Ahad Ha'am (Asher Ginsberg) - Writer of the Protocols

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

I've always puzzled about the description of the Protocols as a "Forgery" or a "copy of the original". My impression at this point makes me think that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion were originally written down in Hebrew or Yiddish that was shared among Rabbis-Zionists in Europe and America in the late 1890s before the Basel Conference of 1897. I believe the ideas of Anglo-American Christian Zionists from the 1840-1880s to bring the Jews into Palestine for restoring "God's Kingdom with the Jews at the head in Jerusalem" was given to the Rothschilds in the 1880s by Millerite Prophet, Zionist, Pyrimidiologist, Biblical Scholar, and 33-degree mason Charles Taze Russell.  By the 1890s, under the guidance of the Rothschilds, the head Rabbis took the Christian Prophecies to mean the restoration of the Jewish rulership in terms of the Kabballah-Old Testament-Talmud with helpings of Zvi, Marx, Anarchist writers and other Jewish Scholars.  Consequently, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in any language except the original Hebrew-Yiddish are in fact a "Forgery".  The original still exists and is likely buried away in the library of a Jew in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv... IMHO.

Some say that Asher Ginsberg authored the original likely at the direction of the Rabbis and the Rothschilds.

Fredd
September 22nd, 2009 at 1:26 am

Some writers - such as Paquita de Shishmareff, author of Waters Flowing Westward - have argued that the internationalist-Protocols are the work of Asher Ginsberg, aka Ahad Ha'am (his pen name), presented to the B'Nai Zion (sons of zion) congregation. It would have been only later that the internationalist new world order ideology of the Protocols would have been introduced into the Zionist movement created by Herzl, who was the main opponent of Ginsburg. Herzl believed in zionism as "an economic-political entity" for Jews, whereas Ginsburg believed in a cultural "Jewish state" as a world-center for judaism. One thing is for sure: the Protocols do not promote in any way any nationalist plan to massively displace and unite Jews in a national Palestine, yet they do promote international jewish dominion through machiavelian means. Some perceptive russian writers have even compared NWO ideologue Asher Ginsberg to the fascists of the 30's and 40's because of his nietzschean "superman" vision of jewish supremacism. Since the 30's and the 40's, we should note, the religious-cultural version of Zionism promoted by Ginsberg and (fascist) Jabotinsky rapidly took over the secular-economic Zionism of Herzl. So, again we see that the notion that "zionism is an extreme opposite of judaism because it is founded on the vision of secular non-believer Herzl", is incorrect.

http://ziofascism.net/blog/2009/08/prot ... hmotocols/

-------

Ahad Ha'am (Asher Ginsberg)




Asher Zvi Hirsch Ginsberg (18 August 1856 - 2 January 1927), primarily known by his Hebrew name and pen name, Ahad Ha'am, (Hebrew: אחד העם‎, lit. one of the people, Genesis 26:10), was a Hebrew essayist, and one of the foremost pre-state Zionist thinkers. He is known as the founder of Cultural Zionism. With his secular vision of a Jewish "spiritual center" in Palestine he confronted Theodor Herzl. Unlike Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, Ha'am strived for "a Jewish state and not merely a state of Jews."[1]

Early years

Ginsberg was born in Skvyra, near Kiev in what was then Russia, to pious well-to-do Hasidic parents. As early as eight years old, he began to secretly teach himself to read Russian. His father, Isaiah, sent him to heder until the age of 12. When Isaiah became the administrator of a large estate in a village in the Kiev district, he moved the family there and took private tutors for his son, who excelled at his studies. Ginsberg was critical of the dogmatic nature of Orthodox Judaism but remained loyal to his cultural heritage, and especially the ethical ideals of Judaism. [2]

Hovevei Zion

After unsuccessfully attempting to study in Vienna and Germany, he returned in his early thirties to Odessa where he was influenced by Leon Pinsker, a leader of the Hovevei Zion (Lovers of Zion) movement. Hovevei Zion began as independent study circles in the late 19th century, and formed a philanthropic confederation called Hibbat Zion (love for Zion). Their practical aim was settlement of Jews in Palestine, and they produced the settlements of the first Aliyah (immigration wave). The Zionist settlement program was beset by practical difficulties, and many settlements failed or were failing.

Unlike Pinsker, Ginsberg did not believe in political Zionism, which he fought, 'with a vehemence and austerity which embittered that whole period'.[3] Instead, from his very first article, he hailed the spiritual value of the Hebrew renaissance within the Zionist movement. To counter the debilitating fragmention for the Jewish folk-soul of life throughout the diaspora, the idea of assuring unity through an ingathering of Jews into Palestine was not an answer. That is, kibbutz galuyoth was a messianic ideal rather than a feasible contemporary project. The real answer lay in achieving a spiritual centre, or 'central domicile', within Palestine, that of Eretz Israel, which would form an exemplary model for the dispersed world of Jewry in exile to imitate, a spiritual focus for the circumferential world of the Jewish diaspora.[4] He split from the Zionist movement after the First Zionist Congress, because he felt that Theodor Herzl's program was impractical.

Visits to Palestine

Ahad Ha'am traveled frequently to Palestine and published reports about the progress of Jewish settlement there. They were generally glum. They reported on hunger, on Arab dissatisfaction and unrest, on unemployment, and on people leaving Palestine. In an essay[5] soon after his 1891 journey to the area he warned against the 'great error', noticeable among Jewish settlers, of treating the fellahin with contempt, of regarding 'all Arabs a(s) savages of the desert, a people similar to a donkey.'[6][7]. He believed that rather than aspiring to establish a 'Jewish National Home' or state immediately, Zionism must bring Jews to Palestine gradually, while turning it into a cultural center. At the same time, it was incumbent upon Zionism to inspire a revival of Jewish national life in the Diaspora. Then and only then, he said, would the Jewish people be strong enough to assume the mantle of building a nation state. Ahad Ha'am did not believe that the impoverished settlers of his day, laboring in Palestine far from the minds of most Jews, would ever build a Jewish homeland. He saw that the Hovevei Tzion movement of which he was a member was a failure, since the new villages created in Israel were dependent on the largess of outside benefactors.


Importance of Hebrew and Jewish culture

   This article may contain original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding references. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. More details may be available on the talk page. (October 2007)

Ahad Ha'am's ideas were popular at a very difficult time for Zionism, beginning after the failures of the first Aliya. His unique contribution was to emphasize the importance of reviving Hebrew and Jewish culture both in Palestine and throughout the Diaspora, something that was recognized only belatedly, when it became part of the Zionist program after 1898. Herzl did not have much use for Hebrew, and many wanted German to be the language of the Jewish state. Ahad Ha'am played an important role in the revival of the Hebrew language and Jewish culture, and in cementing a link between the proposed Jewish state and Hebrew culture.

Cultural Zionism

Ahad Ha'am's 'cultural Zionism' and his writings have been widely distorted however, or misunderstood and quoted out of context to imply that he thought Jews should not settle in the Land of Israel / Palestine, or that he thought it was impossible to ever establish a Jewish state. In 1889 his first article criticizing practical Zionism, called "Lo ze haddereckh" (This is not the way) appeared in HaMelitz. The ideas in this article became the platform for Bnai Moshe (sons of Moses), a group he founded that year. Bnai Moshe, active until 1897, worked to improve Hebrew education, build up a wider audience for Hebrew literature, and assist the Jewish settlements.

In 1896, Ginsberg became editor of Hashiloah, a Hebrew monthly, a position he held for six years. After stepping down as editor in 1903, he went back to the business world.

In 1897, following the Basel Zionist Congress, which called for a Jewish national home "recognized in international law" (Volkerrechtlich), Ahad Ha'am wrote an article called Jewish State Jewish Problem ridiculing the idea of a Volkerrechtlich state given the pitiful plight of the Jewish settlements in Palestine at the time. He emphasized that without a Jewish nationalist revival abroad, it would be impossible to mobilize genuine support for a Jewish national home. Even if the national home were created and recognized in international law, it would be weak and unsustainable. In 1898, the Zionist Congress adopted the idea of disseminating Jewish culture in the Diaspora as a tool for furthering the goals of the Zionist movement and bringing about a revival of the Jewish people. Bnai Moshe founded Rehovot, hoping it would become a model of self-sufficiency, and opened Achiasaf, a Hebrew publishing company.
[edit] Later years
Ginsberg's tomb, labeled "Ahad Ha'am" on the tombstone, Trumpeldor cemetery, Tel Aviv

In 1908, following a trip to Palestine, Ginsberg moved to London to manage the office of the Wissotzky Tea company. He settled in Tel Aviv in early 1922, plagued by ill health, and died there in 1927.[2]


Political role

Ahad Ha'am's influence in the political realm can be ascribed to his charismatic personality and spiritual authority rather than to his official functions he fulfilled. For the "Democratic Faction", the party that propagated cultural Zionism (founded in 1901 by Chaim Weizmann), he served in the words of his biographer, Steve Zipperstein, "as a symbol for the movement's culturalists, the faction's most coherent totem. He was, however, not – certainly not to the extent to which members of this group, especially Chaim Weizmann, would later contend – its chief ideological influence."[8] It is not widely known, that the rather shy Ahad Ha'am was a talented negotiator: In this role he was engaged during the "language controversy" that accompanied the founding of the Haifa Technikum (today: the Technion) and in the negotiations culminating in the Balfour Declaration.[9]

Commemoration

Many cities in Israel have streets named after Ahad Ha'am.

 References

'This article incorporates text from an edition of the New International Encyclopedia that is in the public domain.

   1. ^ Ahad Ha'am, The Jewish State and Jewish Problem, trans. from the Hebrew by Leon Simon c 1912, Jewish Publication Society of America, Essential Texts of Zionism[1]
   2. ^ a b Encyclopedia of Zionism and Israel, vol. 1, Ahad Ha'am, New York, 1971, pp. 13-14
   3. ^ Shalom Spiegel, Hebrew Reborn,(1939) Meridian Books, Cleveland, New York 1962 p.271
   4. ^ Shalom Spiegel, Hebrew Reborn, ibid. pp.286-289
   5. ^ 'Truth from Eretz Yisrael',
   6. ^ Anita Shapira, Land and power: The Zionist resort to force, 1881-1948, Oxford University Press, 1992 p.42
   7. ^ >variant translation in Tom Segev, One Palestine, Complete: Jews and Arabs Under the British Mandate,Metropolitan Books, 2000 p.104
   8. ^ Steven J. Zipperstein, Elusive Prophet: Ahad Ha'am and the Origins of Zionism, London: Peter Halban 1993, p. 144
   9. ^ Zipperstein, Elusive Prophet, 269, 296–301

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahad_Ha%27am

[scorpio]

Fascinating article.
I have always thought that the original Protocols was written in Hebrew.
Russian and english are considered goy languages to god's chosen ones.
This needs further research....

[ArthurTopham]

I don't see anywhere in the article from wiki on Ginsberg any indication that he authored the Protocols. In fact, after reading this brief bio on his life and work, I think it's highly unlikely that he would have penned such a piece. Anyone opposed to political Zionism would not likely write what is contained in that document simply because it represents the whole intent of such an ideology.

As well it should be noted that much of the information contained in the Protocols existed a good century prior to the translation of Professor Segyei Nilus's work out of which the Protocols is but ONE chapter. Very strange that the rest of the book has never been translated to date.

What I think is important is the fact that the methodology contained in the Protocols appears in Weishaupt's papers which are contained in the writings of the Illuminati and in other writers throughout the 19th Century, including Disraeli, Maurice Joly and others. It's fairly well established that by the mid-1900's the Jews had taken over the Continental freemasons and had access to these documents.

The aim throughout them all is the destruction of all religions and nation-states and the establishment of a global super State ruling the world by ruthless terror. Here I'm paraphrasing Douglas Reed's words written in 1956. They ring true with greater clarity with each passing year.

[scorpio]

The aim throughout them all is the destruction of all religions and nation-states and the establishment of a global super State ruling the world by ruthless terror. Here I'm paraphrasing Douglas Reed's words written in 1956. They ring true with greater clarity with each passing year.

Arthur - Great first post.
I wish more people would read Douglas Reed's Books.
He is one of the great forgotten writers of the 20th century.(1930's-50's)
A best selling author world wide, until he started writing about zio-Jewish control and the corruption of our society.
The Contoversy of Zion and Far and wide stick out in my mind.



Welcome to tiu  

[MikeWB]

Welcome to TiU!

I too would like to know more on the authorship of the Protocols.

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Welcome to TIU Arthur,

You make a good argument about the Protocols, but I don't think it holds together.  

You might take another look at Wikipedia on the origin of the earliest publications of the Protocols. If you believe Joly, Disraeli, or other some other writer, wrote the Protocols before the end of 19th century, you might ask yourself "how" did the Russian Secret Police in 1903 finally find (and translate) a document that had been in existence for over 40 years which proposed Global Domination by Jews --  Global domination, not by a Jewish State, but by the sheer Chutzpah and Political machinations of the Jewish People? The Czars secret police did track the publications of radical Jews. It likely wasn't unusual for the Czar's secret police to find Bolshevik-Anarchist-Revolutionary literature in the satchels of Jewish Scholars, Jewish Artists and Jewish Students sitting side by side with the Torah, Talmud and Rabbi literature.  

