THE UNHEEDED WARNINGS 

to ‘the Children of Israel’ and ‘Judah’ 

The Qur’an: 

“In The Name of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful. 

Glorified be He Who carried His servant [Machammad] by night from the inviolable Temple [Mecca] to the Farthest Temple [Jerusalem] whose precincts We did bless, that We might show him some of Our signs and tokens! for He, [Ellah] and only He, is the One Who Hears, and Sees all things. 

We gave unto Moses the Book of Scripture as an appointed guidance for the Children of Israel, saying: “Choose no other guardian in place of Me.” 

You who are descended from those who We carried along with Noah in the Ark, for he was indeed a most grateful devotee. 

And We gave clear warnings to the Children of Israel in their Scripture, that on two occasions they would work corruption on earth, and elated with mighty arrogance, would become great tyrants. 

So when the first of Our warnings came to pass, We sent against you servants of Ours inclined to vehement warfare, who ravaged your country entering the innermost parts of your homes. And it was one of the warnings completely fulfilled. 

[As Jeremiah informed them in the Old Testament Part II Chapter 30: “...for, lo, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will bring again the captivity of My people Israel and Judah: ...and I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers and they shall possess it. And these are the words that the Lord spoke concerning Israel and concerning Judah.”] 

Then we allowed you to retaliate against them and We aided you with wealth and children, and made you more numerous in man-power. 

Saying to you: “If you do well, you do it for the benefit of your own souls, but if you do evil, you do so to its detriment.” So when the time for the second of Our punishments came to pass, We sent against you others from amongst Our servants, to ravage and disfigure your faces, and to enter the Temple even as they entered it the first time, and to lay waste, with utter destruction all that fell into their hands. 

It may be that your Lord will have mercy upon you, but if you return to your crimes, [Judah and Israel] We will revert to Our punishments: And We have made hell a prison for those who insolently reject belief."[Qur’an, Surah 17, Al-Isra’, verse 1-8] 

Malachi 4:1 warns: “...and the day that comethh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave neither root nor branch.” 

THE LAST EXODUS - THE LAST ALIYAH 

THE 3rd TIME UNLUCKY! 

In a recent newspaper article by Andrew Billen, entitled ‘Exodus - The Last Jews of Rumania’, he informs us of the work of Rumania’s Chief Rabbi, Moses Rosen and the run-down of Rumania’s Jewish population, due to the process of Aliyah, a Hebrew term for emigration to Israel, which was never prevented during the reign of Sir Nicolae Ceauscescu, whose family had strong Jewish connections and like all Communist regimes officially suppressed anti-Semitism as standard policy, which in the case of Rumania gave it the the lucrative Most Favoured Nation trade status with the foster father of Israel, The United States of America. Ceauscescu also had diplomatic relations with Israel. 

Rabbi Rosen says: “...It is my proudest achievement that 97% of Jews left.” 

Rosen was elected Chief Rabbi of Rumania’s Jewish community 42 years ago, says Billen, the final descendent of an 800 year old line of Rabbis from Galicia in Poland. “Freedom brings its own dangers”, says Rabbi Rosen, not only must Aliyah be speeded up, but, he concluded, it may be time for him to advise every Jew in Rumania to leave. “Democracy is a good thing, but let us not forget Hitler came to power through free elections...” 

The achievements of Rabbi Rosen, on behalf of the Jews of Rumania, are celebrated by Jewish leaders world wide. But His Eminence, as he is described in official publications, is, says Billen, “...not only the supremely powerful lay and spiritual leader of his community, but also a consummate national politician.” 

If he is now exaggerating the dangers to his people, he will not be doing so carelessly. 

Fiercely Zionist, he fears that without Talmud Torah classes, to teach young Jews Hebrew, they will be unable to contribute to life in Israel and may even lose the will. To this extent, it is in his interests to play up tensions between the communities by, for instance, accusing Rumania’s national poet Mihai Eminescu of anti-semitism - at a time when social barriers in Rumania have a chance of coming down." [this is standard practice] 

Probably more interesting, is the fact that Rabbi Rosen was also a member of Rumania’s puppet parliament which, Billen reports, is bringing him under scrutiny for his links with the Ceaucescu dynasty. Furthermore, he says, there are fewer than 20,000 Jews out of a population of 23 million, yet there are many Jewish leaders of the front, including Silviu Bucan, former ambassador to the United Nations, and current prime minister Petre Roman. Billen says, “ There is a disproportion here.” [And it is this disproportion which has been the historic cause of anti-Judaism for generations]. 

“Although Rosen has always denied any knowledge of it, Israel was literally allowed to buy Jews from the Rumanian Government. And by 1978, according to Ion Pacepa, Rumania’s former Head of Security who defected to the West, the amount could range from $2,000 to $50,000 depending on the citizen’s value to each state.” 

Ceaucescu’s overthrow meant some quick rewriting of Rosen’s memoirs, ‘Dangers, Tests and Miracles’, recently published by Weidenfeld and Nicolson. For to be accused of having been close to Ceaucescu is the most heinous charge that can be levelled against a Rumanian these days, worse, says Billen, than being called pro-Hungarian. 

“A 1965 picture showing Rabbi Rosen congratulating Ceaucescu has been removed at the proof stage. In the new and fraudulent text [again standard procedure] Rosen swears that he only met Ceausescu no more than eight or nine times, and portrays him as a covert anti-semite, who inspired articles against him in the press.” [This again is an age-old red-herring, it’s hard to credit Ceaucescu being anti-Jewish, when evidence exists that he himself was of Jewish stock, and his wife was definitely Jewish.] 

