why do people ignore the zionist protocols?

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Someone posted that it was written much sooner than any of the writings you mention..

Wouldn't the starting point be to find out if that is true and WHEN the Protocols (if real) were written??

first, that was me and i have more if interested.
nice goal to have but don't plan on achieving it ... many have tried and many have died.
the originals (except 2 or 3 copies) are long lost through time, tribulation and rampant destruction.

here's some details in case you're interested ... source
*** beware, many will attack the source and it isn't one of my favs BUT, its historical references can be checked elsewhere (i already have) -- and atm, the Hertzl diaries have my interest

The word "Protocol" signifies a precis gummed on to the front of a document, a draft of a document, minutes of proceedings. In this instance, "Protocol" means minutes of the proceedings of the Meetings of the Learned Elders of Zion. These Protocols give the substance of addresses delivered to the innermost circle of the Rulers of Zion. They reveal the converted plan of action of the Jewish Nation developed through the ages and edited by the Elders themselves up to date. Parts and summaries of the plan have been published from time to time during the centuries as the secrets of the Elders have leaked out. The claim of the Jews that the Protocols are forgeries is in itself an admission of their genuineness, for they NEVER ATTEMPT TO ANSWER THE FACTS corresponding to the THREATS which the Protocols contain, and, indeed, the correspondence between prophecy and fulfillment is too glaring to be set aside or obscured. This the Jews well know and therefore evade.

Captain A.H.M. Ramsay records in his classic, The Nameless War: "According to a letter published in "Plain English" (a weekly review published by the North British Publishing Co. and edited by the late Lord Alfred Douglas) on 3rd September, 1921:-

"The Learned Elders have been in existence for a much longer period than they have perhaps suspected. My friend, Mr. L. D. van Valckert, of Amsterdam, has recently sent me a letter containing two extracts from the Synagogue at Mulheim. The volume in which they are contained was lost at some period during the Napoleonic Wars, and has recently come into Mr. van Valckert's possession. It is written in German, and contains extracts of letters sent and received by the authorities of the Mulheim Synagogue. The first entry he sends me is of a letter received:-

16th June, 1647.

From O.C. (i.e. Oliver Cromwell), by Ebenezer Pratt.

"In return for financial support will advocate admission of Jews to England: This however impossible while Charles living.

Charles cannot be executed without trial, adequate grounds for which do not at present exist. Therefore advise that Charles be assassinated, but will have nothing to do with arrangements for procuring an assassin, though willing to help in his escape."

In reply was dispatched the following:-

12th July, 1647.

To O.C. by E. Pratt.

"Will grant financial aid as soon as Charles removed and Jews admitted. Assassination too dangerous. Charles shall be given opportunity to escape: His recapture will make trial and execution possible. The support will be liberal, but useless to discuss terms until trial commences."

Captain Ramsay quotes Isaac Disraeli, father of Benjamin, Earl of Beaconsfield, Britain's first Jewish Prime Minister, in his two volume "Life of Charles I", published in 1851: "The English Revolution under Charles I was unlike any preceding one . . . From that time and event we contemplate in our history the phases of revolution." There were many more to follow on similar lines, notably in France. In 1897 a further important clue to these mysterious happenings fell into Gentile hands in the shape of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

In that document we read this remarkable sentence: "Remember the French Revolution, the secrets of its preparation are well known to us for it was entirely the work of our hands." (See Protocol No. III, XIV).

In 1865 a certain Jewish Rabbi named Rzeichorn delivered a speech at Prague. It is a very accurate summary of many aspects of the Protocols which would come to light several decades later and was published eleven years later by Sir John Radcliff, who was assassinated shortly afterwards, giving testimony to the powers of the secret organisation of inner elite Jewry even then.

The presumption is strong that the Protocols were issued, or reissued, at the First Zionist Congress held at Basle in 1897 under the presidency of the Father of Modern Zionism, the late Theodore Herzl.

Now, XCathdra keeps harping on the Graves article and while it did go to print in August 1921,
that was only After Henry Fords' statement, made earlier in February 1921, was gaining attention, interest and steam throughout the country.

