Fredrick Töben says: Don't blame the Jews, blame those that bend to their pressure in the battle of the wills!



Here are two definitive writers: John Kaminski and Andrew MacGregor with their worldview - Weltanschauung


-added, John Bryant's response, below.





Who's wagging whom?

Do sinister Jews control the world or are they mere puppets of some white racist Illuminati?

By John Kaminski

11 August 2005

Dear Abby,

Awhile back, I got into a most interesting e-mail debate about who really controls the world. It was titled "Who's Wagging Whom?" The participants generally were split along typical conspiratorial lines: with their superior intelligence and guile, the Jews control everything, versus, the poor Jews are being used by a Eurocentric, white racist Illuminati as designated patsies in a neverending criminal Crusade against the Middle East and other hapless nonwhites.

As I recall, the debate was not resolved with finality, nor in the real world has this question yet been answered in a clear fashion.

But what may be the even more significant aspect of the question "Who's Wagging Whom?" is the growing notion that world politics is not really determined by its recognizable political entities. People are beginning to figure out that it's not a simple matter of the capitalists vs. communists, whites vs. blacks, or North vs. South. It's not simply the U.S. vs. Germany and Japan, U.S. vs. USSR, or the free world vs. the supposed Muslim terror menace.

This growing notion senses a more authentic line of demarcation that identifies rich vs. poor as the more appropriate label between sides in this new war, which is also the old war, and the endless war.

Further, it suspects, through repeated analyses of the events of recent history, that somehow a single entity manages to bankroll BOTH sides in each conflict, employs deceptive operatives who pretend to be working for one side when they're really working for the other (if they're not openly working for both), and generally fans the flames of violent hatred whenever it can for one purpose only, to make sure war breaks out and continues — because that is where the real money is, and always has been.

Perhaps the clearest recent example of this was the eight-year war between Iraq and Iran, during which the Western axis of evil — the U.S., Britain and Israel — did everything it could to fund BOTH sides in the conflict, hoping that the two nations would destroy each other. Then these usurious vultures could walk in and pick up the profitable pieces. When that didn't happen, the Western axis of evil decided it had to start its own war there, which it did. This eviscerating wound to not only the Iraqi people but to all the peoples of the world, including Americans, has reached the point where we are now on the verge of World War Three as this policy swaggers on toward its depraved conclusion.

Somebody wants World War Three. And we can locate the people who do as residing within the Western axis of evil. But, returning to our original question, is it the Jews, or are they merely pawns of the racist Eurocentric Illuminati, all of them trapped in their own demonic delusions while transporting us all toward a megamistake that can't be undone?

Jewish paranoia is an amazingly complex and frightful topic, one with two distinct aspects. The Jews themselves have had drilled into them from childhood that non-Jews consider them pariahs. Ever since Moses was driven out of Egypt, the Jews have exhibited a schizophrenic persecution complex, insisting everybody's after their butts because their God told them they are superior to everyone else. This is a message clearly presented in both the Talmud and the Old Testament, and this is precisely what drives their attitude. It is the rare Jew indeed who perceives the connection between their claims of superiority and the persecution they claim to receive. The obvious solution seems to be for Jews to admit they're just another clan in the human family, but for some reason they don't seem to be willing to do that, and likely, one day, that will result in a future for them far darker than their hubris dares imagine.

The second aspect of Jewish paranoia centers around a marathon history known generally as the diaspora. No one social group has survived intact as long as this one. The big question that never seems to be erased from the minds of suspicious non-Jews is why Jews have been kicked out of so many countries, and why, when wandering Jews arrive in another country, that country evinces a bad habit to deteriorate, disintegrate, and die.

Those who see the world's problems as a Jewish problem, and insist that Jews have caused all the wars in human history, have an impressive array of superficial historical facts to back up their arguments.

Sticking for the moment to only the 20th century, anti-Jewish thought blames both World Wars on Jews. World War I was only a European conflict until the forces of Zionism received a guarantee from England to recognize their claim to Palestine, at which point, the U.S., with President Woodrow Wilson cunningly blackmailed by his Jewish adviser Colonel House, brought America into the "war to end all wars." Even worse, after the shooting stopped, House betrayed Wilson and humanity by implementing impossible financial constraints on the defeated Germans that all but guaranteed another world war.

Darker still, U.S. Jewish bankers actually helped fund Hitler to build Germany up for yet another war. It is one of the great misstatements of history that the Western axis of evil actually triumphed for freedom's sake in World War II, when in fact, the financial powers behind the Western nations actually fomented the war for profit, and then when Hitler asked Churchill for peace before the war really got started, the West refused because it wanted to destroy Germany's economic success story for good — and of course make all that war money. The very same process happened again in 1968 when Jewish war criminal Henry Kissinger needlessly prolonged the Vietnam war for five more years.

But getting back to World War I — just for a minute — two other world changing events occurred that are also laid at the feet of the worldwide Jewish banking conspiracy. The first was the creation of the Federal Reserve legislation, which forever placed the American money system in the hands of private bankers and guaranteed that genuine participatory government was gone for good from the United States.

And second, of course, was the infamous Bolshevik Revolution which did the same thing in Russia, although in a different way. The key element in that bloody uprising was the presence of key American Jews who were funded by New York bankers. Trotsky and others were sent into Russia and supervised the murder of the czar, his family, and twenty million people. That's why Hitler was so afraid of the Jews. He saw what happened. And he saw the same crowd — again, this goes exactly to the question of who's wagging whom? — doing the same to Germany in the 1920s. So he took action. And the bankers from America, among whose ranks dwelled members of the opportunistic Bush family — rubbed their hands with glee.

Of course, these questions go much further back into history, even back before the time of the so-called Christ, when the known world was coerced into worshipping a Jewish male, which is perhaps the ultimate in conspiracy theory achievement.

There are many more stories in this genre throughout history, but for now, let us return to the present and consider another story that goes to the heart of the matter of who's wagging whom?

