months of passionate media discussions, mostly centered at the issue whether this colorful relation, from Jesus Christ last half day of earthly life, has an anti-Semitic character or not. Such propaganda without doubt has helped to make a fortune by enterprising investors into filmed version of “Passion”, but surely not only money animated all these, not yet finished, deliberations about the supposed history of last moments of most important Christian hero. (Moslems believe that Apostles had a delusion, seeing their teacher at the cross, according to their interpretation, on the cross was hanged someone else, while prophet Issa escaped from hostile Israel, and ended his life peacefully in beautiful Indian Kashmir.)

Looking at the contemporary mass-media phenomena in a cool way, any film is, by its definition, only a play of shadows, which excites spectators self-imprisoned inside dark, Platonian cavern-like cinema halls. The film is thus – Gibson's “Passion” included – only a ‘doxa’, a delusion of senses, as called it ancient Greek philosophers. But what kind of wisdom – a deeper, not directly touching our senses message – we have to search for, behind filmed by Gibson cruel images of the misery of last moments of Jesus?

In order o answer this question, it is worth to recall what ancient philosophers had to say about the cruel fate of people who, like Jesus of Nazareth, dreamed of re-organization of their societies in possibly just manner. It is not so surprising that already in “Republic” of Plato, which was written roughly four hundred years before the supposed Christ crucification, we find the pre-figuration of tortures of Jesus Christ during his last dozen of hours. Describing the standard behavior of “most unjust” people, one of participants of this antique dialogue, Plato's brother Glaucon observes:

These who place the unjust above the righteous will say that the righteous, which I pictured, will be flagellated, tortured, charged with chains, that they will burn out his eyes, and finally, after suffering all these wrongdoings he will be crucified” (lit. impale – “La Republique” II, 361, Flammarion, Paris 1966).

Glaucon argues “that by committing these most unjust acts he (the most unjust person) earns the greatest reputation of being a righteous one, and in case he makes an error, he used to speak with eloquence in order to throw out the guilt (onto the innocent man-scapegoat)”.

The chapter II of “Republic” gives thus the outline of the perfidious – but highly efficient – behavior of “most unjust” people. In subsequent chapters of this dialogue Socrates argues that this highly unethical situation – when unjust men "heal wounds" of their reputation by inflicting sufferances to righteous people – is possible only in totally corrupt and unjust societies, where elites have not been trained enough to feel the repulsion towards such perversion of ethics. In the light of Plato's "Republic", the cruel history of crucification of truth-telling Jesus of Nazareth, has to be considered as the result of the ‘training in cognitive corruption’ of the theocracy of antique Israel. This ruling caste Jesus of Nazareth openly denounced, as "thieves and robbers", and thus no wonder that sincere followers of Moses punished him in agreement with prescriptions of their Holy Robbers’ Law (Torah).

One of these Mosaic "thieves and robbers" was without doubt the prophet known as (deutero) Isaiah, who was writing roughly at the same time as Plato. This famous prophet proposed (to careful readers of his lucubrations) the “just way”, in which swindlers and criminals of all kinds may “dress themselves” in appearances of righteous citizens. According to Isaiah's recipe, in order to appear as a man of justice and of a good reputation, a master (a “Lord”) has to profit skillfully from the misfortune of his “suffering servant” (or eventually of his own son). Moreover, this “Lord’s servant” (or son) has to accept his fate of a ‘redeemer’ with the lamb-like, imbecile resignation. Literally, Isaiah wrote: “He was oppressed and he was afflicted, yet he not opened his mouth; like a lamb that is lead to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is dumb, so he not opened his mouth. By oppression and judgement he was taken away.” (Is. 54, 7-8; isn’t it a kind of a repetition of the quoted above opinion of Glaucon from “Republic”?

This antique Hebrew recipe for creating the appearance of righteousness – by an exaltation of the redemptory value of the sufferance of “God’s lamb” – has become, with centuries, the most important dogma of the official Christian Church. The “voluntary suffering of Christ (who has become for us a model to follow)”, was for example the theme of teaching of our Catholic Pope, during the General Audience at Vatican on January 14 this year. John Paul II stressed during this audience that he only repeats teachings of his predecessor, Apostle Peter, who, in his “I-st Letter”:

“has drawn a worth of admiration synthesis of Christ’s passion, referring to words and images of Isaiah, applied to the person of suffering servant, and read anew from the messianic point of view through the ancient Christian tradition. (According to this Tradition) Jesus is the immolatory lamb without blemish, whose precious blood has been spilled for our redemption. He is a living stone thrown out by builders, nevertheless chosen by God to be a “corner stone”, which joins together the “spiritual edifice” which is the Church. He is the righteous, who sacrifices himself for unrighteous, this in order to lead them to God. (...) St. Peter pictures Christ as a model to contemplate and to imitate, as a “program”, which is necessary to realize, and as an example, which is necessary to follow without hesitation, mimicking his choice. (...) This idea, although set up in different words, corresponds to the teaching of St. Paul about the baptism, in which we are born anew as a new creation, by an immersion in the mystery of passion, death and glory of Christ.” (Warsaw journal “Nasz Dziennik”, Jan. 15. 2004, p.8)

The fact that the technique of “redemption” was known already centuries before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth, inspires us to ask, where from got Isaiah his fertile idea that by sufferances inflicted upon a sinless (without blemish) human scapegoat, it is possible to “heal wounds” (it means, to obliterate sins and crimes) of believers in this cruel story? Our illustrious ecclesiastics maintain that this is a mystery (vide Pope), but this is not a mystery for lawyers who studied methods, which unscrupulous people use to “dress themselves” into doings of these righteous ones. This is not a mystery also for these of Christians, who thoroughly studied Gospels, where Our Savior tells his disciples that “all who come before me were thieves and robbers”. This opinion suggests that by an analysis of the behavior of contemporary gangsters we may find wherefrom originated essential mysteries of the Judeo-Christianity. (To these “mysteries” I include, in particular, the incorporation of pastoral letters of Peter and Paul into the canonic Christian Bible – this was definitively achieved during the Council of Nice in 325.)

As the method of ‘redemption’ of criminal acts, by casting them on an innocent man-scapegoat is considered, I have in memory a story I’ve read about 20 years ago in Poland. A member of a large, multigenerational family of village dwellers had committed a serious crime in vicinity, and the police soon discovered that all traces lead to the house of this particular family. But the son, who did this crime (a murder, as I remember) had a wife with several kids, and moreover, he had a very well paid job, so the “large family council” has decided that the youngest, not yet married son, has to admit the crime, and in this way he will save his important (for the family budget) brother. For all family members were witnessing against him, the innocent young men went to prison, and being young and attractive soon become a sexual “puppet” to his cellmates. After a year or two he has become psychically ill, and thanks to prison’s psychiatrist his sinister case of a “savior”, of the crime-ridden family, has reached the press.

This is not an isolated case. In 1999, soon after the “liberation” of Kosovo Mafia by NATO “Salvation Army”, I’ve read in Polish newspaper about the method of “redemption of crimes” practiced by Albanian gangsters, who usually have extremely numerous families, up to twelve children, as it was the case of this prolific mythical Patriarch of Israel, Jacob. These Albanian, super-fertile families select in advance one of their members (usually the least aggressive one) to be killed by others in case the family runs into troubles – in front of the tribunal all family members solidarize blaming the dead member for the crime committed, and in this simple way the family escapes the justice. (Of course, for scapegoats they choose in advance these among them, who have the preponderancy to tell the truth, for these are dangerous ones, who eventually may become traitors of family – or clan’s – criminal secrets. This was in deep Antiquity the fate of not only of Jesus of Nazareth, but also of the truth-telling Joseph, whom other sons of biblical Jacob intended to kill.)

I do postulate that these practices of clans (“families”) of unscrupulous gangsters of Antiquity the prophet Isaiah has “spiritualized” and purposefully inserted into the Hebrew Bible. Subsequently, Funding Fathers of the Church, apostles Peter and Paul, have made from this, prepared by prophet Isaiah recipe, a “living stone thrown out by (mentally healthy) builders, a ‘corner stone’, which joints together the ‘spiritual edifice’ which is the Church”. This is the most catholic opinion of the Pope, who at the General Audience at Vatican on January 15 has told visitors that Jesus “is the righteous, who sacrificed himself for unrighteous, this in order to lead them to God”.

