Charles Guliani - Jesus was a zionist zealot?

[Yo Mama]

So, TF, tell us about how Jebus appeared to you in a "revelatory vision" and instructed you on how to correctly interpret the writings of the New Testament.  This should be good.

 :lol:

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

So, TF, tell us about how Jebus app....

 :lol:

You won't say the name Jesus—just as the Talmud commands you.

'May his name and memory be blotted out forever."

[Yo Mama]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Jesus Christ is not mentioned in the Talmud.

The Jesus Narrative In The Talmud
http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesusnarr.html

 :up:

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

No, His name was replaced in the Talmud with pseudonyms as a means of obscuring from prying Christian eyes, who were becoming suspicious of the Talmud.

[Yo Mama]

No it wasn't.  "Balaam" is not some kind of secret Talmud code word for Jesus.

Jesus in the Talmud
http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesus.html

 8-)

[pas]

Does anyone knows who's behind this research?  

http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesus.html

Jews would deny anything that makes them look bad, nothing new there.
It contradicts testimonies from jews who learned about their ''enemy Jesus'' in the yeshiva's.

Which jews to believe?
The ones that portray their culture in a positive way, or the ones that don't?

[Yo Mama]

pas, just because Jesus isn't actually mentioned in the Talmud doesn't mean that Jews(or the Talmud) are good.

I hope that's clear.

[joeblow]

I missed this portion of Agent Yo Mama/ZOG's campaign to discredit TiU.

Jesus isn't actually mentioned in the Talmud

I tried to do a Google search for "Jesus isn't in the Talmud" and could not come up with anything to support your statement, rather the opposite that He is.

I hope that's clear.

Yes, it is clear to me that you are a Jew, hence the temporary ban has now been made permanent.

I do hope that all the other disruptive elements have been noticing that TiU has returned to being a Research Forum. Go find somewhere else to play.

[blueocean]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Jesus Christ is not mentioned in the Talmud.

The Jesus Narrative In The Talmud
http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesusnarr.html

 :up:

I Bought a physical volume of the Talmud (nice BLOODRED SATANIC COLOUR) to see for myself if Jesus was mentioned in it and it DOES refer to JESUS!!!

SO LYING SACK OF SHIT FUCK OFF!

[GordZilla]

My problem is not if someone doesn't believe in Jesus, that is fine to each his own, my problem is when people who are apparently  'Jew wise' have a HATE for this man. So I asked Yo Moma directly "What is it that Jesus actually said about the Jews that makes you hate Him so much?". He wouldn't address that directly, but instead offered some other quotes by Jesus which seem contradictory, and perhaps are, but do not reflect  -in any way- what Jesus had to say about the 'Jews'. I.e. he side stepped the question once again.

 As for some of what he did post about Jesus, I can actually see a logic in the statements, Jesus did cause divide, and still does, within families, between nations etc. I think Jesus knew this would be the outcome, He knew everyone wouldn't just drop everything and hug and love each other. He knew that His presence on earth would most certainly later cause great divide, and it did. Also to be a true Christian in every sense of the word, a feat most of us can only strive to be -if we choose, means to love Christ first and foremost, dropping everything else to the side. Doing so in today's world will again, most likely turn your family and friends against you.  They would start seeing you as a complete 'Jesus' freak' and if you took it to the extreme that Christians are supposed to, you would drop all worldly needs and possessions therefore even further alienating yourself from friends and loved ones. I think this is what Jesus foreseen, and because He knows there's a life after life, He also wanted us not to worry about the earthly consequences, of becoming a true Christian, as the reward for this loyalty comes later. It's always about context, and I still maintain Jesus had mostly good things to say, and good lessons in which to base our lives on, may not be for everybody, but for the most part they don't hurt.

This brings me back to my original post (on this thread), that being if we followed Jesus' words -strictly- on the topic of the 'Jew' we would actually have a point of unity. You wouldn't have to become a Jesus freak or anything of the sort, I was merely stating it's the perfect vice to keep Jews out and keep our unity strong. Yo Moma had a problem with this, and that I find highly suspicious, for I explained it in such a way as to state upfront that I wasn't trying to convert anyone, I was merely stating this man knew the 'Jew' well, and that I believe those words are a great rallying point for us -all of us.  In an anti-Jew, anti- Zionist forum why would someone have a problem with that? Yo Moma did, and as always whenever the name (Jesus)was mentioned on this web site, his hairs stood up and immediately he went on the offensive. Why?