I've gotten myself into hot water with virtually all factions of the 9/11 skeptics movement by continuing to insist that various Jews played a key role in the false flag operation that killed all those people in New York and Washington, and set the stage for the intensification of corporate tyranny that is now waging war on innocent people all over the world, and particularly in Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

Outraged critics from all over the political spectrum have assailed me for my so-called anti-Semitism for mentioning this unmentionable topic, and tried to lure me into toeing the line on this matter with promises of increased financial success if I would just drop it.

So let me just drop on you a series of smoking guns that PROVES beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jews were intimately involved in the planning and execution of

9/11 (we already know that Jewish Israel was the primary beneficiary of 9/11 because it took the spotlight off its continuing genocide of the Palestinians, and later got the American war machine inextricably involved in wiping out its Islamic adversaries throughout the Middle East).

First is best, and here it is. Leland Lehrman, a young father who lives out West, was a Jew but is now a committed Christian. He reports, in "Israel, Mossad, Iran and a Nuclear False Flag,"

The Mossad is a leading candidate for architect of the 9/11 attacks. This suppressed German Intelligence Document reveals how senior Israelis knew in advance about the attacks and "urgently wished that no attempt was made to prevent the attacks." Here's a longer quote:

"It is very evident from surveillance conducted against Mossad agents in the Federal Republic as well as interceptions of Israeli diplomatic communication from the Federal Republic to Tel Aviv, that the Mossad has successfully penetrated various extremist Arab groups in both the Federal Republic and the United States.

These investigations disclosed in late May of 2001 that an attack was to be made against certain specified targets in the American cities of Washington and New York. But it was apparent that the Mossad was not only fully aware of these attacks well in advance but actually, through their own agents inside these Arab groups, assisted in the planning and the eventual execution of the attacks.

That the Israeli government was fully aware of these attacks is absolutely certain and proven. Diplomatic traffic between the Israeli Embassy in the Federal Republic and the Israeli Foreign Office made it very clear that Minister President Sharon was fully aware of this pending attack and urgently wished that no attempt was made to prevent the attacks.

Although the Israeli officials were instructed to warn the American intelligence community that some kind of an attack might be possible, at no time were the specific dates and targets (known at that time to Israeli officials) to be given to the Americans.

The rationale for this attitude was expressed in a conversation on August 1, 2001, between the Israeli Military Attaché in the Federal Republic to a member of the Israeli General Staff. There it was stated that Israel believed an attack on the continental United States would so inflame American public opinion that they would permit Israel to "cleanse" their state of "Arab terrorists and those who support such terrorists". This "cleansing" was explained as the expulsion of all Arabs, and even Christian groups, from the Palestine area."

The website has additional supporting evidence for Mossad involvement in 9/11 in its background information section.

I suggest if you care about the future of your world that you go to that site and read that whole story.

Regarding further smoking guns that PROVE Jewish Israeli involvement in 9/11:

• Between August 26 and September 11, 2001, a group of speculators, identified by the American Securities and Exchange Commission as Israeli citizens, sold "short" a list of 38 stocks that could reasonably be expected to fall in value as a result of the pending attacks. These speculators operated out of the Toronto, Canada and Frankfurt, Germany, stock exchanges and their profits were specifically stated to be "in the millions of dollars."

Short selling of stocks involves the opportunity to gain large profits by passing shares to a friendly third party, then buying them back when the price falls. Historically, if this precedes a traumatic event, it is an indication of foreknowledge. It is widely known that the CIA uses the Promis software to routinely monitor stock trades as a possible warning sign of a terrorist attack or suspicious economic behavior. A week after the Sept. 11 attacks, the London Times reported that the CIA had asked regulators for the Financial Services Authority in London to investigate the suspicious sales of millions of shares of stock just prior to the terrorist acts. It was hoped the business paper trail might lead to the terrorists.

Investigators from numerous government agencies are part of a clandestine but official effort to resolve the market manipulations There has been a great deal of talk about insider trading of American stocks by certain Israeli groups both in Canada and Germany between August 26 and the Sept.11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Lynne Howard, a spokeswoman for the Chicago Board Options Exchange (CBOE), stated that information about who made the trades was available immediately. "We would have been aware of any unusual activity right away. It would have been triggered by any unusual volume. There is an automated system called 'blue sheeting,' or the CBOE Market Surveillance System, that everyone in the business knows about. It provides information on the trades — the name and even the Social Security number on an account — and these surveillance systems are set up specifically to look into insider trading. The system would look at the volume, and then a real person would take over and review it, going back in time and looking at other unusual activity."

 Wasn't it funny, then (to put it mildly), that the FBI publicly concluded shortly thereafter that there was nothing suspicious about these pre-9/11 stock profits that indicated any kind of foreknowledge of the event. Read the whole story at

"Israeli citizens," the story said. Hmm. I wonder who else might be Israeli citizens involved in this whole deceptive mess. How about Rabbi Dov Zakheim?

In a document called "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century" published by The American Enterprise's "Project for a New American Century", System Planning Corporation (SPC) International executive, Dov Zakheim, called for "some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor" being necessary to foster the frame of mind needed for the American public to support a war in the Middle East that would politically and culturally reshape the region. A respected and established voice in the intelligence community, his views were eagerly accepted, and Dov went from his position at Systems Planning Corporation to become the Comptroller of the Pentagon in May 2001. Perhaps not so coincidentally, it was an SPC subsidiary, TRIDATA CORPORATION, that oversaw the investigation after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in 1993.

SPC, according to their official website, specializes in many areas of defense technology production and manufacture, including a system developed by their Radar Physics Group called the Flight Termination System, or FTS. This is a system used to destroy target drones (craft that would be fired on by test aircraft or weaponry) in the event of malfunction or "misses". This highly sophisticated war-game technology allows the control of several 'drones' from a remote location, on varying frequencies, and has a range of several hundred miles. This technology can be used on many different types of aircraft, including large passenger jets.

Once again, if you're interested in delving into the dirtiest details of this key neocon player, check out and be sure and click those links at the bottom, too, where you'll find nuggets like

System Planning Corporation designs, manufactures and distributes highly sophisticated technology that enables an operator to fly by remote control as many as eight different airborne vehicles at the same time from one position either on the ground or airborne. For those looking for an extraordinarily interesting hobby, please see photos and specs of this hardware (about the size of a small refrigerator) at Just be sure your mom doesn't catch you causing havoc with the airlines.