If we dare to observe that “Unique G-d” of thieves and robbers is Mammon, the meaning of Christ’s passion becomes suddenly very transparent. Jesus “was oppressed and he was afflicted”, he was tortured and finally crucified (empaled? – as suggests it Glaucon in Plato’s “Republic”), in order to assure the well-being of all these religoius scoundrels – to use once again Pope own words – who by an “immersion in the mystery of passion, death and glory of Christ, are born anew as a new creation.” In short, when Jews, pictured at Mel Gibson’s movie, shout “His blood on ours and our children heads!” they unconsciously dream of prolongation of their specific culture by a “baptism (by a sprinkling with precious blood of Christ) in which they will be born anew” in form of so-called “Newly born Judeo-Christians” of today.

This principal idea of St. Paul that previously pagan Christians are supposed to convert into New, Better Jews, was well understood by Fathers of the Church, in particular by St. Augustin, who in “La doctrina Christiana” gave the recipe how to proceed successfully in footprints left by Moses thieves and robbers. I’ve argued, already during the World Public Forum at Rhodes in Sept. 2003 that since the invention of “Passion” public spectacles – which happen roughly a thousand years ago, immediately after the split between the Western and Eastern Church – treasures of Vatican become quickly filled with gold and other riches collected in all converted to “the Christian faith” countries [1].

In my humble opinion this is the WISDOM hidden behind the ‘doxa’ – the appearance – of the ‘catharsis’ of participants in the recently filmed spectacle of the tragedy of mute Christ. By throwing (frequently unconsciously) onto Jews their own sins, these “born anew, as the new creation” pseudo-Christians are becoming internally serene, and thus ready for new, external conquests. At present our “Newly Born Pseudo Christians”, principally from USA, become engaged in a New Crusade against Islam, and thus is no wonder that their hardly concealed “invisible leaders” restored to socio-techniques used during First Crusades, a thousand years ago. Thanks to Israel Shamir (from Israel) I’ve learned about the Joahim Martillo’s article “The politics of Passion” [2] where the author writes:

The early development of Passion plays may correlate both with the Crusades and with the suppression of political disorder and heresy in France and Germany. There is a fairly large (mostly dubious) literature from that time period that portrays the Muslim as the ally of the Jew. Creating enough animosity to inspire French and Germans to take up arms and travel to fight in Palestine might have required a difficult staged marketing effort that involved portraying a Jewish/Judean persecution of Christ and then making claims that Muslims were Jewish allies.”

A thousand years later the geopolitical situation changed. After the suppression of heresy (communism) in Europe, Moslems have become the “terrorist danger” to Mankind. And in order to inspire Americans, Russians, Italians (Poles and so on) to travel to Middle East to fight terrorism, requires a difficult staged marketing effort: Muslims are not believers, for they believe not that Christ was crucified, and thus automatically they believe not in our Redemption. So (pseudo)Christians, acting as Paul’s ‘New, Better Jews’, are supposed to erase this heresy, saving at the same time “the Hebrew root of our Christian faith”. (Once again I repeat the recent, ultra-catholic opinion of Vatican officials.) The more perspicacious Orthodox Rabbis have grasped well this opportunity to exploit, for the Israel’s advantage, feelings of compassion of “stupid as animals” (pseudo)Christians. Already several months before the “Passion” release, the New York’s rabbi Lapin in a radio talk argued in a following way:

Right now, the most serious peril threatening Jews, and indeed perhaps all of Western Civilization, is Islamic fundamentalism. In this titanic 21st-century struggle that links Washington, D.C. with Jerusalem, our only steadfast allies have been Christians. In particular, those Christians that most ardently defend Israel and most reliably denounce anti-Semitism, happen to be those Christians most fervently committed to their faith. Jewish interests are best served by fostering friendship with Christians rather than cynically eroding them. Rejecting flagrant anti-Christianism on the part of Jews claiming to be acting on our behalf would be our wisest course as a community.” [3]

The Pope has indicated, in his speech during the audience of January 14, that the obligatory engagement of Christians (?) on the side of the Hebrew Tradition, we can trace back to Apostles Peter and Paul. But were these illustrious Fathers of Church really righteous men, or they only got their good reputation by profiting of the Jesus of Nazareth sufferance? Were these Apostles only “healing their wounds” – it means, improving their public image – by waving the cross with Jesus crucified, as does it incessantly our Pope? (In respect to this highly reputable person, since more than two decades I have an impression that he fits well the description of Pharisees and hypocrites given by the truth-telling Jesus: “(they) look like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness. So (they) outwardly appear righteous to men, but within are full of hypocrisy and iniquity” – Mat. 23, 27-28.)

In Plato’s “Republic” Socrates argues that it is indeed a hard task to behave as a righteous man, in fact one has to be trained since childhood in appropriate way (by gymnastics, music and than mathematics) to develop in himself the virtue. Moreover, one has to demonstrate righteousness during all his adult life, it is not at all possible to be “born anew, as a new creation”, as Jewish Pharisee and hypocrite Saul, after mutation into Christian Apostle Paul, deceitfully assured naive consumers of his “letters”. “Apostles Acts” inform us that the “breathing murder and threats” Saul unjustly condemned the free-thinking, “Hellenizing” Christian leader Stephen for the death by lapidation, so we can be sure – in light of not only Socrates pedagogy – that Paul hasn’t become a righteous person, also after his conversion, while he “dressed himself into an ornate” of Vicar of Crucified Christ.

The same critic holds in case of Peter. Already during Jesus life he denied Him three times, afraid of personal punishment. It is thus evident that also after the death of his temporary Teacher (rabbi), he denied him too, while menaced by secret police of Israel of his time. In “Letters of Peter” we find not a word of Jesus’ teachings, instead we have the mindless repetition of “teachings” of Isaiah, and a faithful repetition of Paul’s calls for submission of Christians to all authorities – including these most unjust ones. Both these Apostles should be thus considered as mere Jesus Traitors. The Church they have built on Christ’s crucified body (it means, on Jesus dead flesh, bones and skull) only appears (doxa) to be the one, which is promoting behaviors recommended by Evangiles.

In its deeper significance the mission of Peter & Paul is an updated continuation of the same Hebrew Tradition laid down by Isaiah and other “servants of the Lord Mammon”. It means that inside Vatican, well hidden behind the paper curtain of Gospels, dwells in security the Brigand Cavern of New, Better Jews, dreaming of the total, promised by Isaiah, planetary conquest (see for ex. Is. 60, 11-13).

It is not by an accident that all more prominent (pseudo)Christians dream loudly about the “New Jerusalem” and the “New Earth”. In order to create such dreamed by Apostle Peter “new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells” (II P. 3, 13) Fathers Pilgrims, chased from England, came to North America in 1621 with their genocide mission. About this Isaiah’s “New Earth” dreams overtly also the present Pope in his encyclical letter “Laborem exercens” of 1981. But the Socratic analysis of the text of Isaiah, where from the lure of the “shinning city on the hill”, New Jerusalem has originated, points cruelly to the fact that such “New Israel” must necessarily be the City (Polis) of the Most Unjust People. There is no way to avoid this sinister reality, towards which lead us blind “missionaries of God-Mammon”, relying on the Authority of the Bible. Simply, on sufferances of (without blemish) “God’s servants”, only empires of the wickedest people can be build. For a man, thinking in rational terms, the cross symbolizes the fate of all righteous people in a pervert society, which is the one, which worships Passion. (This is what teaches my cousin, a mountain guide, to school excursions he guides in Tatras, where in last 20 years crosses proliferated at the pollution reaching level.)

The noble, in the intention of Jesus of Nazareth, concepts of Christianity became perverted soon after the death of their Author. We can infer this already from the message of “II Letter of St. Peter”, where the aging Apostle tries to convince readers that his prophetic guidance is comparable to that of... Lucifer:

And we have the prophetic word made more sure. You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.” The morning star, planet Venus, is called in French – and possibly also in Latin – Lucifer, the one which “brings light”. And what kind of light our Apostle has brought to his “sheep”? We find it in a subsequent verse “First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” (II P. 1, 19-21.) This, directed against all broad-minded men interdiction, clearly indicates that not only Saul/Paul, but also Peter was in fact a full-breed Luciferian, wanting to keep minds of people in constant delusion with the fake light of “Scripture from God”.