Also consider that with Maurice Joly and Disraeli, you might be putting the Protocols far before the Zionist Horse in terms of decades. The Protocols were a prescription for the destruction of societies, particularly Christian-Monarchies, but it also looked at taking over any movement that had any kind of gravitas behind it.  M. Joly and Disraeli kept and published their papers and researchers have found their Machiavellian styles as remarkable. Their works were hardly something to hide from prying eyes, nor was it told in a manner of an "elder" to a "student" -- in fact, the Protocols reads very much like the instruction of Talmudic-Torah teacher in a Yeshiva in Old Europe, it is not be questioned or argued with.  Basically, it is.. here is the plan.. memorize it and act it out at the right time. Joly and Disraeli wrote more for publication, fame and entertainment, with both Christianized Jewish and Goy audiences, not in a manner to create a secret movement.  I see them as similar but the Protocols like the TALMUD was not to be found or read by GOYIM-GENTILE eyes.  

First, let's look at the Publication of the Protocols.  The earliest known version is in 1903.  :

Publication history

The Protocols appeared in print in the Russian Empire as early as 1903. The anti-Semitic tract was published in Znamya, a Black Hundreds newspaper owned by Pavel Krushevan, as a serialized set of articles. It appeared again in 1905 as a final chapter (Chapter XII) of a second edition of Velikoe v malom i antikhrist (The Great in the Small & Antichrist), a book by Serge Nilus. In 1906 it appeared in pamphlet form edited by G. Butmi.[1]

These first three (and subsequently more) Russian language imprints were published and circulated in the Russian Empire during 1903–1906 period as a tool for scapegoating Jews, blamed by the monarchists for the defeat in the Russo-Japanese War and the 1905 Russian Revolution. Common to all three texts is the idea that Jews aim for world domination. Since The Protocols are presented as merely a document, the front matter and back matter are needed to explain its alleged origin. The diverse imprints, however, are mutually inconsistent. The general claim is that the document was stolen from a secret Jewish organization. Since the alleged original stolen manuscript does not exist, one is forced to restore a purported original edition. This has been done by the Italian scholar, Cesare G. De Michelis in 1998, in a work which was translated into English and published in 2004, where he treats his subject as Apocrypha.[2][3] As fiction in the genre of literature the tract was further analyzed by Umberto Eco by his word, Foucault's Pendulum in 1988, and in English translation in 1989, and in 1994 in chapter 6, "Fictional Protocols", of his Six Walks in the Fictional Woods.

As the 1917 Russian Revolution unfolded, causing white Russians to flee to the West, this text was carried along and assumed a new purpose. Until then The Protocols remained obscure;[4] it was now an instrument for blaming Jews for the Russian Revolution. It was now a tool, a political weapon used against the Bolshevikis who were depicted as overwhelmingly Jews, allegedly executing the "plan" embodied in The Protocols. The purpose was to discredit the October Revolution, prevent the West from recognizing the Soviet Union, and bring the downfall of Vladimir Lenin's regime. In that regard, The Protocols failed to achieve their aim.[2][3]

It was first published in the United States in the English language in 1919 as two newspaper articles in the Philadelphia Public Ledger by journalist Carl W. Ackerman, but all references to Jews were replaced by references to Bolsheviks and Bolshevism.[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protoc ... rs_of_Zion

Now this was shortly after the Zionist Conference in Basel, Switzerland of 1897 when the idea of "subversive" Political-Judaism, Zionism, would become known as a World wide coordinated movement which would be carried out under the semi-secret auspices of the world's first Globalists (The Rothschilds). Obviously, Hertzl, the man who hosted the Basel Zionist conference sought a political Zionist state that JEWS could escape to and live "peacefully" with the Arabs -- Hertzl's idea was not a movement that would strengthen Jewish Political Power in the traditional manner (Bribes, Blackmail, Lies, Murder and Brutal force).  Strangely, only a mind that was politically acute of the general masses and classes across Pre-WWI Europe could author a document and anchor it among the "common" people. I don't think Disraeli was that observant of all levels of society -- at least that is my impression.  Before the Zionist Conference of 1897, Jews could utilize secret societies and their traditional usury in the Arab and Christian worlds to further their social and political agendas -- the Masons were their behind the scenes political handmaidens to reconstruct the "Third Temple" much of Masonic lore is Jewish and not Cathar... but after WWI, these Masonic handmaidens would no longer be needed like the were once needed under the  Monarchs. Now it was all "above the table" movements with explicit deals and threats that advanced the Jewish Agenda -- like the blackmail of Woodrow Wilson, promises to bring the USA into wars, formal decrees for central banks and taxes. Warburg came to the USA to create a central bank and he certainly knew how the Jews used the NY Banks to attack the Czar's Russia pre-1914. Many players in many countries led by Politically observant Jews -- Colonel House, the Fabians, the Bolsheviks, etc.


Now to prepare a group of students for the removal of the Secretly run and controlled Jewish societies and to replace them with publicly identifiable "jewish run societies" before and after WWI -- the Protocols were needed. And they needed to be secretly shared among many levels in Jewish society.  They were needed to inform other Jews of what Rothschild, Schiff and Warburg had planned for Europe and the world.  Only an acutely observant political Jewish mind much like Asher Ginsburg's (who helped negotiate the BALFOUR DECLARATION -- read that again if you must to let it sink in -- Asher Ginsburg a nationalist for the Jewish people and obviously a Talmudic would have the drive to prepare his "students" for the upcoming Jewish role in the world under the financing of Rothschild. The Protocols talk about a coming world in which all these things were to happen -- not the world of Joly or even Disraeli. This is intended for the Post-VictorianPost-Monarchy era of Europe when the "Masses" rule. It coalesces all the learnings of How to Corrupt "Goyim" society learned by Jew Leaders since the time of the French Revolution, and the Revolutions of the 1840s, and of the early wisdom of Global Finance-Government Loans as well.

Do you think Asher didn't read Joly and Disraeli and even Machiavelli?  

Of course he did.  Do you think a studious and cunning political mind like his would let good advice on how to wreck a Goy society go to waste?  The timeline fits with him along with the translation and consequent publication of the Protocols. He or some Russian-Ukrainian Jew likely Asher wrote it first in Hebrew/Yiddish to share internationally among Jews... Funny how thinks that the "Sons of the Covenant" and other explicitly Jewish run "sons" type organizations suddenly grow in the USA and Europe (ADL).  They had gotten the message blessed by Rothschild. The Rothschilds likely pushed both a "Hertzl" solution and a "Asher Ginsburg" solution for Zionism -- build a territorial homeland for the Third Temple  while corrupting Goy societies and cultures to strengthen the Jewish people as earthly rulers. The more that money and labor from the Goyim could be utilized to strengthen Israel via Blackmail, Bribes and inside control and Agents -- the better.  In fact, if you really think about it, the Protocols would require a "Jewish Homeland" to fight for lest the "conspiracy" would be discovered and the Jews expelled or pogromed once and for all. Realists and Political operatives such as Asher likely didn't expect that "Hertzl's" plan would work -- so they used the Protocols as the "BACK UP Plan" when it failed.

Think about it. A journal article on Asher. He's the guy. Focus on the leaders.  For whom, and for what purpose did they pursue the wrecking of Europe in WWI? Rothschild hedged his bets if the little settlement in Palestine failed.

-----------

Ahad Ha-'Am: A Political Failure?, by Yossi Goldstein  © 1990 Springer.

Abstract
Why is it that Ahad Ha-'Am failed to attain political predominance within the Zionist movement of his time? This question has not been addressed by scholars, who have accepted Ahad Ha-'Am's protestations of "non-alliance" at face value -- his desire to appear before the public as an apolitical figure, an intellectual, a commentator on Jewish events, literature, and philosophy. It may be said without exaggeration that, over time, he achieved the status of teacher and prophet in the eyes of his followers. His opinions on both secular and religious issues were eagerly sought and his writings well received. But his biography belies the claim that this was all he aspired to. Ahad Ha-'Am was always in the eye of the political storm, active in struggles and political intrigues, and in search of positions of power and influence. What prevented him from achieving political leadership? The obvious conclusion to be drawn from Ahad Ha-'Am's public career and his not having attained positions of power within the Zionist movement was that he avoided responsibility at any cost. Even when he enjoyed authority -- for instance, when he stood at the head of Bnei Moshe (1889-97) -- he was ambivalent about his position and refused to pursue power. This was the key to his behavior at the first All-Russian Conference of the Zionist movement (Warsaw, 1898). It was also the case when members of the Democratic Faction sought to present him as an alternative to Herzl (1900-1901), when the Russian Zionists at the second Zionist Conference in Minsk (1902) considered him a leader, as well as during the Russian revolution of 1905 and at the time of the Balfour Declaration (1917-18). Each time Ahad Ha-'Am was close to the pinnacle of political power, and each time he withdrew. He explained his behavior as his rejection of the authority inherent in political power. However, this contradicts the facts of his own intensive political activity. Perhaps the inconsistency was born of his own manic personality, with its radical mood swings, and of his fear of political leadership. Such explanations are difficult to address precisely, but they seem the most likely. Is it possible to describe Ahad Ha-'Am as a political failure? Objectively, he did not attain political power. But his other achievements -- He was a figure of perhaps greater influence on his particular brand of Zionism than any of his contemporaries, as well as a successful editor and writer -- compensated in large measure for his political failings. /// [Abstract in Hebrew].

http://www.jstor.org/pss/20101080

The Life of Sergei Nilius (looks like he found a Hebrew-Yiddish copy and translated it):
-------------

The son of Alexander Petrovich Nilus, from a family of Swiss immigrants, Nilus was a landowner in the government of Orel. He studied law and graduated from the University of Moscow, and was a magistrate in Transcaucasia. He later moved to Biarritz, living there with a mistress named Natalya Komarovskaya until his estates went bankrupt and he broke off their relationship. Though he was raised in the Russian Orthodox faith, Nilus did not seem to care much about religion until an accident with his horse caused him to recall an unfulfilled childhood vow to visit the Troitse-Sergiyeva Lavra. Later he met St. John of Kronstadt, whom he credited with healing a throat infection and turning him fully back to his native faith.

In 1901 or 1902, Nilus published his book Velikoe v malom i antikhrist, kak blizkaja politicheskaja vozmozhnost. Zapiski pravoslavnogo (The Great within the Small and Antichrist, an Imminent Political Possibility. Notes of an Orthodox Believer). The text of the Protocols appeared as Chapter Twelve of the 1905 edition of this book. A secret investigation ordered by the newly-appointed chairman of the Council of Ministers Pyotr Stolypin soon determined that the Protocols had first appeared in Paris in antisemitic circles around 1897–1898.

In 1906 Nilus married Yelena Alexandrovna Ozerova, who had served as a lady-in-waiting to Alexandra Feodorovna, last empress of Russia. In 1907, Nilus moved to Optina Monastery, where he lived until 1912. During this time he published several books on spiritual topics, including his most famous work (other than Velikoe v malom): On the Bank of God's River, a portrait of his years at Optina and of the many Orthodox Starets living there. During this timeframe, Nilus was given the papers of Nikolay Motovilov, a Russian landowner and Fool for Christ who was a disciple of St. Seraphim of Sarov. Nilus published one of these manuscripts as "A Wonderful Revelation to the World: the Conversation of St. Seraphim with Nicholas Alexandrovich Motovilov on the acquisition of the Holy Spirit."[1] This manuscript would become one of the most oft-read Orthodox texts of modern times. In 1912 a report was received by the Holy Synod that Nilus was living at the monastery with his wife (though the Niluses were not actually living within the monastery, but rather as guests in a small house nearby), and Nilus was ordered by the Synod to leave Optina.

Nilus circulated several editions of the Protocols in Russia as part of an antisemitic campaign. Though the early prints were in Russian, the Protocols were quickly spread to the rest of Europe by Russian expatriates after the 1917 revolution. Some of them claimed that they provided proof that the Jews were behind the Russian Revolution. By the time Nilus died, Europe had been saturated by millions of copies of the Protocols.

Under the new Soviet government, Sergei Nilus was arrested and briefly imprisoned in 1924, 1925 and 1927. He died on January 14, 1929, after a heart attack.

In the USSR possession of Nilus' books was punished by up to 10 years of imprisonment, as "running anti-Soviet propaganda by keeping anti-Soviet literature".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serge_Nilus

It was translated into English from Russian:

George Shanks was an expatriate British man, who is most famous as the first translator of Protocols of Zion into the English language. His version was produced for The Britons, an early anti-immigration and anti-Semitic organization.