And of course I would be remiss not to mention that Rabbi Zakheim just happened to be the chief financial officer of the Pentagon one ordinary day when a news conference was held in New York City.

On September 10, 2001, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld held a press conference to disclose that over $2 TRILLION in Pentagon funds could not be accounted for. Rumsfeld stated: "According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions."

Such a disclosure normally would have sparked a huge scandal. However, the commencement of the attack on New York City and Washington in the morning would assure that the story remained buried. To the trillions already missing from the coffers, an obedient Congress terrorized by anthrax attacks would add billions more in appropriations to fight the War on Terror.

The Comptroller of the Pentagon at the time of the attack was Dov Zakheim, who was appointed in May 2001. Before becoming the Pentagon's money manager, he was an executive at System Planning Corporation, a defense contractor specializing in electronic warfare technologies including remote-controlled aircraft systems.

Zakheim is a member of the Project for a New American Century and participated in the creation of its 2000 position paper Rebuilding America's Defenses, which called for "a New Pearl Harbor."

This telling little news brief can be found at my favorite 9/11 website:

These three news nuggets dwarf other, more well known connections between the Jewish state and 9/11: Israeli agents Perle/Wolfowitz/Libby/etc. driving White House policy; WTC landlord Larry Silverstein's personal connection to Israel's war criminal prime minister Ariel Sharon; Israeli henchman Benjamin Netanyahu being in New York City and saying 9/11 "was a good thing for Israel"; the dancing Israelis arrested by New Jersey police for cheering the destruction of the towers and having boxcutters in their van; the advance warning to the Odigo phony company; and other stuff.

And I would be remiss not to mention the role of Rabbi Michael Chertoff, now head of America's Homeland Security secret police, who coordinated the multi-agency non-investigation right after 9/11.

Now, many people know what I'm talking about, though most are afraid to speak of it. White racists like Edgar Steele and David Duke and even the falsely imprisoned Ernst Zundel correctly identify some of the Jewish negativities in the world, but sabotage their own message by trashing the wholly innocent and manipulated black race, which plays right into the hands of the master manipulators and makes these Revisionist contributions to the larger debate on how to run a humane and healthy world less than they could be.

And even supposedly compassionate liberal commentators like William Blum, Amy Goodman, and Noam Chomsky are razor sharp when it comes to describing the demented depredations of the United States against the hapless poor people of the world, but they suddenly (and not inexplicably) grow shy and quiet on the subject of Jewish manipulation of the American and British governments, the churches of the Western world, and the Jewish hammerlock on money, media, education, law, and medicine in this society that we have mistakenly called our own.

What piques my alarm is the continuing attempt by so many "thoughtful"

commentators to distance the evil deeds of the warmaking Zionist menace from "ordinary Jews" to a certain criminal element that was as much a danger to Jews as to anybody else (which is certainly true, in one respect). But I instantly rejected this transparent ruse by realizing that everything bad that Zionists have done is not only heartily endorsed by the evil books known as the Talmud and Torah (first five books of the Old Testament), but also that the clearly illegal and immoral existence of the criminal state of Israel is supported by all Jews, lapsed or not, except for a tiny splinter group of Orthodox Jews who nevertheless embrace the same racist Jewish supremacy garbage as their holy creed.

Jews doubtless feel this is an unwarranted intrusion into their business, but the human community insists on knowing more about a dogma that consigns the rest of the world to slavery, often with the status of animals or products, and this sensible world community, knowing it is an unwise course for humanity to follow the we are now pursuing, demands to know why Jews regard non-Jews as cattle as it is written in what they claim are they their holy books.

Furthermore, the definitive evidence for me is that British political supremacy in the world did not really occur until the Marrano Jews were expelled from Spain around 1500 (the Rockefellers went to Turkey, then on to Holland where they took their present name and became Episcopalians).

Most of those expelled went to Holland, which accounts for the astonishing political power today of Queen Juliana), before crossing over into England and, through the implementation of the practices of usury and fractional reserve banking, enabled Britain to become ruler of the world, plundering country after country (as did Holland).

This was the power of usury — great for empires, bad for people. But the price Britain paid for power was that it gave up its actual sovereignty to Jewish bankers, who eventually captured, through Nathan Rothschild's astute maneuver after Wellington's victory over Napoleon, the Bank of England. Since then British "royals" have intermarried with Jews to the point that Britain and Israel are virtual synonyms.

Rense columnist Henry Makow, in his recent commentary "The Jewish Conspiracy is British Imperialism," even concedes ...

According to L.G. Pine, the Editor of Burke's Peerage , Jews "have made themselves so closely connected with the British peerage that the two classes are unlikely to suffer loss which is not mutual. So closely linked are the Jews and the lords that a blow against the Jews in this country would not be possible without injuring the aristocracy also." (Tales of the British Aristocracy, 1957, p.219.)

Better yet is the alarming rebuttal to the contention in Makow's title by an anoymous Pakistani writer known only as H., who recounts the plunder of India by a "perfidious Albion" wholly under the control, in the mid-1800s, of the Rothschild banking dynasty. It's a fascinating read at

And it is more than alarming to realize that British Israel wholly constructed India's governmental system and staffed it with quisling stooges who remain in power to this day, furnishing alert observers with an unsettling mirror as to what has been done to the United States in the last half of the 20th century.

Ah yes, this is anti-Jewish paranoia at its most powerful. Would that it only stopped there.

Did you know that Zecharia Sitchin, architect of the dominant New Age paradigm about extraterrestrial beings intermingling — ahem, I believe the relevant phrase is "came into the daughters of men," a quote from the Jewish Old Testament — with early protohuman hominids, is really an Israeli economist?

Did you know that, according to maverick theologian David Livingstone, the Wahabbi sect of Islam that not only includes the ruling clan of Saudi Arabia but also the purported architects of the Muslim revolution machine now supposedly running around the world sowing the seeds of "terror," was really founded by an Iraqi Jew? No? Perhaps you should check out or

And lastly, did you know that what is arguably the founding event in the history of Western civilization — the escape of Moses from Egypt in the 12th century B.C. — is a story that has been grossly misrepresented to you by more than 3,000 years of propagandistic mythmaking?