Despite three years, which Peter supposedly spent in a company of Jesus, he remained a stubborn “like a mule”, narrow-minded orthodox Jew, faithful to his “ papyrus/paper Lord”, wishing not to know the triviality, which his Teacher was trying to reveal to his followers: that Holy Scriptures of Israel were written (and kept in purity through centuries) by Spiritual Gangsters, claiming themselves to be “servants of G-d”. And with the “numerous as stars on the sky” progeny of these industrious, but blind, “termites” of Antiquity we have somehow to cope today.


M.G. Zakopane, 2004-03-18


[1] See M. G. “Globalisation – but No Dialogue of Civilisations Ahead” in “World Affairs”, New Delhi, Oct.-Dec. 2003; in electronic form it is accessible in . In a longer form I developed this topic in “Lord of Ignorance and its Opus Dei”, which I e-mailed during Christmas 2003.

[2] Joahim Martillo’s “The politics of Passion”, )from Febr. 28 2004.

[3] Rabbi Daniel Lapin, a president of Towards Tradition, in 23 September 2003 Radio talk-show. /


P.S. For I do not want to be only one pointing at the true Challenge of 21-st Century, so I attach below, to these compact reflections about “mercantile uses of Passion”, a recent essay of John Kaminsky about the history of “Spiritual gangsters”.

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2004 4:47 PM
Subject: Spiritual gangsters

Spiritual gangsters

Which is more important: somebody's name or the eternal truth?

By John Kaminski

It's not the creed that's important, it's the integrity.

    It's not the name that we give to the thing we worship, it's recognizing the essence of that thing as the highest truth, the thing worth being worshipped, so that the name we put on it doesn't really matter, as long as we recognize the thing for what it is.

    We're too caught up in names, in identity, in rituals, and holiness. Piety makes me sick. Rituals bore me. What we're looking for is truth, and that can come in many guises, be from many places, and certainly have an infinite number of different names.

    Do you understand what I'm saying?

    Let me make it clearer.

    Those spiritual gangsters who were run out of Egypt all those years ago have led us in the wrong direction. And they've been abetted by holy men of all persuasions who have betrayed those who have sought sanctuary in them, solace from them. The maintenance of their own churchly business has become more important to them then the souls they're supposed to be putting at ease, to be trying to save. It's a problem with every church, synagogue and mosque that ever existed. Some of them lose their souls over it.

    Spiritual gangsters, that's the right name for them. They saw the people's need. And they took advantage of it. We have to have that home to go to, that place of rest. If we don't have it, we can't function. Sure, you can call it repression of fear of death. But it's the human condition. We can't deal with it without some help. Otherwise, we'll get sick, or worse, weird. And maybe that's what happened to them. It's the story of the first holy man, and every single one since.

    People need to have things explained. Why am I here? What is it all for? And most importantly, where am I going? If it's not explained, and then tucked safely away in your brain like some kind of paid fuel bill, you're going to worry. And worry keeps you from seeing, from being able to do all those other wonderful that makes life the joy it can be.

    But problems arise when you get two different versions of the truth. It's the same truth. But it's two businessmen, each describing it differently, each trying to survive, each trying to make a profit (no, that's too harsh, at this level) ... each trying to make his creed survive to serve the people it was intended to serve. And eventually going to war over their two different versions of the same story. Really sick. It's the story of the stupid human race.

    Here in this Westernized world we live in, we all derive our spiritual heritage from the same bunch of Old Testament hooligans who were thrown out of Egypt for nasty, usurious practices that many of them still exhibit today. Then they were kicked out of Babylon and set up shop near the Dead Sea.

    Put any kind of name on them you want: thugs with yarmulkes or perverts with crosses, or perhaps worst of all, smug businessmen with clerical collars telling you they can save your soul when they're really thinking about building theme parks in South Carolina. They've bet their eternal souls on their bank accounts, and made people believe that the name was more important than the thing that the name was trying to describe.

    And that's how we lost our way.

    Which leads us to the present day.

    These same certain thugs are acting like any holy men trying to set up an advantage for themselves in order to gain more money to pile in their particular houses of worship. And because they're so subtle, so intelligent, and so rich, they've managed to create laws in a lot of places that forbid people from talking about certain events of history.

    Without going into this particularly freighted event, let's just examine what it means to prohibit people from talking about certain events. I think they call it, in some European countries, "profaning the memory of the dead," and they're putting plenty of people in jail for just bringing the subject up.

    You'd think, in this supposedly enlightened day and age, that people were intelligent enough and open-minded enough to talk about anything, discuss it rationally, and then come to some sort of consensus about what was the objective truth. But no. It hasn't turned out that way.

    The guys with the yarmulkes say you can't talk about it, what we say is true, it may not be challenged, and we'll put you in jail if you continue this conversation.

    Well, you have to take it seriously, because there are people in jail because of it. Just look at old Ernst Zundel, kidnapped out of his house in Tennessee and now having spent a year in solitary confinement in Canada without any formal charges, just because he feels the need to point out that those gas chambers you can see on the Auschwitz tour weren't really there in that particular form during World War II. They've been reconstructed, and some people quibble about the reconstruction. But there's a law that you can't talk about, and he's in jail.

    It's a classic example of the maxim: it's not the creed, it's the integrity. In this case, integrity is the big loser. Not to mention Freedom of Speech. It's definitely a religious issue. But it has nothing to do with God. Only the version (or perversion) of what one group of supposedly holy men wants to cram down the throats of everybody else.

    Now, remember that we have to be careful about who we're criticizing, because all too often we'll discover we're only criticizing ourselves. Such is the case with all this palaver about Jews. Sure, the behavior of Israelis — calling their neighbors vermin and trying to exterminate them as such — brings a lot of needless heat down upon themselves, as do their traditions of usurious banking, constantly claiming they're discriminated against while they're the richest ethnic group on the planet, and also their open sexuality (to put it politely). This last talent causes problems but also makes a lot of money from those who don't like talking about sex in public but sure do in private.

    Considering from where the Jewish tradition derives, the very people who criticize it most better take a lot harder look at where their own traditions come from, and realize that the very basis of Christianity and Islam derive from ideas and rules Jews invented. In fact, if you want to get a little paranoid about it, you could wonder if the Jews didn't invent those two spiritual paths in order to gain a little privacy for themselves. Or some other advantage, like yoking people with moral restraints while keeping their own rules more flexible in order to gain a couple of extra points on the rate, if you know what I mean.

    Lately I was privileged to receive an interesting post from Rumor Mill News titled "Shock: Secret Identity Of Israel's Yahweh Revealed!" I had this feeling I was reading "Weekly World News" in the 7th century B.C.

    The point the story tried to make was that if Israel tried to claim some kind of divine right to that land it stole from the Palestinians, it better take a harder look at its own actual history, and realize the basis for this claim rests on extremely shaky ground.

    Recently, in  speech to visiting Christian Zionists, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon asserted, "This land is ours... God gave us the title deeds..." However, recent scholarly research, including discoveries by an archaeological team from the University of Tel Aviv, not only deconstruct the Biblical Old Testament and Torah stories upon which this claim rests, but grant previously unthinkable credence to an ancient historian's claim that the Israelites of Exodus were actually the Hyksos, and therefore of Asiatic origin.

    So wrote a cryptic fellow who goes by the name of M-theory. Briefly told, he wrote that the Israelites were never in Egypt and that the Jewish god YHWH had a girlfriend, the goddess Asherah. (Is there a law against saying this?)

    He cited evidence that indicates Solomon and David are absent from the archeological record. Holy screaming Pentateuch! Does this mean they didn't exist? Well, the same thing could be said about Jesus. You can't find him in the empirical history books, either.

    As far as the modern day Israelis being descended from the Mongol hordes from Asia, well, we already knew that, from Arthur Koestler's famous book "The Thirteenth Tribe" which revealed that most of the present-day inhabitants of Israel are really expatriate Russians, and not Semites (which means there's nothing to be anti- about). Crooks are crooks regardless of their DNA.

    Other nuggets from Mr. M-Theory include:

    "Asherah, (whose name means "she who walks in the sea") supposedly consort of the supreme god El, was also referred to as Elath (the goddess). According to the Ugarit tradition, whose clay tablets contain the earliest known alphabet, she was consort of El, and mother of seventy gods. She is also associated with Baal and is supposed to have interceded to her husband, the supreme god, on Baal's behalf, for the building of a palace in order to grant him equal status with other gods. In the cuniform tablets of Ras Shamrah (Circa 1400 BCE) the head of the Pantheon was El; his wife was Asherat-of-the-sea (Asherah). After El, the greatest god was Baal, son of El and Asherah. Curiously, Baal's consort is his mother, Asherah. In the Lebanon traditions Baal is equated with Jupiter."