Shanks was the son of a well-known English merchant who resided in Moscow. As a result of the Russian Revolution of 1917, the family sustained financial ruin and became refugees in London. It is believed that the translation was completed during this period. His identity was not discovered until 1978; initially, it was believed that Victor E. Marsden was the translator, as his name came to be associated with the British English language translation of the Protocols in pamphlet or booklet form soon after he died in 1920.

Shanks is known to have engaged in a dispute with The Britons over payment of the royalties to which he was entitled regarding their publication of The Jewish Peril.

In the United States the initial translation of this notorious anti-Semitic forgery is associated with several names, arguably the most important of the names being Boris Brasol, Natalie de Bogory, and Dr. Harris Ayers Houghton.

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Keep in mind. The guy sounds "Protocol" Wise:

Spiritual and Cultural Zionism

The history of Zionism before the First World War is reflected in the multitude of themes that ran across the Zionist Movement, such as the secular, political and social emphases on national reconstruction and renaissance, and the capacity of Jews to transform themselves into autonomous agents of history, as well as Jewish solidarity. These themes were interwoven into the principle of shlilat ha'galut and were intended to be molded, once a Jewish nation in Eretz Israel was established, into a new Jewish collective identity (Eisenstadt, 1992). This utopia is found in the literary masterpieces of Ahad Ha'Am, who was Herzl's ideological opponent.

Ahad Ha'Am was a prolific Zionist writer and a political actor. He contributed more than any writer to the creation of modern Hebrew prose and, at the same time, supported the Lovers of Zion, attended the first Zionist congress and was elected as a member of the Odessa central committee which was the center of the Lovers of Zion organization. Later, Ahad Ha'Am became Chaim Weizmann's confidant during the negotiations over the Balfour Declaration. He attempted to influence the course of Zionism by emphasizing that Zionism should be a cultural movement, not just a political force. It should attempt to solidify the spiritual content of Jewish existence and reconstitute Jewish national culture so that, upon the acquisition of a state, Jews would continue to be guided by their historic quest for spiritual greatness.

Ahad Ha'Am presciently realized the establishment of a Jewish state would cause only a small portion of the Jewish people to immigrate to Israel. This implied that the Diaspora would continue to house the majority of the Jewish population. Since a newly established Jewish state would not solve the economic problems of Jews who continued to reside abroad, its responsibility toward their vitality would exist through spiritual and cultural spheres.

Spiritual and Cultural Zionism was meant to offer spiritual Jewish values to both the individual Jew in Western Europe who was unable to integrate into the liberal culture of his home country and the East European Jew unable to identify with the nationalist culture of his home country. Not surprisingly, after the publication of Herzl's Altneuland, Ahad Ha'Am published a scathing critique of Herzl's vision of the Jewish state because it ignored the spiritual dimension. In addition, Ahad Ha'Am was among the first writers to emphasize the necessity of confronting the Arab problem in Palestine, first and foremost, by changing the attitudes of the first settlers toward the Arab population. He also warned of the potential emergence of an Arab Palestinian national movement that would eventually confront the Zionist movement.

The Influence of Ahad Ha-Am on modern Israel

By Sidney Rosenfarb

During the time of the beginning of Zionism, which was at the end of the 1800's and beginning of the 1900's, the Jews were drawn in many directions. There was the Yiddish culture advocates, who while they had no external religious expressions of their Jewishness, yet felt that as Jews, they possessed a culture far superior to that of the native culture in the lands in which they lived. To this group, the procreation and enjoyment of the Yiddish culture defined a national entity of the Jews.

Opposite of this view were the political groups of the many and various venues of thought. Amongst them were the Bolsheviks, the communists, the Socialists etc, all divided up in their many sub-categories. These Jews believed that the future of the Jew was to be found in a stable government which gave equality to all of its citizens. They had no religious leanings, but felt that the Jews, both as a group, and as individuals, had their future tied up with the form of government that could grant them their personal liberties.

The religious Jews, in their various forms, Chassidic or just traditional, were losing numbers to the various ideologies that were stirred in the winds. The leading Rabbis in most cities warned their faithful to separate from the Yiddishists, Zionists, and Socialists (in all of their various forms).

The Zionist movement was just beginning to sprout its head. It was small and unorganized. The various Zionist groups were local with out the international organization that was to come later. The draw of the East European Jew to Zion was like a magnet, like a dream. The conditions under which the Jew lived in Eastern Europe were terrible: Pogroms, discrimination and material hardship, coupled with the possibility of oppressive forced military service, Zion was more than a dream, it seemed an only choice to many. To live in our own land, to determine our own fate drew many youth to desire that this be the logical possibility.

Unfortunately, Herzl had not yet set up his Zionist congress, nor revealed his dream. Life in Israel was wrought with danger from Arabs and disease. The land needed hard work and living conditions were very trying even to the most dedicated Zionist.

Asher Ginsberg, who became known via his pen name of Ahad Ha-am, was one of the most influential people in this important time.

Ahad Ha-am was born in Skvira, a small town near Kiev in the Ukraine in 1856. He received the traditional Jewish education from the age of three. He excelled in his talmudic studies and became familiar with the various Jewish philosophic rabbinical texts.

He was a strong willed boy who had a tremendous amount of intellectual curiosity. At the age of eight he taught himself to read Russian. By twelve, he began reading the forbidden "haskala" (Jewish Enlightenment) literature. Although he became a "free-thinker" he continued his talmudic education.

He was a fastidious, morally upright person with a strong sense of human dignity. He disliked corruption and vulgarity. He was quiet, reserved and shy and felt that only work was worth doing. He enjoyed deep conversations with friends which gave him his relaxation. Although he distanced himself from his religion, yet he maintained the Jewish dietary laws, said Kaddish when it was necessary, had a reverence for the Jewish tradition.

Although he lived among the Yiddish writers and was fluent in Yiddish, he maintained a contempt for Yiddish. Ahad Ha-am wrote only in Hebrew, and because of his respect for the tradition coupled with his solid knowledge of the Talmud and biblical sources, his writings were enriched and inseparable from Jewish values.

He married a simple and poor Jewish girl who bore him three children. Although she stood by his side through out his life, he always felt a spiritual lonliness. When one of his daughters married a Russian gentile, Ahad Ha-am refused to speak with her for many years, so strongly did he feel his Jewishness, yet he was unable to transfer it to his daughter.

At first Ahad Ha-am wanted to study the works of the "haskala" but he was disappointed in the "maskilim". The maskilim were the authors and thinkers of the haskala movement. With his disappointment in the maskilim, Ahad Ha-am went to study the various secular subjects taught in the universities. He mastered many languages.

In Odessa, he became acquainted with the Hovevei Zion movement. He joined the central committee and became embroiled in many arguments over the method of settling Eretz Israel.

At that time the Hovevei Zion movement recruited candidates to go to Israel. They provided money and support for those who went there to settle. Unfortunately, many were disillusioned in what awaited them in Israel. It was Ahad Ha-am who proposed a rigorous training program in Europe to give the agricultural skills to those who desired to emigrate along with philosophy to carry them through the difficult period of re-adjustment.

It was at that time that he published his first important article, Lo Zeh ha-Derich, (This is not the Way) which advocated dedicated and trained settlement. This controversial essay written under the pseudonym Ahad Ha-am (meaning "One of the People") propelled him into fame as an intelligent thinker and convincing writer.

He continued to write and was adopted as the spiritual leader of the "B'nei Moshe" movement. This movement lasted for about eight years, and his writings were their direct inspiration.

In 1891, Ahad Ha-am visited Eretz Israel and summed up his impressions in Emet me Eretz Yisrael, (Truth from the Land of Israel). He was strongly critical of the economic, social, and spiritual aspects of the Jewish Settlements. He visited a second time in 1893 and published similar criticisms. He planned at this time an educational encyclopedia on Jews and Judaism (Otzar ha-Yahadut) which he hoped would encourage Jewish studies and revitalize Jewish thought. The massive work was never completed, but he became the manager of an influential Jewish publishing house, and the editor of their monthly magazine, Ha-Shilo'ah.

He advocated a continuity between tradition and the emergence of the new Israeli culture. He felt that with out the traditional Jewish values, the Zionist dream would turn into a secular state devoid of inherent Jewish values.

Ahad Ha-am clashed with the other leaders of Zionism, notably Herzl and Nordau. He had no faith in the dream of Herzl to set up a Jewish state anywhere, devoid of Jewish values. Herzl and Nordau's estrangement from Jewish values and culture troubled him. He accused them of neglecting the cultural tradition which he felt were the pulse and soul of the emerging Jewish nation.

When Herzl published his book, "The Jewish State" in 1896, Ahad Ha-am wrote a scathing review of it asking what was Jewish about this proposed state and pointed out the absurdities in it. During the Sixth Zionist Congress, in 1903, Ahad Ha-am expressed his opposition to Herzl's consideration for the British proposal for an autonomous Jewish entity in Uganda.

It was the East European Zionists who insisted on Palestine and caused the rejection of the famous "Uganda Plan". It was due to this defeat that Herzl suffered his heart attack which eventually took his life. After Herzl's demise, Chaim Weizmann and others, together with Ahad Ha-am took over the World Zionist Organization.

Ahad Ha-am was considered an important contributor to the Jewish character of the modern Jewish state. He basically used his excellent mind and writing skills to outline the need for a Jewish character for the new Jewish state.

He settled in Israel in 1922 where he remained until his death in 1927. His essays were not confined to Zionism, but were philosophical analysis of ideas and concepts that affected the life of all men. A man of tremendous stature and influence in his life time, today his works are perhaps too philosophical for a generation of enjoyment seekers.