The brilliant Polish professor Marek Glogoczowski, at a recent conference in Kiev, Ukraine (titled "Zionism as the biggest threat for modern civilization"), analyzed the work of the Roman Jewish historian Flavius Josephus and discovered a mention by him of the Egyptian priest Manetho, who lived in the 5th century B.C. and left an account suggesting that the story of the famous Exodus Jews was modeled on an actual historical event in Egypt. Quoting Josephus:

"The pharaoh Amenophis, after the victory over Hyksos, rounded up 80,000 of leprous (lepers) in the city of Avaris in the Delta of Nile. There these leprous organized themselves under the leadership of archpriest Ozarzif or Moses, fortified the city, but Egyptians conquered it, permitting leprous to leave the Egyptian soil."

Glogoczowski, who publishes his essays in a half dozen different languages, scrutinized the passage, and wrote this analysis:

Why does this story of the Exodus of the City of Leprous ? which "city" St.

Augustin took as a model of his Civitas Dei ? recurrently appear in texts related to the history of Jews? Thirty years ago the author of this essay had a chance to visit a big leprozorium, located in Puri, in the state of Orissa in India. He learned there that bacteria of leprosy attacks at first neurons conducting signals to human skin, and then also to extremities like fingers or noses. These, not stimulated by nervous system organs, remain insensible and immobilized, and thus quickly undergo atrophy, their tissues are rotting and finally they are dropping off .... The subsequent stage of development of this illness is less visible, for bacteria of leprosy attack neuronal cells inside the brain, heavily damaging them, cutting connections between diverse brain centers, so the ill person loses the sense of reality, begins to hallucinate and so on. Perhaps Moses, who heard the voice of his "Lord" at the desert, was in fact afflicted by this illness, which made him hallucinate that he will lead his Chosen People towards the land "flowing with milk and honey".

 Long ago, Sigmund Freud concurred with this interpretation.

"This similar effect of the loss of neurons," Glogoczowski writes, "connecting not-stimulated brain centers, occurs when people (or any other cerebrated

animals) are inhibited for a long time in their spontaneous movements .... men trained since childhood to behave in agreement with ... "Law of Moses" must have substantial parts of their brains atrophied ... "

This specific "spiritual leprosy" of community, which generation after generation became accustomed to a reading and rereading of the same "Holy Scripture" devoid of criticism, was well known in Antiquity. The contemporary of Philo of Alexandria, Stoic philosopher Seneca, considered Jews as the "most criminal tribe"; another Roman writer Celsus, in his criticism of both Jews and Christians, commenting (on) Christian rites of worship of "the dead corpse", remarked that "a new pestilence originated once again from Judea". Even in medieval times, prior to the mass intoxication of Christians with the Bible translated into national languages, Catholic Popes warned their subjects about misdeeds of the "blind tribe of Judah".

Glogoczowski observes this process in Philo, who despite reading only the Greek version of the Old Testament, displays this "spiritual leprosy."

Nevertheless this "Hellenized" version of the Bible was sufficient to mould (the) neuronal "wiring" of his mind in such a way that things normally perceived as meaningful become for him meaningless, while completely pathological reflections became "beacons" to be followed by everyone.

This pathological path proceeded into the future. The religious focus became ....

... only artifacts having utilitarian application are admitted in Judaism to be objects of fervent veneration, for these artifacts facilitate the "taking the earth into possession" promised by the Bible. The adulation of various utensils was in antique Israel so unashamed, that one of manuscripts found in Qumran practically consists of enumeration of ordinary household gear, each item preceded by the word "God's". Not exaggerating at all, we suggest that in case automobiles were known already in Antiquity, the object of worship of the Chosen People would be also GOD'S VEHICLE , providing an effortless transportation to "small deities", as Philo called his co-believers.

The adornment, in Judaism, of ordinary household utensils has made representatives of this religion, although widely despised for their voracious cupiditas naturalis (greed), very useful helpers of every ruler trying to be "like others", and thus dreaming of dwelling in apparent material comfort, secured by riches (and arms) of all kinds. This was the reason, for example, of the decision of King of Poland Kazimierz the Great, to open the country, in late 14th century, for rich Jewry flying from Germany at that time.

Such pragmatic, utilitarian considerations were surely also behind the incomprehensible acceptance by laymen of the Old Testament as the "spiritual beacon" of the expanding Christian faith, which was done during the Council of Nice in year 325, immediately after Christians seized power in the Roman Empire.

But the Church, by the greed of its leaders, accepted Abraham's children's cupiditas naturalis as the "beacon" directing this church's earthly adventures, and quickly become sucked down ? like the Jewry it despised ? into the neverending pursuit of wealth.

This Catholic (Common) Church predilection for riches automatically has led to the ... separatist Protestant movements, then to bloody religious wars, then to Protestant massive participation in the development of capitalist cancer, and finally, at present encompassing the whole globe, to the Transnational Religion of Mammon.

The German-Jewish psychoanalyst Erich Fromm was really horrified, in the middle of the 20th century, when he realized, soon after his arrival in the U.S., that the Judeo-Christian elites of this "super" country really dream of the "second creation" of the whole Solar System, along the pattern of world's "improvement" outlined by the theosophy of Philo of Alexandria.

Mimicking the famous exclamation of St. Paul "No salvation (of Christians) without the ugliness of Christ's assassination!", we may say that there is NO HUMAN SALVATION WITHOUT BIBLE ABJURATION (ed. — renunciation). This program was already proposed 18 centuries ago by Marcion, son of bishop of Synope, but abandoned a few centuries later thanks to efforts of ambitious cretins like this famous Tertulian, who believed the invented by St. Paul "logos" so much that he proudly announced credo quia absurdum (or ineptum) est. In other terms it means that God, which Tertulian believed in, is hidden in the logical rubbish. And once this LOGICAL RUBBISH took the place of Plotinian ABSOLUTE, it started to radiate downwards, creating subsequent, enumerated by Plotinus, hypostases (ed.

