MAHATMA GANDHI REJECTED ZIONISM
Gandhi’s major statement on the Palestine and the Jewish question came forth in his widely circulated editorial in the Harijan of 11 November 1938, a time when intense struggle between the Palestinian Arabs and the immigrant Jews had been on the anvil in Palestine. His views came in the context of severe pressure on him, especially from the Zionist quarters, to issue a statement on the problem. Therefore, he started his piece by saying that his sympathies are all with the Jews, who as a people were subjected to inhuman treatment and persecution for a long time.
“But”, Gandhi asserted, “My sympathy does not blind me to the requirements of justice. The cry for the national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me. The sanction for it is sought in the Bible and in the tenacity with which the Jews have hankered after their return to Palestine. Why should they not, like other peoples of the earth, make that country their home where they are born and where they earn their livelihood?”
He thus questioned the very foundational logic of political Zionism. Gandhi rejected the idea of a Jewish State in the Promised Land by pointing out that the “Palestine of the Biblical conception is not a geographical tract.” The Zionists, after embarking upon a policy of colonization of Palestine and after getting British recognition through the Balfour Declaration of 1917 for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jews,” tried to elicit maximum international support. The Jewish leaders were keen to get an approval for Zionism from Gandhi as his international fame as the leader of a non-violent national struggle against imperialism would provide great impetus for the Jewish cause.
But his position was one of total disapproval of the Zionist project both for political and religious reasons. He was against the attempts of the British mandatory Government in Palestine toeing the Zionist line of imposing itself on the Palestinians in the name of establishing a Jewish national home. Gandhi’s Harijan editorial is an emphatic assertion of the rights of the Arabs in Palestine. The following oft-quoted lines exemplify his position: “Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs… Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home.”
Gandhi’s response to Zionism and the Palestine question contains different layers of meaning, ranging from an ethical position to political realism. What is interesting is that Gandhi, who firmly believed in the inseparability of religion and politics, had been consistently and vehemently rejecting the cultural and religious nationalism of the Zionists.
What follows then is that he was not for religion functioning as a political ideology; rather, he wanted religion to provide an ethical dimension to nation-State politics. Such a difference was vital as far as Gandhi was concerned. A uni-religious justification for claiming a nation-State, as in the case of Zionism, did not appeal to him in any substantial sense.
The history of Palestine in the first half of this century has been characterized by the contention between two kinds of nationalism: Zionism and Palestinian Arab nationalism-the former striving for creating a Jewish nation in Palestine by colonizing its land through massive Jewish immigration and the latter struggling for freedom of the inhabitants of the land of Palestine from colonial and imperialist control.
Gandhi, in his role as leader of the national struggle and the Indian National Congress (the organization embodying that struggle), had been actively engaged during the 1930s and 1940s in moulding the perception of the people of India to the nationalist and anti-imperialist struggles in the Arab world. The 1937 Calcutta meeting of the All India Congress Committee (AICC) “emphatically protested against the reign of terror as well as the partition proposals relating to Palestine” and expressed the solidarity of the Indian people with the Arab peoples’ struggle for national freedom. The Delhi AICC of September 1938 said in its resolution that Britain should leave the Jews and the Arabs to amicably settle the issues between the two parties, and it urged the Jews “not to take shelter behind British Imperialism.” Gandhi wanted the Jews in Palestine to seek the goodwill of the Arabs by discarding “the help of the British bayonet.”
Gandhi and the Congress thus openly supported Palestinian Arab nationalism, and Gandhi was more emphatic in the rejection of Zionist nationalism. The major political driving force in such a position was the common legacy of anti-imperialist struggle of the Indians and the Palestinians. Gandhi’s views on the Zionist doctrine and his firm commitment to the Palestinian cause starting from the 1930s obviously influenced the design of independent India’s position on the Palestine issue.
Gandhi’s prescription for the Jews in Germany and the Arabs in Palestine was non-violent resistance. With regard to the Jewish problem in Germany, Gandhi noted, “I am convinced that if someone with courage and vision can arise among them to lead them in non-violent action, the winter of their despair can, in the twinkling of an eye, be turned into the summer of hope.” His views on Zionism and his prescription of non-violent action and self-sacrifice to the Jews in Germany generated reactions ranging from anger to despair. Famous Jewish pacifists, Martin Buber, Judah Magnes and Hayim Greenberg, who otherwise admired Gandhi, felt “highly offended by Gandhi’s anti-Zionism” and criticized him for his lack of understanding of the spirit of Zionism. Martin Buber, in a long reply to Gandhi’s Harijan editorial, remarked, “You are only concerned, Mahatma, with the “right of possession” on the one side; you do not consider the right to a piece of free land on the other side – for those who are hungering for it.”