Graves 'debunking' was prose paid for and published by the same zionists (Time owners) and served merely as damage control, which is a behavior historically repeated by the zionists every time the 'word gets out' so to speak.

regarding the claimed forgery being derived from Dialogue in Hell ... quote from prvs wiki link wiki

Ironically, scholars have noted that Dialogue in Hell was itself a plagiarism, at least in part, of a novel by Eugene Sue, Les Mystères du Peuple (1849–1856)

need more ??

here's a question for ya ... why is Hitler so vehemently portrayed as 'the jew killer' ?? when the reality IS ... he and his atrocities were nothing more than the actions of a punk in comparison to Stalin. Stalin (jew) and the Bolshevik regime committed the worst atrocities / genocide against the jews in all of history. Hitler just doesn't compare, except his actions were much more widely known than Stalin. A lot had changed between 1900 & 1940, but the atrocities of Stalin are schmoozed over like they never happened.

See, the propaganda here is ... Hitler was perceived Anglo-Saxon (although genealogy reports him a jewish descendant / moms side) while Stalin was a known zionist jew.
What better opposition than the two races ?? especially when the goal is division ?
much better effect on the populus as a whole rather than the truth that each period of genocide was orchestrated and committed by and against the jews, simultaneously.

The whole mess is akin to the high-jacked history of slavery in America.

Reply to post by Honor93

 

Hitler was perceived Anglo-Saxon (although genealogy reports him a jewish descendant / moms side)

No, they do not. It is POSSIBLE, but not likely, he was on his father's side. But his mother was not Jewish.

while Stalin was a known zionist jew.

Again, no he was not. In fact, there is no evidence to even support that claim.

reply to post by patternfinder


Why show a quote when the screenshot there shows the blatant plagiarism?

I'd write a second line but stupidity and closed mindedness doesn't need any more than what I give it.

reply to post by Xcathdra

I was asking for you to provide a source that supports the concept they are real. Again, its just a question. If you dont have any sources thats fine to, just say so. As you and others are fond of pointing out that western media / sources arent always reliable, a request for sources to support your side of the argument would give me and others a better idea of why people thinks its real as well as any information that western sources have left out

well ok, i'm guessing you're just ignoring my postings and that's ok but here is some of what you ask ...

unfortunately, these sources are dated before America existed so i'm afraid your desire for Western input stops at the big pond next to England. the source is linked in an pvs posting.

The presumption is strong that the Protocols were issued, or reissued, at the First Zionist Congress held at Basle in 1897 under the presidency of the Father of Modern Zionism, the late Theodore Herzl.

There has been recently published a volume of Herzl's "Diaries," a translation of some passages which appeared in the JEWISH CHRONICLE of July 14, 1922. Herzl gives an account of his first visit to England in 1895, and his conversation with Colonel Goldsmid, a Jew brought up as a Christian, an officer in the English Army, and at heart a Jew Nationalist all the time. Goldsmid suggested to Herzl that the best way of expropriating the English aristocracy, and so destroying their power to protect the people of England against Jew domination, was to put excessive taxes on the land. Herzl thought this an excellent idea, and it is now to be found definitely embodied in Protocol VI!

if you can produce or discover applicable records that old, to either prove or disprove the above presumption, i'm listening.

From the First Zionist Congress ... source

The main items on the agenda were the presentation of Herzl's plans, the establishment of the World Zionist Organization and the declaration of Zionism's goals-the Basel program.

In the version submitted to the Congress on the second day of its deliberations (August 30) by a committee under the chairmanship of Max Nordau, it was stated: "The aim of Zionism is to create for the Jewish people a home in Eretz­Israel secured by law."

and just think, it only took a mere 70 yrs to accomplish ... and do Notice --> the specific choice of the word "create" in the above quote.

excerpt from the Second Zionist Congress ... same source as above

Second Congress - Basle, 1898

In the face of a more active opposition to Zionism from amongst various Jewish leaders, Herzl called on the Congress to “conquer the communities.” In essence, this was a demand that the Zionist movement focus its attention not only on political activity for Palestine but also on work within the Jewish communities. At this Congress, the foundations were laid for the establishment of the Jewish Colonial Trust, a financial body aimed at the development of Palestine. It was also at this Congress that a group of Socialists first appeared demanding representation within the Zionist leadership.