— underlying reality; common example: Christ existing in three hypostases — father, son, and holy ghost).

Further analysis by Glogoczowski leads him to conclude:

In this particular, Judeo-Christian ordo vivendi (sinister path), the hypostasis (foundation), following the LOGOS of St. PAUL, became the SPIRIT OF JUDAISATION, known today the best as the Calvinist "American Psyche". This penetrating everywhere "Holy Spirit of Free Enterprise" creates on the earth below the LUMPENCULTURE of Junk Food Eaters, Shopping Mall customers and consumers of the Rubbish Religion and Rubbish Science. Formed by this (lumpen) culture individuals create, by their industrious activities, the ultimate hypostasis of the "Absolute" in form of a GIGANTIC HEAP OF GARBAGE of planetary dimensions.

This "New Creation" (Nowotwór ? in Polish this means Global Tumor), is the END OF TIMES PROJECT inspired by the Bible Judeo-American "solidarity" of bankers leading their masses.

Leading their masses to certain destruction, I would add.

See also here: for complete texts of these and other Glogoczowski commentaries in a variety of languages.

So ... You still wanna tell me that those poor Jews in Israel are being exploited by those nasty old British monarchs and American neocon necrophiliacs?

You think a relatively recent tradition of inbred regal buffoonery can dominate a two millennia old tradition of utter insanity, butchery for bucks, and profound cosmic paranoia?

Now would be a good time to talk about this, since it seems to be the main reason World War Three is about to start.

And Abby. Dear, dear Abby.

So this is what I want to ask, Abby. Just who do you think is wagging whom?

Best wishes, John K.

P.S.: Abby? I know your sister's name is Landers, and yours is Van Buren. But wasn't your maiden name Friedman? It's OK. My Volynian greatgrandfather's name was Max.

For a wonderful tour of Jewish self-hatred and what it has done to the world, check out

This is getting long, so I'll mention only one excerpt:

... you will also find abundance evidence for internal corruption within, and horrific conduct by, the state of Israel; along with clarifying Israel's solid role in the facilitation of international crime, this material should fortify you against backsliding under the banner of Zionism, just in case this latest icon of Jewish identity at all tempts you. If Israel's role as sanctuary for Jewish criminals on the run, as a hub for money laundering and trade in blood diamonds or its egregious record in human trafficking doesn't disenchant you enough, focus on its historic role in the arms trade and its support of murderous dictatorships in such places as Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panama, Argentina, Chile, or Columbia. Familiarizing yourself with these and many other equally charming qualities of the Jewish state should do the trick.

I should point out to you that as long as you think of yourself as a Jew, you are fated to contend with the longest running, most pronounced internal conflict in history — a conflict threaded through and woven into history as a whole to such a profound extent that only serious, deliberate and honest study can extricate you and deliver you to a position of independence. Take a look at Hemdat, an Israeli website that features stories of ultra-orthodox Rabbis and their yeshiva minions still hurling excrement at conservative synagogues. They tote Uzis and attack old Jewish women for using their electric wheelchairs on the Shabbat. This is one aspect of Jewish identity. Another aspect is billionaire Edgar Bronfman, peddling whiskey and Gangsta-rap and supporting Zionism; or Al Goldstein, porn merchant; or Lev Trotsky, internationalist revolutionary bankrolled by capitalists. It will be your task to survey the material I am recommending in search of a Jewish identity — beyond the contradictions and conflict — worth salvaging

Jewish "self-hatred" is an aspersion cast upon Jews by Jews, and it is indicative of the conflict that arose within and from a people fixed by the fact and the presumptuousness of having initiated a totalitarian worldview, i.e. under one governance — in the original case a god.

This idée fixe has proved a burden of enormous weight to the people who have carried it forward and managed its mutation under a variety of guises, oftentimes against a general will. Indeed, Jews have a long history of oppressing themselves with this fixed vision of self-importance and also of seeking escape from themselves, in recent centuries directly and indirectly spinning radical and subversive elements continually out into the larger societies they inhabit, all the while maintaining a pathological sense of superiority and an indifference to the destructive effects in this pattern, except perhaps when it crashes down upon themselves.

The real meaning of Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ is not about Jewish/Christian conflict, but about internal Jewish conflict, an undiminished conflict that is a visible in Israel today as it was in the time of Jesus. The same radical progressives and frothing, fundamentalist fanatics embodied in the trial of Jesus are alive today in Israel and in the extended Jewish community, and they have drawn the world into their narrative and dilemma.

• • •

Know what the best thing about this story is? It's that Christians can no longer assail Jews — nor vice versa — because they both suffer from the same dreadful and depraved disease.

Know what the second best thing is? Now we know who was really behind 9/11.

Have a look at these links




Andrew MacGregor is a former policeman who has definitively commented on the Port Arthur Massacre - and that took courage!



The Keystone Cops

13 August 2004

It was on reading of a Police Explanation into the shooting of the Brazilian, Jean Charles de Menezes on the internet that caused me to do some thinking. Later when I tried to find the exact article, and I believe I read it on, I was disappointed in not being successful. So now I have to try and work from memory.

It is my understanding that the London Special Branch obtained an address from one of the wallets of the deceased ‘Suicide bombers’. The address was staked out by members of the Special Branch. There was a problem though, the address was one of a block of flats that used a communal front door, and so the watchers were only able to observe those people using the ‘communal’ front door.

Apparently there was some confusion we were told by this article in that when Menezes emerged from the ‘communal’ front door as to whether he was the main suspect, but in any case a team of police officers were then tasked to follow the suspect Menezes. The team of apparently 20 trained police officers then swung into action.

Again the article states that there was some confusion when Menezes boarded a bus, and even more consternation when he left the bus and entered the Stockwell train station. The decision was made and the three members of the police squad then moved in to arrest Menezes, with the result that Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the body.

Rightio, now then, let me point out the first item of concern. It is now a fortnight since the first bomb attacks on the London Transport Services. The Special Branch have had the information they used to instigate a stake-out on the address where Menezes resided for a fortnight, but have only instigated this move on a suspected bomber 14 days after the information came to their attention.