As mentioned earlier, Gandhi refused to view the Zionist “hunger” for land in Palestine as a right. Gandhi wrote on 7 January 1939 the following in response to an editorial in the Statesman, “I hold that non-violence is not merely a personal virtue. It is also a social virtue to be cultivated like the other virtues. Surely society is largely regulated by the expression of non-violence in its mutual dealing. What I ask for is an extension of it on a larger, national and international scale.”
Also, it is significant to note that, as far as Gandhi was concerned, non-violent action was not pacifism or a defensive activity but a way of waging war. This war without violence also requires discipline, training and the assessment of the strength and weakness of the enemy.
According to Paul Power, four factors influenced Gandhi’s position on Zionism:
He thus questioned the very foundational logic of political Zionism. Gandhi rejected the idea of a Jewish State in the Promised Land by pointing out that the “Palestine of the Biblical conception is not a geographical tract.” The Zionists, after embarking upon a policy of colonization of Palestine and after getting British recognition through the Balfour Declaration of 1917 for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jews,” tried to elicit maximum international support. The Jewish leaders were keen to get an approval for Zionism from Gandhi as his international fame as the leader of a non-violent national struggle against imperialism would provide great impetus for the Jewish cause.
But his position was one of total disapproval of the Zionist project both for political and religious reasons. He was against the attempts of the British mandatory Government in Palestine toeing the Zionist line of imposing itself on the Palestinians in the name of establishing a Jewish national home. Gandhi’s Harijan editorial is an emphatic assertion of the rights of the Arabs in Palestine. The following oft-quoted lines exemplify his position: “Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs… Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home.”
Gandhi’s response to Zionism and the Palestine question contains different layers of meaning, ranging from an ethical position to political realism. What is interesting is that Gandhi, who firmly believed in the inseparability of religion and politics, had been consistently and vehemently rejecting the cultural and religious nationalism of the Zionists.
What follows then is that he was not for religion functioning as a political ideology; rather, he wanted religion to provide an ethical dimension to nation-State politics. Such a difference was vital as far as Gandhi was concerned. A uni-religious justification for claiming a nation-State, as in the case of Zionism, did not appeal to him in any substantial sense.
The history of Palestine in the first half of this century has been characterized by the contention between two kinds of nationalism: Zionism and Palestinian Arab nationalism-the former striving for creating a Jewish nation in Palestine by colonizing its land through massive Jewish immigration and the latter struggling for freedom of the inhabitants of the land of Palestine from colonial and imperialist control.
Gandhi, in his role as leader of the national struggle and the Indian National Congress (the organization embodying that struggle), had been actively engaged during the 1930s and 1940s in moulding the perception of the people of India to the nationalist and anti-imperialist struggles in the Arab world. The 1937 Calcutta meeting of the All India Congress Committee (AICC) “emphatically protested against the reign of terror as well as the partition proposals relating to Palestine” and expressed the solidarity of the Indian people with the Arab peoples’ struggle for national freedom. The Delhi AICC of September 1938 said in its resolution that Britain should leave the Jews and the Arabs to amicably settle the issues between the two parties, and it urged the Jews “not to take shelter behind British Imperialism.” Gandhi wanted the Jews in Palestine to seek the goodwill of the Arabs by discarding “the help of the British bayonet.”
Gandhi and the Congress thus openly supported Palestinian Arab nationalism, and Gandhi was more emphatic in the rejection of Zionist nationalism. The major political driving force in such a position was the common legacy of anti-imperialist struggle of the Indians and the Palestinians. Gandhi’s views on the Zionist doctrine and his firm commitment to the Palestinian cause starting from the 1930s obviously influenced the design of independent India’s position on the Palestine issue.