please correct me if i am wrong but i seriously doubt you can ... and, there is sooooo much more.
Now, i will agree that the Russian printed protocols passed around, during turn of the century may be a mere shadow form of the original but, i am also acutely aware that copies of some version appeared in France in 1897.
And amazingly, even though the Graves article appears in 1921, that does nothing to dissuade Hitler in 1940.

oh and Goebbels ???? you trust any word of the "Propaganda Minister - 1933"?? really?

They're very relevant considering Israel is Mystery Babylon the Great

Israel will be reformed when Jesus returns: Jesus has not returned

Youngest of end time great nations: Israel was formed in 1948.

Turned on Their Heritage: The Jews in Israel are antichrist by definition as they did not except Jesus as their messiah.

They do not regard the gods of their fathers: The Jews have embraced Satanism (Babylonian Mystery Religion) ever since their Babylonian captivity.

Where our lord was crucified, where the two prophets preach and are slain: Jerusalem

City built on 7 hills: Jerusalem

en.wikipedia.org...
Jerusalem, Israel (see Seven hills of Jerusalem)
whitesareisrael.wordpress.com...

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

call it what you want but there is certainly supporting evidence ... [even you corrected me and mentioned his father's side oooops ... which is correct btw]

There was increasing suspicion that Stalin himself was Jewish. He had always been considered a Semitic-Mongoloid mixture, perhaps non-Jewish. MANY JEWS, HOWEVER, BELIEVED HIM TO BE ONE OF THEM, and a columnist in the Los Angeles B'nai B'rith Messenger, March 3, 1950, col. 2, p. 5 wrote: "A FORMER SOVIET GENERAL CLAIMS THAT JOSEPH STALIN ES OF JEWISH ANCESTRY."

MANY WHITE RUSSIANS WHO FLED THE BOLSHEVIKI SAY STALIN WAS A JEW. ONE, A CAPTAIN IN THE CZAR ’ S ARMIES, STATED THAT HE KNEW STALIN IN THEIR BOYHOOD AND THAT STALIN ’ S FATHER (DZHUGASHVILI) WAS “ A JEWISH COBBLER. ”

source

In the Georgian language "shvili" means son of, or son, as in Johnson. "Djuga" means Jew. Therefore Djugashvili means Jewison.

So Joe Stalin's real name, before he changed it, was Joe Jewison. It gets better, his name was Joseph David Djugashvili, a typical Jewish name. During his revolutionary days he changed his name to "Kochba", the leader of the Jews during one of the anti-Roman uprisings of the Jews. Russians don't change their names. Georgians don't change their names. Jews change their names.

source
add: ohhhh man, i forgot to mention his (yep, three) 3 jewish wives, mistress, doctor, confidant, staff & more info from the European Heritage Library ... source.
honest, i make mistakes but i don't BS in threads unless i'm in a BS thread

reply to post by curious7

don't follow ... apparently they are both plagiarisms according to wiki citations .. so, which is based on an original and the real question is "which" original.

reply to post by Xcathdra

With the info above, whats your take on the book?

Do you think its valid, or do you think its possible it could be a fake?

I haven't researched the issue so have no opinion as yet.

That's why I suggested rather than argue about later rebukes and discussions, we should confirm when and by whom the earliest mention was..

reply to post by Honor93


You should probably do some more homework before quoting / posting information.

Who is Wille Martin?
A white supremacist and anti-semetic who is pretty much worshipped by StormFront.
900 quotes by Willie Martin - Stormfront (Neo Nazi)

In addition to being antisemetic he is also not a fan of Black people either, maintaining that inter racial marriages pollute the White Race which will result in its downfall. He shares his insight in the article 101 facts about blacks.
I really dont think "facts" that are put out by a White Supremecist and an anti-semitic individual could be considered non biased in this case, which makes any argument based off of Mr. Martin's research suspect.