Thus it cannot be considered as coincidental that on this very same day there were four totally inept bomb incidences in London. Again that there were four bomb incidences on a single day, yet none over the previous fortnight, after the initial bomb attacks and even more importantly, none afterwards, suggests that these four incidents were orchestrated, but for what purpose? Now consider the fifth incident, the murder of Menezes. What is the mathematical probability of these 5 incidents being totally independent of each other, and yet occurring on the same day within the same city? Now consider the mathematical problem in the reverse, that these incidents could be dependent on each other.

Now I want you to consider what the public was informed about Jean Charles de Menezes, in that he was totally innocent of any ‘terrorist’ action. So with this, let us go back to the police stake-out at the block of flats that Menezes resides in, and that time when he exits the premises via the ‘communal’ front door.

The Police Officer in charge is apparently not certain that Menezes is the right suspect, but in any case he orders a surveillance squad (the dogs) to follow Menezes, but this team consists of approximately 20 police officers.

20 men to follow one suspect! That is Keystone Cops. The ‘dogs’ squads were never any more than three or four, because any larger number becomes too conspicuous and unwieldy. It is far more the normal police practice, that the ‘stake-out would have consisted of the same three men who executed Menezes at the Stockwell Train Station.

Again, in considering that the Police Officer in charge of the stake-out is not certain, but decides to react. Does that mean that he would then detail his entire surveillance team on one uncertainty? In the stake-out of a block of flats with a ‘communal’ front door, where there is the possibility of having more than one suspect, just how many ‘surveillance teams were at the O.C.’s disposal? Come to think of it, where would he hide such a team of twenty surveillance squad members? Where and how could he hide additional teams, that is another twenty, or forty or sixty men?

Again we are told that the Police O.C. was not certain if Menezes was the suspect. I beg your pardon? In such situations the police are given a photograph of the suspect, otherwise they would have no idea of who to watch for. Can you comprehend this little matter? To have a stake out, there must be means to identify just whom you are watching otherwise, there will be a lot of photographs being taken for analysis.

Rightio, let’s have some more fun. Just suppose that Menezes was not just a ‘suspected’ bomber, but in actual fact a ‘real suicide bomber’, just as the police imagined they had. You watch this bomber exit his residence from the ‘communal’ front door, and do nothing. You watch him as he walks down the street, and simply follow him. You watch him as he waits for a bus, and try to make yourself inconspicuous. You watch him as he boards the bus, and then board it yourself. You watch him as he moves to a seat, either upstairs or downstairs, and do nothing. You watch him as he gets off the bus at the train station, and you simply follow him. You watch him as he enters the train station without buying a ticket (because he already has one) and then you and two of your companions do something to startle him and it is then he runs towards the landing platform.

You give chase, with the best two runners out front, whilst the third removes the Glock handgun from its holster, and the suicide bomber, realising that he had been discovered and there is little chance of escape, simply detonates the bomb killing the three policemen and any civilians unfortunate enough to be with close proximity.

In this whole series of events, what we can actually see is that there had been several opportunities for the police to isolate and apprehend the ‘supposed’ suicide bomber, without major danger to the public, but had the released story that Menezes was believed to have been a ‘suicide bomber’ been anywhere near factual, then the question must be posed as to why he was not apprehended when he first left his flat, via the ‘communal’ front door.

A friend several years ago told me of an assassination he witnessed in Manila in 1984. A man was walking down the street, a woman walked up to him, removed a handgun from her handbag, fired a single shot to the back of his head, and then when he fell to the ground another shot to his head, returned the handgun to her handbag as she walked off and nobody did a thing to stop her. It is that simple.

In Israel, there have been cases where a ‘suicide’ bomber has been discovered prior to arriving at the preferred site, and simply detonated on discovery. There have been times, not many, but times when a ‘suicide’ bomber has been apprehended by police and wounded so as to apprehend the bomber alive. The Israeli doctrine of shooting ‘suicide’ bombers in the head sounds really good except for one minor detail. A head shot is very difficult, and to accomplish such a shot especially with a handgun one would normally have to get very close.

Now just how does a policeman get real close to an unsuspecting ‘suicide’ bomber? I mean for a start, how can a policeman identify a ‘suicide’ bomber? I mean every civilian has the right to know just how to identify a ‘suicide’ bomber walking around with the bomb vest on, not only so they can then inform a policeman, if you can find one, but also to remove themselves from any possible danger. Now if you have any difficulty here, just think of “Mr Bean (actor Rowan Atkinson) at the L.A. airport scene”.

Then what is the next step that police do when they have apprehended or shot a ‘suicide’ bomb suspect? Get all the back-up evidence that they can. This is normally accomplished with the aid of a search warrant to search for clues, such as explosives residue, or other material, at the person’s residence or other places of frequence. Were such acts instigated with the Menezes murder?

Now if it was a case of mistaken identity, and please remember that the Police O.C at the stake-out was not certain that Menezes was ‘their man’ then that raises the distinct possibility that another male person residing within the block of flats was the real suspect, and in that case, the police having blown their investigation in regard to the real suspect, and would then still have to preform the required searches for evidence.

You see there is only one possibility that the police can draw upon. They were watching an address of a suspected ‘suicide’ bomber. If Menezes was an unfortunate mistake, then that still leaves the real suspect at that address. If no further acts were carried out in regard to that address, then the only assumption that can be drawn was that Menezes was the man that police were hunting.

Again, if police did not act to recover’ evidence’ in relation to ‘suicide’ bombs at Menezes flat, and I mean much more than just a mere search of the premises, then we can only assume that the police did get their man, but the accusation of ‘suicide’ bomber was a total fabrication. This then links the other acts of the so-called four bombs on that particular day in London directly with the Menezes murder.

The last point to make is the quickness that the London Police had in stating that Jean Charles de Menezes was totally innocent. Yet just prior to his execution Menezes acted and looked, according to witnesses as though he was well aware of what was going to happen in the immediate future, that is that the three plainclothes ‘policemen’ were trying to murder him. This means that Menezes although not a suicide bomber was not totally ‘innocent’ as suggested, but rather knew something that he was not permitted to pass on. Menezes knew something and that is why he died.