Gandhi’s prescription for the Jews in Germany and the Arabs in Palestine was non-violent resistance. With regard to the Jewish problem in Germany, Gandhi noted, “I am convinced that if someone with courage and vision can arise among them to lead them in non-violent action, the winter of their despair can, in the twinkling of an eye, be turned into the summer of hope.” His views on Zionism and his prescription of non-violent action and self-sacrifice to the Jews in Germany generated reactions ranging from anger to despair. Famous Jewish pacifists, Martin Buber, Judah Magnes and Hayim Greenberg, who otherwise admired Gandhi, felt “highly offended by Gandhi’s anti-Zionism” and criticized him for his lack of understanding of the spirit of Zionism. Martin Buber, in a long reply to Gandhi’s Harijan editorial, remarked, “You are only concerned, Mahatma, with the “right of possession” on the one side; you do not consider the right to a piece of free land on the other side – for those who are hungering for it.”
As mentioned earlier, Gandhi refused to view the Zionist “hunger” for land in Palestine as a right. Gandhi wrote on 7 January 1939 the following in response to an editorial in the Statesman, “I hold that non-violence is not merely a personal virtue. It is also a social virtue to be cultivated like the other virtues. Surely society is largely regulated by the expression of non-violence in its mutual dealing. What I ask for is an extension of it on a larger, national and international scale.”
Also, it is significant to note that, as far as Gandhi was concerned, non-violent action was not pacifism or a defensive activity but a way of waging war. This war without violence also requires discipline, training and the assessment of the strength and weakness of the enemy.
According to Paul Power, four factors influenced Gandhi’s position on Zionism:
– “First, he was sensitive about the ideas of Muslim Indians who were anti-Zionists because of their sympathy for Middle Eastern Arabs opposed to the Jewish National Home; second, he objected to any Zionist methods inconsistent with his way of non-violence; third, he found Zionism contrary to his pluralistic nationalism, which excludes the establishment of any State based solely or mainly on one religion; and fourth, he apparently believed it imprudent to complicate his relations with the British, who held the mandate in Palestine.”
Gandhi withstood almost all Zionist attempts at extracting a pro-Zionist stance from him. G.H. Jansen wrote about the failure of Zionist lobbying with Gandhi:
Gandhi withstood almost all Zionist attempts at extracting a pro-Zionist stance from him. G.H. Jansen wrote about the failure of Zionist lobbying with Gandhi:
– “His opposition [to Zionism] remained consistent over a period of nearly 20 years and remained firm despite skilful and varied applications to him of that combination of pressure and persuasion known as lobbying, of which the Zionists are past masters.”
Apart from responses to Gandhi’s anti-Zionism from Jewish pacifists such as Buber, Magnes and Greenberg, Jansen points out at least four separate instances of Zionist attempts to get a favourable statement from Gandhi. At first, Hermann Kallenbach, Gandhi’s Jewish friend in South Africa, came to India in 1937 and stayed for weeks with Gandhi trying to convince him of the merits of the Zionist cause. Then, in the 1930s, as requested by Rabbi Stephen Wise, the American pacifist John Haynes Holmes, tried “to obtain from Gandhi a declaration favourable to Zionism”. In March 1946, a British MP from the Labour Party, Sydney Silverman, an advocate of Indian independence in Britain, attempted to change Gandhi’s mind. At the end of their heated conversation, Gandhi stated that “after all our talk, I am unable to revise the opinion I gave you in the beginning.” The fourth Zionist attempt to change Gandhi’s mind was by Louis Fischer, Gandhi’s famous biographer, to whom Gandhi reported to have said that “the Jews have a good case.”
Later, Gandhi clarified in one of his final pieces on Zionism and the Palestine question on 14 July 1946 that “I did say some such thing in the course of a conversation with Mr. Louis Fischer on the subject.” He added, “I do believe that the Jews have been cruelly wronged by the world.”
Gandhi went back to his initial position by categorically stating that “But in my opinion, they [the Jews] have erred grievously in seeking to impose themselves on Palestine with the aid of America and Britain and now with the aid of naked terrorism… Why should they depend on American money or British arms for forcing themselves on an unwelcome land? Why should they resort to terrorism to make good their forcible landing in Palestine?”