    Yeeowww! This means that Yahweh, whom Jewish scholars now say redacts back to Baal, had sex with his mother! Holy screaming Sophocles! There must be a law against saying that! Maybe there will be soon.

    "According to biblical scholars who focus on the "P Source" for the old testament," M-Theory writes, "Yahweh as a name is first used with Moses in Exodus, and is indicative of monolatory (exclusive worship of one of many Gods) rather than  monotheism. The name Yahweh can also be translated as "I am who I am", literally a way of saying "mind your own business", a way of disguising his true identity. Yahweh does not appear until Exodus and, strangely, the god Baal is entirely absent in Genesis."

    And, the mysterious author adds, in a perfect consistency with the vicious tone of the Old Testament, "This Yahweh is prone to violence and seems to despise his chosen people."

    Lest I give away M-Theory's entire game, let me just quote one other segment of his fascinating exploration of pre-Christian mythology.

    "The Hebrews living in Canaan were therefore under Egyptian rule. It is also here in Canaan that we can make a comparison between Yahweh and the Canaanite Moloch (Baal) and extrapolate a polemic inversion of the story of Pharaoh ordering the death of all the "first born" in Exodus.

    "The worshippers of Moloch sacrificed their first born children to their deity through immolation. Worshippers of Yahweh in Canaan were also known to carry out child sacrifice on occasion, especially in times of hardship, although immolation (holocaust) was supposedly frowned upon. Slitting the child's throat, however, was acceptable."

    This information dovetails perfectly with what I've been reading lately in my Talmudic studies on Carol Valentine's eye-opening website Come and Hear <> (a must-read compendium if there ever was one) where the preferred method of execution for innumerable offenses by the goyim (surely you know who they are — they're us, dummy) is decapitation.

    So the danger becomes: if Christians and Muslims try to impugn the Jewish faith and declare their god is some minor mountain deity from the hinterlands of Ugarit, they're only going to bring themselves down with it. Because the whole legend of Jesus, which was constructed of equally spurious and unrigorous chicanery, is cobbled together with the same inconsistency, carelessness and manipulation.

    Religion is essentially crowd control, devised by Constantian-type governments to keep the people from rising up against their leaders. It had to be a very rich person who said "the meek shall inherit the earth."

    Anyway, the whole piece — "Shock: Secret Identity Of Israel's Yahweh Revealed!" — is well worth reading for its astonishing Old Testament gossip. Click

    All this folderol goes to show the wisdom on the ancient proscription of trying to give that ineffable and majestic spirit that animates the universe any kind of name whatsoever. You're only asking for trouble if you do, thanks to priests (and ministers and rabbis and whatever kind of guruistic occupational title you want to apply) who value the profitability of the tale they wish to tell higher than the needs of those who need to be reassured that their future is something more than the ignominious dust they will one day surely become.

    If you want to go looking for the essence of the spirit that animates everything, don't go searching through ossified parchments in rancid temples. Find the spark you need to mobilize yourself in the diamond's eye in the rain, or in the teardrop of your lonely child.

    And don't let the spiritual gangsters tell you otherwise. 

    John Kaminski is the author of "America's Autopsy Report," a collection of his Internet essays featured on hundreds of websites around the world. A second volume of his essays, titled "The Perfect Enemy," is currently under construction and due to be published later this year. In addition he is about to release a pamphlet titled "The Day America Died," an overview of 9/11 aimed at convincing those who still believe in the official version of events that the story as told by the U.S. government is really a manipulative fantasy aimed at vilifying Muslims to more easily steal their oil. Funding for this project, and the author's food budget, is still being sought, and contributions will be gratefully accepted. 

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 5:58 AM
Subject: REDUX on the Man


by Eric Thomson

07 Sep 01

This accusation emanated from Hitler's enemies, who claimed that one of Hitler's ancestors was named Schickelgruber, and that Schickelgruber was a jew. Perhaps there was a Schickelgruber in Hitler's family tree, but was he jewish?

Even jews cannot define who is a jew with any unanimity, so I, as a White man, will let the reader know what I have learned about 'jewish identity'. My research has revealed jews to be (1) mongrels who (2) distinguish themselves by their genius for predation, usurpation, usury and other criminal activities which they inflict upon their host peoples. Some jews practice talmudism, but most are not 'religious'. Many Ashkenazim or Russian jews, are not members of any synagogue, and many are not circumcised, according to statements by various Khazars or Ashkenazim I have encountered, although I have not demanded that they show proof of their allegations. Suffice it to say that a jew is defined by the Orthodox Rabbis of Israel as anyone born of a jewish mother, who must, herself, stem from at least four generations of jewish mothers. The father's ancestry is discounted. Thus, the jews themselves treat jewishness as a nationality, rather than a religion, in Israel.

Many so-called jews believe that religion is the way in which one may show his 'jewishness'. Some jewish sects recognize converts. Since there is no agreement amongst jews, themselves, in regard to jewish identity, the Zionist Occupation Government of Palestine lets all self-styled jews enjoy their jewishness, by refusing to define' jewishness' in Orthodox terms, for this would curtail much of American jews' support for Israel.

In 700 A.D. Bulan, the Kagan or King of Khazaria, adopted talmudism or pharisaism as the religion of the Khazars, and his people became known as "jews". This would be like English converts to Christianity dropping the word,"English,"to describe their nationality, and using "Christian" instead. Although the Khazars converted to a Semitic religion, they are of Turkic, rather than Semitic origin and have no biological connection to Palestine. For such people to invade Palestine and call themselves "Semites" is as absurd as Chinese converts to Christianity calling themselves "Italians" and invading Rome!

Vikings, who were probably fed up getting 'jewed' in their trading expeditions through the Khazar Empire, conquered the major cities and the Ashkenazim dispersed into Western and Eastern Europe. Sephardim or Semitic jews entered Europe via Spain and Portugal, many of them settling in Holland and adopting Dutch names, like the Roosevelts and Rockefellers. Despite miscegenation with their host peoples, jews traditionally maintain their tribal and national affiliations.

Jews can even adopt other religions, including Christianity, and maintain their jewish nationality. As Cardinal Lustiger said, "I am a Christian, but I remain a jew." This is no different than Charlemagne saying, "I am a Christian, but I remain a Frank."

Since jews are not a race, but a mongrel mixture of Mongol, Caucasian and Negro, they deserve no capitalization. Racial mixtures like sambo, mestizo and mulatto are not capitalized. Since most jews are not religious, we cannot use a capital, as is customary for Moslem, Hindu, etc. Since jew equates with predator, parasite, usurer, usurper and criminal, one does not capitalize jew or other related criminal activities.

Having therefore analyzed the reality of 'jewish' identity, we may now ask if Hitler was a member of a synagogue and therefore a member of a jewish community. Hitler was baptized into the Roman Catholic Church, so we can, in all probability, conclude that he did not practice pharisaism or talmudism. This leaves only the biological question of Turkic and/or Shephardic ancestry, which could only be shown by DNA tests.

The so-called Nürmberg Race Laws which the National Socialist government of Germany promulgated, after collaborating with such Zionists as Rabbi Leo Baeck, who proposed the Star of David as the jewish national symbol, were based on tradition, belief and loyalty, rather than biology. A "German" could be anyone whose grandparents had converted to christianity. Some Aryans who had converted to Judaism were deemed "jews". In 1944, the German government circulated a civil service questionnaire which asked each department how many jews were employed therein, and how many Germans in the civil service were married to jews. The jews of Berlin remained, as jews did everywhere in "Nazi" Germany, if they were not engaged in criminal activities. The 1944 Berlin telephone directory listed some dozen jewish organizations in that city, and SS veterans who were sent to defend Berlin have told me of stacking their rifles to assist civilians in digging anti-tank ditches. They noticed that many, but not all, of their civilian trenchmates wore large yellow Stars of David!