If he's just a militant atheist, that's one thing but there are numerous websites which support that position, he'd have no shortage of friends. But I would argue it is something more than that when it came to  Yo Moma. For to me this is, first and foremost,  a web site dedicated against fighting this parasite, known as the Jew, so even if you don't believe certainly you can recognise that Jesus would also very likely be a member in good standing at a web site such as this. He shared a lot of the same beliefs we do.  Yo Moma worked hard, in my opinion, to deter anyone here from reaching that same conclusion, a conclusion that even if it's all fiction, would certainly not harm our collective efforts. After all we're not talking about Judeochristianity here, we're not talking about converting anyone, just simply that this Jesus fellow had some good and on target insight into this devil known as the Jew. Honestly of all the faiths on earth, and secular peoples too, I know of only one group that would take issue with that.

He is/was right about one thing, I'm not a scholarly writer, and I do tend to go on and on expressing my opinions, but I don't know of too many standards to go by when discussing topics such as these, and frankly so what? Most scholarly pursuits in today's modern age are fruitless anyways, except you may find yourself becoming a more concise writer than myself.  I have a college level education , and I believe that's enough to feel 'entitled' to speak my mind. I personally think there should be no prerequisite what-so-ever when it comes to speaking one's mind on an internet forum, except maybe speaking in the right language for the forum  :-)

Finally Jesus in the Talmud, even if His name is not found there, the Jew's collective hatred of this man is all I need to prove to me that they certainly know of Him and certainly are against His message, that is without any doubt .  I think that says a mouthful towards the creditability of this man, and to the fact that 'they' certainly didn't create Him  - that just makes no sense.  Pharisees did not heed His words in any way, they did not record them except for ridicule when they saw fit.  Jesus didn't come for the Pharisees, He came for us. He came to shed light on the Pharisees, for us. Even as a Jew wise Buddhist, you'd have to respect that, I think.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Shlomo's source:

The Jesus Narrative In The Talmud
http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesusnarr.html

is completely unsourced. Now contrast this with the Elizabeth Dilling site that is completely sourced and quite exhaustive:

http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/p_chapt03.html

Gordzilla, as you know, Yo_Mama never directly answers questions. And that's what makes him so unpleasant.

Look, here is something from an atheist website that refutes Yo_Mama as an atheist—at least as far as his illogics.

Avoiding the Question: Not Answering Challenges to a Claim
When trying to make a case for some idea, we encounter questions which challenge the coherency or validity of that position. When we are able to adequately answer those questions, our position becomes stronger. When we cannot answer the questions, then our position is weaker. If, however, we avoid the question altogether, then our reasoning process is revealed as weak.

http://atheism.about.com/od/logicalflaw ... gquest.htm

[mgt23]

can we stick to the topic in the OP. Assuming people have listened to charles last 6-8 audios on christianity and essenes+jesuits+jesus was a zionist+christian identity interview etc etc. i want to know peoples opinions on the material he is presenting and the sources he is claiming to use. I want to see it refuted or at least a counter arguement point by point on charles position.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

its important as he's saying that the essene sect was a jewish zionist sect and in collusion with josephus plotted to take over the roman empire. just because they were against the sanhedrin doesnt mean to say they themselves didnt exalt Israel and hence are zionist. i just thought it was interesting because it would mean a different level to the conspiracy that the jews took over the catholic church not just with the jesuits under marrano loyola, but from the start, christianity was a jewish conspiracy. (also starting not from armenia but from britain under joseph of arimethea.) Since Gord has his zio 101 lectures on his site, i want to know after people listen to these audios what christians think.

I would suggest reading the complete volumes of Josephus, specifically The Wars of the Jews and Antiquities of the Jews. Why would you listen to what someone else has to say about a person when you could read directly from that person? I fail to see how the alleged Jewish/Christian conspiracy fits the Hegelian model. Perhaps you could explicitly illustrate this.