Rabbi Rosen demonstrates that he is a great exponent of ‘Chutzpah’, in other words he has the cheek of the devil. Remember, where Zionism predominates, mendacity always asserts itself. Andrew Billen further states: “It might be wise for Rabbi Rosen also to withdraw from the bookstand at the Choral Temple in Bucharest a 1973 selection of his speeches. One, an open address he gave to Ceaucescu, begins: ‘Permit me, on behalf of the Federation of Jewish Communities of Rumania, my colleagues and fellow Jews of The Mosaic Cult of this country and on my own behalf, the expression of most respectful homage, of the great gratitude and - let me say it - of the boundless affection we feel for you.‘ 

The speech was made in 1968 , but as late as last August [88/89] on the annual Liberation Day celebrations, the diplomatic community saw Rosen repeatedly rise to join the crowds in interrupting Ceaucescu’s interminable speech with applause. 

If Anti-Semitism can be exploited to distract and confuse, by accusing others of it, [which is again standard procedure] let alone a whole nation, Rosen could be hoping to deflect attention from his own record. Assuredly, it would be a bad time for him to plead to a volatile and immature electorate the exigencies of realpolitik. 

The danger for Rumanian Jewry is the old one; of crying wolfe..." 

NASTY WRITING ON THE WALL FOR THE JEWS 

Under this headline wrote Peter Hillmore from Bucharest in ‘The Observer’ of February 11th 1990: 

“ The young interpreter said she was reading a book called Protocol and it was very interesting and informative. I told her that Frederick Forsyth’s novel was Mrs. Thatcher’s favourite reading, and this royal seal of approval seemed to please her greatly. 

But her face grew mystified as I expressed my own reservations about the plot and the far-fetched theories it contained. ‘No, no,’ she said vehemently, reveling in the new freedom to argue, ‘it is not at all outrageous, it is all very possible, and it is quite certain that the Jews really do have a plan to dominate Europe’. 

It was not ‘The Fourth Protocol’ she was talking about, but ‘The Protocol of Zion’, a book that is available in a Rumanian translation in Bucharest book shops. Dredging up my sketchy knowledge from history lessons, I explained that her ‘Protocol’, published in 1897, was a brilliant and elaborate forgery by the old Russian Secret Service, purporting to be a Zionist description of its nefarious ambitions, designed to encourage and give historical respectability to anti-semitism. I’m not sure if I was completely believed. 

Anti-Semitism is becoming respectable again in Rumania. Or, if not respectable, then alarmingly noticeable. In the Bucharest underground stations, the walls are plastered with political slogans and posters... Many are healthy lampoons and political insults - a picture of President Ion Iliescu with a hammer and sickle underneath. But some are dangerous; a picture of Petre Roman, with a hammer and sickle - plus a Star of David underneath, the same under pictures of Silviu Brucan, the same under pictures of other political figures who happen to be Jewish. It is not a pleasant sight. The comments in Bucharest are not very pleasant to hear either... While the gypsies are the objects of hate in Bucharest, the Jews seem to be the objects of distrust... 

There is not a vempaign], and most of them live in Bucharest. Rumania’s support for the Nazis until the end of the war, plus Ceauescu’s policy of bartering exit visas for Israeli goods, has thinned the community down to about 15,000 (‘they all went to Jew York,’ said one politician laughing at his own un-funny cliche). 

But, like Jewish communities almost everywhere, their influence has been far in excess of their numbers. And, like Jewish communities almost everywhere in Eastern Europe, many achieved positions of power in the Communist Party, the party now in disgrace." 

However, a much earlier dispatch from Rumania tells another story: “ The Jews have caused an epidemic of corruption and social unrest. They monopolize the press, which, with the aid of foreign help flays all the spiritual treasures of the Rumanians. To defend ourselves is a national and patriotic duty - not anti-Semitic. Lack of measures to get rid of this plague would indicate that we are cowards who let ourselves be carried alive to our graves. Why should the Jews enjoy the privilege of living like parasites on our backs? It is logical and holy to react against them." [Patriarch Crista, Head of the Greek Orthodox Church in Rumania, quoted in the New York Tribune, August 17th 1937] 

Unfortunately Peter Hillmore was either too afraid or ignorant of the historical facts, or too compromised to be objective on this issue. He writes as if fearful of being accused of committing the ‘blasphemy of Jewish-criticism’. As if it is at all new, this notion of Jewish involvement in the Communist movement or the indisputable fact that Jewish planning, money, and terror have been the prime mover behind practically every revolution and insurrection in recent history, as we have seen from the evidence presented thus far in our investigation. But a conspiracy of silence, or concealment of evidence, certainly is still in force on this ever sensitive issue. 

It is a pity that Peter Hillmore was not as observant or as impartial as Robert Wilton, seventeen years Russian correspondent for The Times, and an eye-witness of exceptional value of all the events of the Russian Revolution. [or more accurately the Zionist Revolution that took place in Russia] 

It is a noteworthy fact that the English edition of Wilton’s book ‘The Last Days of the Romanovs,’ published in September 1920 by Thornton-Butterworth, did not contain the data obtained from the painstaking French study of the Russian Bolshevik Revolution based on official reports and original documents, confirming his own narrative. He says: “I have done all in my power to act as an impartial chronicler”. 