The National Socialist government had many "Germans" of jewish backgrounds: Funk and Ley (Levy) were hanged at Nürmberg. Canaris (Meyerbeer), the traitorous head of German Army Counter-Intelligence (Abwehr), had betrayed his high position of trust for many years. Milch of the Luftwaffe, was under Goering's personal protection. "Wer Jude ist, bestimme ich!" Goering declared. ("I say who is a jew!") Adolf Galland believed that a highly-placed traitor in the Luftwaffe was sabotaging German aircraft production by insisting that bombers and fighter aircraft had to have "dive-bombing capabilities" and other such nonsense. Milch was the only one empowered to make such decisions on aircraft production and design, and Goering himself admitted that he knew nothing about 'modern flying machines', which he'd flown in World War I so he delegated such decisions to Milch, his pet jew.

Certainly, Germany had more than enough traitors of German ancestry to sabotage its epic struggle for survival, without the jewish ones, but every German traitor is said to not know for sure. German traitors such as Speidel, Rommel's adjutant, who failed to convey the message of the Allied landings in Normandy, were rewarded by Germany's Zionist Occupation regime with rank, pay and privileges. The non-traitors who served important roles in the Third Reich were hanged and otherwise punished by the Zionist victors. [Note by Maguire]

But let's return to the 'jew', Adolf Hitler. According to my research, Hitler was accused of being a jew by some of his early opponents. Some Allied propaganda ridiculed Hitler, dubbing him "Herr Schickelgruber". But this propaganda faded away as the war progressed. Did this mean that Hitler was no longer 'jewish'? Consider how inconvenient this would be for present day Holohoaxers: 'Hitler, the jewish jew-slayer', would be hard for Goyim to comprehend. If a jew kills jews, why must the hapless Gentiles pay, and bear the burden of guilt and obloquy?

Some writers claim that Hitler was a jew, because he helped create the propaganda pretext for founding the state of Israel. These writers forget that it was the Allies who concocted the "gas chamber" fiction, and that the magical number of six million was recycled from jew lies of 1919. Hitler did attempt to assist jews in leaving Germany. Adolf Eichmann and his jewish partner, Joel Brandt, were smuggling jews into British-occupied Palestine. The Zionists murdered Brandt first, then Eichmann, to hide this one aspect of Nazi-Zionist collaboration.

Other writers claim that Hitler was a jew, because "he got Germany into World War II". Even Allied diplomats admitted that World War II was begun at Versailles. "Powder kegs" in one diplomat's words were being set all over Europe. Polish government officials like Smigly-Ridz (sp?) bragged that Germany could not stay out of war, no matter how she tried! War had been decided upon by international finance banksters, and Hitler knew that. Their plan was simple and well-coordinated with Soviet plans for the conquest of Europe by Messrs. Djugashvili (Jewson) alias Stalin and Kaganovich. Germany was to be allowed to rearm sufficiently to enter a war against Poland, but not against the former Allies of World War I. But as we know, Germany defeated Poland and the Allies on the continent of Europe by 1940, and fooled "Stalin" into thinking that Germany would attempt to invade England in Operation Sealion, just as the half-jew Churchill proclaimed, at the behest of the jew, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. But "Stalin's" invasion of Western Europe was smashed by German military units which he believed were on the French coast. It was no thanks to the jew leaders of the Allies that: Western Europe remained free of Soviet occupation after 1945, but it was entirely due to the valiant efforts of the 'jew', Hitler, and Germany's allies. If Hitler were a jew, why did the jew rulers of Britain, France, the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R. wage war on him?

Several writers claim that Hitler was a 'jew' because he was never charged with war crimes and he escaped to live in South America, or in German Antarctica. Jew #1, "Stalin", told jew #2, U.S. Ambassador Averell Harriman, that Hitler had escaped to Argentina, via Spain. This story was repeated by jew #3 of the CIA who allegedly interviewed ex-Gestapo chief, Heinrich MülIer. Jew #4, Lt. Heimlich of the U.S. Army's Counter Intelligence Corps, purportedly was the first "U.S. representative" to inquire about Hitler's death in Berlin, and after seeing his jewish congeners' "evidence" concluded that no insurance company would pay Adolf Hitler's widow a nickel, based on what he had seen. Since all the stories of Hitler's alleged escape from Berlin in 1945 come from jewish sources, we are entitled to some degree of doubt, for we know that the favorite tactic of jews is to use a story for their perceived political and economic purposes, regardless of its truth or falsehood. Most often, jews will use a story to hide the truth. Thus it is wise for us to ask ourselves 'cui bono' whenever jews make claims about anything. Usually, the beneficiaries of jewish statements are the jews, whose 'holy' duty it is always to bemuse and befuddle us, the Goyim.

As the reader has likely noted, the 'proofs' of Hitler's jewishness omit the sole item required to establish a jewish genetic background: a modern DNA test. According to my research, Adolf Hitler's brother, Fritz, remained alive after 1945, and he may have descendants. I have seen pictures of Hitler's parents' gravesites, and there may be public records of Hitler's ancestry which survived the holocaust of World War II and the Allied occupation. It would seem to me that the jews themselves would have the greatest interest in proving Hitler's jewishness, one way or the other. If I were a jew, I'd sure like to know!

The other arguments used to 'prove' that Hitler was a jew are non sequiturs based on his alleged actions and his alleged motives, i.e. to benefit the jews, rather than the Aryans. Using similar 'logic' it can be argued that the inventors of the airplane were "Negros", because that invention is used to carry swarms of Blacks (and other non-Whites) into White livingspace!

As one British intelligence officer said of the acknowledged traitor, Kim Philby, "We never know for whom a bloke is working, unless we draw up a balance sheet of his results. If the perceived benefits of his actions tend to fall on our side of the sheet, then we may conclude that he was our man, after all. "Savitri Devi saw the battle between Aryans and the Dark Forces of Cabalism, Communism, Capitalism and Christianity as being "a cosmic struggle," which is never-ending. Hitler was aware of the enormous dimensions in which he had to fight, and in so doing, he 'lost' some battles on behalf of his Bigger Picture. Savitri Devi described him as a man "in time, above time and against time", who understood the important, yet fleeting nature of temporal existence.

Without Hitler, Germany was dying on its knees. With Hitler, Germany stood up and fought its oppressors. If I were a German, existing in the vile environment of defeated Weimar Germany, I would have welcomed Hitler who exhorted Germans to work and fight on behalf of their own survival and the survival of all they held dear, rather than yield to the oppressors and alien invaders. If Hitler were a jew, then we desperately need another 'jew' like him, in preference to jews like Roosevelt, "Stalin" and Churchill.

As usual, I enjoy receiving replies from my jewish readers. In your opinion, was Hitler jewish?

THE GENETICS OF THE JEWS: "Jews are not White," says Professor Leonard Fein, who teaches Politics and Social Policy at Brandeis University in the U.S.A. Fein was addressing the 17th biennial congress of the Jewish Board of Deputies in Johannesburg, South Africa in May, 1972. "You are not White, either symbolically or literally, as anyone knows who goes to Israel," he said. Professor Fein, besides being a specialist in jewish community problems in the U.S.A., is a specialist, in Black-White relations in the cities. RAND DAILY MAIL, May 15, 1972.

"Jewish blood is different," says jew Dr. Michael Kaback of the John F. Kennedy Institute in Baltimore. Jewish blood lacks an enzyme called Hex A and often results in a condition called Tay-Sachs disease. Over 90% of the Tay-Sachs disease is found in jews. This disease causes convulsions, paralysis, idiocy and death."

A TV documentary featured the story of a jew who called himself "German". He mated with a Cajun woman. Their child was born with Tay-Sachs disease and died in infancy. Jews of all parts of the world have specific genetic similarities, even common fingerprint characteristics, according to Dr. Leo Sachs, who heads the genetics section of The Weizman Institute of Science in New York, in collaboration with Dr. M. Bat-Miriam.

"The Genetics of the Jews" by A.E. Mourant et al., Oxford University Press, 1978, reports the findings of jew hematologists, whose work was originally published in The Lancet, the journal of the British Medical Association. They report that "even the blondest jew has Negro marker genes... which are due to concubinage (prostitution) and slavery." For more information, contact RACIAL LOYALTY.