[mgt23]

thanks for reading suggestions.

Why would you listen to what someone else has to say about a person when you could read directly from that person?

sure but others bring a different perspective on the matter and for that i occasionally ask for considered opinions.

how the alleged Jewish/Christian conspiracy fits the Hegelian model

......i suppose what charles is saying is two-fold(jesus is a zionist seems to be running on and on) 1)that the original jesus was nothing like what the later romanticised jesus was claimed to be. For example his stance on usury seems to be not to be clear cut and that he maintained the distinction between jew and gentile. 2)that christianity is a anaesthtic to military revolutionary action against the jew controlled apparatus. the "god will deal with them" arguement. so in that sense it de-militarises the goy.

...anyway they are some good points that i have to say i get value out of and can empathise with his position that he is trying to be more critical about even ones own most treasured assumptions. good shows and make no mistake he is against zog and he is spiritual...seems one of the good guys imo

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

thanks for reading suggestions.

Why would you listen to what someone else has to say about a person when you could read directly from that person?

sure but others bring a different perspective on the matter and for that i occasionally ask for considered opinions.

how the alleged Jewish/Christian conspiracy fits the Hegelian model

......i suppose what charles is saying is two-fold(jesus is a zionist seems to be running on and on) 1)that the original jesus was nothing like what the later romanticised jesus was claimed to be. For example his stance on usury seems to be not to be clear cut and that he maintained the distinction between jew and gentile. 2)that christianity is a anaesthtic to military revolutionary action against the jew controlled apparatus. the "god will deal with them" arguement. so in that sense it de-militarises the goy.

...anyway they are some good points that i have to say i get value out of and can empathise with his position that he is trying to be more critical about even ones own most treasured assumptions. good shows and make no mistake he is against zog and he is spiritual...seems one of the good guys imo

I see what you're saying. One thing to consider is that many folks take many portions of the Bible, add them up, and come up with all kinds of formulas and calculations—without any or with little consideration for context. For example, questions need to be asked, like: when was this said? What was the mindset of the commoners at the time this was spoken? To whom was this being addressed and how did they interpret it? Things like these matter.

An huge example of what results when you take portions of the Bible out of contest and create formulas around them is all the Christians sects and cults that exist today. All of them are different from one another, and all of them are different based on only one or a few portions of the Bible taken out of context.

Regarding Josephus, the man appears to be virulently hated by Jewry. I haven't read all of his writings, but from what I have read, they are harmonious with the Bible, specifically Josephus' accounts of the Roman sacking of Jerusalem. Without Josephus, Christian Zionism would be a lot more common among Christians today. Josephus's writings confirm a form of Bible prophecy that counters the Christian Zionist's eschatology. And that is one of the big reasons Jews hate Josephus. They especially hate the fact that Josephus points out the fragility of Israel against its Roman conquerers. Consider that Christian Zionists today, and Jews, believe that the state of Israel is invincible. Christian Zionists actually believe that if a nuke were sent to Israel, God would intercept it.

Enter Josephus and he shows the complete opposite. He retells the brutal overtaking of Israel at the hands of General Titus in excruciating detail.

Rome guts Jerusalem



Jerusalem burned to its rotten core, exactly as God warned it would

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.



God's judgment upon the Jews, according to Josepus and the Bible—NO ZIONISM HERE!

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Note that Jerusalem's utter destruction (in 70 AD) happened a mere 30 years or so after Jerusalem and its Jews crucified Jesus Christ. Coincidence?

Now, I ask you, if the Christian God is Zionist, why did this alleged Zionist god not protect Israel from the massacres at the hands of Titus and his Roman armies? Then, this man, Flavius Josephus, just happens to personally witness and document this monumental event in human history. Another coincidence?