After Robert Wilton had written in a conspiracy of silence, or concealment of evidence, certainly is still in force on this ever sensitive issue. 

It is a pity that Peter Hillmore was not as observant or as impartial as Robert Wilton, seventeen years Russian correspondent for The Times, and an eye-witness of exceptional value of all the events of the Russian Revolution. [or more accurately the Zionist Revolution that took place in Russia] 

It is a noteworthy fact that the English edition of Wilton’s book ‘The Last Days of the Romanovs,’ published in September 1920 by Thornton-Butterworth, did not contain the data obtained from the painstaking French study of the Russian Bolshevik Revolution based on official reports and original documents, confirming his own narrative. He says: “I have done all in my power to act as an impartial chronicler”. 

After Robert Wilton had written in 1920: “ The Jewish domination in Russia is supported by certain Russians... They are all screens or dummies behind which the Sverdlovs and the thousand and one Jews of Sovdepia continue their work of destruction,” his chances in English journalism were gone. It is a well-known fact that he died in straitened circumstances in January, 1925. 

So perhaps Peter Hillmore does know what he’s not talking about? If not, we will try to refresh his memory with the benefit of information from un-doctored history and unsolicited Jewish testimony as to their part in originating revolutionary global subversion and Zionism’s policy of malevolent terror. 

According to Dr. Fahey in ‘The Rulers of Russia’, Robert Wilton says on page 29 of the French version of The Last Days of the Romanovs, ‘Les Derniers Jours des Romanof’: “In order not to leave myself open to any accusation of prejudice I am giving (on pages 136-137) the list of the Central Committee, of the Extraordinary Commission, and the Council of Commissars functioning at the time of the assassination of the Imperial Family... If the reader is astonished to find the Jewish hand everywhere in the affair of the assassination of the Russian Imperial Family, he must bear in mind the formidable numerical preponderance of Jews in the Soviet administration...” [1918-1919] 

The Sunday Times of May 10th 1992 reported that the remains of the Tsar and his family had been found in a forest grave. The report confirms Petrovski’s assertion that the Russian Royal family had been exterminated by the Jews Yourowsky, Golostchokine and Voikoff in the ‘House of Special Purpose’ at Ekaterionburg. 

Wilton established from data extracted from official Soviet Press reports, that overall of the 556 important functionaries of the Bolshevik State, he now included an additional 69 Jews to the 388 submitted by Rev George Simons to the U.S. Senate. They were in charge of the administration, responsible for the brutal extermination of the Russian Royal Family, and the holocaust of countless millions. Of the 556, 457 were Jews, a trend that also ran through the American, British and French administration as well as those of most other prominent countries, then as of now. The Jews who surrounded Lloyd George, (President) Wilson, and [freemason] Clemanceau are to be blamed for having created a ‘Jewish Peace’. [M.G. Batault, Le Problems Juif, page 38] “Wilson’s best friend was Bernard Baruch, who, heading another batch of 117 Jews, accompanied [President] Wilson to the ‘peace’ conference at Versailles”, written by Alfred Rosenberg, from Munich, on November 1921. [Are These Things So?, page 360] 

“Mr. Wilson brought to Paris 117 Jews and 39 Gentiles (mostly Valets)”, says Count Cherep-Spiridovich. [The Secret World Government, page 39] 

List of members of the central executive committee, chaired by Sverdlov, responsible for ordering the extermination of the imperial family of the Romanovs: 

Out of the 61 members only 4 were Russians, with 6 Letts, 1 German, 2 Armenians, 1 Czech, 1 Imeritian, 2 Georgians, 1 Karaim, 1 Ukranian, with 42 Jews. A view still endorsed by Peter Hillmore of The Observer in 1990 of Jewish communities almost everywhere, that of:-" their influence being far in excess of their numbers". 

As the erudite Russian writer, Petrovski stated:- 

“Nicholas II, the Imperial family and the faithful members of his suite, were shot by the Jew, Yourowsky, assisted by the Jews, Golostchokine and Voikoff, in obedience to the order sent from Moscow by the Jew Sverdloff, and with the approval of the Council of the People’s Commissars.” And of that Council of 22 Commmissars, Chaired by Lenin, 17 were Jews; or 18, if we now correctly count Lenin as being fully Jewish; or 19, to give the devil his due, by allowing Jacob H. Schiff full credit, to boast as he did, that “Mein leetle Russian Revolution has succeeded at last.” For without massive financial support, vision and determination, there would have been no revolution. And it is still the case today, 73 years on, for in order to keep their revolution solvent the Soviet Union needs all kinds of financial and technical support from their alleged enemies. 

The original situation prompted Pope Pius XI to write in his Encyclical Letter, ‘Divini Redemptoris’, “For them (the peoples of the Soviet Union) We cherish the warmest paternal affection. We are well aware that not a few of them groan beneath the yoke imposed on them by men who in very large part are strangers to the real interests of the country. We recognise that many others were deceived by fallacious hopes. We blame only the system with its authors and abettors who considered Russia the best field for experimenting with a plan elaborated years ago, and who from there continued to spread it from one end of the world to the other.” 

The Rev Denis Fahey in his book ‘The Rulers of Russia’ from which much of this data is derived, says that Pope Pius XI was referring to the Marxian plan elaborated years earlier, by members of the Jewish nation, and that Communism was the latest and, up to then its most decadent materialistic phase demonstrating the Jewish nation’s opposition to the Supernatural Messias. 