He explored the desire to live individually, and as a nation. He touched on the attributes of divine mercy and G-d's attributes. He tried to define the essence of a Jew and of the Jewish nation. He explored the consant sub-conscious of the Jew and of the Jewish nation. After the rise of the Jewish State, his ideas reached their fruition as embodied in the Jewish spirit of the Jewish State.

~~~~~~~

from the February 2004 Edition of the Jewish Magazine

[ArthurTopham]

The aim throughout them all is the destruction of all religions and nation-states and the establishment of a global super State ruling the world by ruthless terror. Here I'm paraphrasing Douglas Reed's words written in 1956. They ring true with greater clarity with each passing year.

Arthur - Great first post.
I wish more people would read Douglas Reed's Books.
He is one of the great forgotten writers of the 20th century.(1930's-50's)
A best selling author world wide, until he started writing about zio-Jewish control and the corruption of our society.
The Contoversy of Zion and Far and wide stick out in my mind.



Welcome to tiu  

Thanks scorpio11. Good to finally get the opportunity to post here. Another member of this forum had recently sent me some of their posts and they included the url to it. I went to it and tried to register only to find that I already was a member! I'd joined around this time last year but didn't get to post. Talk about tardy. Too many irons in the fire I guess.

Yes, I consider Douglas Reed to be one of my mentors when it comes to political Zionism. His classic, The Controversy of Zion, changed my world view with respect to the profound influence that the Jews hold over the rest of the planet. I have about 13 of his books and they all are fascinating reading and should all be online for the world to learn from.

[ArthurTopham]

Welcome to TiU!

I too would like to know more on the authorship of the Protocols.

Thanks for the welcome MikeWB. Appreciated. I'm afraid I lean more toward the position that Reed and others do in that the authorship of the Protocols is only a big deal to the Jews because it's one of the main reasons that they use to try and discredit the document. It's akin to saying someone is "anti-Semitic" and therefore not worth listening to. I'm of the opinion that the Protocols are the road map for the fulfillment of the Rothschild's agenda for global governance and it doesn't matter diddly squat who composed the final version that Nilus translated. As I said it only matters to the Jews because if they can build a case for the document being a "forgery" then they can extend that to mean it's not worthy of study (which would be a serious error on the part of anyone professing to be a sober student  of history).

[ArthurTopham]

Welcome to TIU Arthur,

You make a good argument about the Protocols, but I don't think it holds together.

Hi CSR and thanks for the welcome.

Well I don't think I'd call those preliminary comments a good argument, just some observations based upon the research I've done on the subject over the past few years. I'd have to amass a lot more evidence to back up what I said and expand much further on the subject and I'm not sure I could commit to that at this point.

I should note as well that I'm deeply involved in a legal battle here in Canada with the Zionist Jew front organization B'nai Brith Canada who have charged me with a sec. 13 "hate crimes" complaint. One of their primary pieces of "evidence" that I'm publishing materials which, in their devious minds, constitute materials that promote "hatred toward Jews and citizens of Israel" (the actual text of the complaint) is the fact that I have the Protocols posted on my website. So in my own defense I've had to do a whole lot of research on the matter. The case is still in the Tribunal stages after two years of legal back and forth and back and forth.

But I ought to state a bias of mine right off the bat when it comes to reliable sources and for me I don't rely upon Wikipedia. No offense meant but it's akin to watching the "History channel" on the Jewtube in order to get a clear, unbiased version of history. Both these venues are suspect in my mind and loaded with double meanings and disinformation. In many ways no different than the Jewish msm.

One thing I should clarify though is that in mentioning Joly and Disraeli I wasn't inferring that they specifically collaborated in any way in the formation of the final edition. My point was that the general plan for what we see being actualized big time during this past century and now this one first appeared in the writings of Adam Weishuapt the good German Jew who brought to light the infamous Illuminati secret society.

But as I said above to a previous poster, whether the Protocols are a forgery or not is but a ruse of the Jews to deflect the argument. Ezra Pound put it rather succinctly in context when he said of them:

"If or when one mentions the Protocols alleged to be of the Elders of Zion, one is frequently met with the reply: "Oh, but they are a forgery."

Certainly they are a forgery, and that is the one proof we have of their authenticity. The Jews have worked with forged documents for the past 24 hundred years, namely ever since they have had any documents whatsoever. And no one can qualify as a historian of this half century without having examined the Protocols....

The interest in them does not lie in the question of their having been or not been concocted by a legislative assembly of Rabbis — democratically elected or secretly chosen by the Mysterious Order of Seven Branched Antlers or the Bowling Society of Milwaukee. Their interest lies in the type of mind, or the state of mind of their author. That was their interest for the psychologist the day they first appeared. And for the historian two decades later, when the program contained in them has so crushingly gone into effect up to a point, or down to a squalor."

With respect to Asher Ginsburg you write:

Only an acutely observant political Jewish mind much like Asher Ginsburg's (who helped negotiate the BALFOUR DECLARATION -- read that again if you must to let it sink in -- Asher Ginsburg a nationalist for the Jewish people and obviously a Talmudic would have the drive to prepare his "students" for the upcoming Jewish role in the world under the financing of Rothschild.

Do you have evidence showing that Ginsburg helped write the Balfour Declaration? It's my understanding that Lord Rothschild wrote it himself but I would certainly like to know if Ginsburg played a part in it too.

But again, in reading these Jewish tracts on Ginsburg's life and work I honestly don't see how his temperament would fit that of whoever amassed the malicious contents of the Protocols. It strikes me that Ginsburg was more of a humanitarian and a spiritual/philosophical personality rather than the Machiavellian mind that put together the Protocols.

One final thing CSR. The Wikipedia statement:

It [the Protocols] was translated into English from Russian:

George Shanks was an expatriate British man, who is most famous as the first translator of Protocols of Zion into the English language. His version was produced for The Britons, an early anti-immigration and anti-Semitic organization.

Shanks was the son of a well-known English merchant who resided in Moscow. As a result of the Russian Revolution of 1917, the family sustained financial ruin and became refugees in London. It is believed that the translation was completed during this period. His identity was not discovered until 1978; initially, it was believed that Victor E. Marsden was the translator, as his name came to be associated with the British English language translation of the Protocols in pamphlet or booklet form soon after he died in 1920.

Again I would have to see some proof for this statement as it flies in the face of what Reed found in his extensive research of the subject. Strange too that Shanks's identity wasn't "discovered" until 1978 the very year that Reed's Controversy of Zion first hit the stands.

Vigilance is of the utmost importance whenever we refer to Jewish texts related to these matters. Another good example is the fact that the Jews just recently published a book with the title "The Controversy of Zion." It's exactly the opposite of Reed's book and designed obviously to throw researchers and general readers off the trail of the original work.
-----------

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

To be honest Topher,
I think I should actually sit down and read Reed's book "The Controvesy of Zion" from cover to cover.  (since I haven't cough...)

  I do hope you have success in fighting off the B'nai Brith of Canada in court, one thing is that if you at least point to one Jewish leader and say "This is the guy that wrote the Protocols of the Elders of Zion" and then go on to prove the motivations behind the writing of the Protocols, you might force them into examining the conflicted factions of the early Zionist movement. Asher is a good figure to "Accuse" since he actually sounds like the voice behind the Protocols to me in his observations of the Arabs in Palestine. I do think that one highly observant and condescending Jew wrote the Protocols. If it wasn't Asher in fact, then it was a Politically motivated Jew just like him at the end or very early beginning of the 20th century. This writer seems to have dug in deep with the books.  BTW, I find Wikipedia actually pretty good to launch off into primary sources for "Jewish" topics. I generally supplies a decent "background story" like the US History Channel  but obfuscates the "motivations" behind the actions -- it provides generally worthless analysis on cause and effect, or is biased and one-sided for Jew friendly topics, but it will show the general facts. This website might be of interest particularly this quote.

Ahad Ha'am influenced a generation of young Zionists, most particularly in Eastern Europe that included Hayyim Nahman Bialik, Chaim Weizmann, and Micha Josef Berdyczewski. Although he moved to London in 1907 to serve as the agent for the Wissotzky tea company, he continued his Zionist work, playing a part in the securing of the The Balfour Declaration. In 1922, he arrived in Eretz-Israel to spend the last five years of his life in Tel Aviv.

Ahad Ha'am (the pen name of Asher Ginsberg, a Jew from Skvira, near Kiev, Ukraine) (1856-1927) (18) warned his fellow Jews about purchasing Arab land in Palestine: He wrote presciently in 1912 the following:

"We are in the habit of thinking that all the Arabs are wild men of the desert and do not see or understand what goes on around them. But that is a great mistake. The Arabs, especially the town-dwellers, see and understand what we are doing and what we want in Palestine, but they do not react and pretend not to notice, because at present they do not see in what we are doing any threat to their own future. ...But if ever we develop in Palestine to such a degree as to encroach on the living space of the native population to any appreciable extent, they will not easily give up their place." (19)

Herbert Samuel (1870-1963), a British Jew and member of Parliament, who later became High Commissioner of the British Mandate of Palestine, wrote from Palestine in 1921 the following:

"There are those...who sometimes forget or ignore the present inhabitants of Palestine. Inspired by the greatness of their ideals, feeling behind them the pressure of two thousand years of Jewish history, intent upon the practical measures that are requisite to carry their purpose into effect, they learn with surprise and often with incredulity that there are half-a-million people in Palestine, many of whom hold, and hold strongly, very different views." (20)

Keep in mind David Lloyd George:  

Chaim Weizmann Appears on the Scene

In 1914 native Russian and devout Zionist Chaim Weizmann (1874-1952) was 40 years old and a naturalized British citizen. As a result of solving some pressing British munitions problems (he was a chemist) in the early days of World War I, he was able to meet Welshman David Lloyd George (1863-1945), then Minister of Munitions and later to become Prime Minister, who once joked that "acetone converted me to Zionism". (21) Weizmann made a good impression on Lloyd George who also said, "I am his proselyte...There is no man with a greater part in the conversion of the Gentiles running the war than my friend Dr. Weizmann...[He is] one of the noblest and most unselfish men I have ever met." (22)

More on David Lloyd George

Recall that Lloyd George had first come into contact with Zionism in 1903 when Joseph Chamberlain asked Lloyd George's law firm to draft up the scheme to sell British land to Jews migrating to East Africa (see above). When Britain declared war on Turkey in November 1914, Lloyd George, who had remained quiet about his opinions on Zionism for a decade, told Herbert Samuel that he was "very keen to see a Jewish State established" in Palestine." (23) Thus, when Chaim Weizmann entered the picture in 1914, Lloyd George was "predisposed to be receptive", notes Stein.

Lloyd George had mixed feelings about Jews. Occasionally he would make remarks, such as: "There were a good many Jews they could well spare", while other times he would show sensitivity to the "Jewish mystique". (24) He admitted once that growing up in Wales he learned more about the history of the Jews in Old Testament readings than he learned about his own people. He loved those stories, including the prophecy about restoring the Jews to the Holy Land. He also related to Jews because, he said, he, too, belonged to a small nation [Wales].

Lord Balfour Again

Lloyd George became Prime Minister in December 1916 and decided right away to take the risk of a large-scale campaign for the conquest of Palestine, which he confided to a friend was "the one really interesting part of the War." (25) Meanwhile Arthur Balfour, former Prime Minister (1903-1905), joined the Lloyd George Government as Foreign Secretary at the end of 1916. In 1906, Balfour had actually met Weizmann at a Manchester meeting when the East African project was still roiling. Balfour recalled the meeting vividly. When Weizmann was attempting to connect with Balfour via a mutual friend, Balfour wrote in 1914: "I have the liveliest and also the most pleasant recollections of my conversation with Dr. Weizmann...and should be very pleased to hear from him." (26)

Weizmann wrote to Ha'am (see above) of the meeting with Balfour, as follows:

"I saw Balfour on Saturday....Our talk lasted an hour and a half. Balfour remembered everything we had discussed eight years ago, and this made it superfluous for me to repeat my exposition of the Jewish problem in its national aspect...When I expressed my regret that our work [in Palestine] had been interrupted, he said: 'You may get your things done much more quickly after the war....'...He said that, in his opinion, the [Jewish] problem would not be solved until either the Jews became completely assimilated here or a normal Jewish society came into existence in Palestine, and, moreover, he was thinking more of the West European Jews than of those of Eastern Europe. [Weizmann persuaded Balfour of the need to look at the plight of Eastern European Jews and asked to see Balfour again after the war.]

The two subsequently met several times in 1915 and 1916. Weizmann wrote that Balfour said: "Christian civilisation owes to the Jews a debt which it cannot repay." (27) Balfour hedged on British taking responsibility for Palestine for "she would be suspected of seeking territorial aggrandizement" and favored the United States undertaking the role of protecting the Jews in their development of Palestine, according to Weizmann who felt "ashamed of my niggling mind." (27)

Nevertheless, it turns out that stony Balfour revered Old Testament stories during his youth in Scotland, and, like Lloyd George, had a soft spot for the Jews and their dilemma. After the Balfour Declaration had been announced, Balfour said that both he and Lloyd George "have been influenced by a desire to give the Jews their rightful place in the world; a great nation without a home is not right." (28)

The British Invasion of Palestine in 1917

Just several months after David Lloyd George became Prime Minister in early December 1916, he began pushing the War Cabinet to invade Palestine. British troops had already cleared Egypt of Turks but Lloyd George wanted them to capture Jerusalem and then expel the Turks from Palestine. Stein writes: "So far as Palestine was concerned, it is clear that Lloyd George was influenced by other than purely military considerations. He writes in his "Memoirs" that, when the question of going on with the Palestine campaign was discussed by the War Cabinet on 2 April 1917, 'we realized the moral and political advantages to be expected from an advance on this Front, and particularly from the occupation of Jerusalem.'" (29) Indeed, the object of the Palestine campaign was not merely to defeat the Turks there but to bring Palestine permanently under British control. (29)