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Josephus Rebukes the Jews

(v:ix:4)

4. While Josephus was making this exhortation to the Jews, many of them jested upon him from the wall, and many reproached him; nay, some threw their darts at him: but when he could not himself persuade them by such open good advice, he betook himself to the histories belonging to their own nation, and cried out aloud, "O miserable creatures! are you so unmindful of those that used to assist you, that you will fight by your weapons and by your hands against the Romans? When did we ever conquer any other nation by such means? and when was it that God, who is the Creator of the Jewish people, did not avenge them when they had been injured? Will not you turn again, and look back, and consider whence it is that you fight with such violence, and how great a Supporter you have profanely abused? Will not you recall to mind the prodigious things done for your forefathers and this holy place, and how great enemies of yours were by him subdued under you? I even tremble myself in declaring the works of God before your ears, that are unworthy to hear them; however, hearken to me, that you may be informed how you fight not only against the Romans, but against God himself.

In old times there was one Necao, king of Egypt, who was also called Pharaoh; he came with a prodigious army of soldiers, and seized queen Sarah, the mother of our nation. What did Abraham our progenitor then do? Did he defend himself from this injurious person by war, although he had three hundred and eighteen captains under him, and an immense army under each of them? Indeed he deemed them to be no number at all without God's assistance, and only spread out his hands towards this holy place, which you have now polluted, and reckoned upon him as upon his invincible supporter, instead of his own army. Was not our queen sent back, without any defilement, to her husband, the very next evening?—while the king of Egypt fled away, adoring this place which you have defiled by shedding thereon the blood of your own countrymen; and he also trembled at those visions which he saw in the night season, and bestowed both silver and gold on the Hebrews, as on a people beloved by God.

Shall I say nothing, or shall I mention the removal of our fathers into Egypt, who, when they were used tyrannically, and were fallen under the power of foreign kings for four hundred ears together, and might have defended themselves by war and by fighting, did yet do nothing but commit themselves to God! Who is there that does not know that Egypt was overrun with all sorts of wild beasts, and consumed by all sorts of distempers? how their land did not bring forth its fruit? how the Nile failed of water? how the ten plagues of Egypt followed one upon another? and how by those means our fathers were sent away under a guard, without any bloodshed, and without running any dangers, because God conducted them as his peculiar servants?

Moreover, did not Palestine groan under the ravage the Assyrians made, when they carried away our sacred ark? as did their idol Dagon, and as also did that entire nation of those that carried it away, how they were smitten with a loathsome distemper in the secret parts of their bodies, when their very bowels came down together with what they had eaten, till those hands that stole it away were obliged to bring it back again, and that with the sound of cymbals and timbrels, and other oblations, in order to appease the anger of God for their violation of his holy ark. It was God who then became our General, and accomplished these great things for our fathers, and this because they did not meddle with war and fighting, but committed it to him to judge about their affairs.

When Sennacherib, king of Assyria, brought along with him all Asia, and encompassed this city round with his army, did he fall by the hands of men? were not those hands lifted up to God in prayers, without meddling with their arms, when an angel of God destroyed that prodigious army in one night? when the Assyrian king, as he rose the next day, found a hundred fourscore and five thousand dead bodies, and when he, with the remainder of his army, fled away from the Hebrews, though they were unarmed, and did not pursue them. You are also acquainted with the slavery we were under at Babylon, where the people were captives for seventy years; yet were they not delivered into freedom again before God made Cyrus his gracious instrument in bringing it about; accordingly they were set free by him, and did again restore the worship of their Deliverer at his temple.

And, to speak in general, we can produce no example wherein our fathers got any success by war, or failed of success when without war they committed themselves to God. When they staid at home, they conquered, as pleased their Judge; but when they went out to fight, they were always disappointed: for example, when the king of Babylon besieged this very city, and our king Zedekiah fought against him, contrary to what predictions were made to him by Jeremiah the prophet, he was at once taken prisoner, and saw the city and the temple demolished. Yet how much greater was the moderation of that king, than is that of your present governors, and that of the people then under him, than is that of you at this time! for when Jeremiah cried out aloud, how very angry God was at them, because of their transgressions, and told them they should be taken prisoners, unless they would surrender up their city, neither did the king nor the people put him to death; but for you, (to pass over what you have done within the city, which I am not able to describe as your wickedness deserves,) you abuse me, and throw darts at me, who only exhort you to save yourselves, as being provoked when you are put in mind of your sins, and cannot bear the very mention of those crimes which you every day perpetrate. For another example, when Antiochus, who was called Epiphanes, lay before this city, and had been guilty of many indignities against God, and our forefathers met him in arms, they then were slain in the battle, this city was plundered by our enemies, and our sanctuary made desolate for three years and six months.(29)