And therefore, “Accordingly there is no reason for being surprised at the prepoderating role of the Jews in the assassination of the Imperial Family. It is rather the opposite which would have been surprising.” 

Before people like Peter Hillmore dismiss the evidence of people who have been on the receiving end of Judeo-Bolshevik-Zionism they should be sure of their facts and in turn, amplify and communicate these facts to enlighten the world outside, rather than playing for more time, when it is high time to put matters right. If he is still unconvinced then, hopefully, the following examples will help him and others to come to their senses. 

It is patently obvious to any unbiased, unprejudiced mind that Bolshevism was the culmination of the age old conspiracy of evil against all humanity, Jew and Gentile alike. But still, in spite of all the evidence, ‘The human mind jeers at the theory of mental manipulation’. [let alone its successful implementation] 

Commenting on the publication of ‘The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion’ an editorial of the ‘Christian Science Monitor’ said on June 19th 1920 under the headline of ‘the Jewish Peril’: 

“It is necessary to plunge into the thorny question as to whether the Jewish Peril, of today, is as much a delusion of its prophets as was the Yellow Peril in its day? What is important to dwell upon is the increasing evidence of the existence of a secret conspiracy, throughout the world, for the destruction of organised government and the letting lose of evil. The human mind jeers at the theory of mental manipulation, yet prominent politicians, philosophers and soldiers are found, at critical moments, giving expression to views of an absolutely non-moral description, which are not in accordance with their ordinary life ... It is here that the conspiracy of evil against humanity becomes recognizable.” 

BY WHAT SPIRIT, THE PROTOCOLS? 

“ The evil is the one and only means to attain the evil, the good. Therefore we must not stop at bribery, deceit and treachery when they should serve towards the attainment of our end. Before us is a plan in which is laid strategically the line from which we cannot deviate without running the risk of seeing the labour of many centuries brought to naught.” 

The ‘Kol Nidre’ Prayer For The Day Of Atonement Of ‘Yom Kippur’: “All vows, bonds, oaths, devotions, promises, penalties and obligations wherewith we have vowed, sworn, devoted and bound ourselves: from this Day of Atonement, unto the next Day of Atonement, may it come unto us for good; lo, all these, we repent us in them. They shall be absolved, released, annulled, made void, and of none effect: They shall not be binding nor shall they have any power. Our vows shall not be vows; our bonds shall not be bonds; and our oaths shall not be oaths.” [The American Jewish Year Book (1923-1924), volume 25, page 183] 

Samuel Roth says: “No other religion in the world has offered a spectacle as contradictory, as malicious as the Jewish prayer [Kol Nidre] used during Yom Kippur. The Jewish Prayer Book lists the following sins specifically, as amongst those which are unconditionally forgiven the Jew on Yom Kippur : 

Sins committed with incestuous lewdness; 
Assembling to commit fornication; 
Oppressing one’s neighbor; 
Deceitful acknowledgments; 
Violence; 
Denying and lying; 
Taking and giving bribes; 
Calumny; 
Extortion and Usury; 
Haughtiness; 
Shamelessness, 
Lawlessness; 
Litigiousness; 
Treachery to one’s neighbor; 
Tale-bearing; 
False-swearing; 
Embezzlement; 
Stealing. 
[Jews must live, pages 130 & 136] 

Rabbi Louis Finkelstein states: “Pharisaism became Talmudism, Talmudism became Medieval Rabbinism, and Medieval Rabbinism became Modern Rabbinism. But throughout these changes of name, inevitable adaption of custom, and adjustment of Law, the spirit of the ancient Pharisee survives unaltered. When the Jew reads his prayer, he is reciting formulae prepared by pre-Maccabean scholars; When he dons the cloak prescribed for the Day of Atonement and Passover-Eve, he is wearing the festival garment of ancient Jerusalem; when he studies the Talmud he is actually repeating the arguments used in the Palestine academies.” [The Pharisees, Volume 1, page XXI] 

The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (1943) lists under “Pharisees”: 

“ The Jewish religion as it is today traces its descent without a break, through all the centuries, from the Pharisees. Their leading ideas and methods found expression in a literature of enormous extent...The Talmud is the largest and most important single member of that literature...” 

“Whence comes this uncanny note of prophecy, prophecy in part fulfilled, in part far gone in the way of fulfilment? Have we been struggling these tragic years to extirpate the secret organisation of world dominion, only to find beneath it, another, more dangerous because, more secret?” [The Times, London, May 8th 1920] 

Before discussing in more detail the claim of the Protocols’ “forgery”, we reproduce a few quotes of what has been said about them. 

“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 powers... It is too terribly real for fiction, too well sustained for speculation, too deep in its knowledge of the secret springs of life, for forgery.” [The Dearborn Independant, July 10th 1920] 

Henry Ford: “ The only statement I care to make about the ‘Protocols’ is that they fit in with what is going on. They are sixteen years old and they have fitted the world situation up to this time. They fit it now.” [New York World, February 17th 1921] 

Lord Sydenham of England: “What is the most striking characteristic of the Protocols? The answer is knowledge of a rare kind, embracing the widest field. The solution of the ‘Mystery’, if it is one, is to be found by ascertaining where this uncanny knowledge, on which prophecies now literally fulfilled are based, can be shown to reside.” [August 27th 1921, quoted from The Protocols, Kuwait 1968] 

Norman Jaques, M.P., Canadian House of Commons: “ Those who feel libelled by the Protocols have the most obvious remedy in the world; All they have to do is 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.” [July 9th 1943] 

In fact the most likely author of the Protocols is Theodor Herzl. The disclosure by Dr Marcus Ehrenpreis, Chief Rabbi of Sweden in 1924, adds further weight to identifying Herzl as the author of the “compressed” version of the Protocols. Quoted in ‘The Effective Judaism’, Rabbi Ehrenpreis states:- “Long have I been well acquainted with the contents of the Protocols, indeed for many years before they were ever published in the Christian press. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, were in point of fact not the original Protocols at all, but a compressed extract of the same. Of the 70 Elders of Zion, in the matter of origin and of the existence of the original Protocols, there are only ten men in the entire world who know.” 