I had to go to your source and once there, I had to remove the article specific text in order to get to that home page - Israelite watchman
The resource page also contains questionable research, which is to say they are pushing an agenda and have no problems distoring history, facts or just outright lying.

As far as your second quote, it comes from a website called JewWatch.
The founder of Jewwatch is Frank a member of the National Alliance, a white nationalist organization.

What is Jew Watch?
Wiki - Jew Watch

Jew Watch is an antisemitic[1] website that promotes Holocaust denial,[3] and makes many negative claims about Jews, which include allegations of a conspiracy that Jews control the media and banking industries,[4] and accusations of Jewish involvement in terrorist groups. The site contains a large amount of propaganda, according to Sam Varghese of The Age, similar to that used in Nazi Germany.[5] It is widely considered a hate site.[1] Jew Watch has received support from Stormfront, a neo-Nazi site.[6] The site describes itself as a "not-for-profit library for private study, scholarship, or research (that keeps) a close watch on Jewish Communities [sic] and organizations worldwide".[7]

The site received media attention in April 2004 when it emerged as the first result in a Google search for the word "Jew". A petition was started to get the site removed from Google search results. A scandal in 2006 involved solicitations for donations to aid victims of Hurricane Katrina being redirected to Jew Watch.

I particularly like the scam they ran on Katrina victims, diverting money to Storm Front - A Neo Nazi site I mentioned above. Another intresting tidbit of info on that site is where they talk about the Jew / Communist who burned down the Reichstag, which in reality did not occur. Hitler and his political party were behind that and blamed it on the jews, which paved the way for Hitlers take over.

The other name on the site is James Stentzel, who is now owner of Jewwatch.
Care to take a guess about his baclground? He would be another white supremecist and anti semetic individual and has picked up where Willie Martin and Frank Weltner left off.

To drive home a point, the ew watch page actually invokes the term communism and Jew together. I guess its one way for the Neo Nazis to kill 2 birds with one stone.

I can get you more information if you would like. I am just pointing out that the sources you are using to support the Protocols of the Elders of Zion argument are not reputable sources at all and push an anti jew, anti black racial purity agenda.

I do find it ironic though, after reading up on this stuff, how closely radical Islam and Neo Nazi ideology and doctrines go hand in hand.

Like I said, if you would like more info I can pull some more up.

Also both of the sites also deny that the holocaust ever occured.

Do you by chance have any other sources we can take a look at? While searching around I found a few more listings for updated version of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (which is still a big seller in the Middle East). The governments of Egypt, Syria, Iraq (pre saddam) Saudi Arabia and a few others have all endorsed the protocls as being real, even with the proof it was a hoax.

Here is a step by step review of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion - Wiki

If a cabal of jews are going to plot to take over the world, do we rely thing they are going to take meeting minutes and then "lose" them?

Also, thank you for the back and forth debate and keeping it civil. I appriciate it.

Thanks.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Mate, according to some, 99% of the population is anti-semetic..

All you have to do is state a FACT to be called anti-semetic.

The phrase anti-semetic has lost all meaning..

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

With the info above, whats your take on the book?

Do you think its valid, or do you think its possible it could be a fake?

I haven't researched the issue so have no opinion as yet.

That's why I suggested rather than argue about later rebukes and discussions, we should confirm when and by whom the earliest mention was..

Agreed - This is what ive come across so far.

Protocols of the Elders of Zion - wiki

Hermann Goedsche - AKA Sir John Retcliffe

Sir John Retcliffe was the pseudonym of the German writer Herrmann Ottomar Friedrich Goedsche (12 February 1815 – 8 November 1878)

Sir John Retcliffe was the pseudonym of the German writer Herrmann Ottomar Friedrich Goedsche (12 February 1815 – 8 November 1878) primarily remembered for his antisemitism and the extent to which his fiction indirectly contributed to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

** In trying to keep our U2U agreement im trying to shrink the walls of text.
Highlights -

In his 1868 book Biarritz, Goedsche plagiarized a book by the French satirist Maurice Joly, The Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu, and made an addition: the chapter "At the Jewish Cemetery in Prague" described a secret rabbinical cabal, Council of Representatives of The Twelve Tribes of Israel (he clearly was ignorant that in the Jewish tradition, there remain only 2 tribes - 10 had vanished) which meets in the cemetery at midnight for one of their annual meetings.