Note: David Irving disposed of the Jewish Milch idea in "Rise and Fall of the Luftwaffe".  It appears Eric doesn't agree with him.   Anyway, Irving records that when the allegations of Milch's Jewishness was raised a full SS investigation was conducted.  The results of this investigation revealed that Milch's mother's legal husband (and the official legal father) was in fact Jewish.  This man had several relatives in an insane asylum.  Because of this Mrs. Milch only contracted marriage on the condition it be childless as to the husband.  She in fact conceived all her children, including Erhard, out of wedlock with her non-Jewish lover.  Had this datum been revealed it would have equally disqualified Erhard Milch from commission under the Prussian rules of the time ("no bastards").  Goering learned the details after investigating because of accusations by Streicher.   Because of the reason Milch wasn't Jewish and Prussian rules concerning commissioning, the 'exoneration' had to be kept secret even after it was uncovered.

    Goering therefore merely announced "I determine who's a Jew".  Goering was quite gallant about this affair and didn't reveal it even at Nuremburg.  Given the nature of his parentage Milch didn't contest it either even at Nuremburg since his mother was still living.  Irving documented it all quite extensively from contemporary papers and also Milch family testimony.

    Aircraft development.  Luftwaffe legal officers in 1942 determined the failure to develop effective aircraft between 1939-1942 was due to Goering's employment of Ernst Udet as head of the Luftwaffe Air Armaments Office.    Udet was a First War to Kill White People aviation hero and also a John McCain jet-jock prototype.  Udet committed suicide in 1942 as the consequences of his mismanagement came to fruition.  After the internal investigation Milch, as Air Minister and Inspector General of the Luftwaffe, resumed control of the Air Armaments Office.  Udet had known nothing about modern machines either.   The Luftwaffe internal investigation showed that Goering and Udet had usually discussed "the good old days" whenever they met.  Goering's statement that "he knew nothing about modern machines" was made during the post Udet suicide investigation.

    After Udet, between 1942-1944 (when Speer finally took dictatorial control of production) Milch turned things back around.  It was during this period that the groundwork was laid for the 'miraculous' expansion of fighter production in 1944 that Speer later took credit for, and that occurred despite the spring 1944 USAAF targeting of the Luftwaffe's factories.  All the preparatory work in expanding sub-contractors' production that was essential for this was done by Milch between 1942-1944.  It was also during this period that the Me-262, the Arado 234, the Horten brothers' flying wing stealth fighter and other advanced projects were pressed ahead.  The driving force behind these was in fact Erhard Milch.

    In addition to Udet another major 'saboteur' was Hans Jeschonnek.  He was Chief of the Luftwaffe Air Staff until he also
committed suicide in 1943 after watching bombing raids on German cities.  Previously in mid-1940 Jeschonnek had told Udet he
"wouldn't know what to do" with a monthly fighter production of 500 units.

    It's interesting Eric brought this up because in my opinion it was this Goering-Udet-Milch triangle that cost Germany the war.
During post-war interrogation Milch was asked what mistakes he thought Germany had made in the air war.  He replied, "Just one. 140,000 unbuilt fighters!"  Milch was also the 'father' of the Fi-104 cruise missile, or "V1 Flying Bomb" as it's more commonly known.  He envisioned it as an extremely low cost alternative to the Heer's hyper-expensive A4 missile.

    Too bad Goering and Milch didn't get along very well.  The lessons I've personally drawn from all this are:

1.  The military has to be an apolitical priesthood serving the entire nation.
2.  We have to develop mechanisms to allow the natural leader geniuses, like Nathan Bedford Forrest, to rise early and not late.


Zundel is no champion of civil rights

By Marvin Kurz

Globe and Mail, March 17, 2004

An old legal maxim holds that hard cases make bad law. Neo-Nazi propagandist Ernst Zundel has consistently attempted to live that adage.  His numerous challenges of Canadian law, in service of a campaign to  make his Jew-hating legal, have twisted Canadian courts into pretzels.

Throughout his tortured route through the Canadian legal system, Mr.  Zundel has attempted to portray himself as a crusader for freedom.  However, he has shown more of a penchant for self-promotion than virtue.  Notoriously, he once dragged a cross to court, evoking not so subtle  references to the notion that he, like the Christ, was the victim of an evil Jewish conspiracy.

In recent weeks, The Globe and Mail has taken up Mr. Zundel's cause. In  both an editorial and a feature article by justice reporter Kirk Makin,  The Globe focused on the use of a national security certificate to jail  Mr. Zundel as a potential security threat. The headline of the feature  article: "Ernst Zundel, civil-rights champion?" says it all.

If, as the advertisement says, context is everything, a bit of it is  needed here. Mr. Zundel is a Hitler-loving neo-Nazi who emigrated from  Germany in the 1960s. He spent decades portraying the Jews as the true  criminals of the Holocaust. Expanding on themes found in Mein Kampf, Mr.  Zundel became one of the most notorious and well-connected hate  propagandists in the world.

Successive Ontario attorneys-general refused to charge Mr. Zundel under  the hate-propaganda sections of the Criminal Code, baselessly fearing  that the provisions were unconstitutional. Without ministerial consent,  he could not be charged. Finally, a Holocaust survivor, Sabina Citron,  despaired of a government refusing to use its own laws. She privately  charged Mr. Zundel under an obscure law dealing with the promotion of  false news. Although the government was shamed into taking over the  case, it refused to charge him under the proper hate-propaganda law. Two  successive juries convicted Mr. Zundel before the Supreme Court of  Canada ruled that the false-news law, unlike the hate-propaganda law,  was unconstitutional. Mr. Zundel crowed that our legal system sanctioned his views.

Mr. Zundel applied for Canadian citizenship in the 1990s. He realized  that any conviction would see him deported to Germany, where he already  had a conviction and was wanted on new hate-propaganda charges. He was  refused Canadian citizenship because the Security and Intelligence  Review Committee found, under existing law, that he was a security  threat. Mr. Zundel's appeals, all of the way to the Supreme Court, were  rejected.

 In 1996, both Ms. Citron and the City of Toronto complained to the Canadian Human Rights Commission about Mr. Zundel's anti-Semitic website. Mr. Zundel denied ownership of the site. Relying on the evidence of his own correspondence and the testimony of his ex-wife, a  human-rights tribunal rejected his claims. It ordered him to cease and  desist using his site to promote hatred of Jews. Anticipating this  ruling, Mr. Zundel fled Canada for the United States. When the Americans  threw him out, Canada need not have accepted him back. When it did, he  made a cynical refugee claim. Only then did the government hold him  under a security-certificate procedure.

Whatever evidence the government has against Mr. Zundel, it has already  proven that he is a risk to Canada. He contemptuously abandoned our  country when it finally became clear that his form of hatred would not  be tolerated. He then attempted to hoodwink our system when the  Americans evicted him. He may be entitled to challenge our  security-certificate law, but civil-liberties champion? Give me a break.

Marvin Kurz is national legal counsel of the League for Human
Rights of  B'nai Brith Canada.



Dialectical Thinking

From: "Peter Myers" <> Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002
4:39 PM


When I called the EU "Communist", I meant the New Left, i.e. Marxist
Might this be a euphemism for Jewish-controlled Socialism?
Perhaps there are 2 kinds of Socialism: that controlled by Jews, and
that outside their control.

<< I would support Zionism if all the Jews would agree to leave and go
to Israel. But they won't do that. If they did that they would lose all
their power.>>

The Balfour Declaration was carefully worded so as to make sure that
Jews had BOTH. That bit of the wording was done by Leo Amery. It was the
most sensitive part of the formula.

I have the details of that somewhere, but connot put my finger on it
right now - remind me later.

The Jerusalem Post of Tuesday, January 12, 1999, reported in an article
entitled "Balfour Declaration's author was a secret Jew":

"by DOUGLAS DAVIS: LONDON (January 12) - Leopold Amery, the author of
the Balfour Declaration - the 1917 document from British foreign
secretary Arthur Balfour to Lord Rothschild which laid the groundwork
for the establishment of the State of Israel - was a secret Jew. This
has been disclosed in just-published research by William Rubinstein,
professor of modern history at the University of Wales, who says Amery
hid his Jewish background."

The report is at

Now the interesting part:

After the West's destruction of Islam, which, if China is pushed (by
Western insensitivity) onto the Moslem side, will leave the world
battered & bruised, there will be a power vacuum in the Middle East,
which would enable Israel to expand its borders as the Eretz Israel
lobby envisage.

At the same time, the devastation of the world being partly blamed on
Zionism, it's possible that American resentment of the Jews will have
risen to such a point that they will leave as they left the USSR, taking
their money and exposing the US to the real state of its international

Israel could then be a major world power.