These disclosures by Rabbi Ehrenpreis are altogether consistent with the evidence provided by Nesta H. Webster in her ‘Secret Societies and Subversive Movements’ published in the same year, 1924. 

On page 408-409, she states:- “Contrary to the assertions of certain writers, I have never affirmed my belief in the authenticity of the Protocols, but have always treated it as an entirely open question. The only opinion to which I have committed myself is that, whether genuine or not, the Protocols do represent the programme of World Revolution, and that in view of their prophetic nature and of their extraordinary resemblance to the protocols of certain Secret Societies in the past, they were either the work of some such society or of someone profoundly versed in the lore of Secret Societies who was able to reproduce their ideas and phraseology.” 

“ The so-called refutation of the Protocols which appeared in The Times of August 22nd, tends to confirm my opinion. According to these articles the Protocols were largely copied from the book of Maurice Joly, Dialogues aux Enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu.” [or Montesquieu et Machiavel] 

A point confirmed later by Professor Norman Cohn,in his ‘Warrant For Genocide’ in 1967, in which he states on page 80:- “In the autobiography which he wrote in 1870 Maurice Joly has described how, strolling one evening by the Seine in Paris, he suddenly conceived the idea of writing a dialogue between Montesquieu and Machiavelli. Montesquieu would present the case of Liberalism, Machiavelli the case for cynical despotism. Open criticism of the regime of Napoleon III was forbidden. In this way [he thought] it should be possible, through the mouth of Machiavelli, to present the Emperor’s motives and methods stripped of their usual camoflage of humbug. So thought Joly but he underestimated his adversary. The Dialogues aux Enfers was printed in Belgium and smuggled into France for distribution, but the moment it crossed the border it was seized by the police and its author was quickly traced and arrested. On 25th April 1865 Joly was tried and sentenced to fifteen months’ imprisonment; his book was banned and confiscated. 

Joly’s later career was equally unfortunate. Witty, aggressive, no respecter of persons, he proceeded from disappointment to disappointment until, in 1879, he committed suicide. He deserved a better fate. He was not only a brilliant stylist, he had fine intuition of the forces, which gathering strength after his death, were to produce the political cataclysms of the present century. In his novel Les Affames he shows a rare understanding of those tensions in the modern world which foster revolutionary movements, whether of the right or the left. Above all, in his reflections on the amateurish despotism of Napoleon III he arrived at insights which remain valid when applied to various authoritarian regimes of our own time. Moreover, something of Joly’s insights even survived when the Dialogue aux Enfers was transformed into the Protocols of the Elders of Zion; that is one reason - though as we shall see, not the only reason - why the Protocols often seem to forecast twentieth-century authoritarianism...Such is the book that inspired the forger of the Protocols. He plagiarized it shamelessly..." 

But who was this shameless forger and what was the object of the exercise? 

Herzl, according to Rabbi Ehrenpreis, seems to have embodied all the qualifications; a man with both the vision and the ability to write and ignite the blue touch-paper, and retire immediately. After all, according to Marvin Lowenthal, the editor and translator of Herzl’s Diaries:- “he was to all intents and purposes a man of letters: a Journalist, a Playwright, Feuilletonist, and Short story writer” who “aspired to be a Novelist...” [The Herzl Diaries, page x]. And as such he was more than qualified to reproduce the ideas and phraseology of Secret-Society lore. Rabbi Ehrenpreis says: “I participated with Dr. Herzl in the first Zionist Congress which was held in 1897. Herzl was the most prominent figure at the Jewish World Congress. Herzl foresaw, twenty years before we experienced them, the revolution which brought the Great War and he prepared us for that which was to happen. He foresaw the splitting up of Turkey [a proven 100% Judeo-Masonic Conspiracy], that England would obtain control of Palestine. We may expect important developments in the world.” [In 1962 David Ben Gurion made similar predictions] 

Back to Mrs Webster’s ‘Secret Societies and Subversive Movements’, page 409: “Now precisely at the moment when Joly published his Dialogues aux Enfers the secret societies were particularly active, and since by this date a number of Jews had penetrated into their ranks a whole crop of literary efforts directed against Jews and secret societies marked the decade.” 