At first the War Cabinet wavered about an offensive in Palestine, but eventually moved forward with it, which had the effect of bringing the Zionist question into the foreground.  On April 3, 1917, Lloyd George saw Weizmann who was subsequently told to be ready to leave for Egypt within the next ten days by diplomatic advisor Sir Mark Sykes who "showed interest in [Weizmann's] proposal that a statement of British policy in a pro-Zionist sense should be prepared for publication in Palestine at the first opportune moment." (30)

British War Cabinet Considers a Pro-Zionist Public Announcement

The British War Cabinet first began to discuss the advisability of a public pronouncement in favor of a Jewish national home in Palestine in summer 1917. Weizmann on June 13, 1917 wrote to Sir Ronald Graham that "it appears desirable from every point of view that the British Government should give expression to its sympathy and support of the Zionist claims on Palestine. In fact, it need only confirm the view which eminent and representative members of the Government have many times expressed to us, and which have formed the basis of our negotiations throughout the long period of almost three years." (31)

The Foreign Office, led by Lord Balfour, agreed, and on June 13, 1917, suggested that the time had arrived "when we might meet the wishes of the Zionists and give them an assurance that His Majesty's Government are in general sympathy with their aspirations." (31) United States President Woodrow Wilson and France did not object. Stein writes that "Weizmann and his colleagues were being encouraged to impress upon the American and Russian Jews that if Great Britain gained control of Palestine, she could be relied upon to favour the building up of a Jewish Commonwealth. They had hinted, or more or less hinted, that they were authorized to give this assurance, but it would be all the more convincing if a friendly interest in Zionism had been openly expressed by the British Government itself. (31) Indeed Weizmann in June persuaded Balfour to receive "a declaration which would be satisfactory to us [Zionists], and which he would try and put before the War Cabinet." (32)

Anti-Zionist Jews Respond Bitterly

It took a while to hammer out the wording of the declaration. Meanwhile, non-Zionist Jews caught wind of the arrangement and complained bitterly. An good example of their sentiment is in the words of Mr. Montagu, as follows: "The Government has dealt an irreparable blow at Jewish Britons and they have endeavored to set up a people which does not exist; they have alarmed unnecessarily the whole Moslem world; and, in so far as they are successful, they will have a Germanised [militaristic] Palestine on the flank. Why we should intern Muhammad Ali in India for Pan-Mohammedanism when we encourage Pan-Judaism I cannot for the life of me understand. It certainly puts the final date to my political activities." (33) [Bolding by Editor.]

http://www.semp.us/publications/biot_re ... BiotID=394

[ArthurTopham]

To be honest Topher,
I think I should actually sit down and read Reed's book "The Controvesy of Zion" from cover to cover.  (since I haven't cough...)

Now there's an honest admittance CSR. I would bet that you'd find it a most fascinating read. Reed goes into great depth in describing the lives of most of the players you refer to: Herzl, Weizmann, Belfour, and many many more of the actors of his day. His chapter on the Protocols is a gem. You could read it at the following url: "The Protocols" by Douglas Reed  http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=670

CSR:

I do hope you have success in fighting off the B'nai Brith of Canada in court, one thing is that if you at least point to one Jewish leader and say "This is the guy that wrote the Protocols of the Elders of Zion" and then go on to prove the motivations behind the writing of the Protocols, you might force them into examining the conflicted factions of the early Zionist movement.

Not so easy as this CSR. You must bear in mind that these Zionist deceivers have major law firms and major bucks behind them and they already have embedded in our jurisprudence the infamous sec. 13 law which is found in the Canadian Human Rights Act. There's no way in hell that I could get away with pointing at say Ginsburg and declaring that it was he who drew up the map without having some very impressive evidence.

Another thing is the fact that these complaints don't take place in courts of law as is normal in criminal and other civil actions. No, no. We can't have law courts involved as that would mean the BBs would actually have to prove that I was inciting hatred and of course they can't do that. That is why they created "Human Rights" commissions (commissariats, in fact) and "Human Rights" Tribunals. In other words these are what are known as "quasi-judicial" bodies. In other words political entities filled with political appointees no different than what we saw in Commie USSR under Lenin and Stalin. Being outside the real law so to speak these bolshevik boobs then create their own rules and so on. They are a pus filled pile of putrefaction oozing out their poisonous "hate" planks and their equally vile solutions, i.e. censorship of the internet, fines, years of harassment and legal costs to those accused and even jail if their victims refuse to kowtow to their perverted program.

Ahad Ha'am (the pen name of Asher Ginsberg, a Jew from Skvira, near Kiev, Ukraine) (1856-1927) (18) warned his fellow Jews about purchasing Arab land in Palestine: He wrote presciently in 1912 the following:

"We are in the habit of thinking that all the Arabs are wild men of the desert and do not see or understand what goes on around them. But that is a great mistake. The Arabs, especially the town-dwellers, see and understand what we are doing and what we want in Palestine, but they do not react and pretend not to notice, because at present they do not see in what we are doing any threat to their own future. ...But if ever we develop in Palestine to such a degree as to encroach on the living space of the native population to any appreciable extent, they will not easily give up their place."

This is a good quote CSR  and the one by Samuel as for me it only reinforces what I've been saying about Ginsberg, i.e. that he was already aware that political Zionism was a false Messiah and that neglecting to consider the legitimate inhabitants of Palestine would only lead to disaster in the long run.

Herbert Samuel (1870-1963), a British Jew and member of Parliament, who later became High Commissioner of the British Mandate of Palestine, wrote from Palestine in 1921 the following:

"There are those...who sometimes forget or ignore the present inhabitants of Palestine. Inspired by the greatness of their ideals, feeling behind them the pressure of two thousand years of Jewish history, intent upon the practical measures that are requisite to carry their purpose into effect, they learn with surprise and often with incredulity that there are half-a-million people in Palestine, many of whom hold, and hold strongly, very different views."

It's a fascinating study this early period of Zionist insurrection.

Must get some sleep. More later.

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

The writer lamely tries to blame a Russian author.  But I ask, "what is the difference, are the accusations not true?". Copied from a Jew original is all I have to say, just look at that Jew Blankfein of Goldman Sachs   ...he's got the "Protocols" all over his lying Jew face! -- the CSR:

The Protocols have been known to be a forgery since 1921, when The Times of London revealed that they had been largely copied from an 1864 political tract by a Frenchman, Maurice Joly. That work was a commentary on French politics and had nothing to do with Jews. Golovinski, working with such mystical anti-modernizers as the Holy Brotherhood, combined Joly's fantasy elements of world domination with earlier anti-Jewish and anti-Masonic material to produce "evidence" of an overarching Jewish-Masonic plot. Late-Imperial Russia was awash in documentary forgeries, domestic spying, and counterspying, with revolutionaries and the Czarist secret police often involved in complex duplicities. Golovinski himself changed sides after the 1917 revolution, becoming a Bolshevik propagandist.

----------

Thursday, April 29, 2010
Meet the Forger of "The Protocols of Zion": Mathieu Golovinski

Forging Protocols

Charles Paul Freund
From the February 2000 issue of Reason

The last mystery surrounding the infamous anti-Semitic pamphlet Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion--the identity of the 1904 hoax's author--finally has been solved. According to the Russian historian Mikhail Lepekhine, the Protocols were concocted by a Russian propagandist named Mathieu Golovinski as part of a monarchist scheme to persuade Czar Nicholas II that the capitalist modernization of Russia was really a Jewish plot to control the world. Golovinski's handiwork--24 subversive "protocols" that purport to be the minutes of a secret "Zionist" conclave--was to become a bulwark of anti-Semitic paranoia and an essential text of Nazism. The Protocols remain dear to credulous paranoids throughout the world.

Historian Lepekhine discovered Golovinski's authorship in Russia's long-closed archives and published his findings last November in the French newsweekly L'Express. Golovinski had been linked to the work before: The German writer Konrad Heiden identified him as an author of the Protocols in 1944.

The Protocols have been known to be a forgery since 1921, when The Times of London revealed that they had been largely copied from an 1864 political tract by a Frenchman, Maurice Joly. That work was a commentary on French politics and had nothing to do with Jews. Golovinski, working with such mystical anti-modernizers as the Holy Brotherhood, combined Joly's fantasy elements of world domination with earlier anti-Jewish and anti-Masonic material to produce "evidence" of an overarching Jewish-Masonic plot. Late-Imperial Russia was awash in documentary forgeries, domestic spying, and counterspying, with revolutionaries and the Czarist secret police often involved in complex duplicities. Golovinski himself changed sides after the 1917 revolution, becoming a Bolshevik propagandist.

Of course, a parallel universe of Protocol-believers has continued to claim that the Protocols are authentic, and that any evidence to the contrary is the real forgery. The leading proponent of this view was probably Nesta Webster, who wrote prolifically in the 1920s about purported Jewish conspiracies, and whose anti-revolutionary zeal may have stemmed from her belief that she had been guillotined by French revolutionaries in an earlier incarnation.

The Protocols remain widely sold in the Middle East, are readily available in Japan, and have lately become quite popular in the Balkans. In the U.S., reprints can be found in many Afrocentric bookstores. The Protocols were reprinted in their entirety in William Cooper's popular 1991 conspiracist work, Behold a Pale Horse, though Cooper instructed readers that "any reference to 'Jews' should be replaced with the word 'Illuminati.'"

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2010/04 ... -zion.html

 

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Israel Shamir is an Israeli journalist based in Jaffa. His articles can be found on the site http://www.israelshamir.net
(ISRAEL SHAMIR MAKES SOME CRAPPY APOLOGIA for the PROTOCOLS via Solzhenitsyn, but indeed, certainly Solzhenitsyn saw them as 100% created by a well informed Jewish writer that knew Russia, Jewish International Finance, Zionism and Jewish Sheltlism all intimately-- precisely a person like Asher Ginsberg! -- CSR)


====

Solzhenitsyn is aware of faults of the Protocols. "Its style is that of a filthy leaflet, the powerful line of thought is broken and fragmented, mixed up with ill-smelling incantations and psychological blunders. The system described is not necessarily connected with the Jews; it could be purely Masonic or whatever; while its strongly anti-Semitic current is not an organic part of the design".
 
Solzhenitsyn makes a textual experiment, removes words "Jews", "Goyim" and "conspiracy" and finds many disturbing ideas. He concludes: "The text demonstrates impressive foresight on the two systems of society, the Western and the Soviet one. While a strong thinker could possibly predict the development of the West in 1901, how could he grasp the Soviet future?"
 
Solzhenitsyn braved the Soviet regime, dared to write and publish the mammoth Archipelago Gulag, an indictment of the Soviet repression, but even he stalled and did not publish his research of the Protocols. He asked it to be published after his death only, and it was printed against his will in a very small number of copies in 2001. Let us follow Solzhenitsyn's line of thought and gaze into the crystal ball of the Protocols, while temporarily discounting its "Jewish line" and paying heed to the idea of creating a new system, not necessarily a Jewish-dominated one. The master-plan begins with reshaping of human mind:

"People's minds should be diverted (away from contemplation) towards industry and trade, and then they will have no time to think. The people will be consumed by the pursuit of gain. It will be vain pursuit, for we shall put industry on a speculative basis: what is withdrawn from the land by industry will slip through the hands of workers and industrialists and pass into the hands of financiers.
 
The intensified struggle for survival and superiority, accompanied by crises and shocks will create cold and heartless communities with strong aversion towards religion. Their only guide is gain that is Mammon, which they will erect into a veritable cult".
 
Foresight of Anonym is amazing: in the days of the Protocols' publication, Man was still the measure of things, and full eighty years would pass, until Milton Friedman and Chicago School would proclaim Market and Profit as the only guiding light.
 
The tool for enslavement of minds is the media, writes Anonym. "There is a great force that creates the movement of thought in the people, and that is the media. It is in the media that the triumph of freedom of speech finds its incarnation. Through the Press we have gained the power to influence minds while remaining unobserved. We shall erase from the memory of men the historical facts we do not want them to know, and leave only those we wish".
 
Years will pass since the publication until a small group of people who control our discourse while remaining unobserved, the media lords, would rise. The free discussion of the media barons, Berlusconi and Black, Maxwell and Sulzberger, Gusinsky and Zuckerman is banned from the media they own, while their cooperative affinity remains impressive. The freedom of discourse survives wherever independent (from media barons) media still exists. Hundred years ago, this force was much weaker than it is now, and it is amazing the Anonym recognised its potential.
 
Century before the rise of World Bank and IMF, the Protocols noticed the foreign loans are the best tools to rob countries of their wealth. "While the loans were internal, money remained in the land, but with externalisation of loans, all nations pay tribute of their subjects to the oligarchy". Indeed, the bigger loans poor countries get, the poorer they become.
 
Concentration of capital in the hands of financiers, concentration of media in few hands, extra-judicial killings of unyielding leaders, stock market with its derivatives sucks out wealth and it accumulates in the hands of the priesthood of Mammon, gain (or "market forces") as the only measure of successful strategy. Yes, the interest to the Protocols does not disappear because the described plan of creating oligarchic (not necessarily Jewish) rule is being implemented in real time and it is called the New World Order.

http://www.rense.com/general32/elders.htm

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

The Talmudic New World Order

Where is all this heading?

In 1865 a certain Jewish rabbi named Rzeichorn delivered a speech at Prague which is a very accurate summary of many aspects of the Protocols. It is also a stark eye-opener for anyone who harbours the impression that true Orthodox Judaism is a religion like others based upon the pursuit of spiritual betterment, love and universal peace. Just like the Protocols the plan described within has provably come to pass.