Andrew S. MacGregor



A Response from Edgar Steele


From: Edgar J. Steele
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 8:19 AM
To: John Kaminski
Subject: RE: Kaminski: Who's wagging whom?

>>>White racists like Edgar Steele and David Duke and even the falsely imprisoned Ernst Zundel correctly identify some of the Jewish negativities in the world, but sabotage their own message by trashing the wholly innocent and manipulated black race, which plays right into the hands of the master manipulators and makes these Revisionist contributions to the larger debate on how to run a humane and healthy world less than they could be.<<<

Obviously, you never read the free copy of "Defensive Racism" that I sent you. I'm disappointed in this from you, John. Particularly since I had to pay for the two copies of your books of essay collections that I bought.

Your calling blacks "wholly innocent," just because they are manipulated by Jews leaves me gasping and reaching for a thesaurus in a struggle to label you properly. You, of course, are well aware of the disproprtionate black on white crime rates throughout the world. You, of course, are well aware of the black-on-white genocidal and gang rape spectacles that Rhodesia and South Africa have become. According to outdated Justice Department figures, Blacks commit 7 times the violent crimes of whites, while being only 1/12th the total population. Do the math. Any Black is 50 times as likely as any White to commit a violent crime, and the violence has escalated markedly since those figures were released, even with the more violent Black perps in prison.

Was Jack the Ripper wholly innocent, too? How about Jeffrey Dahmer? George Bush? After all, they merely acted at the effect of the societies of which they were products.

By logical extension, then, I am no racist, because I am a product of my society, too. It must be responsible. Yep. Blacks and me. Wholly innocent. Yes, indeedy.

Of course, I am no racist, either, an outlook which requires the unremitting hatred of all races different from one's own. Fact is, I readily accept 90% of the people in the world. Can you honestly make that claim, John? What I do is boldly refuse to participate in my own race's genocide. Like so many, you confuse that with true racism. Read that book I sent you - everybody says it's an easy and a fun read - you will learn just what I am, so that you won't have to make ridiculous statements like this.

Your audience, a high percentage of which is also my audience, knows the difference, believe me. A great many of them brought your statement to my attention. Surprise. They are a pretty discerning lot. And, many of them now have read my book. So many, that I am completely sold out and awaiting the second printing of 3,000.

Nor will you be winning many hearts over at StormFront, now that it is subtitled DukeFront, with your calling Duke a racist. Of course, there are those pictures of him wearing Nazi uniforms and he WAS a Klan leader, so you might make that stick. Oh, that's right - I represented true white racists, so that means I must be one, too. Hell, with you calling me a racist, I might as well go ahead and get fitted for a hood and a white sheet. In for a penny, in for a pound.

Yet, you pile it on and lump Ernst Zundel into white racism, as well. Have you actually read anything that Zundel has promoted or has written, John? At least, I can say that I am proud to stand next to Ernst on this charge.

Yes, in my book, I specifically argue that Blacks are manipulated by Jews. That does not let them off the hook. That merely puts the Jews on a somewhat higher hook.

I use the J word all the time. This is only the second time I've seen you use it, however. But, then, that is understandable, I suppose. I'm not Jewish.




Edgar Steele responds to John Kaminski in letter to John Bryant, per cc


Regarding the back-and-forth between you and Kaminski, appended below, here it is in a nutshell, John: Kaminski is a Jew. Does that make everything now add up, including the following statements in his reply to you?-----

>>>We need blacks in the Revisionist movement. And they're eligible and they're willing. So you're stupid to put them in the same class with Jews, and so is Steele. Ignorant is a better word. Blacks have been victimized by the same system we rail against. They are our fellow victims. And they deserve our support and understanding. I would much rather hang out with black people than I would with bigots, no question. You can't trust bigots because they're irrational and sociopathic. And it makes everything they say basically invalid, untruthful. This is not a genetic problem, it's an intellectual problem. Jews are mostly bigots. So are most American Christians.<<<

The breadth of this man's presumption and hostility literally takes my breath away!

So, you and I - specifically you and I - are "stupid" - well, at least "ignorant." And "bigots," presumably, by inference, based upon his language.

Furthermore, we are "irrational and sociopathic" (errr, umhhh, sociopathic about what, do you suppose?), not to mention "untrustworthy." Keep in mind that he is talking about a very large class of people here, but he still has used you and me as placemarkers for that class.

Therefore, everything we say is "invalid, untruthful." Everything, John. Not just some things. Everything. Hmmmmmm.

Our handicap, he says, is that we have an "intellectual problem." Y'know, I've always suspected that about us.

What's more, "Jews are bigots" (well, he would know, now, wouldn't he?). Finally, something with which I can agree.

But, then, so are "most American Christians"...bigots, that is. That sound you just heard was most of Kaminski's following going out the exit door.

Lessee now, let me count the ways that our beknighted and infinitely deluded friend living so dreadfully alone in that shabby little Florida house trailer, all the while endlessly whining about our not sending him enough money, has besmirched the two of us. You and I are:

1. Stupid
2. Ignorant
3. Bigots
4. Irrational
5. Sociopathic
6. Untrustworthy
7. Untruthful
8. Handicapped intellectually, somehow

SIBIISUUH.......mmmmm.....BUSHISUI...Bush is you and I?....Bush is the University of Indiana? I reading too much into this, do you suppose? Must be simply a manifestation of my intellectual handicap. Besides, I'm a stupid, ignorant bigot, not to mention an irrational sociopath and both untrustworthy and untruthful, to boot. But, then, so are you.

See what I mean? Kinda breathtaking, isn't it? Perhaps we can get a group rate on some intensive psychotherapy at the hands of one of Kaminski's Chosen brethren.

Here's the bottom line: Kaminski figures the rest of us owe him a living due to his obvious superiority with the written word (giggle) and just generally, if you know what I mean. To him, this is a zero-sum game. If you or I get a piece of pie (attention, in this case), then that leaves less pie for him, when he really deserves the whole thing.

In reality, of course, life can be a win-win proposition. If we all supported and promoted one another in advancing the cause of the American people, we could actually make the pie grow, such that we all get more. Kaminski doesn't get it, however. His kind of logic actually makes the pie shrink.