To portray the meeting, Goedsche borrowed heavily from the scene in the novel Joseph Balsamo by Alexandre Dumas, père in which Alessandro Cagliostro and company plot the affair of the diamond necklace, and likewise borrowed Joly's Dialogues as the outcome of the meeting.

After Goedsche's death, an extract from the chapter containing his fictional "secret cabal" circulated in the Russian Empire. In the 1890s, Goedsche's version was in turn plagiarized by Matvei Golovinski and adapted into what came to be known as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Matvei Golovinski

Matvei Vasilyevich Golovinski (alternatively Mathieu; Russian: Матвей Васильевич Головинский; 1865–1920) was a Russian-French writer, journalist and political activist. Critics studying the Protocols of the Elders of Zion have argued that he was the author of the work. This claim is reinforced by the writings of modern Russian historian Mikhail Lepekhine, who in 1999 studied previously closed French archives stored in Moscow containing information supporting Golovinski's authorship. Back in the mid 1930s, Russian testimony in the Berne Trial had linked the head of Russian security service in Paris, Pyotr Rachkovsky, to the creation of the Protocols.

Pyotr_Rachkovsky

Role in the creation of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion

These faction fights provide the backdrop to the infamous fraud The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Many authors maintain that it was Rachkovsky's agent in Paris, Matvei Golovinski, who in the early 1900s authored the first edition.[2] The text presented the impending Russian Revolution of 1905 as a part of a powerful global Jewish conspiracy and fomented anti-Semitism to deflect public attention from Russia's growing social problems. Another Rachkovsky agent, Yuliana Glinka, is often cited as the person who brought the forgery from France to Russia.

Philip Graves

Philip Perceval Graves (25 February 1876 – 3 June 1953) was an Irish journalist and writer. While working as a foreign correspondent of The Times in Constantinople, he exposed The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as an antisemitic plagiarism, fraud, and hoax.

The picture below is just part of the debunking process Mr. Phillips used.



I will keep digging around but to be honest the more I look into this I am seeing 2 reocurring themes -
* - There is a credible, imo, explanation from point A to point B on how this book came about and how it was debunked as a fraud.
* - I see radical groups (StormFront / National movement / Hamas) continuing to use the book as if it were absolutey 100% true.

If you are able to find other info let me know.

And thank you for keeping things on track and responding to my questions / comments.

Originally posted by patternfinder
I've got an idea, how about if the people who think it's a hoax, post any part of it that proves to you that it's a hoax?

hold on, you are the one claiming that they are real, so it is up to YOU to prove that they are, not others disprove your hoax!

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Mate, according to some, 99% of the population is anti-semetic..

All you have to do is state a FACT to be called anti-semetic.

The phrase anti-semetic has lost all meaning..

My use of anti semetic with regards to Hamas or Storm Front is not my opinion, but their stated facts. While Hamas / Radical groups only concentrate n the Jewish part, Stormfront goes way beyond just Jewish people to include blacks and other "lesser" species as they refer to it.

Feel free to use a different word (although neo nazi groups are pretty open about their anti semetic antics and do not deny that they dont care for jewish people.

I included Hamas since they refer to the protocols in their charter. Knowing what the book is about I dont think its exactly a far leap of logic to assume Hamas is anti semetic

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

 

call it what you want but there is certainly supporting evidence ... [even you corrected me and mentioned his father's side

oooops

... which is correct btw]

Regarding Hitler's father, it is quite possible. The problem is that Jewry is transferred through the mother, not the father. This is supported by their Torah.

There was increasing suspicion that Stalin himself was Jewish. He had always been considered a Semitic-Mongoloid mixture, perhaps non-Jewish. MANY JEWS, HOWEVER, BELIEVED HIM TO BE ONE OF THEM, and a columnist in the Los Angeles B'nai B'rith Messenger, March 3, 1950, col. 2, p. 5 wrote: "A FORMER SOVIET GENERAL CLAIMS THAT JOSEPH STALIN ES OF JEWISH ANCESTRY."