Apart from responses to Gandhi’s anti-Zionism from Jewish pacifists such as Buber, Magnes and Greenberg, Jansen points out at least four separate instances of Zionist attempts to get a favourable statement from Gandhi. At first, Hermann Kallenbach, Gandhi’s Jewish friend in South Africa, came to India in 1937 and stayed for weeks with Gandhi trying to convince him of the merits of the Zionist cause. Then, in the 1930s, as requested by Rabbi Stephen Wise, the American pacifist John Haynes Holmes, tried “to obtain from Gandhi a declaration favourable to Zionism”. In March 1946, a British MP from the Labour Party, Sydney Silverman, an advocate of Indian independence in Britain, attempted to change Gandhi’s mind. At the end of their heated conversation, Gandhi stated that “after all our talk, I am unable to revise the opinion I gave you in the beginning.” The fourth Zionist attempt to change Gandhi’s mind was by Louis Fischer, Gandhi’s famous biographer, to whom Gandhi reported to have said that “the Jews have a good case.”
Later, Gandhi clarified in one of his final pieces on Zionism and the Palestine question on 14 July 1946 that “I did say some such thing in the course of a conversation with Mr. Louis Fischer on the subject.” He added, “I do believe that the Jews have been cruelly wronged by the world.”
Gandhi went back to his initial position by categorically stating that “But in my opinion, they [the Jews] have erred grievously in seeking to impose themselves on Palestine with the aid of America and Britain and now with the aid of naked terrorism… Why should they depend on American money or British arms for forcing themselves on an unwelcome land? Why should they resort to terrorism to make good their forcible landing in Palestine?”
There were an influential number of Jews who thought that force, only force, could ensure the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine. They adopted terrorism as the method to achieve their national goal. This policy of subjugation of the Palestinians by Zionist terror was totally rejected by Gandhi in no uncertain terms.
A few months before his assassination, Gandhi answered the question “What is the solution to the Palestine problem?” raised by Doon Campbell of Reuters:
A few months before his assassination, Gandhi answered the question “What is the solution to the Palestine problem?” raised by Doon Campbell of Reuters:
“It has become a problem which seems almost insoluble. If I were a Jew, I would tell them: ‘Do not be so silly as to resort to terrorism…’ The Jews should meet the Arabs, make friends with them and not depend on British aid or American aid, save what descends from Jehovah.”
(Dr. Ramakrishnan is a senior lecturer, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam, Kerala, India. He presented this paper on June 13, 1998 at a seminar organized by the Institute of Islamic and Arab Studies. The seminar was inaugurated by the chairman of India’s National Minorities Commission, Prof. Tahir Mahmoud, who highlighted the traditional Indian support for the Palestinian struggle against Zionist Occupation.)
(Dr. Ramakrishnan is a senior lecturer, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam, Kerala, India. He presented this paper on June 13, 1998 at a seminar organized by the Institute of Islamic and Arab Studies. The seminar was inaugurated by the chairman of India’s National Minorities Commission, Prof. Tahir Mahmoud, who highlighted the traditional Indian support for the Palestinian struggle against Zionist Occupation.)
In the 1800s documents surfaced which were misleadingly called "The Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion".
Almost everything these documents proposed to do has happened over the last 100 years, but these developments had little if anything to do with the Jews. The very publication of these documents may have been for purposes of disinformation, to deflect growing suspicion away from the actual manipulators to a convenient scape goat, the Jews.
The manipulation of the world by the secret society of the "Illuminati" is not a Jewish phenomenon. There have been some Jews involved, but no more than members of many other races, and people of all political persuasions, from capitalist to communist to anarchist. All play their part in the covert game plan, and the Jewish people have suffered more than most from the machinations of this shadowy Brotherhood.
To overcome the misleading reference to Zion, we will call these protocols (i.e. secret plans) by their truer name "The Protocols of the Illuminati", and the name "Illuminati" will be used to describe the elite leaders of Brotherhood who are aware of the real agenda. The Protocols clearly express the Illuminati's view of the masses, its contempt of the general population, and we will replace their reference to the Goyim, as they call people like us, with the more precise term "rabble".
It sees us as little more than sheep or cattle. And while its analysis is distasteful, it cannot, unfortunately, be accused of inaccuracy in its contention of how easily most people allow themselves to be manipulated.
from LiberalsLikeChris Website
Contents
The document known now as The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is one of the most important documents ever to come to light in the world. In fact, it can be described as the blueprint for the domination of the world by a secret brotherhood.
It is graphic in its contempt for those who will be its victims, in its profound understanding of the human condition and mind; and it is equally graphic in detailing the methodology it will use against, and with the complicity of, the world’s population, in such a way as to go unrecognized by the vast majority of the participants.
