Is the book 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' a hoax, a forgery or neither?

originally posted by: ken10

It doesn't change the fact that International Jewry has been criticised by many noteable people...even by their own, Ben Freedman

Yes but, what happens when you criticize ...

Austria cancels WWII event involving Holocaust survivor who compared Jews to Nazis

“In consideration for the concerns against some of the participants, the Austrian Parliament has canceled the event ‘In Grandmother’s Words: The Fate of Women in the Second World War,'” Parliament spokeswoman Marianne Lackner said.

"It had showed already that it is difficult to find witnesses for the project whose physical and health condition allows participation in the event. A short-term replacement of the podium is therefore not possible."

The official avoided mentioning the name, Hedy Epstein, who was also to attend. The woman in her 90s stands accused by Israel of tarnishing its reputation. The Anti-Defamation League has strongly criticized her.

Epstein left her native Germany for Britain in 1939 with the aid of a program designed to rescue at-risk children.

When on Friday the invitations were sent off, Epstein’s description on paper was that of a peace and human rights activist, according to Haaretz. She was to be the only Jewish speaker at the canceled ceremony and was to talk of her wartime experiences.

However, Epstein’s accusers still remember a 2004 lecture where she had made the stark comparison between Nazi treatment of Jews to the Jewish treatment of Palestinians. She also took part in several attempts to break Israel’s blockade on the Gaza Strip, held by Hamas. She also advocated alongside the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement seeking to hold Israel accountable for its actions.

Epstein is certainly not the only Jew to side with the Palestinians or to ever criticize her own government: the winner of the Berlin Film Festival, Israeli director Udi Aloni, branded the Netanyahu government “fascist,” urging Germany to stop its support of the Jewish state.

And for all the de-facto antisemites who dare to criticize Israel, please share your toughts :

Religious consequences of Israel jewish state proposal

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

That israel attacks criticisers, doesn't mean the book is correct ... it only means, that the state of Israel is too weak to tolerate criticism.

The book in question, is just like so many other books ... the Bible, the Tanaq, the Quoran, the book of Mormon ... it's a book, that bases itself on "some" facts, that may even be stolen from other cultures, or as in many cases, re-interpreted to fit the situation. All done, to serve a political purpose.

The question is NOT, weather the book is factual ... the question is, what political purpose did it serve and is it being used, for the same or different political purpose today.

That's how I see it.

a reply to: bjarneorn

Sorry, but the Protocols are no book comparable with the Bible, or Koran.

They are a work of fiction designed to stoke up anti-Semitism. You are correct though in that the Protocols are still used today and the purpose of anti-Semitism rolls on. The main "users" of the messages are Islamic countries and even Hamas contains the Protocols in their Constitution.

The Protocols were written to breed hatred and distrust. They worked then, and they continue to pollute today. Made worse by people who seem to think they have a worthy message.

originally posted by: paraphi
a reply to: SargonThrall

In the early part of the 20th century many people believed all sorts of rubbish.

If you lived in Russia and Ukraine during the early 1990's you would believe the Protocols were based on absolute truth. From a Russian perspective Jews stole the wealth from the ex USSR.

a reply to: network dude

Is that conspiracy logic? It's something that amazes me. Aparently there exists a mathmatical formula to determine the validity of a story by the inverse proportion of the ammount of people who call it Bull #.

It's fascinating and I'd love to learn more of this new "math".

Does anyone have a white board and can show their work on this?

That's just one rule of thumb. Another one is that the more a person refutes a particular conspiracy theory, the more likely that person is obviously a shill.

Shill fist bump?

a reply to: Dark Ghost

I read them when I read William Cooper's BEHOLD A PALE HORSE, in which they were included. Now then, one thing I note is the source, because I conclude that Cooper was wrong about many things in his book, not the least of which is that his claim that the precipitating event that lead to his life of conspiracy was the admission inside top-secret halls of his job in the Navy that JFK had been killed by his driver, something I've looked at and flatly refute.