And what need I bring any more examples? Indeed what can it be that hath stirred up an army of the Romans against our nation? Is it not the impiety of the inhabitants? Whence did our servitude commence? Was it not derived from the seditions that were among our forefathers, when the madness of Aristobulus and Hyrcanus, and our mutual quarrels, brought Pompey upon this city, and when God reduced those under subjection to the Romans who were unworthy of the liberty they had enjoyed? After a siege, therefore, of three months, they were forced to surrender themselves, although they had not been guilty of such offenses, with regard to our sanctuary and our laws, as you have; and this while they had much greater advantages to go to war than you have. Do not we know what end Antigonus, the son of Aristobulus, came to, under whose reign God provided that this city should be taken again upon account of the people's offenses? When Herod, the son of Antipater, brought upon us Sosius, and Sosius brought upon us the Roman army, they were then encompassed and besieged for six months, till, as a punishment for their sins, they were taken, and the city was plundered by the enemy.

Thus it appears that arms were never given to our nation, but that we are always given up to be fought against, and to be taken; for I suppose that such as inhabit this holy place ought to commit the disposal of all things to God, and then only to disregard the assistance of men when they resign themselves up to their Arbitrator, who is above. As for you, what have you done of those things that are recommended by our legislator? and what have you not done of those things that he hath condemned? How much more impious are you than those who were so quickly taken! You have not avoided so much as those sins that are usually done in secret; I mean thefts, and treacherous plots against men, and adulteries. You are quarrelling about rapines and murders, and invent strange ways of wickedness. Nay, the temple itself is become the receptacle of all, and this Divine place is polluted by the hands of those of our own country; which place hath yet been reverenced by the Romans when it was at a distance from them, when they have suffered many of their own customs to give place to our law.(30)

And, after all this, do you expect Him whom you have so impiously abused to be your supporter? To be sure then you have a right to be petitioners, and to call upon Him to assist you, so pure are your hands! Did your king [Hezekiah] lift up such hands in prayer to God against the king of Assyria, when he destroyed that great army in one night? And do the Romans commit such wickedness as did the king of Assyria, that you may have reason to hope for the like vengeance upon them? Did not that king accept of money from our king on this condition, that he should not destroy the city, and yet, contrary to the oath he had taken, he came down to burn the temple? while the Romans do demand no more than that accustomed tribute which our fathers paid to their fathers; and if they may but once obtain that, they neither aim to destroy this city, nor to touch this sanctuary; nay, they will grant you besides, that your posterity shall be free, and your possessions secured to you, and will preserve our holy laws inviolate to you.

And it is plain madness to expect that God should appear as well disposed towards the wicked as towards the righteous, since he knows when it is proper to punish men for their sins immediately; accordingly he brake the power of the Assyrians the very first night that they pitched their camp. Wherefore, had he judged that our nation was worthy of freedom, or the Romans of punishment, he had immediately inflicted punishment upon those Romans, as he did upon the Assyrians, when Pompey began to meddle with our nation, or when after him Sosius came up against us, or when Vespasian laid waste Galilee, or, lastly, when Titus came first of all near to this city; although Magnus and Sosius did not only suffer nothing, but took the city by force; as did Vespasian go from the war he made against you to receive the empire; and as for Titus, those springs that were formerly almost dried up when they were under your power since he is come, run more plentifully than they did before; accordingly, you know that Siloam, as well as all the other springs that were without the city, did so far fail, that water was sold by distinct measures; whereas they now have such a great quantity of water for your enemies, as is sufficient not only for drink both for themselves and their cattle, but for watering their gardens also. The same wonderful sign you had also experience of formerly, when the forementioned king of Babylon made war against us, and when he took the city, and burnt the temple; while yet I believe the Jews of that age were not so impious as you are.