"Gold in the hands of experts will always be the most useful weapon for those who possess it and an object of envy for those who are without it. With gold one can buy the most upright consciences. With gold one can fix the value of every stock, or every merchandise, one can loan it to states that afterwards one holds at one's mercy. Already the principal banks, the stock exchanges throughout the world, the loans to all the governments are in our hands. The other great power is the Press by ceaselessly repeating certain ideas the Press in the end makes them considered as true. The theare renders similar services. Everywhere theatre and press follow our directives."

    "An indefatigable campaign in favour of the democratic form of government will divide the Gentiles amongst themselves in political parties, and we shall thus destroy the unity of their nations. We will sow the seed of discord. Powerless they will have to accept the law of our banks, always united, always devoted to our cause."

    "We will push the Christians into war by judicious exploitation of their pride. They will massacre each other and thus make more space where we can place our own people. The possession of land has always procured influence and power. In the name of social justice and equality we will divide the great properties. We will give small fragments of these properties to the peasants who desire them with all their heart but who will soon be indebted to us by the very exploitation of these properties. Our capital will enable us to become the real masters. In our turn we shall become the great owners of land and this possession will assure our power."

    "Let us use all our force to replace the circulation of gold by that of paper. Our banks will absorb the gold and we shall decide then what value the paper money will have. This will make us the masters of every man's existence. We will have amongst ourselves many fine orators capable of feigning enthusiasm and of convincing the masses. We will send them among the nations to announce the changes that will make for the happiness and prosperity of mankind. By gold and by flattery we will win the proloteriat who will take on their shoulders the job of exterminating Christian capitalism. We will promise to the workers salaries that they have never even dared dream of, but we will also heighten the price of all necessities, so much so that our profits will be even greater."

    "In this manner we will prepare the revolutions that the Christians will conduct themselves and out of which we shall collect the fruits. By our jokes and by our attacks we will render their priests ridiculous and eventually odious. Their religion as ridiculous and as odious as their priests."

The above agenda is so similar to that outlined in the Protocols of Zion that it cannot but be part of the same conspiracy.

More dramatically however the agenda outlined in the Protocols was foreshadowed with over two thousand years of similar documents, edicts and statements.

Both Communism and Zionism can be seen to be the two means by which the Protocols unfolded in the early twentieth century, whilst communism acted to tear down the Russian aristocratic system and to replace it with a tyranny and dictatorship led predominantly by Jews, thus placing a vast area of territory and human resources into the hands of the conspirators.

Zionism used the false accusation of the need for the establishment of the prophesised Jewish homeland to re-home the eastern Jews who were being persecuted in Russia. In fact as is shown from Government documents of the time the accusation of mass anti-Semitism and pogroms in Russia at the turn of the century against the Jews is massively exaggerated. This was essentially a press-led propaganda tactic employed in the west to further the aims of Zionist interest and to ease the passage of the mass of Eastern Jews who immigrated to the west in the late l9th and early 20th century.

Since the Second World War, the sole subject of the ancient conspiracy - the Jewish hatred of the Gentile nations - and the historical records which show the massive destructive influence which Jews have had upon mankind have all been made taboo.

The reaction to exposure of the ancient conspiracy is merely a pre-programmed pavlovian reaction created and instilled by the very perpetrators of the same ancient conspiracy. And today very few will dare speak above a whisper of that all-encompassing Judaic oppression of mankind.

By an interesting "coincidence" President Franklin Roosevelt from a Jewish family had 72 advisers around him when he led the USA into World War II, of which 52 were known Jews. The Elders of Zion, the Sanhedrin, the highest Jewish authority since Biblical times officially numbered 71.

Whilst in Britain in 1999 the Labour government admitted that it has 72 official "advisers" or spin doctors "- professional liars.

Recent world political history has been provably controlled and manipulated by Russian Jews who have no racial ties or origin in the land of Palestine

In 1920 Lord Northcliff, the owner of several newspapers as well as being joint proprietor of The TImes caused to be published in the Times an article called "The Jewish Peril - a Disturbing Pamphlet - Call for enquiry". This article on the Protocols called for a proper investigation into the document. In February 1922 he set about a fervently anti-Zionist mission - a series of articles about what was really going on in Palestine.

On August 14th 1922 Northcliff died of "ulcerated endocarditis". He had been confronted on a train to Evian-les-Bains in June by the editor of the Times, Wickham Steed, with a doctor who had certified Northcliff " nsane" . On the strength of this he was barred from entering the offices of the Times by a police guard and the staff were ordered to ignore his communications. All of this without showing any outward signs of madness to those who later commented on his appearance and state of mind. However he had stated that he believed his life was in danger and that he was being poisoned.

This whole story was suppressed until the publication of the official history of the Times thirty years later in 1952. This one man, who had enough power to challenge the Protocols and Zionism on an international stage to an audience of millions and who was committed to illuminating the world as to the true agenda, had been removed.

.The often cited "fact" that the Protocols are a proven fraud is easily dismissed. It is entirely untrue and is based on a very specific court case. On the 26th June 1933 the Federation of Jewish Communities in Switzerland and the Berne Jewish Community brought an action against the members of the Swiss National Front seeking a judgement that the Protocols were a forgery and a prohibition of their publication.

The procedure of the court was an astounding fraud. The provisions of the Swiss Civil Code being deliberately set aside. 16 witnesses were called to the Plaintiffs but only one of the 40 witnesses called by the Defendants was allowed a hearing. The judge allowed the Plaintiff to appoint two private stenographers to keep the register of the proceedings during the hearing of their witnesses instead of entrusting the task to a court official. In view of these and similar irregularities it was not suprising that after the case had lasted just on two years the court pronounced the Protocols to be a forgery and demoralising literature. The decision was given on the 14th May 1935, but it was announced in the Jewish Press before it was delivered by the Court.

On the lst November 1937 the Swiss Court of Criminal Appeal squashed this judgement in its entirety. Jewish propagandists however still declare that the Protocols were "proved" to be a forgery.

Winston Churchill (himself of course an "agent") wrote:

    "It would almost seem that the Gospel of the Christ and the Gospel of Anti Christ were destined to originate amongst the same people. Can it be that such pervasive Jewish control which we are seeing today is the harbinger of even greater Jewish control to come?"

In the Book of Revelations a great harlot is described ruling the world riding on a horned-headed beast. Throughout the Old Testament Israel was described as a harlot, the mother of spiritual whoredom among nations. Is the harlot of Revelations actually Israel riding upon her false Messiah the anti-Christ?

Today many believe that Israel is on the road to fulfil one of the prophecies of Isaiah. A great Jewish temple is being planned A priestly class called the Cohn is being readied. Ritual sacrifices are being studied. Truly prophecy is being fulfilled. Christianity is being effectively outlawed. If a Christian were to walk in any town in Israel giving out New Testaments he could be sentenced to prison for five years.

Israel is not moving towards Christ she is moving towards her false Messiah as Christ. In Anti Christ Israel hopes to find all the worldly power and glory which Jesus denied her but she will not find it as the Bible teaches.
The place of Nature in Religion

At the outset of the century the ideas with mass followings remained the great religions. Their doctrines include various injunctions about nature.

The god of the ancient Hebrews enjoins:

    " Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds and over every living thing that moves upon the earth" . Genesis 1:26-29

This and other biblical passages Genesis 9 :1-23 " God tells Noa hand his sons:

    "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. The fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth and upon every bird of the air and upon everything that creeps upon the ground and all the fish of the sea; into your hand they are delivered. Every moving thing shall be food for you and as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything."

Who could ask for clearer licence to appropriate all the net primary productivity of the planet? These and other and other biblical passages inspired an argument to the effect that Christianity or the Judeo-Christain tradition uniquely encouraged environmental despoliation.

Every durable body of scripture is ambiguous, self contradictory and amenable to different interpretations to suit different circumstances, but these and other constraints affected environmental outcomes only modestly.

A variation on the Judeo-Christain theme is the notion that Western humanism, rationalism or the scientific revolution uniquely licensed environmental mayhem by depriving nature of its sacred character. It is true that western science helped recast environments everywhere indirecly by fomenting technological change.

Environmental change on earth is as old as the planet itself. Homo Sapiens has altered earthly environments for about four million years but there has never been anything like the twentieth century.
p>For most of human history people could not pollute the air except by kicking up a little dust. Then half a million years ago fire was harnessed. Landscapes were torched, releasing carbon dioxide and other gases into the air. But this made little atmospheric impact. Natural processes including the steady work of trillions of microbes and the occasional major volcanic eruption governed the atmosphere.

Since 1900 one thing above all else accounts for air pollution - fossil fuel combusion. In 1900 coal combustion caused most of the air pollution. Most of the things that changed environments came from economic activities.

The human race has undertaken a gigantic uncontrolled experiment on the earth and in environmental history the twentieth century stands alone because of the acceleration of so many processes that bring ecological change. Most of these processes are not new, timber has been cut, ore has been mined, wastes have been generated, crops have been grown and animals hunted for a long time. But since 1945 these things have been done more than ever before.

The ecological peculiarity of the twentieth century is a matter of scale. Air pollution previously only had a local impact but it has now grown on so comprehensive and large a scale that it affects the fundamentals of global atmospheric chemistry.

The environmental history of the twentieth century is different not only because ecological changes were greater and faster but also with increased intensities. For example incremental increases in fishing brought total collapse in some oceanic fisheries. Accumulation of many increased itensities may throw some grand switches producing some very basic changes on the earth.

The twentieth century would also appear equally unusual if one chartered the long term use of fresh water use, timber use or mineral use for industrial output All of these boomed after 1900 as did the generation of solid waste and of air and water pollution.

The use of artificial fertilisers allowing perhaps an extra two billion people to eat , systematically widened the gaps between rich and poor farmers around the world. Fertilisers mostly miss targets and become water pollutants . Estimates vary but something between half of the fertilisers applied end up in the waters of agricultural communities and their downstream neighbours.

The impact of chemical fertilisers did not stop with chemistry. They strongly influenced the choice of crops after 1950. Those that respond well to fertilisers, maize for example, spread far and wide replacing those that did not. Hence the trend towards more and more people eating fewer and fewer varieties of food. Two-thirds of grains now come from three plants: rice, wheat and maize.

Chemical fertiliser use also made food production dependent upon the fossil fuels needed for fertiliser production. It has recast the global phosphorus and nitrogen cycles and strongly favours all species that thrive on heavy diets of these nutrients. Whilst the chemistry industries of the twentieth century replenish the soil nutrients they have helped to contaminate the soil.

The effects of these planetary changes to humanity remain as yet unclear.

http://www.pgorg.com/talmudic.html

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Looks like Brother Kapner sends some "spiritual" arrows deep on these tragic truths about Zionism, Ginsberg and the Protocols... he touches new sources as well with interesting research. The case is presented clearly.

The links in his article are definitely worth checking out. -- CSR

============

THE JEWS WHO WROTE THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION
By Brother Nathanael Kapner, Copyright 2010

Articles May Be Reproduced Only With Authorship of Br Nathanael Kapner
& Link To Real Zionist News (SM)
http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=534

Support The Brother Nathanael Foundation!

Or Send Your Contribution To:
The Brother Nathanael Foundation, PO Box 1242, Frisco CO 80443
E-mail: http://beforeitsnews.com/story/108/064/ ... ocols.html

A hard copy of this document may be obtained from US National Archives in Washington DC - its number is 245-1.

On page 5 of the document, the public writings of Theodore Herzl, hailed as the father of world political Zionism, are cited as having "identity of thought found in the Protocols."

This long-suppressed, finally declassified document, displays striking similarities between Herzl's essay published in 1897 titled "The Jewish State" and Protocols 1 and 20:

Theodore Herzl: "Every point which arises in the relations between nations is a question of might. I do not here surrender any portion of our prescriptive right when I make this statement.

In the world as it now is and will probably remain, might precedes right. For us to be loyal patriots as were the Huguenots who were forced to emigrate is therefore useless. The Jews must acquire economic power sufficiently great to overcome prejudice against them.

When we sink, we become a revolutionary proletariat, but when we rise, there rises also our terrible power of the purse." (View Entire Story Here, Here & Here.)

From The Protocols: "According to the law of being, might is right. Our right lies in force. Through our financial dominance we will manipulate capital, create depressions, and bankrupt Gentile states.

In our hands is the greatest power of our day — gold. We shall not fail with such wealth to prove that all the evil we have had to commit has served to bringing everything into order.

We shall contrive to prove that we are benefactors who have restored to the mangled earth the true good of the person, on the condition, of course, of strict observance of the laws established by us." (View Entire Story Here & Here.)