I don't put out this sort of criticism to my list, but don't let that stop you, of course. I will, however, circulate it to a few in the movement who, like you and I, until today did not clearly see Kaminski for what he really is.

Sit down, John Kaminski. Your fifteen minutes now are up. Oh, and by the way, I think you now are finished in "the movement."

Indcidentally, Mr. Kaminski, note that I have copied you on this email. Unlike yourself, I stab people in the front, not the back.

Edgar Steele



John Bryant responds to John Kaminski


This Week's Hell's Lettres: Correspondence with John Kaminski

[Birdman writes to John Kaminski:]


A few months ago you wrote me a letter denouncing me -- to the best of my recollection -- as an antisemite, racist bigot. So it was quite a surprise to receive from one of my correspondents a copy of your excellent essay "Who's Wagging Whom?" in which you seemed to be saying about the Jews pretty much what I have been saying for a long time.

Now it is pretty hard to get an apology out of anyone these days, but I thought I would ask anyway. Of course, maybe I am wrong that you are saying pretty much the same thing as I, because you detect in my writing and posting some mote which infernally and eternally pollutes anything I say. I mention this because, in your essay you mention Ed Steele and some other people I know -- people whose position on the Jews is very similar to mine -- and say that the opinion of these folks is somehow polluted because of their position on blacks -- an assertion which is quite incomprehensible to me, since Steele et al rarely mention blacks (altho they often talk about Jews), and since there is no logical relation between blacks and Jews.

If you will allow me to theorize for a moment, I think the reason you are denouncing Steele et al is because you want to cover yourself for having denounced me, Steele and the rest for our opinions on Jews, that is, you want to make it look OK that you denounced us, even tho you embrace our position now.

Now I want to make it clear that I will not greatly fault you if you do not offer me, Steele et al an apology. I say this because most people seem to have very weak egos, and simply are not strong enuf emotionally to make an apology, and I would not feel right in causing you to have to permanently up your daily dose of Prozac just to get you to make an apology. Apologies are only for 'big dogs' -- people who are strong and self-confident, and who therefore have the emotional wherewithal to admit that they made a mistake. Instead I want to welcome you into that rare group of people, known to most of the rest of the world as 'haters', 'antisemites' and the like, who have the courage to criticize the Self-Chosen. That you have joined us is enuf for me, and is enuf to show your courage and a fair degree of intellectual honesty.

[Kaminski replies:]

I'm confused. I thought you were the same guy as Joe Salzano. And, I thought you were dead. So I'm happy you're not.

As I recall my complaint, I was upset about your racism. I am not a racist. When I write about Jews, I'm upset about widespread and deceptive criminal behavior, which is bad for everyone, even the people doing it. I don't blame anything on people's genes. People can overcome anything, especially genetic handicaps. The one thing they can't perhaps overcome is the lies of their own priests. That's why I focus on that subject so often.

I often apologize when I know I'm wrong. I have no problem doing that. But one is not appropriate in this situation. I stand by my story. We need blacks in the Revisionist movement. And they're eligible and they're willing. So you're stupid to put them in the same class with Jews, and so is Steele. Ignorant is a better word. Blacks have been victimized by the same system we rail against. They are our fellow victims. And they deserve our support and understanding.

I would much rather hang out with black people than I would with bigots, no question. You can't trust bigots because they're irrational and sociopathic. And it makes everything they say basically invalid, untruthful. This is not a genetic problem, it's an intellectual problem. Jews are mostly bigots. So are most American Christians.

Basically, I believe that both Christians and Jews have the same problem. They believe in a lie. And they use that lie to persecute and violate others to salve their own perverted drive to palliate their own fearful inferiority complexes and, on a deeper level, to nurture the sick fantasy that they don't die. This is the central psychological problem of the human species.

We need to get the Revisionist argument into the mainstream, which is clogged by Jewish media. It's important. But it's not about genetics, it's about lies. The Revisionist revelation gets people to see the lies they've been told about the world they live in. We don't completely understand how the lies we've been told and have grown up with really affect how WE act in this world, so how can we criticize another group that has been victimized by what are essentially the same set of lies? All we can do is lay out the facts as we see them and try to fix the problem. What makes it important to write about the Jewish question is that their behavior has had such a negative impact on the world. But we mustn't forget that it's about what they've been taught, not genetic defects. Like religions, the matter of race is essentially a propaganda tool exploited by those who manipulate us, our priests, bankers, and politicians.

Jews are people too, whether they admit it or not. They've been taught to be paranoid, they're not naturally born that way. The real point of my story, in case you missed it, is that there's no difference between Britain and Israel. And that's what you need to contemplate. Because everything the Jews are accused of doing now is only what good Christians have done to the detriment of many in the past. And if what you're howling about concerns regaining that white hegemony, forget it, because that was just as bad, if not worse, as the situation we have now.

Best wishes, John K.

[Birdman responds:]


There are three major points of yours on which I would like to respond.

1) You say you aren't racist. I, on the other hand, say EVERYONE is racist, and that not only is it good, but it is a LAW OF NATURE. You will find a full explanation here:

Why I Am a White Racist

2) You say blacks are 'innocent and manipulated'. As I already told you, I say blacks are in no way innocent, tho they may well be manipulated, and the proof is the collection of articles on blacks in the Articles of Others section of my webpage, www/ Here again is the url (scroll down for the 13 sections of articles on Blacks):

I do, however, concede that there may be an argument on what is meant by 'innocent' (ie, not blameworthy), and for this reason I have written you this evening an essay which I have attached, and which will be posted in a future Weekly Letter, "The No-Blame Game and Its Liberal Practitioners".

3) You object to holding the entire Jewish nation responsible for the crimes of guilty Jews. This question is probably a bit more complicated than you thought, and I address it in my essay

The Real Jewish Question

In addition I recommend you read the following essay of mine:

Racial Attitudes: A Matter of Perspective?

There is actually a great deal more on my webpage which I believe you would find enlightening, but I shall restrain myself from further recommendations. -j

[Kaminski did not reply]


Top of Page | Home Page

©-free 2005 Adelaide Institute