Wherefore I cannot but suppose that God is fled out of his sanctuary, and stands on the side of those against whom you fight. Now even a man, if he be but a good man, will fly from an impure house, and will hate those that are in it; and do you persuade yourselves that God will abide with you in your iniquities, who sees all secret things, and hears what is kept most private? Now what crime is there, I pray you, that is so much as kept secret among you, or is concealed by you? nay, what is there that is not open to your very enemies? for you show your transgressions after a pompous manner, and contend one with another which of you shall be more wicked than another; and you make a public demonstration of your injustice, as if it were virtue.

However, there is a place left for your preservation, if you be willing to accept of it; and God is easily reconciled to those that confess their faults, and repent of them. O hard-hearted wretches as you are! cast away all your arms, and take pity of your country already going to ruin; return from your wicked ways, and have regard to the excellency of that city which you are going to betray, to that excellent temple with the donations of so many countries in it. Who could bear to be the first that should set that temple on fire? who could be willing that these things should be no more? and what is there that can better deserve to be preserved? O insensible creatures, and more stupid than are the stones themselves!

And if you cannot look at these things with discerning eyes, yet, however, have pity upon your families, and set before every one of your eyes your children, and wives, and parents, who will be gradually consumed either by famine or by war. I am sensible that this danger will extend to my mother, and wife, and to that family of mine who have been by no means ignoble, and indeed to one that hath been very eminent in old time; and perhaps you may imagine that it is on their account only that I give you this advice; if that be all, kill them; nay, take my own blood as a reward, if it may but procure your preservation; for I am ready to die, in case you will but return to a sound mind after my death."

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

By the way MGT, the guy in these audios, he and I used to debate on this issue. I know him. I don't know if he ever was a Christian. Good to see he hasn't lost his Jew York twang.

The whole "elite Jew pigs" thing doesn't convince me. Guliani set up a strawman by putting a Christian Identity person on his show as a legitimate representative of Christianity. Totally obvious strawman.

IMO, Guliani's shows here are mainly anti-religious rhetoric sprinkled with cliche anti-Jewish phrases...The fact that he repeats "elite Jew pigs" so many times tells me that there isn't much there for him. Seems it's just a vehicle to allow him to propagandize about other issues.

Keep in mind that Jews realize their anti-Christian gig is up. Now they are targeting religion in general—even if it means throwing their own religion under the bus, too. It's a means to an end.

And perhaps CSR will agree with me, but Guliani's show has an Alex Jones/GCN/John Gray feel to it. Same topics, same guests, and same advertizers.

[mgt23]

charles was on the AZL, then got all weird with TIU and then there blog became members only. as far as elite jew pig goes it is the same as yelling anti-semite and i suppose he is propagandising, but do u blame him. i dont listen to anyone else on oracle since carolyn left(she did some stuff on the emerald tablets of thoth). As for strawman-well any guest can be construed as a strawman and he did put forward the standard line....is it judaism for whites? this is the key and central issue. to defeat the jew do we have to have a uniting philosphy that makes us just like them? Maybe another CI guest would be good for a round two...

2)i dont think God is a zionist...i think the divine is beyond my understanding but perhaps not beyond my apprehension. right i must do some reading in a bit.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

charles was on the AZL, then got all weird with TIU and then there blog became members only. as far as elite jew pig goes it is the same as yelling anti-semite and i suppose he is propagandising, but do u blame him. i dont listen to anyone else on oracle since carolyn left(she did some stuff on the emerald tablets of thoth). As for strawman-well any guest can be construed as a strawman and he did put forward the standard line....is it judaism for whites? this is the key and central issue. to defeat the jew do we have to have a uniting philosphy that makes us just like them? Maybe another CI guest would be good for a round two...

2)i dont think God is a zionist...i think the divine is beyond my understanding but perhaps not beyond my apprehension. right i must do some reading in a bit.

I agree that Christian Identity is Judaism for whites—and white supremacism is too for that matter. But it's the way he uses it. I am going to have to go back and listen to the Texe Marrs interview. This is the first time I have heard of Oracle Radio. ANd I had no idea that Charles Guliani, an obvious pseudonym, was doing a show. I thought he was just a charismatic character on pal talk. Frankly, he sounds Jewish. But I don't want to make that the basis for my argument. "Guliani" used to admin rooms a few years back and would boot those talking about the Jewish conspiracy in detail. Now he goes on about "elite Jew pigs" and it just sounds so fake.