“Now it will be remembered that amongst the sets of parallels to the Protocols quoted by me in World Revolution, two were taken from the sources above quoted - the documents of the Haute Vente Romain and the programme of Bakunin’s secret society, the Alliance Sociale Democratique. Meanwhile Mr Lucien Wolf had found another parallel to the Protocols in Goedsche’s book. ‘The Protocols’ Mr Wolf had no hesitation in asserting, ‘are, in short an amplified imitation of Goedsche’s handiwork’ (Spectator for June 12, 1920), and he went on to show that ‘Nilus followed this pamphlet very closely.’ The Protocols were then declared by Mr Wolf and his friends to have been completely and finally refuted. But alas for Mr. Wolf’s discernment! The Times articles came and abolished the whole of his carefully constructed theory. They did not, however, demolish mine; on the contrary, they supplied another and a very curious link in the chain of evidence. For is it not remarkable that one of the sets of parallels quoted by me appeared in the same year as Joly’s book, and that within the space of nine years no less than four parallels to the Protocols should have been discovered? Let us recapitulate the events of this decade in the form of a table and the proximity of dates will then be more apparent: 

1859. Cretineau Joly’s book published containing documents of Haute Vente Romaine (parallels quoted by me). 

1860. ‘Alliance Israelite Universelle’ founded. 

1864. 1st International taken over by Karl Marx. 

1864. Alliance Sociale Democratique of Bakunin founded (Parallels quoted by me) 

1864. Maurice Joly’s Dialogue aux Enfers published (parallels quoted by the Times). 

1866. 1st Congress of Iternationale at Geneva. 

1868. Goedsche’s Biarritz (parallels quoted by Mr Lucien Wolf). 

1869. Gougenot Des Mousseaux’s Le Juif et la Judaisation, etc 

1869. Bakunin’s Polemique contre les Juifs. 

It will be seen, then, that at the moment when Maurice Joly wrote his ‘Dialogues’, the ideas they embodied were current in many different circles. It is interesting, moreover, to notice that the authors of the last two works, the Catholic and Royalist Des Mousseaux and the Anarchist Bakunin, between whom it is impossible to imagine any connection, both in the same year denounced the growing power of the Jews whom Bakunin described as ‘the most formidable sect’ in Europe, and asserted that a leakage of information had taken place in the secret societies. Thus in 1870 Bakunin explains that his secret society has been broken up be cause its secrets have been given away, ... and that his colleague Netchaieff has arrived at the conclusion that ‘in order to found a serious and indestructible society on must take for a basis the policy of Machiavelli.’ ... Meanwhile Gougenot Des Mousseaux had related in Le Juif, that in December 1865 he had received a letter from a German statesman saying: ‘Since the revolutionary recrudescence of 1848, I have had relations with a Jew who, from vanity, betrayed the secret of the secret societies with which he had been associated, and who warned me eight or ten days beforehand of all the revolutions which were about to break out at any point of Europe. I owe to him the unshakeable conviction that all these movements of ‘Oppressed peoples,’ etc, etc., are devised by half a dozen individuals [10 according to Rabbi Ehrenpreis], who give their orders to the secret societies of all Europe. The ground is absolutely mined beneath our feet, and the Jews are these miners.’ 

It is further important to notice that Joly’s work is dated from Geneva, the meeting place for all revolutionaries of Europe, in cluding Bakunin, who was there in the same year, and where the first Congress of the Internationale led by Karl Marx was held two years later. Already the revolutionary camp was divided into warring factions, and the rivalry between Marx and Mazzini had been superseded by the struggle between Marx and Bakunin. And all these men were members of secret societies. It is by no means improbable then that Joly, himself a revolutionary, should during his stay in Geneva have come into touch with the members of some secret organization who may have betrayed to him their own secret or those of a rival organization they had reason to suspect of working under the cover of revolutionary doctrines for an ulterior end. Thus the protocols of a secret society modelled on the lines of the Illuminati or the Haute Vente Romain may have passed into his hands and been utilized by him as an attack on Napoleon (III) who, owing to his known connection with the Carbonari, might have appeared to Joly as the chief exponent of the Machiavellian art of duping the people and using them as a lever to power which the secret societies had reduced to a system. 

This would explain Maurice Joly’s mysterious reference to the ‘political system which has not varied for a single day in its application since the disasterous and alas! too far-off date of its enthronement.’ Moreover, it would explain the resemblance between all the parallels to the Protocols from the writings of the Illuminati and Mirabeau’s Projet de Revolution of 1789 onwards. For if the system had never varied, the code on which it was founded must have remained substantially the same. Further, if it had never varied up to the time when Joly wrote, why should it have varied since that date?... 

Might not the same process of evolution have taken place between the dates at which the works of Joly and Nilus were published? I do not agree with the opinion of the Morning Post that: ‘the author of the Protocols must have had the Dialogues of Joly before him.’ It is possible but not proven. Indeed, I find it difficult to imagine that anyone embarking on such an elaborate imposture should not have possessed the wit to avoid quoting passages verbatim - without even troubling to arrange them in a different sequence - from a book which might at any moment be produced as evidence against him. For contrary to the assertions of the Times, the Dialogues of Joly is by no means a rare book, not only was it to be found at the British Museum but at the London Library, and recently I was able to buy a copy for the modest sum of 15 francs. There was therefore every possibility of Nilus being suddenly confronted with the source of plagiarism. Further, is it conceivable that a plagiarist so unskilful and so unimaginative would have been capable of improving the original? For the Protocols are a vast improvement on the Dialogues of Joly. The most striking passages they contain are not found in the earlier work, nor, which is more remarkable, are several of the amazing prophecies concerning the future which time has realized. It is this latter fact which presents the most insuperable obstacle to the Times solution of the problem. 

To sum up then, the Protocols are either a mere plagiarism of Maurice Joly’s work, in which case the prophetic passages added by Nilus or another remain unexplained, or they are a revised edition of the plan communicated to Joly in 1864, brought up to date and supplemented so as to suit modern conditions by the continuers of the plot. 

Whether in this case the authors of the Protocols were Jews or whether the Jewish portion have been interpolated by the people into whose hands they fell is another question. Here we must admit the absence of any direct evidence. An international circle of world revolutionaries working on the lines of the Illuminati, of which the existence has already been indicated, offers a perfectly possible alternative to the ‘Learned Elders of Zion.’ It would be easier, however to absolve the Jews from all suspicion of complicity if they and their friends had adopted a more straight forward course from the time the Protocols appeared. When some years ago a work of a similar kind was directed against the Jesuits, containing what purported to be a ‘Secret Plan’ of revolution closely resembling the Protocols [Revolution and War or Britain’s Peril and Her Secret Foes, by Vigilant, 1913], the Jesuites indulged in no invectives, made no appeal that the book should be burnt by the common hangman, resorted to no fantastic explanations, but quietly pronounced the charge as a fabrication. Thus the matter ended. 

But from the moment the Protocols were published the Jews and their friends had recourse to every tortuous method of defence, brought pressure to bear on the publishers - succeeded, in fact, in temporarily stopping the sales - appealed to the Home Secretary to order their suppression, concocted one clinching refutation after another, all mutually exclusive of each other, so that by the time the solution now pronounced to be the correct one appeared, we had already been assured half a dozen times that the Protocols had been completely and finally refuted. And when at last a really plausible explanation had been discovered, why was it not presented in a convincing manner? All that was necessary was to state that origin of the Protocols had been found in the work of Maurice Joly, giving parallels in support of this assertion. What need to envelop a good case in a web of obvious romance? Why all this parade of confidential sources of information, the pretence that Joly’s book was so rare as to be almost unfindable when a search in the libraries would prove the contrary? Why these allusions to Constantinople as the place ‘to find dark secrets’, to the mysterious Mr X. who does not wish his real name to be known, and to the anonymous ex-officer of the Okhrana from whom by mere chance he bought the very copy of the Dialogues used for the fabrication of the Protocols by the Okhrana itself, although this fact was unknown to the officer in question? Why, further, should Mr X., if he were a Russian land owner, Orthodox by religion and a Constitutional Monarchist, be so anxious to discredit his fellow Monachists by making the outrageous assertion that ‘the only occult Masonic organization such as the Protocols speak of’ - that is to say, a Machiavellian system of an abominable kind - which he had been able to discover in Southern Russia ‘was a Monarchist one’? 

It is evident then that the complete story of the Protocols has not yet been told, and that much yet remains to be discovered concerning this mysterious affair." 

Does this leave any doubt in the exercise of undue, disproportional influence of Zionist Jews in world politics? 

Benjamin Disraeli said: “An insurrection takes place against tradition and aristocracy, against religion and property...The natural equality of men and abrogation of property are proclaimed by the Secret Societies which form Provincial Governments, and men of the Jewish race are found at the head of everyone of them. The people of God co-operate with atheists; most skillful accumulators of property ally themselves with Communists; the peculiar and chosen race touch the hands of all the scum and low castes of Europe; and all this because they wish to destroy that ungrateful Christendom which owes them even its name, and whose tyranny they can no longer endure. 

When the Secret Societies, in February 1848, surprised Europe, they were themselves surprised by the unexpected opportunity, and so little capable were they of seizing the occasion, that had it not been for the Jews, who of late years unfortunately have been connecting themselves with these unhallowed associations, imbecile as the governments were, the uncalled-for outbreak would not have ravaged Europe. But the firey energy, and the teeming resources of the Children of Israel maintained for a long time the unnecessary and useless struggle. If the reader throws his eyes over the provisional governments of Germany, and Italy, and even France, formed at that period, he will recognise everywhere the Jewish element". [Lord George Bentink, page 357] 

Disraeli also said: “You never observe a great intellectual movement in Europe in which the Jews do not greatly participate. The first Jesuits were Jews; that mysterious Russian Diplomacy which so alarms Western Europe is organised and principally carried on by Jews; that mighty revolution which is at this moment preparing in Germany, and which will be, in fact, a second and greater reformation, and of which so little is known in England, is entirely developing under the auspices of Jews, who almost monopolise the professorial chairs of Germany. [Coningsby, page 231-232] 

The Jewish Communal Register of New York states: “ The firm of Khun, Loeb & Co. [headed by Jacob H. Schiff] floated the large Japanese War Loans of 1904-5, this making possible the Japanese victory over Russia. Mr. Schiff has always used his wealth and his influence in the best interests of his people. He financed the enemies of autocratic Russia and used his influence to keep Russia from the Money-Market of the United States.” [page 1018-1019] [which explains why Mr. Kennan and Dr. Nicholas Russel, ‘the Friends of Russian Freedom’, were allowed free access to the 50,000 Russian prisoners-of-war, ‘to sow 50,000 seeds of Liberty’ and prepare the way, for Mr. Jacob H. Schiff’s ‘Leetle Revolution’] 

Rabbi Stephen S. Wise wrote in the ‘Jewish Opinion’ of December 1933: “With the rise of the Soviet regime, the Jews have been granted rights not accorded even in the most advanced countries. The state which previously did not employ any Jews, now employs in White Russia 61% per cent Jewish officials. A Jew is President of the State Bank; Jews occupy almost all important ambassadorial positions; universities, professions, judiciary and administration now have a greater percentage than any other nationality. Anti-Semitism has been declared a state offense, and is punished as counter revolution.” [The Jews, page 137] Contrary to popular belief, even under Stalin the situation remained the same. 