The document has achieved fame and infamy in its time.
Essentially, the accusations leveled against it are that it is a fraud and a forgery. Some say it is a report of a genuine conspiracy but has been blamed on the Jews in order to hide its true origins, and that to believe it to be genuinely Judaic shows one to be ’anti-Semitic’. This kind of black propaganda and emotional reaction arises quite naturally in the course of events whenever any proof of the ancient conspiracy against humanity is uncovered.
Despite a general misconception amongst certain politically-aligned groups and ill-informed individuals - including Jews and non-Jews alike - that the Protocols are a ’proven fraud’, this is not the case, as I will show.
The cry of ’anti-Semitic’ is a standard one and almost automatic from ill-informed, if often well-intentioned individuals who have little background knowledge of the vast history and consciousness of the perpetrators of the ’world revolution’. The majority of people remain drastically unaware of the conspiracy because a vital aspect of the conspiracy is to hide itself behind many walls of secrecy, as the following information will show. Those that would call ’anti-semitism’, or say ’there is no conspiracy’, are amongst the greatest victims of the very conspiracy they vehemently deny.
Someone who has lived in a box without windows for their entire life might genuinely cry out ’there is no sun, it is a myth, a vicious lie and anti-boxism’. There remains, however the unalterable fact that there is a sun and those that point this out to the one in the box, in an attempt to enlighten and free them from self-imposed ignorance, are not automatically ’anti-boxists’ or feel any sort of hatred towards boxes or those who live in them at all.
Neither is the reporting of the following document anti-Semitic.
It is a call to the attention of those who may have been born into the current age of suppression and propaganda, and have yet to recoup some of this information which until very recently was openly discussed on a global scale. However, since the triumphs of Zionism and the further implementation of mass mind / information control since the Second World War, with regards to anything remotely Jewish, such information has been buried through censorship and revision of history-books by the very power which imposed the conspiracy in the first place. The Protocols make it quite clear that ’anti-semitism’, meaning ’anti-Judaic’, is an ’indispensable’ part of the plan for world domination. It will be used for ’the management of our lesser brethren’. This document makes chilling reading for both Jews and Gentiles alike when one looks back to the treatment of Jewry during the Second World War; that a self-appointed elite should be willing to sacrifice and allow the persecution of their ’lesser brethren’, for the greater aim of world domination, should be a wake-up-call to all of Jewry, the vast majority of whom constitute what the authors of the Protocols deem to be ’lesser brethren’.
’Anti-Semitic’ is a phrase which means ’against Semites’ but has come to be used solely as meaning ’anti-Jewish’. The irony inherent in this ill-used phrase is that the Semitic Arabs are actually amongst the greatest victims in the crime and fraud known as Zionism, in which Russian Jews, who are racially non-Semitic, in the first half of the Twentieth Century, fostered and executed a plan (as prophesied by God through Ezekiel 11:15) to create an officially recognized Jewish homeland in Palestine. The result of which was the mass displacement and persecution of the indigenous Arab citizens. This is without doubt ’anti-semitism’ at its worst. And yet to state this plain fact openly today is to invite the accusation of being ’anti-Semitic’! I will also show in this work that the ordinary Jewish people, unbeknownst to themselves, have been victims to the same ancient agenda and are considered by the Elders to be necessary sacrifices to their cause. As the British; American and other Anglo-Saxon and Celtic peoples are also descended from Shem/Sem, they are also Semitic peoples. Therefore anyone who is anti-British or anti-American is anti-Semitic, in the true definition of the term. But, of course, as explained in the Protocols, it is the Jews who publish the dictionaries and so they define the words according to their plan.
The main point pertinent to this work is that the plan and execution of this agenda was predicted and detailed in the Protocols, before the Zionist plan began to be put into action openly on the world stage. More dramatically, however, the agenda outlined in the Protocols was foreshadowed by over 2,000 years of similar documents, edicts and statements.
The document itself attributes the authorship of these self-same conspiratorial Protocols to the highest echelons of world Jewry. It would be madness to ignore the possibility that this document is genuine and authored by those claimed, simply because certain people find it offensive. Because if it is genuine, then people absolutely should find it offensive! It is the greatest single betrayal of both Jews and Gentiles imaginable. Even if it were not authored by a Jewish elite, the fact that world Jewry have suffered along the very lines as predicted in the document, should be enough for every Jew alive to give this document their full attention.