[mgt23]

then get the dirt and out him.....even better ring him up for an interview or something. i'm sure if one is civilised he would do it. he's well aware of TIU, so do it and lets see what happens. get joe to ring him as well, it would be funny.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Count how many times he says "elite jew pigs" in that third broadcast. Then line them up with the tangible things he says about the Jewish conspiracy. Next to no contest there. And he spouts the same tired Zeigeist lines against religion. It's becoming a broken record.

[pas]

TimothyFitzpatrick,

You make very serious allegations and even some personal attacks against Charles Giuliani of what i see no proof of.

I know him. I don't know if he ever was a Christian

Do you know how many shows he has done on Christianity, how it's under attack by judaism.
He even was a minister for some years and his Bible knowlegde is pretty vast.(he studied Greek and some Hebew even)

Guliani set up a strawman by putting a Christian Identity person on his show as a legitimate representative of Christianity. Totally obvious strawman.

No, he didn't and he made that perfecly clear.Even the (Christian) callers were aware of that.
He also has brought up the notion that the particular CI guest (Fink) wasn't representative of CI at all, according to an other CI'er.Let alone for the whole of Christianity.

Seems it's just a vehicle to allow him to propagandize about other issues.

Like?
He treats lots of topics, but the ''soul'' of his show is very anti-judeic.Backed by good research imo.

but Guliani's show has an Alex Jones/GCN/John Gray feel to it.

Charlie bashes AJ al the time ; "Some talkshow hosts want to make you believe Arabs own Hollywood".
I think there are big differences.

ANd I had no idea that Charles Guliani, an obvious pseudonym, was doing a show

You didn't know he had a show, but you do know his name is a pseudonym?
You said you knew him?

Frankly, he sounds Jewish.

Obviously Italian.

"Guliani" used to admin rooms a few years back and would boot those talking about the Jewish conspiracy in detail.

That would be a red flag, if true.

Count how many times he says "elite jew pigs"

When i started listening to him that also felt weird to me , the over-the-top yelling did remind me of AJ but the info is very different.Charlie just calles a spade, a spade.Few do.

MGT23 said :

then get the dirt and out him.....even better ring him up for an interview or something.

I agree, that would be the honourable thing to do.But it would be suffice to proof some of the claims you made.If possible ofcourse.

I hope your attack isn't a reaction, based alone, on the attack Charlie has made on your religion.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Italian's and Jews do, at times, sound similar; however, Guliani's dialect sounds more Jewish than Italian. The pseudonym happening to be Italian sounding is a convenient alibi. Where are the pictures of this guy? What does he do for a living? Anyone can put a fake name on a book and a broadcast.

ELITE JEW PIGS

If "Charles Guliani" is among the best that the new hijacked anti-Zionist movement has got, you guys are in trouble.

ELITE JEW PIGS

I hope your attack isn't a reaction, based alone, on the attack Charlie has made on your religion.

No. its based on the time I followed him on pal talk over the last 6 years or so.

ELITE JEW PIGS

Frankly, pas, I am shocked that your Zionist shill radar hasn't been going nuts.


and remember fight the ELITE JEW PIGS!!!!


Charles Guliani's argument:

The Bible is a myth, fabricated from ancient pagan, greek, and Roman gods. ELITE JEW PIGS. THe chicken crossed the road to get to the other side. ELITE JEW PIGS. Jesus never existed. ELITE JEW PIGS. God is a genocidal evil god. ELITE JEW PIGS. My cat's breath smells like cat food. ELITE JEW PIGS. War, gur na pu ne pu. ELITE JEW PIGS...I haven't got any real concrete evidence that Jews are elite pigs but...ELITE JEW PIGS!

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

I love how "Guliani" claims Jesus was a Zionist merely because Jesus quoted Isaiah. Guliani then takes Isaiah out of context in order to strengthen his case that Jesus is supposedly advocating that the nations shall bow at the feet of Israel.