Is this possible?

 Dialectical Thinking

Date: Sun, 5 May 2002 05:06:07 -0400 From: "Don" <>

> The Balfour Declaration was carefully worded so as to make sure that
> Jews had BOTH. That bit of the wording was done by Leo Amery. It was
> most sensitive part of the formula.

Of course, if they didn't have both then they would have had what was
basically the Nazi solution. They would have had Israel but would have
lost their world power.

Since as you mention, the Jews don't think linearly they certainly
wouldn't want to give up that power. This is why, after learning the
truth about the Jews, I had to become anti-Zionist. Before this I was a
fanatical Zionist.

> Leopold Amery, the author of the Balfour
> Declaration - the 1917 document from British foreign secretary
> Arthur Balfour to Lord Rothschild which laid the groundwork for
> the establishment of the State of Israel - was a secret Jew

Yeah, I think I read that somewhere on your site.

> Israel could then be a major world power.
> Is this possible?

This presupposes that there will be a world war with Islam and the West
will win. I don't think Islam is something that can be defeated with
conventional warfare. Islam is an idea. Ideas cannot be destroyed purely
with violence unless you physically exterminate every single believer.
Though I must say that I was a bit disturbed immediately after September
11 at seeing a few Americans calling for the complete destruction of
Islam. I can certainly imagine a scenario where Americans would become
so bloodthirsty with revenge that they may support genocide of Muslims.

I don't see how China would ever side with the USA in a war against
Islam. They may be in a specific instance, such as with Osama bin Laden.
But in general they are far too much of realists to do such a stupid
thing. And what about Russia? Would Russia just stand by and watch?

I think the Jews are trying to use the Free Trade dogma to penetrate
China and subvert its government. I think they plan to use free trade to
take over the Chinese economy and then take over the government. Then,
maybe then, they may get China on their side in the war on Islam. The
only question here is if the Chinese leaders are blind to what the Jews
are. If they don't understand the true nature of the Jews they will
probably be hoodwinked. If they are Jew-aware they may not fall for the
trap. This is why the elites keep promoting the idea of "engagement"
with China and the idea of China as a "strategic partner". This is why
they keep promoting the idea to businessmen that China is a market of 1
billion customers, while ignoring the billion customers in India.

I don't think Americans will ever resent the Jews even after a World
War. People just don't understand what the Jews really are. I say this
because I myself didn't understand what the Jews were and I was in
complete ignorance as to what is really happening in the world. The mass
media is too powerful. "Anti-semitism" is the greatest of all the sins
in this society.

The biggest problem is that people are too locked up in what you call
linear thinking. People find it hard to understand how such a small
minority could rule the world. It really shouldn't be that hard to
understand since all great empires, such as the British in India, ruled
their colonies with a small minority. But nonetheless most people just
don't seem capable of understanding how this kind of thing can be done.
They think the Spanish took over Mexico because of technology and that
the British ruled India because of technology. But there's much more to
it than that.

On the other hand look at what has been happening in France. The Jewish
policy is to bring in Muslim immigrants. What is the result? The Far
Right, such as Le Pen, starts making big electoral gains. So perhaps as
the Jews keep pushing they will end up destroying themselves. Maybe when
the Muslims are 25% of France someone like Le Pen will get 50% of the
vote and then the Jews may be deported. After all, this is what happened
in the 1930's. The Jews kept pushing with Communism until they finally
ended up screwing themselves. They got Hitler (and Stalin). And Hitler
was just a reaction to what the Jews were doing with Communism. That
time they won the world war but the next time they may not be so lucky.

The supreme irony is that as far as I can tell Le Pen, whom the Jews
hate, seems like a French version of Sharon. They are both the same age,
they were both in the military and were involved in atrocities and they
both have the same hate of Arabs. For themselves the Jews want a Sharon
but for the French they want a bleeding-heart liberal.

How did Hitler do it? He took the Jewish movement, Communism, and made a
mirror-image of it. His party was the National Socialist German Worker's
Party. If you were to judge by the name you would think it was
Communist. So Hitler took the Jewish mind-control propaganda and turned
it against them. There may well come a man in the future who will take
the modern Jewish propaganda such as Feminism and multiculturalism and
turn it against the Jews. And this is the same thing Napoleon did.
Napoleon took the Judeomasonic propaganda of "democracy" an used it to
make himself an emperor. Napoleon was an absolute monarch claiming to be
a democrat. Just as Napoleon did with democracy and Hitler did with
Socialism/Communism in the future someone may do with the modern Jewish

In your website you claim that Hitler was a linear thinker. But I think
this seems to show he may have been non-linear. He took what the Jews
created and turned it against them. The Fascists and Falangists, on the
other hand, pursued what may be described as more linear strategies as
they didn't try to hijack Jewish propaganda and turn it against them.

I don't see American Jews leaving the USA. The USA is too much of a
world power for them to give up. The Jews may leave but only once the
USA is no longer a great power worth controlling. In other words, they
may leave but only after they have ruined us. This is what they did in

The devastation of the world may well be blamed on Zionism but it will
not be blamed on the Jews. I think it's more likely the devastation will
all be blamed on the Muslims. The losers of total wars are always
blamed. The victors of wars always make sure to put the blame on the
losers. There will be great war crimes trials and it will be "proven"
that the Muslims exterminated millions of Jews. This will be enough to
keep the Jews from getting blamed. This worked after the devastation of
WWII, why won't it work again? It's certainly believable that the
Muslims would want to kill all the Jews. If the Zionists are indeed
planning a WWIII they are also certainly planning the propaganda to go
with it. Very likely this will involve an alleged Muslim holocaust of
Jews. Incidentally, this will also satisfy the requirements of the
dispensationalist theory.

The Zionist propaganda is moving in this direction. They say the Arab
leaders, such as Arafat, admired Hitler. They say one of Arafat's
henchmen named one of his sons Abu-Eichmann and the other Abu-Hitler.
They say Saddam Hussein grew up with a portrait of Hitler. Perhaps this
is the preliminary propaganda for the future propaganda that the Muslims
exterminated millions of Jews.

This can be found here:

Israel as a great world power? That is an even scarier thought than
anything that had occured to me. That's certainly what the Likud types
want. But it doesn't completely make sense. The power of the Jews arises
from the fact that they are dispersed. If they all go to Israel they
lose their power, even if the rest of the world were completely

Peter Myers, 21 Blair St, Watson ACT 2602, Australia          ph +61 2 62475187
to unsubscribe, reply with "unsubscribe" in the subject line

March 20, 2004

The Unmentionable Source of Terrorism

by John Pilger

The current threat of attacks in countries whose governments have close
alliances with Washington is the latest stage in a long struggle against
the empires of the west, their rapacious crusades and domination. The
motivation of those who plant bombs in railway carriages derives directly
from this truth. What is different today is that the weak have learned how
to attack the strong, and the western crusaders' most recent colonial
terrorism exposes "us" to retaliation.

The source of much of this danger is Israel. A creation, then guardian of
the west's empire in the Middle East, the Zionist state remains the cause
of more regional grievance and sheer terror than all the Muslim states
combined. Read the melancholy Palestinian Monitor on the Internet; it
chronicles the equivalent of Madrid's horror week after week, month after
month, in occupied Palestine. No front pages in the West acknowledge this
enduring bloodbath, let alone mourn its victims. Moreover, the Israeli
army, a terrorist organisation by any reasonable measure, is protected and
rewarded in the west.

In its current human rights report, the Foreign Office criticises Israel
for its "worrying disregard for human rights" and "the impact that the
continuing Israeli occupation and the associated military occupations have
had on the lives of ordinary Palestinians."

Yet the Blair government has secretly authorised the sale of vast
quantities of arms and terror equipment to Israel. These include leg-irons,
electric shock belts and chemical and biological agents. No matter that
Israel has defied more United Nations resolutions than any other state
since the founding of the world body. Last October, the UN General Assembly
voted by 144 to four to condemn the wall that Israel has cut through the
heart of the West Bank, annexing the best agricultural land, including the
aquifer system that provides most of the Palestinians' water. Israel, as
usual, ignored the world.

Israel is the guard dog of America's plans for the Middle East. The former
CIA analysts Kathleen and Bill Christison have described how "two strains
of Jewish and Christian fundamentalism have dovetailed into an agenda for a
vast imperial project to restructure the Middle East, all further
reinforced by the happy coincidence of great oil resources up for grabs and
a president and vice-president heavily invested in oil."