Both Communism and Zionism can be seen to be the two means by which the Protocols unfolded during the early Twentieth Century. Whilst Communism acted to tear down the Russian aristocratic system and replace it with a tyranny and dictatorship led predominantly by Jews, 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 prophesied Jewish homeland to re-home the Eastern Jews who were being badly persecuted in Russia at the time. In fact, as is shown by government documents of the time, the accusation of mass anti-Semitism and pogroms in Russia at the turn of the century (against Jews who are non-Semitic; being descendants of Japheth, not Shem) is massively exaggerated.
This was essentially a Press-led propaganda tactic employed in the West to further the aims of Zionist interests and to ease the passage of the masses of Eastern Jews who emigrated to the West around the late 19th and early 20th Century. According to Zionist Rabbi Stephen Wise, until 1900, American Zionism was confined to immigrant Jews (Khazar Ashkenazim descended from Japheth, not Shem - Genesis 10:3), and the mass of American Jews (mainly German ’Western’ Sephardim) were opposed to it. However, by 1910, a million Jewish immigrants had arrived in America from Russia and the Zionist lobby began to represent a significant number of voters. Today, Jews represent approximately 3% of the American population but occupy more or less 90% of all the key positions in the US-Administration. Just as in Russia following the Bolshevik Revolution, the number of Jews numbered around 10% of the population, whereas the number of Jews in the Bolshevik government was approximately 90%.
Another interesting ’coincidence’, President Franklin Roosevelt (from a Jewish family) had seventy-two advisors around him when he led the USA into World War II of whom fifty-two were known Jews. The Elders of Zion consist of the Sanhedrin, the highest Jewish authority since Biblical times, officially numbering 71, and the Judaic texts also reveal the existence of a king, making 72. Whilst in Britain in 1999, the Labour government admitted that it has 72 official ’advisors’ or ’spin-doctors’ (professional-liars). Both Roosevelt and Blair have implemented social ’reforms’ called the ’New Deal’, which in the USA was also known by those in the know as the ’Jew Deal’. Do we see here history repeating itself?
As the well tried and tested truism says:
those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.
The British and American governments were manipulated by the Zionists - against the overwhelming opposition of the Western Jews and the Palestinian Jews and the majority of Gentiles - to commit themselves to the creation of an official Jewish homeland in Palestine, which had nothing to do with British national interest, at an enormous cost during a time - the First World War - when all manpower and resources were desperately needed to fight the enemy.
Why this should have occurred is against all logic. However, the most revealing insight into the modus agendi and the modus operandi of the world manipulators is acquired through reading the Protocols.
Not only does this document illuminate the reason for the massive success of international Zionism, but it also provides profound insight into every single political situation of the last century and sheds great light on much of what has transpired for the past 2,600 years on the world stage.
Stunningly, virtually everything planned for and predicted in the Protocols has provably come to pass. This document is as pertinent today as it was when it first came to light in 1905.
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, who flocked to the West a century ago. That century has provably unfolded according to the Protocols, which ascribe themselves to the elite of world Jewry. The earliest Israelite holy works (The Torah), right up to the latest (Jewish Talmud and Zohar) have continually promised that the world would be delivered to the true Israelites and that the Gentile nations would be consumed; grafted into and ruled by the single Chosen People who would govern them.
That this would be a ’coincidence’, and the Protocols a mere act of deceitful anti-semitism, has to be the grossest form of ill-logic.
The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is a document which should be read by all. No other single document provides us with such a clear understanding of why the world is gradually moving towards a One World Government, controlled by an irreproachable ’Hidden Hand’. In fact, in the Protocols, we are given clear insights as to why so many incomprehensible political decisions are made in both local, national and international politics, which seem to continually work against the favor of the masses and in favor of the vested interests of the banking / industrial cartel - the global power elite.
We ignore it at our peril.
It is graphic in its contempt for those who will be its victims, in its profound understanding of the human condition and mind; and it is equally graphic in detailing the methodology it will use against, and with the complicity of, the world’s population, in such a way as to go unrecognized by the vast majority of the participants.
The document has achieved fame and infamy in its time.