CLOSELY ASSOCIATED WITH THEODORE HERZL, was Max Nordau, who convinced the Zionist leader to organize the First Zionist Congress of 1897.

Nordau was born Simcha Sudfeld in 1849 in Budapest and later changed his name to create a "Gentile" public face. It was at the First Zionist Congress, held in Basel, Switzerland, that Nordau was elected to serve as Vice President to the Presidency of Herzl.

At the Sixth Zionist Congress in 1903, Nordau announced the Zionist plan as a fait accompli for the next two decades:

Max Nordau: "The rungs of our ladder lead upward and upward: The First Zionist Congress - The English Proposition For A Jewish Homeland - The Future World War - The Peace Conference By Which A Jewish Palestine Will Be Created " (View Entire Story Here.)

Herein are displayed the "rungs" of both the Zionist and Protocols ladder ... a preconceived plan to be put into motion by controlling the levers of international politics.

History does not lie. Nor do the words of the Jews who foretold what they would be forging in the century ahead.

And those words have been accurately recorded for us
in perhaps the most deadly and dominating document in history,
now formally known as:
"The Protocols Of The Learned Elders Of Zion."
___________________________________

http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=534

--------------------
Sources in article at Brother Kapner's site:

http://newchristiancrusadechurch.com/books.htm
http://www.iahushua.com/BeWise/newlight.html
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/przion1.htm
http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/2507977
http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/proto_biblio_5.html
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Lesley_Fry#_note-0
http://blograrebooks.co.uk/bookstore/de ... php?id=184
http://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/biography ... hayla.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Krushevan
http://judeo-masonic.blogspot.com/2010_ ... chive.html
http://www.alexanderpalace.org/lostsplendor/xi.html
http://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/biography ... lus_s.html
http://www.amazon.com/Elusive-Prophet-A ... 0520081110
http://www.zionism-israel.com/hdoc/Acha ... he_way.htm
http://books.google.com/books?id=CpYpAA ... &q&f=false
http://pascasher.blogspot.com/2010/04/l ... zburg.html
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/ij_ch5.htm
http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=62
http://www.iahushua.com/BeWise/libel.html
http://www.vehi.net/asion/freemason.html
http://www.mideastweb.org/thejewishstate.htm
http://www.zionism-israel.com/js/Jewish_State_tc.html
http://www.zionism-israel.com/js/Jewish_State_2.html
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... tcong.html
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.h ... 946297D6CF
http://www.u-r-next.com/ZionPlan.htm

[rusix]

Missing Protocols of the Elders of Zion - Part III - Declassified US Military Documents Confirms Protocols (quoted from here who quotes from here - the original, and of course, your own thread in question sourced twice by Kapner.

[Timothy_Fitzpatrick]

I've always puzzled about the description of the Protocols as a "Forgery" or a "copy of the original". My impression at this point make mes think that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion were originally written down in Hebrew or Yiddish that was shared among Rabbis-Zionists in Europe and America in the late 1890s before the Basel Conference of 1897. I believe the ideas of Anglo-American Christian Zionists from the 1840-1880s to bring the Jews into Palestine for restoring "God's Kingdom with the Jews at the head in Jerusalem" was given to the Rothschilds in the 1880s by Millerite Prophet, Zionist, Pyrimidiologist, Biblical Scholar, and 33-degree mason Charles Taze Russell.  By the 1890s, under the guidance of the Rothschilds, the head Rabbis took the Christian Prophecies to mean the restoration of the Jewish rulership in terms of the Kabballah-Old Testament-Talmud with helpings of Zvi, Marx, Anarchist writers and other Jewish Scholars.  Consequently, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in any language except the original Hebrew-Yiddish are in fact a "Forgery".  The original still exists and is likely buried away in the library of a Jew in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv... IMHO.

Some say that Asher Ginsberg authored the original likely at the direction of the Rabbis and the Rothschilds.

Interesting. I would say that the "Anglo-American Christian Zionists" you mention were probably all exclusively Masons. Do you know that the Talmud commands Jews to mislead Christians on the Book of Daniel's 70 Week prophecy?

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy Place.

-Daniel 9:24

Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troubled times.

-Daniel 9:25
 

For Bible reading Christian Millinealists, they would be easy material for Talmudic Zionists, Imperial Rothschilds and Corrupted Masons to "cut stone" with for a Jewish Third temple.  And so it continues at this time...



A few quotes on the Protocols:
---------

"Upon that much-vexed subject the authenticity of ... The Protocols of Zion we shall not enter, except to say that if the document is a forgery, as alleged, then it is one of the most remarkable in the history of literature."—The Spectator, London, October 16th, 1920

"Those who feel libeled by the Protocols have the most obvious remedy in the world; all they have to do is to ruse and denounce the policy of them, instead of denying the authorship ... But when you come to read them how can any reasonable man deny the truth of what is contained in them??"—Norman Jaques, M.P., in Canadian House of Commons, July 9th, 1943

"On the one hand, the authenticity of this document cannot be proved; on the other hand, the efforts made by some writers, principally Jewish, to show it to be a forgery do not carry conviction to many serious minds."—The Rev. Denny Fahey, C.S.Sp., B.A., D.D., 1939

"Whosoever was the mind that conceived them possessed a knowledge of human nature, of history, and of statecraft which is dazzling in its brilliant completeness, and terrible in the objects to which it turns its power. It is too terribly real for fiction, too well sustained for speculation, to deep in its knowledge of the secret springs of life for forgery."—The Dearborn Independent, July 10th, 1920

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Conspiracy theories: Ahad Ha'am (Asher Ginzberg) is really the father of the Protocols?


Waters Flowing Eastward, "L. Fry"

1.4 Ginzberg: The Interpreter Of Jewish Aims

If Herzl strove to modify and conciliate Jewish ambition with its gentile surroundings, it was the task of Ginzberg to give it a new form and the strength of mass fanaticism.

Asher Ginzberg 1 was born at Skvira, in the province of Kiev, in 1856, of well-to-do parents belonging to the Jewish sect of Hassidim. He received a strictly rabbinical education and, at seventeen, married the grand-daughter of a prominent rabbi, Menachem Mendel. Five years later (1878), he moved to Odessa, where he continued his studies, with special attention to the works of Spinoza, Moses Mendelssohn, and Nietzsche. Not long after, 2 he visited Berlin, Breslau, and Vienna where he met Charles Netter, a French Jew and one of the founders of the Alliance Israelite Universelle, who introduced him into that body.

It was thus that, in 1884, on his return to Odessa, Ginzberg joined the Friends of Zion 3 under Leo Pinsker and Moses Lilienblum, and attended the conference at Katto-witz. His shrewd, restless mind and command of Hebrew soon raised him to prominence: a letter in Hebrew to the scientist S. Finn on his seventieth birthday, attracted the notice of Alexander Zederbaum. Zederbaum was the editor of the Hebrew paper Ha-melitz, and immediately invited Ginzberg to contribute.

Although he had constantly criticized the methods of the Friends of Zidh privately, he hesitated to do so in print; but finally overcoming his scruples, he sent in a radical article, entitled Not the Way, 4 which appeared the same year (1889). In it, Ginzberg attacked Pinsker's plan of sending Russian Jews to Palestine for the material advantages they might derive. 5 All attempts to improve the condition of Russian ghettoes were futile, he insisted; the Jews must first become consciously, aggressively national. The article with its direct appeal to fanaticism was read by Jews all over Europe; other articles by the same pen followed.

He now broke with the Friends of Zion, and with him went a group of young men who had come to share his advanced views. These men he formed (1889) into a secret organization called the Sons of Moses. 6 It met in his house in Yamskaya Street, Odessa, and numbered among its first members, Ben Avigdor, Zalman Epstein, Louis Epstein, and Jacob Eisenstaat. It was to this small group that Ginzberg read what is to-day known as " the protocols ", 7 in which the national aim is set forth in such direct, forceful language, -in strange contrast to the confused, pedantic style of the Talmud.

The opening words give the tone of the whole.

" Let us put aside phraseology and discuss the inner meaning of every thought: by comparison and deduction let us illuminate the situation. In this way I will describe our system, both from our own point of view and that of the goyims.

" It must be remembered that people with base instincts," he continues, " are more numerous than those with noble ones; therefore, the best results in governing are achieved through violence and intimidation, and not through academic discussion. Every man seeks power; every one would like to become a dictator if he possibly could; and rare indeed are those who would not sacrifice the common good in order to attain personal advantage."

The argument is then developed with conciseness and lucidity: all objections are anticipated and met in a few terse phrases. No rhetorical effect is sought; expression is natural and vivid: e.g. of the mob at the time of a revolution, 9 the author says:

" These beasts fall asleep when they have drunk enough blood; it is then easy to shackle them."

The Protocols are sometimes criticized as containing nothing that had not been said previously by philosophers or statesmen; but even if that were true, it would detract little from their interest. For their importance does not lie in the aim, world domination, nor in the theory by which it is attained, exploitation of man's baser instincts, but in the extraordinary astuteness with which the practical application of the plan has been suited to existing conditions.

The very fact that the language is forceful and incisive, that all the allusions are striking, and the thesis so to speak irrefutable, is to some an obstacle to belief: nor is this surprising.

If, at Waterloo, Napoleon had had a battalion of tanks and a few batteries of modern eight-inch guns, the forces of England and Prussia would have been driven from the field: with the improved methods of warfare of the last century at his command, he could have defied the armies of the world in 1814.

For the past century the Jews have been making rapid progress in the theory and practice of politics, while the rest of the world thought them merely emerging from the ghetto; and, as it cannot understand the intricate new machinery of government they have devised and set up, it says, " Such a thing is impossible." Yet, like a great engine of war, the organization of the Kahal advances on the course determined, crashing all resistance.

That course is succinctly stated in the twenty-four protocols of Ginzberg: they are an epitome of Jewish thought from Rabbi Akiba 10 and Maimonides 11 down to Marx 12 and Engels. At the same time the reader is reminded constantly of some familiar event of recent years which bears out the thesis. For example the passage: 13

" To show that all the gentile governments of Europe are enslaved by us, we will manifest our power by subjecting one of them to a reign of terror, violence and crime."

Can anyone, recalling the Russian revolution of 1918, read this, knowing it was written before 1897, 14 and not be impressed by the correspondence between the prophecy and its fulfilment two decades later?

But Ginzberg was no visionary: he knew of what he wrote, and the course of the revolutionary movement already on foot in Russia had been too carefully calculated to leave any doubt as to its eventual success.

The Second International was formed in 1889, and the theories of Marx and Engels adopted. The labour movement was no longer represented by a small group of workingmen led by theorists, but by powerful national organizations of workers. Therefore the aim of the Second International to secure the transfer of power to the proletariat was to be pursued under conditions more favourable than those which had prevailed at the time of the First International. The dominant industrial and financial interests served to further the objectives of the socialists through a callous disregard for labour. 15

In 1900, on Lenin's return from exile, appeared the first number of the revolutionary paper Iskra (" The Spark ") edited in London by Trotsky (Braunstein) a Jew, and supported by another Jew, Blumenfeld. 16 Organizations directed by Iskra spread throughout Russia: it was the source from which the ideas of local leaders were derived. In March 1903, there emerged at its first meeting in Minsk, a completely formed Russian communist party; it represented six organizations and was headed by nine men, of whom at least five were of Jewish descent. 17 It was known as the " Russian social democratic party " (until 1918), and its methods as well as its motto " Proletarians of all countries, unite ", were those of Marx and Engels. A second congress of the party met at Brussels and then at London, in July and August, of the same year. Here the doctrine that " the necessary condition of the social revolution is the dictatorship of the proletariat ", was expressed for the first time. 18

Then came the split between bolsheviks and mensheviks, and the movement faced its first real test in 1905. Weakened by defeat in the war with Japan, the Tsarist government could not forestall strikes and disorders. The shooting down of workmen who had assembled before the winter palace encouraged the bolsheviks to attempt an armed uprising. A congress of the party met in London on April 25, 1905, and formulated the programme which was to be put in practice twelve years later. 19

The outbreak in Russia was immediately hailed by a Zionist paper as the work of Jews.

" The revolution in Russia is a Jewish revolution, a crisis in Jewish history. It is a Jewish revolution because Russia is the home of about half the Jews of the world, and an overturning of its despotic government must have a very important influence on the destinies of the millions living there and on the many thousands who have recently emigrated to other countries. But the revolution in Russia is a Jewish revolution also because Jews are the most active revolutionists in the Tsar's empire ". 20

Unsupported by the peasants and the army, the revolts of 1905 failed. A period of reaction set in, bringing with it the arrest and exile of many of the revolutionary leaders. From that time, in fact, plans for a revolution in Russia had to be entirely directed from abroad. How the old leaders usually managed to escape their prison sentences; 21 how they secured funds to travel about and participate in congresses in Stockholm, Paris, Prague, Berne and other cities; and how they managed to keep alive a central organization is not explained in published documents; but the connection between these subversive activities and Zionism will become clearer further on. 22

Meantime the protocols, secretly circulated in Hebrew among the Sons of Moses, had helped the expansion of that order throughout Russia and Poland and contributed to its victory at the Basle congress in 1897, 23 when Zionism became an official movement.

But when Ginzberg saw that Herzl's conception of Zionism was " an economic one first and foremost ", 24 excluding as it seemed the spirit of Jewish nationalism, he gathered his old adherents into a new secret order, the Sons of Zion (B'nai Zion) to propagate the true faith. While affecting himself to keep outside of the official movement, he edited a Hebrew paper, Hashiloah (" The Way "), thanks to financial aid from a Moscow tea merchant, a Jew, Kalonymous Wissotzkii, and became head of a great Hebrew publishing firm called Ahiasaf. With these powerful organs, he could attack Herzl with impunity. One of the latter's friends complains : 25