The "neoconservatives" who run the Bush regime all have close ties with the
Likud government in Tel Aviv and the Zionist lobby groups in Washington. In
1997, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (Jinsa) declared:
"Jinsa has been working closely with Iraqi National Council leader Dr Ahmad
Chalabi to promote Saddam Hussein's removal from office..." Chalabi is the
CIA-backed stooge and convicted embezzler at present organising the next
"democratic" government in Baghdad.

Until recently, a group of Zionists ran their own intelligence service
inside the Pentagon. This was known as the Office of Special Plans, and was
overseen by Douglas Feith, an under-secretary of defence, extreme Zionist
and opponent of any negotiated peace with the Palestinians. It was the
Office of Special Plans that supplied Downing Street with much of its
scuttlebutt about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction; more often than not,
the original source was Israel.

Israel can also claim responsibility for the law passed by Congress that
imposes sanctions on Syria and in effect threatens it with the same fate as
Iraq unless it agrees to the demands of Tel Aviv. Israel is the guiding
hand behind Bush's bellicose campaign against the "nuclear threat" posed by
Iran. Today, in occupied Iraq, Israeli special forces are teaching the
Americans how to "wall in" a hostile population, in the same way that
Israel has walled in the Palestinians in pursuit of the Zionist dream of an
apartheid state. The author David Hirst describes the "Israelisation of US
foreign policy" as being "now operational as well as ideological."

In understanding Israel's enduring colonial role in the Middle East, it is
too simple to see the outrages of Ariel Sharon as an aberrant version of a
democracy that lost its way. The myths that abound in middle-class Jewish
homes in Britain about Israel's heroic, noble birth have long been
reinforced by a "liberal" or "left-wing" Zionism as virulent and
essentially destructive as the Likud strain.

In recent years, the truth has come from Israel's own "new historians," who
have revealed that the Zionist "idealists" of 1948 had no intention of
treating justly or even humanely the Palestinians, who instead were
systematically and often murderously driven from their homes. The most
courageous of these historians is Ilan Pappe, an Israeli-born professor at
Haifa University, who, with the publication of each of his ground-breaking
books, has been both acclaimed and smeared. The latest is A History of
Modern Palestine, in which he documents the expulsion of Palestinians as an
orchestrated crime of ethnic cleansing that tore apart Jews and Arabs
coexisting peacefully. As for the modern "peace process," he describes the
Oslo Accords of 1993 as a plan by liberal Zionists in the Israeli Labour
Party to corral Palestinians in South African-style bantustans. That they
were aided by a desperate Palestinian leadership made the "peace" and its
"failure" (blamed on the Palestinians) no less counterfeit. During the
years of negotiation and raised hopes, governments in Tel Aviv secretly
doubled the number of illegal Jewish settlements on Palestinian land,
intensified the military occupation and completed the fragmentation of the
22 per cent of historic Palestine that the Palestine Liberation
Organisation had agreed to accept in return for recognising the state of

Along with the late Edward Said, Ilan Pappe is the most eloquent writer of
Palestinian history. He is also one of the most scholarly. This combination
has brought him many admirers, but also enemies among Israel's academic
liberal mythologists in Britain, one of whom, Stephen Howe, was given the
Pappe book to review in the New Statesman of 8 March. Howe often appears in
these pages; his style is to damn with faint praise and to set carefully
the limits of debate about empire, be it Irish history, the Middle East or
the "war on terror." In Pappe's case, what the reader doesn't know is
Howe's personal link to the Israeli establishment; and what Howe does not
say in his review is that here for the first time is a textbook on
Palestine that narrates the real story as it happened: a non-Zionist
version of Zionism.

He accuses Pappe of "factual mistakes," but gives no evidence, then
denigrates the book by dismissing it as a footnote to another book by the
Israeli historian Benny Morris, who has long atoned for his own revisionist
work. To its credit, Cambridge University Press has published Pappe's
pioneering and highly accessible work as an authoritative history. This
means that the "debate" over Israel's origins is ending, regardless of what
the empire's apologists say.

Why a "Nazi" writer? Why not just say a "German " writer. To what end does the use of the word "Nazi" serve?
Surely not just the reminding the great unwashed that all Germans were and possibly still are (underneath) evil "Nazis"... and don't you forget it". WW2 propoganda still exists in todays papers.

Nazi writer may have created Nabokov's Lolita

By Hannah Cleaver in Berlin

Sydney Morning Herald
March 22, 2004

Lolita, the story of a temptress whose seduction of an older man caused a sensation when published by Vladimir Nabokov and a scandal when filmed by Stanley Kubrick, was the creation of a Nazi journalist, a new analysis says.

A novella, published in 1916 by Heinz von Eschwege, describes a girl called Lolita who obsesses and then seduces the narrator. The narrator, who is lodging in her house while on holiday, is distraught when the girl dies at the end of the story. This is astoundingly similar to Nabokov's book, published in 1956, says Michael Maar, a literary scholar.

"The name is the same, the title, the fact that it is written in the first person," he said.

"There is a close description of first seeing Lolita, looking into her eyes and seeing she was more than a girl, more than a child. The narrators are lodgers and both have passionate affairs and then Lolita dies."

Mr Maar came across the von Eschwege book after being drawn into an argument at a party with a teacher who suggested the Lolita name and story were not new.

Von Eschwege, who wrote under the name Heinz von Lichberg, was a journalist in the Third Reich. He is known for his radio commentary during Adolf Hitler's torch-lit procession to the Reichstag in 1933.

By this time von Lichberg had already published his 18-page story in which a man, looking for a quiet place for a holiday, travels to Spain and ends up renting a room in Alicante, where he soon engages in eye contact with his host's daughter, Lolita.

"When you read it today and compare it with the [Nabokov] novel, you do get a light feeling of surreality and deja vu," Mr Maar said.

Von Eschwege and Nabokov lived in the same area of Berlin for 15 years, which Mr Maar believes makes it possible that the Russian read the earlier work.

But Mr Maar said that in his eyes Nabokov's reputation was undiminished.

"What you can see is that the theme itself is nothing. The first novel is not of great artistic merit but then the master takes the subject and creates a work of art."

The Telegraph, London




I would just like to pass on to all concerned.  Today, here at KIRKUK
Iraq, we were told that we were no longer allowed to fly the United
flag.  The reason we were given is so we would not offend the Iraqi
We were told that we are not occupying this country!  And apparently we
not in charge.  Well, my question is this.  If we are not in charge,
who is?  Obviously, the Iraqi people are not.  The Iraqi people do not
any of these bases over here yet, and may not for quite some time.  We
KIRKUK AB, Fire Dept have up to today, both Post and Retire the colors
day.  Today in a show of respect and honor especially for those who have
fallen, we disobeyed the order and raised our flag, but less than an
later we were Ordered to take our flag down.  The moral here is low, but
mission remains in focus.  It is a slap in the face of those families
home who have lost a loved ones.  It is also a slap in the face for
who still remain here, not only protecting our people back home, but
to make a difference here in the pursuit of freedom for the Iraqi
people.  I
would appreciate the widest  dissemination of this message.  If we are
fly the Iraqi flag with our flag then so be it.  But don't tell us that
show the respect for our flag, when so many have died in the name of
Freedom.  The only people I think who would be offended, are the people
kill innocent women and children in the name of religion.  Thank you for
your support and prayers.

Samuel D. Arbuckle, TSgt, USAFR

From:   Talley Chuck CMSgt 506 AEG/CCC
Sent:   Thursday, February 05, 2004 5:11 PM
To:     Roznovsky Franklin SMSgt 355 AMXS
Cc:     506 AEG FSGT's; 506 AEG CHIEFS
Subject:        RE: Flying of US Flag

All outside US flags need to come down per CENTAF guidance.  Col Gibson
taking this back to CENTAF.  Inside flags are good, Chief T

We are allowed to put the flag up for special days or events, but we
have it up all the time implying that we are occupying Iraq.  Chief T

Sir, When we carry the bodies of our fallen men and women to the
for their final flight home, can we still drape the coffins with our
or will that still offend the people that we are dying for so they can

         MSgt, W. Dalton


Top of Page | Home Page

©-2004 Adelaide Institute