Essentially, the accusations leveled against it are that it is a fraud and a forgery. Some say it is a report of a genuine conspiracy but has been blamed on the Jews in order to hide its true origins, and that to believe it to be genuinely Judaic shows one to be ’anti-Semitic’. This kind of black propaganda and emotional reaction arises quite naturally in the course of events whenever any proof of the ancient conspiracy against humanity is uncovered.
Despite a general misconception amongst certain politically-aligned groups and ill-informed individuals - including Jews and non-Jews alike - that the Protocols are a ’proven fraud’, this is not the case, as I will show.
The cry of ’anti-Semitic’ is a standard one and almost automatic from ill-informed, if often well-intentioned individuals who have little background knowledge of the vast history and consciousness of the perpetrators of the ’world revolution’. The majority of people remain drastically unaware of the conspiracy because a vital aspect of the conspiracy is to hide itself behind many walls of secrecy, as the following information will show. Those that would call ’anti-semitism’, or say ’there is no conspiracy’, are amongst the greatest victims of the very conspiracy they vehemently deny.
Someone who has lived in a box without windows for their entire life might genuinely cry out ’there is no sun, it is a myth, a vicious lie and anti-boxism’. There remains, however the unalterable fact that there is a sun and those that point this out to the one in the box, in an attempt to enlighten and free them from self-imposed ignorance, are not automatically ’anti-boxists’ or feel any sort of hatred towards boxes or those who live in them at all.
Neither is the reporting of the following document anti-Semitic.
It is a call to the attention of those who may have been born into the current age of suppression and propaganda, and have yet to recoup some of this information which until very recently was openly discussed on a global scale. However, since the triumphs of Zionism and the further implementation of mass mind / information control since the Second World War, with regards to anything remotely Jewish, such information has been buried through censorship and revision of history-books by the very power which imposed the conspiracy in the first place. The Protocols make it quite clear that ’anti-semitism’, meaning ’anti-Judaic’, is an ’indispensable’ part of the plan for world domination. It will be used for ’the management of our lesser brethren’. This document makes chilling reading for both Jews and Gentiles alike when one looks back to the treatment of Jewry during the Second World War; that a self-appointed elite should be willing to sacrifice and allow the persecution of their ’lesser brethren’, for the greater aim of world domination, should be a wake-up-call to all of Jewry, the vast majority of whom constitute what the authors of the Protocols deem to be ’lesser brethren’.
’Anti-Semitic’ is a phrase which means ’against Semites’ but has come to be used solely as meaning ’anti-Jewish’. The irony inherent in this ill-used phrase is that the Semitic Arabs are actually amongst the greatest victims in the crime and fraud known as Zionism, in which Russian Jews, who are racially non-Semitic, in the first half of the Twentieth Century, fostered and executed a plan (as prophesied by God through Ezekiel 11:15) to create an officially recognized Jewish homeland in Palestine. The result of which was the mass displacement and persecution of the indigenous Arab citizens. This is without doubt ’anti-semitism’ at its worst. And yet to state this plain fact openly today is to invite the accusation of being ’anti-Semitic’! I will also show in this work that the ordinary Jewish people, unbeknownst to themselves, have been victims to the same ancient agenda and are considered by the Elders to be necessary sacrifices to their cause. As the British; American and other Anglo-Saxon and Celtic peoples are also descended from Shem/Sem, they are also Semitic peoples. Therefore anyone who is anti-British or anti-American is anti-Semitic, in the true definition of the term. But, of course, as explained in the Protocols, it is the Jews who publish the dictionaries and so they define the words according to their plan.
The main point pertinent to this work is that the plan and execution of this agenda was predicted and detailed in the Protocols, before the Zionist plan began to be put into action openly on the world stage. More dramatically, however, the agenda outlined in the Protocols was foreshadowed by over 2,000 years of similar documents, edicts and statements.
The document itself attributes the authorship of these self-same conspiratorial Protocols to the highest echelons of world Jewry. It would be madness to ignore the possibility that this document is genuine and authored by those claimed, simply because certain people find it offensive. Because if it is genuine, then people absolutely should find it offensive! It is the greatest single betrayal of both Jews and Gentiles imaginable. Even if it were not authored by a Jewish elite, the fact that world Jewry have suffered along the very lines as predicted in the document, should be enough for every Jew alive to give this document their full attention.