Isaiah is a highly figurative book. When it speaks of Israel, it's speaking about a spiritual people, not a physical nation.

[pas]

Hey Timothy, you said :

Italian's and Jews do, at times, sound similar; however, Guliani's dialect sounds more Jewish than Italian. The pseudonym happening to be Italian sounding is a convenient alibi

Are you saying he's a jew?

Where are the pictures of this guy?

http://s10.invisionfree.com/The_Unhived_Mind_II/ar/t45820.htm

His pic in on top of the page.(sorry, i wasn't able to get the image alone)

What does he do for a living?

Charles has degree's in history, theology and education. His hobbies include biking, hiking, playing guitar, writing, and collecting fossils, minerals, ancient artifacts and meteorites. Charles has written 20 mostly-self-published books on subjects ranging from alternative science to history, politics and theology. He has also worked in public broadcasting for 9 years. I started out with my own local cable access TV show and later moved into radio broadcasting.

If "Charles Guliani" is among the best that the new hijacked anti-Zionist movement has got, you guys are in trouble.

Why? On a single disagreement? What's "you guys"?

No. its based on the time I followed him on pal talk over the last 6 years or so.

A lot can change in 6 years , nobody is perfect.I've been listening to his show for the last 2 yrs (appr.) and the main case is exposing the jew.(That's 100's of hours!)

Frankly, pas, I am shocked that your Zionist shill radar hasn't been going nuts.

I'm probably not the only one here, who has major trust issues.And i also had them with Charles, but i am willing to hear someone out.Charles has definately proven himself to be on the right side, in my view.

and remember fight the ELITE JEW PIGS!!!!

Maybe you dissagree ,i don't.

I haven't got any real concrete evidence that Jews are elite pigs but...ELITE JEW PIGS!

Every show, where he exposes the jew, is very well documented.And you can e-mail him for the notes.

 

Isaiah is a highly figurative book.

You've pointed out a biblical problem yourself.Because of things like this, there are so many different interpretations.(what's figurative and what's literal)

Timothy, you have yet to come up with proofs to match your claims, instead you continue to attack an anti-judeic, who isn't here to defend himself.
Can't you just answer a couple of question's for me.You've answered none.

Ps. If someone would make similar allegations to you, i'd react in exactly the same way.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

Well I think he is a Jew, but that is not my main argument. My main argument would be that he uses strawman arguments to prop up his position that the Bible is plagiarized from other religions and myths, which I shall expound upon later today. The rest of his information has already been said by every other patriot leader in the movement. He doesn't bring anything new to the table, which confuses me as to why he even has a following. This tells me one thing: it's Guliani's showmanship that, coupled with his information, has earned him a following. Interestingly, this is exactly how Alex Jones came to prominence—with the help of the staged Bohemian Grove incident. And yes, I know Guliani criticizes Jones, but that is irrelevant.

Which questions didn't I answer?

When I say "you guys," I am referring to atheistic/agnostic type anti-Judaics.

[pas]

Timothy_F said :

he uses strawman arguments to prop up his position that the Bible is plagiarized from other religions and myths

Are you willing to call in on his show to debate this?
Then you could expose his agenda and proof to his listeners that he's a jew shill.

If you don't, we can better drop this discussion. (at least i am ) No offence.Because you can't convince me with your theories (with nothing to back them up), and i've done my best to provide you with my conclusions after 100,s of hours listening to CG, but to no avail.

We would only be wasting each other's time.

[Yo Mama]

Don't pay any attention to Timothy Fitzpatrick.  He just hates Charles Giuliani because Giuliani exposes Christianity for the sick, degenerate Jewish cult that it is.

 :roll:

[Yo Mama]

I Bought a physical volume of the Talmud (nice BLOODRED SATANIC COLOUR) to see for myself if Jesus was mentioned in it and it DOES refer to JESUS!!!

SO LYING SACK OF SHIT FUCK OFF!

Nope, the mythological "Jesus Christ" isn't mentioned in the Talmud, despite your lunatic rantings and name calling.

The Jesus Narrative In The Talmud
http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesusnarr.html

 :up: