Well, lots of stuff here. I don't really know where to start.
I understand the Anti-Semitic thing quite well. It's one thing to criticize Israeli Policy.
It's another to publish this sort of bullshit.
I understand. I can see from what you've pointed out, what the book is about.I'll look it over a bit this evening. Mostly to see what is says about JFK and his Assassination itself.
Much to my surprise, after studying the Talmud and various historical sources, I have concluded that the stated offenses are promoted under Talmudic law.
He's a Talmudic scholar! Sure he is. Credentials please.
Credentials? .. Don't think he pointed to those did he?
I won't bother to re-quote all the Talmud stuff you quoted and make this to long. There is much debate when it comes to the Talmud and the Christian bible and etc.
This is absurd. The US thinks it's an exception, just as he claims Jews think of themselves as exceptions. The US was following this path long before the advent of Neo-Con driven foreign policy. By using his logical constructs I should then suppose everyone in American Government is Jewish. Why weren't we invited to Gee Dubya's Bar-Mitzvah? That's all part of the conspiracy, isn't it?
What it is exactly, we may never know for sure. Fingers get pointed in every direction. One thing I think it is for sure, is mass misdirection. I remember reading a quote some place that said something like - "when it comes to reading material, people forget the CIA write books under various names." There seems to be one very important thing and that is - Keep them guessing.
You'll find these same Talmudic quotes all over the internet as the examples of "Jewish evil". The least this guy could have done was been a little original and done REAL RESEARCH. Fundamentalist Bible Literalists are not qualified to make blanket assumptions about Talmudic Law. He's reading LITERALLY. The Talmud is a religious text. What's next? A literal reading of Christian exceptionalism in the Crusades? Once again by using his established construct I'll have to suppose he'll tell us that the Jews were behind that as well.
Again, I understand your point and I think it comes down to who you ask. Many people have different views on this subject. I won't bother to point them out in this JFK thread, but maybe another time in another topic / post.
Here's the corker for me.
The Night of Broken Glass remains highly controversial amongst historians. Jewish political forces would have us believe that the Nazis terrorized innocent Jews without cause. Western historians acknowledge that a young Jew did in fact shoot and kill a German diplomat in Paris, but the incident is surprisingly viewed as unrelated. According to Freedman, The Night of Broken Glass was not an official implementation of "pogroms" against Jews, but rather the culmination of tensions between German Gentiles toward Jews after a five-year Jewish boycott—instigated by Samuel Untermyer—which hurt the German economy badly. In addition, German citizens felt betrayed by Jews over their defeat in World War I. When Herschel Grynszpan murdered German diplomat Ernst vom Rath, that was the last straw. Violent insurrections against Jews followed. Vom Rath’s cold blooded murder by a young Jew had set off anti-Jewish furor that was difficult to contain. Emotions came pouring out—so much so that Hitler told Hess to issue a directive telling Nazi officials not to commit "arson attacks on Jewish businesses….under any circumstances or conditions whatever."
I remember reading about the boycott. Seems to me, it was pages / sections from old news papers from that era. It was very hard for a store to sell any German made products. As far as the rest of story goes, I haven't seen much about it.
That's straight out of right wing conspiracy theory. All that's missing there is Herschel's connection to Allan Greenspan and the International Jewish Banking
The boy relies very little on primary sources. All he's written is a polemic. I am highly critical of all that Israel does. I can however tell when I'm reading anti-Semitic driven drivel. There's a difference between Anti-Semitic, Anti-Zionist and Anti-Israel. They're not the same. The below quote comes straight out of the anti-Semitic apologists handbook.
It is difficult to discuss Hitler and the Holocaust openly because so many opinions are based on raw emotion, not intellect. One of the most controversial topics discussed today among intellectuals is the total number of Jews that died in Nazi Germany. The official number is six million. But there appears to be a double-standard among historians as to how they tallied the number of dead in the Holocaust versus the numbers killed in other atrocities. It is amazing to me that historians are unable to agree on the number of German and Japanese civilians murdered by the allied forces in the fire-bombing of Dresden or the atomic bombing
of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Yet virtually all mainstream historians agree with great certainty that six million Jews died in Nazi Germany over a seven year period (1938-45) under the most clandestine circumstances. Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were there one day, gone the next. Determining the number dead in those three cities should be relatively uncomplicated, but for some reason, historians cannot agree. For a complex atrocity,
everyone agrees; for simpler ones, everyone argues. This double-standard should raise red flags regarding the credibility of historians on this most controversial topic. Are historians being pressured to lie about the Holocaust? If so, why?
British historian David Irving has publicly stated his belief that the number of Jews who died in the Holocaust was intentionally inflated for political reasons. According to Irving, if the number of Jewish dead in the Holocaust was only a million, then Hitler was no more of a war criminal than Churchill, Roosevelt, Truman, or Stalin. In order to villainize Hitler for political purposes, the number of Jewish dead had to be exaggerated significantly. That is why the number six million is so important.
Again, it depends on who you talk to / who you ask. As far as what really happened and what the honest 100% truth is, is anyone's guess. I used to be very defensive of the holocaust and a (one-hundred percent believer) in everything I was told about it. Now, I am more reserved and tolerant of what others think and choose to believe. I"ve done a lot of reading on the subject and I was shocked by some of the stuff I learned.
I remember talking with a man about a year ago, who said to me, when I spoke about how bad I felt for those who suffered through and died in the holocaust. He said "I can understand why you feel that way and I feel sorry for those who died too, but do you also feel sorry for the German people who have suffered for the last 60 years or so? Think how they feel after having their faces shoved in the muck for all these years. Do you know or have any idea what happened to them during and after the war? They haven't been treated like those who got everything handed to them on a silver platter since the ww2. I'm not going to say anymore about it, so do your own research."
Asturia quotes Benjamin Freedman quite a bit. There are pages upon pages
upon pages of Freedman quotes on the Internet... He's quite popular in anti-Semitic, John
Birch Society, Neo-Nazi and White Supremacist Sites.
All that's missing in Salvador Astucia's rant are the references to Blood Libel and the Protocols... Oops... He does mention the blood libel... And later he goes on and gets to the Protocols. It's pitiful. He follows the standard model. It's too damn predictable. The boy's apparently a fundie and relies on the Gospel as history.
Yes, but how many people do? The number would be staggering
I'm sure. Today, they are still trying to perfectly (somehow) combine Christianity with Judaism and tell everyone how it all come to be and all from Religious History. Then we will have a war and blow everyone up, just as the "Religious road map says to do."
The Plot to Kill Jesus
As previously stated, Jesus was extremely critical of the Pharisees which obviously upset them a great deal. In addition, he performed miracles which was viewed by the Pharisees as magic—a form of sorcery punishable by death under Jewish law. When the Pharisees learned that Jesus had reportedly raised Lazarus from the dead, the Sanhedrin decided to take action. They plotted to kill him.
This is classic Christian history... Revisionist I might add. This reference has been discounted as an addition to Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews by the Roman Church to "prove" the existence of Jesus. It's a blatant forgery.
Josephus—a non-Christian source—described Jesus in his book, Antiquities of the Jews (AD 93), in a manner remarkably similar to the Gospels. The following is an excerpt about Jesus
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the]
Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
(Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book 18, Chapter 3, p. 3)
My cousin and I have had these type of conversations many times. Meaning ... Semitic / Anti-Semitic, Zionist / Anti-Zionist and Israel / Anti-Israel rants. Or whatever one wants to call them. Cuz has said to people - "Well, who gave the Jews this power?" I've mentioned this before, but I'll say it again so we understand my cousin (Cuz). He is a strong Pent-Christian. He believes God gave them the power and he often says to read Genesis: Chapters 1-50. He has also said "Who gave them the power over money?" I found a link that seems to tell the story. Jacob I LOVED - Esau I HATED -
.. The author of the site tells it as he sees it though. My cousin seems to only differ on one thing and that is how Jesus is / was just a profit and nothing more. Cuz, calls that Nonsense. So, this leads to more rants on Judaism in Israel or more to the point, Judeo-Christianity. It gets wild when one looks at Dispensationalism and examines it Politically.
The guy should have stuck to the JFK assassination, instead of going off on some anti-Israel rant. Perhaps he should have focused more on the Mob, the CIA and Israeli-Mossad connections?
The Kol Nidre / Talmud and Mishnah.
There is an English Translation here, for those who wish
to check it out for themselves. Contents of the
Soncino / Babylonian Talmud
I read about this before and way back when, even Thomas Jefferson tried to make sense of it. (Talmud) He stated how he figured he had made the right choice in choosing Christianity. If one looks at it from the "Christian standpoint," they should remember what Jesus said in John 14:6 - "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." When Jesus died on the cross, He gave his blood and all of the human race, any one person or peoples, can only be sanctified by His blood. (Saved) In other words, everything changed after Christ came and died on the cross. Incase your wondering, No I'm not a Christian, that is just what I have been told. I'm sure that is what cuz would say. Oh and that we don't have any faith.