Both Communism and Zionism can be seen to be the two means by which the Protocols unfolded during the early Twentieth Century. Whilst Communism acted to tear down the Russian aristocratic system and replace it with a tyranny and dictatorship led predominantly by Jews, 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 prophesied Jewish homeland to re-home the Eastern Jews who were being badly persecuted in Russia at the time. In fact, as is shown by government documents of the time, the accusation of mass anti-Semitism and pogroms in Russia at the turn of the century (against Jews who are non-Semitic; being descendants of Japheth, not Shem) is massively exaggerated.
This was essentially a Press-led propaganda tactic employed in the West to further the aims of Zionist interests and to ease the passage of the masses of Eastern Jews who emigrated to the West around the late 19th and early 20th Century. According to Zionist Rabbi Stephen Wise, until 1900, American Zionism was confined to immigrant Jews (Khazar Ashkenazim descended from Japheth, not Shem - Genesis 10:3), and the mass of American Jews (mainly German ’Western’ Sephardim) were opposed to it. However, by 1910, a million Jewish immigrants had arrived in America from Russia and the Zionist lobby began to represent a significant number of voters. Today, Jews represent approximately 3% of the American population but occupy more or less 90% of all the key positions in the US-Administration. Just as in Russia following the Bolshevik Revolution, the number of Jews numbered around 10% of the population, whereas the number of Jews in the Bolshevik government was approximately 90%.
Another interesting ’coincidence’, President Franklin Roosevelt (from a Jewish family) had seventy-two advisors around him when he led the USA into World War II of whom fifty-two were known Jews. The Elders of Zion consist of the Sanhedrin, the highest Jewish authority since Biblical times, officially numbering 71, and the Judaic texts also reveal the existence of a king, making 72. Whilst in Britain in 1999, the Labour government admitted that it has 72 official ’advisors’ or ’spin-doctors’ (professional-liars). Both Roosevelt and Blair have implemented social ’reforms’ called the ’New Deal’, which in the USA was also known by those in the know as the ’Jew Deal’. Do we see here history repeating itself?
As the well tried and tested truism says:
those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.
The British and American governments were manipulated by the Zionists - against the overwhelming opposition of the Western Jews and the Palestinian Jews and the majority of Gentiles - to commit themselves to the creation of an official Jewish homeland in Palestine, which had nothing to do with British national interest, at an enormous cost during a time - the First World War - when all manpower and resources were desperately needed to fight the enemy.
Why this should have occurred is against all logic. However, the most revealing insight into the modus agendi and the modus operandi of the world manipulators is acquired through reading the Protocols.
Not only does this document illuminate the reason for the massive success of international Zionism, but it also provides profound insight into every single political situation of the last century and sheds great light on much of what has transpired for the past 2,600 years on the world stage.
Stunningly, virtually everything planned for and predicted in the Protocols has provably come to pass. This document is as pertinent today as it was when it first came to light in 1905.
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, who flocked to the West a century ago. That century has provably unfolded according to the Protocols, which ascribe themselves to the elite of world Jewry. The earliest Israelite holy works (The Torah), right up to the latest (Jewish Talmud and Zohar) have continually promised that the world would be delivered to the true Israelites and that the Gentile nations would be consumed; grafted into and ruled by the single Chosen People who would govern them.
That this would be a ’coincidence’, and the Protocols a mere act of deceitful anti-semitism, has to be the grossest form of ill-logic.
The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is a document which should be read by all. No other single document provides us with such a clear understanding of why the world is gradually moving towards a One World Government, controlled by an irreproachable ’Hidden Hand’. In fact, in the Protocols, we are given clear insights as to why so many incomprehensible political decisions are made in both local, national and international politics, which seem to continually work against the favor of the masses and in favor of the vested interests of the banking / industrial cartel - the global power elite.
We ignore it at our peril.
Protocols
1 – The Basic Doctrine
2 – Economic Wars
3 – Methods of Conquest
4 – Materialism Replaces Religion
5 – Despotism and Modern Progress
6 – Take-Over Technique
7 – World-Wide Wars
8 – Provisional Government
9 – Re-education
10 – Preparing for Power
11 – The Totalitarian State
12 – Control of the Press
13 – Distractions
14 – Assault on Religion
15 – Ruthless Suppression
16 – Brainwashing
17 – Abuse of Authority
18 – Arrest of Opponents
19 – Rulers and People
20 – Financial Programme
21 – Loans and Credit
22 – Power of Gold
23 – Instilling Obedience
24 – Qualities of the Ruler