MANY WHITE RUSSIANS WHO FLED THE BOLSHEVIKI SAY STALIN WAS A JEW. ONE, A CAPTAIN IN THE CZAR ’ S ARMIES, STATED THAT HE KNEW STALIN IN THEIR BOYHOOD AND THAT STALIN ’ S FATHER (DZHUGASHVILI) WAS “ A JEWISH COBBLER. ”

source

So all that is there is he said she said. That is not evidence.

In the Georgian language "shvili" means son of, or son, as in Johnson. "Djuga" means Jew. Therefore Djugashvili means Jewison.

Umm . . . no? Djuga means steel. Not Jew. You are trying to Anglicize it, instead of actually translate it.

His surname means son of Juga, and is derived from either the Ossetian йуга Juga (that means 'herd') or the old Georgian ჯუღა djuga - 'steel'.

So Joe Stalin's real name, before he changed it, was Joe Jewison.

Again, no. His name was Ioseb Besarionis dze Jughashvili. Which would translate to Joseph David son of Steel.

His name was It gets better, his name was Joseph David Djugashvili, a typical Jewish name.

It is also a typical Christian name, which is great since him and his family were Georgian Orthodox, and he even went to Georgian Orthodox Seminary.

During his revolutionary days he changed his name to "Kochba", the leader of the Jews during one of the anti-Roman uprisings of the Jews. Russians don't change their names.

It was actually Koba.

--During this period he took the nickname Koba, after the famous Georgian outlaw and the name of a character in the romance "Nunu", by the Georgian author Kazbek. The celebrated brigand Koba was known as a fighter for the the rights of the people, while the fictional Koba was depicted as sacrificing everything in his struggle against the Tsarist authorities on behalf of his people, but unsuccesful, freedom was lost. Link --

Georgians don't change their names. Jews change their names.

People of all sorts change their names.

source

Might as well use Stormfront as a source.

add: ohhhh man, i forgot to mention his (yep, three) 3 jewish wives, mistress, doctor, confidant, staff & more info from the European Heritage Library ... source.

Any proof that they were actually Jews?
honest, i make mistakes but i don't BS in threads unless i'm in a BS thread

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Mate, according to some, 99% of the population is anti-semetic..

Not hard to believe since Nazism, Marxism, Communism, Socialism, Capitalism, Corporatism, Nationalism, and Fascism are all blamed on the Jews.

All you have to do is state a FACT to be called anti-semetic.

Au contraire. Facts are good. Twisting facts is where you get called anti-semitic.

The phrase anti-semetic has lost all meaning..

I agree. It used to mean Jew hater. Now it means "all Semites" or "anti-Zionist."

I will keep digging around but to be honest the more I look into this I am seeing 2 reocurring themes -
* - There is a credible, imo, explanation from point A to point B on how this book came about and how it was debunked as a fraud.

So the whole story is based on one book that was written,
or are there other sources for these Protocols??

I'd better do some research myself..
Nets been down last 2 days..

Originally posted by backinblack

I will keep digging around but to be honest the more I look into this I am seeing 2 reocurring themes -
* - There is a credible, imo, explanation from point A to point B on how this book came about and how it was debunked as a fraud.

So the whole story is based on one book that was written,
or are there other sources for these Protocols??

I'd better do some research myself..
Nets been down last 2 days..

From everything I have seen to date, yes, it started by one book.

Person A writes book
Person B steals the structre of the book for their own
Person C steals the plagerized copy to make their own book - (Protocols)

and so on and so on...

If you find different sources let me know..

reply to post by patternfinder


because the protocols have been proven to be false.

plenty of threads that explain it if you do a search....

reply to post by Xcathdra


I have read it is taken from 2 books, actually

Dialogue in Hell by Maurice Joly

and

Biarritz by Hermann Goedsche

The Protocols of Zion were never proven to be fake or legitimate, the OP asked a question and this thread gets moved to the hoax forum, fascinating.