Take a look at the following list of Bolshevik Ambassadors, from 1935 to 1936 

According to anti-Comintern bulletin (15/4/1935) the head of the G.P.U. (formerly the Cheka), its Jewish overlord Jagoda, held the life, death or imprisonment of millions of Russians under his control, and between 1929 to 1934 Jagoda’s organisation drove out between five and six million Russian peasants from their homes. The official population at that time was 158,400,000, the Jews, according to the Jewish Encyclopedia numbered 7,800,000. ‘The Jewish Chronicle’ on January 6th 1933, stated: -"Over one-third of the Jews in Russia have become officials." [The Rulers of Russia, page 32-37] 

A CHORUS OF MORE SATANIC VOICES 

Marcus Eli Ravage, an American Jewish Writer, wrote in ‘Century Magazine’ in January 1928: 

“Of course you do resent us Jews. The thing that intrigues me about this anti-Jewish business, however, is your total lack of grit. You seem to be suffering from self-consciousness horribly. It is not as if you were amateurs, you have been at it for over fifteen centuries. You resent us, but cannot clearly say why. We are, if you are to be believed, a menace to your racial integrity; We shirk our patriotic duty in wartime, because we are pacifists by nature and tradition. 

You accuse us of stirring up revolution in Moscow. Suppose we admit the charge, what of it? Take the three principle revolutions in modern times; The French, American and Russian. What are they but the triumph of the Jewish idea of social, political and economic justice? And the end is still a long way off. We still dominate you... 

You make much noise and fury about undue Jewish influence in your theaters and movie palaces. Granted, your complaint is well founded. But what is that compared with our staggering influence in your churches, your schools, your laws and your government, and in the very thoughts you think. 

You believe ‘The Protocols of The Learned Elders of Zion’ (to be true). But what is that beside the unquestionable and historic conspiracy we have carried out, and which we never denied because you never had the courage to charge us with it? You call us subverters, agitators, revolution mongers. It is the truth, and I cower at your discovery. (But) You have not begun to appreciate the real depth of our guilt. 

We have taken your natural world, your ideals, your destiny and played havoc with them; We are at the bottom not merely of the latest war, but nearly all your wars. We have brought discord and confusion and frustration into your personal and public life. We are still doing it. We did it solely with the irresistable might of our spirit, with ideas and propaganda. 

If we were in your place, we should dislike you more cordially than you do us. But we would make no bones about telling you why. You go about whispering terrifyingly about the hand of the Jew in this and that. It makes us quake. We are conscious of the injury we did when we imposed upon you our alien faith and traditions, and then you specify and talk vaguely of Jewish financiers and Jewish motion picture promoters, and our terror dissolves into laughter. The Gentiles we see with relief, will never know the real blackness of our crimes, can you wonder that we Jews have always taken your anti-semites rather lightly, so long as they did not resort to violence?" [Antizion, pages 166f.] 

In 1942 Maurice Samuel wrote in New York under the headline ‘You Gentiles’: 

“Between Gentiles and Jews there lies an unbridgeable gulf. Ours is one life, yours, another. This primal difference is not reconcilable, it is abysmal... Where ever the Jew is found, he is a problem, a source of unhappiness to himself and those around him. Jews are, everywhere, to a large extent aliens. 

Unquestionably an alien-spirit in your colleges. He will not accept your rules of right or wrong, because he does not understand them. These two ways of life are utterly alien to the other, they are enemies... 

Our Jewishness is not a creed: It is our totality. A Jew is a Jew in everything. We cannot conceive of a duality: Religion and life, the sacred and the secular: Might I say, ‘We and God grew up together’. In the heart of any pious Jew, God is a Jew [or the Jew became God] Jews alone understand the Universality of God... 

There does not seem to be a single country with a history, which has not been anti-Semitic at one time or another... You might say ‘Well let us exist side by side and tolerate each other’. But the two are not merely different; they are opposed in mortal enmity. In your world, a man should be loyal to his country, to his province, to his city. To the Jew, naked loyalty is an incomprehensible thing... We Jews pay little attention to the after-life. We thank God for having made us different to you. 

We are not in your midst by our will, but through your action. We are unwelcome to you because we are what we are. We have more cogent reasons for hating you, than you for us... Repudiation of the the Jewish Religion does not alter the Jew...You must learn to dislike and fear the modern and assimilated Jew, more than you did the old one. He is more dangerous to you. His enmity to your way of life was tacit before. Today it is active. 

We Jews are accused of being destroyers, We are a homeless mass seeking satisfaction. We cannot find it. We are destroyers, even in the instruments of destruction to which we turn in relief. Jews will remain destroyers for ever; Nothing you do will ever meet our demands." [Antizion, pages 168-169] 

Next: The Luciferian Doctrine

Table of Contents Acknowledgements Prelude Preface Introduction Chronology The Rushdie Report Sadistic Acts : Satanic Nurses Chutzpah : The Shameless Impudence Satanic Purses Carved Turkey Guilt - Edged Insecurity Generic Engineering The Revolt Against Islam The Continuing Subersive War of D.M.J The Unacceptable Face of Zionism The Unheeded Warnings The Luciferian Doctrine Unmasking Jehovah Jah-Bul-On Appendix Bibliography

Download Entire Book -  PDF Format (842kb)  Word Format (657kb)