" Ahad-ha-am (Ginzberg) reproaches Herzl with wanting to imitate Europe. He (Ginzberg) cannot admit that we should borrow from Europe its academies, operas, white gloves. The only thing he would transfer from Europe into Altneuland (i.e. Palestine) would be the principles of the inquisition, the way of acting of the anti-semites, the restrictions of the Rumanian laws... He understands freedom as practised in the ghetto, only in his conception the parts are reversed: persecutions are to continue, but this time, of the gentiles by the Jews... He is one of the worst enemies of Zionism, and it is our duty to protest against its name being used by him. His conception is the exact opposite of Zionism, and he would mislead us by speaking (slightingly) of ' political' Zionism, in contrast to ' this secret Zionism 26 which is his very own."

Fourteen years of labour at last began to show fruit. In 1911, Ginzberg's representatives, Chaim Weizmann and others, scored a victory at the tenth Zionist Congress. Two years later (1913), " when he visited the congress for the second time," writes a disciple, 27 " he was happy. He could see how some of his ideas, some of the truths that he had fought so bitterly to advance, were already working within. He was happy, as a practical philosopher should feel when he realizes that his life has not been in vain, that he has been one link in the long chain that pulls Israel to a glorious future, that he has served Israel, and, through Israel, mankind ".

From this point, Zionism, as Ginzberg understood it, became a reality which his disciples 28 have since carried from victory to victory under the eye of the master. He himself remained aloof, at least from public view, until his death in 1927 in a Judaized Palestine.

—

1. His pen-name was Ahad-ha-am, lit. " one of the people "; his father was a tax-collector.

2. Between 1882 and 1884.

3. Hoveve Zion: supra, ch. III.

4. Lo ha-shiloah.

5. Certainly in this he showed great shrewdness.

6. B'nai Moshe.

7. Infra Part : The Protocols. From internal evidence the date of the protocols may be placed between 1880-1890.

8. The text itself should be studied: to paraphrase or quote a few passages from it is to give a very defective notion of this important work.

9. Protocol II.

10. Compiler of the Mischna (from shanah " to repeat ") or oral tradition of the Jews in the second century A. D. See Preface to Mischna by Maimonides; also, Milman, A History of the Jews, p. 133.

11. Spanish Jew, author of commentaries on Mischna and other works, in the twelfth century.

12. Karl Marx, author of Das Kapital, founder of first international, (1818-1883); joint author with Engels of communist manifesto. Marx's real name was Mordecai.

13. Protocol VII, last paragraph.

14. A copy of the Protocols has been in the records of the British Museum since 1906: infra Part n, Chapter I.

15. W. R. Batsell, Soviet Rule in Russia (Published under the auspices of the Bureau of International Research of Harvard University New York, 1929), p. 756.

16. Batsell, op. cit., pp. 49, 691, 692.

17. Ibid., pp. 689, 690.

18. Ibid., p. 692. Compare, " It suffices even for an instant to give the masses self-government, and they will become a disorganized mob... Capital which is entirely in our hands, will hold out to this state a straw, to which it will inevitably be forced to cling." Protocol I, par. 6.

19. The central committee in 1905 was composed of the well known revolutionaries: Lenin (Ulianov), Rykov, Krassin (Vinter), Bogdanov, and Postalovskii; Batsell, op. cit., p. 694.

20. The Maccabean (New York, Nov., 1905), p. 250, under the title " A Jewish Revolution ".

21. Thanks to the fraternity for the freeing of delinquent Jews: supra ch. II.

22. Infra, ch. V.

23. The Sons of Moses (B'nai Moshe) having achieved its object, was dissolved after the congress; for the latter, see supra, ch. III.

24. In the words of Richard Gottheil, Chief Rabbi of New York City.

25. Pamphlet entitled Audiatur et Altera Pars by Dr. Max Nordau, 1903, at the time of the publication of Herzl's novel Altneuland, which Ginzberg attacked.

26. That set forth in the protocols.

27. Jesse Sampler, in his Guide to Zionism.
28. Among these should be mentioned Chaim Weizmann, Nahum Sokolov, Leon Simon, Jabotinskii, Ussitchin, Schmaryar Levin.

http://pascasher.blogspot.com/2009/09/a ... e-des.html

http://www.iamthewitness.com/listeners/ ... Part_4.pdf

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

J. L. Talmon, the Tsar and the Tsarina

Another leading Zionist intellectual, J. L. Talmon, who receives an equally lavish writeup in the same issue of Who's Who in World Jewry, makes the following statement in his book Israel Among the Nations:

"Three years later the Tsar and all his family were helpless prisoners guarded by a Jew and a few Latvian assistants. 'There was grim although probably quite accidental retribution' - says W. H. Chamberlain in his monumental Russian Revolution - 'in the fact that the chief executioner of Tsar Nicholas II and his family in the Ekaterinburg cellar was a Jew', Jacob Yurovsky ... As if to heighten the symbolism of that dreadful end of one of the most powerful Royal dynasties in history at the hands of an obscure Jew, soldiers of the counter-revolutionary army seized Ekaterinburg a short time after, and found in the murdered Tsarina's room a copy of the Protocols of Zion ... " (pp. 69-70).

http://mailstar.net/hiding.html

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Volume XVI Number 3.....MayMay/June 2010.....www.barnesreview.org


        ASHER GINSBERG



        Achad Ha'am (1856-1927), meaning "one of the people" is the pen name of Asher Ginsberg, a Russian Zionist pinpointed as the godfather of the infamous "Protocols."

         

       Protocols Definitely Not A Czarist Forgery

         

    by Willis A. Carto

        The extensive research of the late Pacquitta DeShishmareff, an American-born woman married into the Russian aristocracy, refutes the hackneyed old saw (heard and seen in one form or another almost daily in the mainstream media) that what we know today as the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion were some sort of "forgery." Nothing could be further from the truth.
        DeShishmareffs seminal work, Waters Flowing Eastward (written under the pen name "L. Fry") remains the first -- and last -- word on the history of the Protocols. She firmly identified a Jew born in Russia, Asher Ginsberg (1856 to 1926), as the philosophical godfather of the infamous "Protocols."
        Ginsberg -- best known as "Ahad Ha'am" (which means "One of the People") -- held the view that Jews needed to come together to make agricultural settlements in Palestine which would serve as what has been described as "a Hebrew-speaking cultural center for world Jewry -- an elite cultural center for world Jewry."
        An Orthodox Jew, educated in rabbinical studies, Ginsberg said Jews were a "super nation" whose "ethnic genius must guarantee their right to world domination." He said, "the Land of Israel must encompass all the countries of the earth in order to improve the world through God's Kingdom."
        In the view of Jewish writer Moshe Menuhin, Ginsberg's Zionist philosophy was "a spiritual Zionism -- an aspiration for the fulfillment of Judaism and not political Zionism" -- that is, the gathering of the entirety of the Jewish people in a single state, isolated from the rest of the planet, thriving only among their own people therein.
        Ginsberg took issue with what he considered preeminent Zionist leader Theodore Herzl's concept that Zionism was economic in nature and should be directed toward the establishment of a political and geographic state. In the view of Menuhin, Ginsberg regarded the Jews as "a unique sort of nation, a homogeneous body apart from the other nations" and that "a Jewish spiritual center in Palestine" would become "a light to the Diaspora" (the scattered Jews around the Earth) and eventually enable the Jewish people to become "a light to the nations." This so-called "spiritual Zionism" of Ginsberg was thus synonymous with classical, prophetic Judaism, no different from the teachings of the Talmud that guided Judaism down through the centuries.
        In short, the commonly-held theory advanced by many people today that "Zionism is not Judaism and Judaism is not Zionism" is wrong-simply wrong.
        We learn that, in 1889, Ginsberg formulated a small group known as the Sons of Moses and it was before this group that Ginsberg first introduced the Protocols. While he may have indeed borrowed from previously published geopolitical works -- lending to the oft-stated claim that the Protocols were "forgeries" that were lifted from other volumes -- what we do know as the Protocols were Ginsberg's product, reflecting his global Jewish agenda.
        During the years that followed, Hebrew-language translations of the Protocols were circulated within the Zionist movement by Ginsberg and his followers, now banded together as the Sons of Zion (or "B'nai Zion").
        And in 1897, when the Zionist Congress met in Switzerland, Zionism emerged as an official movement, the Protocols were effectively incorporated into the Zionist (that is, Jewish) agenda.
        While the non-Jewish world perceived Zionism to be strictly devoted to the establishment of a Jewish state, Ginsberg's so-called "secret Zionism" was very much recognized, within elite Jewish circles, as the real agenda, an international agenda, in effect masked in a strictly nationalist agenda focused on a single Jewish state in Palestine.
        Although there are anti-Zionist Jews who -- for a variety of reasons -- do oppose Zionism, there are also those anti-Zionist Jews who are actually advocates of the establishment of the Jewish Utopia, which is, in fact, the New World Order about which we hear so much. (See article beginning on page 41 of this issue of TBR [Editor's Note: "Utopia...for Some"].)

http://tinyurl.com/32aesb4

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

CAUSATION AS CORRELATION

By Yancy Ames

[From Dr. Harrell Rhome's "The Eagle Newsletter",
POB 6303, Corpus Christi, TX  78466, July-Aug. 2004]

 

The mysterious Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Allegedly a forgery of the Czarist secret police based on the "dialogues" of Maurice Joly published in France in the 1860s, they continue to fascinate based on their uncanny resemblance to the subsequent unfolding of the modern world. The claim of "forgery" fails on many grounds, not the least of which is the internal nature of the document itself. As the pro-Nazi Jew, Arthur Trebitsch, once put it, "an anti-semitic mind, no matter how far it may have been driven by anti-semitic rancor, could never have devised these swindles and underhanded expedients as a whole". Forgery is a difficult business. A forger of a painting, say a Rembrandt, must not merely have the technical ability to do the job, to copy to perfection, to age the paints and the canvas past the point of detection of all but the most sophisticated of modern forensic techniques, he must also have the ability to enter into the spirit of the artist he is copying, else his fraud shall be immediately detectable. In the case of the alleged Czarist "forgery" of the Protocols, in many passages, are identical, word for word, with passages in Joly's "dialogues". Surely any forger, even a Czarist one with grandiose ambitions, would hardly have been so careless as to simply copy passages verbatim from a still available book of only forty years previously. Nothing would be easier for the other side to track down and then pronounce "Aha!". Logic, then, supports the proposition that the Czarist authorities were not even aware of Joly's dialogues, much less culpable of copying from them. Otherwise they were remarkably optimistic as to what they could get away with. But the argument against "forgery" goes much deeper than this. The Protocols are the product of two things: (1) collective thinking and (2) a desire to tear down all that western civilization has created. They are the expression of a will at war with the outside world. This hostility is calculated with scientific precision. Every specific formulae of the Protocols is calculated to: (1) tear down and (2) bring the resulting chaos under ever increasing direction and control. These formulae bear the influence of many years, one might say centuries, of experience and calculation. They have obviously been honed through successes and failures, calculation and recalculation, with many minds' contribution to the fine tuning exactly as in the case of a certain declaration regarding a Jewish "national homeland" in Palestine which also went through many drafts and revisions, courtesy of many hands before being published in all its seeming innocuousness. Any forger, operating in the dark without awareness of his enemies' true design, would be extremely unlikely to accidentally concoct a plan which did not at all describe the world as it then existed but which did accurately foretell so much of what was to subsequently come to pass in the ensuing century. Rather, a forger operating in the dark and with nothing more than malevolence and ill will to guide him, would most likely come up with a blueprint bearing absolutely no resemblance to future events. Thus, if the Protocols are a "forgery" they are of a kind which violates all the considerations which normally govern these matters. There is a further argument against the "forgery" thesis, and that is the reaction of the Jews themselves. The reaction, from the moment of first appearance of the Protocols was one of pure hysteria. It resembled the same reaction which Jews display over the so-called "Holocaust Denial". The Protocols, although first published in Russia in 1905, attracted little public notice until the aftermath of the First World War when a Jewish-instigated communist revolution was raging in Russia. The Protocols then appeared to corroborate political upheavals which were then mesmerizing the world. So uncanny was the resemblance between the events in Russia and the formulae of the Protocols that American State Dept. in 1919 in its position paper "The Power and the Aims of International Jewry" compared the plans of the Protocols with the documented statements of the leaders of world Jewry and found marked synchronicities and similarities. What defeated the Protocols as a topic for public debate was the discovery by the Englishman, Mr. Philip Greaves, that passages in the Protocols were, word-for-word, identical with passages in Maurice Joly's Dialogues.

The debate on the Protocols has never entirely vanished in the succeeding decades. Given the uncanny resemblance between the document and the state of the world, the argument has persisted that the Protocols do represent a real design observable in accomplished effect. Moreover, so the argument goes, only the Jews as an internationally distributed people possessed of incalculable wealth, communications control and access to politicians would have the necessary resources to actually put the plan into operation. Only the Jews have a tradition which teaches them that they are predestined to rule the world and to make the "animals in human form", the goyim, bow down to them. Although the Protocols continue to circulate as an underground best seller, the Protocols have been somewhat superseded in recent decades by Holocaust Denial, an increasingly well supported argument that the alleged Nazi "gas chambers" are a hoax. The anti-semites not unreasonably believe that such a revolutionary thesis makes the Protocols a moot point. The adherents of the Protocols cannot directly prove their case. They cannot establish that any Jew wrote them or even that the Protocols are consistent with the real world in every respect. They can, however, establish the reality of Jewish power in such matters as the rise of Zionism or the pre-World War II Jewish stranglehold on Soviet Russia. They can then reason, inferentially, that such objective and probable facts regarding Jewish power and its capacity for cover up do not make [the] Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion inherently improbable. And there, the debate must rest. Such things as the Zionist attack upon and occupation of Iraq obviously shall be relied upon by devotees of the Protocols as further evidence for their case. The final truth about the Protocols shall probably never be known. Too little is known and the authors ("forgers") passed away long ago. But as a comparison point for the events of the modern world, they shall continue to be a fulcrum for all those who see causation in correlation.

http://www.jrbooksonline.com/HTML-docs/ ... cyames.htm