That being said, the Protocols are fascinating. They appeal to me in a certain way because in looking at how things have degraded with modern society, I've often wondered if Monarchism is not the truest form of government on Earth. I know that might shock some people to hear, but I've seen the democratic experiment devolve to a mob-rule, and really anyone who claims one of the mono-theistic belief systems is intrinsically a monarchist in hope if not in practice. Well, one of the key tenets that I found in the Protocols was the desire to destroy the monarchies in place of constitutional republics which then could be seized over time by those who had set up those systems in the first place. Whereever a monarchy survives, those same monarchs disallow control of these supposed nefarious forces inside of their kingdoms.


And so, look at what is occurring today. Whereever there exists a monarch (not saying these monarchs are good or benevolent rulers, just saying they rule with absolute authority), those nations ostensibly controlled by their central banks attempt to overthrow them and institute constitutional governments with corresponding central banking authority.

Real or fake, it's pretty fascinating.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: paraphi
Oh dear. The Protocols were a hoax. The whole thing is crass anti-Semitism.

The Protocols came out of Russia in c. 1900. However, interestingly, they were themselves likely based on a work directed towards Napoleon, which in that version has him ruling the world and not the Jews.

The fact that people believed the Protocols, like Hitler et al, and still believe them, just shows how successful this on-going perpetuation of anti-Semitism is. Sad to see that some people, even on these Boards, think that the Jews run the world, banking and media, when even a cursory observation of the facts show that it's a myth.

Seconded. Very loudly. The 'Protocols' were a hoax created by the Russian secret police and based on an anti-Napoleon III tract. Ten seconds research will tell anyone that. Simple.

If the Protocols were created by the Tsars police then they were very accurate and as relevant then as now.

originally posted by: and14263

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: and14263
It's not a hoax. Why do you think people have bent over backwards to prove it is a hoax? I'm not anti-semetic, just open minded (sometimes).

Is that conspiracy logic? It's something that amazes me. Aparently there exists a mathmatical formula to determine the validity of a story by the inverse proportion of the ammount of people who call it Bull #.

It's fascinating and I'd love to learn more of this new "math".

Does anyone have a white board and can show their work on this?

I'd go into it but people like you call me anti-semetic then I get banned and the thread closed.

There's some great resources out there that you and the OP can use to make your own mind up.

Also, you are free to believe whatever you want. Read whatever history you want and research whatever leaders you want. If my opinion is not fitting for you then that's fine by me.

I do enjoy your replies though so I won't give the old "Move along if you don't like it" reply. Same goes for our friend 'paraphi' in the post below yours. You're both doing a good job, keep it up.

Yea, I did my own research years ago on this and decided for myself that it is a very well written hoax. But you are free to believe whatever you like. I am just continually amazed at the math used to validate wild conspiracies. (the more who oppose it, the more validity it has in the eyes of those who really, really want to believe it.)

And here I thought facts were what we should base conspiracy validity on.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: network dude

Is that conspiracy logic? It's something that amazes me. Aparently there exists a mathmatical formula to determine the validity of a story by the inverse proportion of the ammount of people who call it Bull #.

It's fascinating and I'd love to learn more of this new "math".

Does anyone have a white board and can show their work on this?

That's just one rule of thumb. Another one is that the more a person refutes a particular conspiracy theory, the more likely that person is obviously a shill.

Shill fist bump?

I kind of ASSumed the shill thing right off the bat. So if we are right, then the math would look like this (WAC)x(SWO)=truthieness.

(WAC-wild ass conspiracies) (SWO-shills with opinions) and of course Stephen Colberts coined word "truthieness"

First of all, they were called a ''forgery'' not a ''hoax''. There is a significant difference in that charge. A hoax was never real. While a forgery is just an unauthorized and/or altered copy. I have noticed this thread is rife with the word "hoax", but the historical dismissal is that the Protocals are a forgery. Who has asked "a forgery of what?"

originally posted by: paraphi
a reply to: SargonThrall

No, the Protocols are not "damn accurate". Go on, what's accurate?

O.K.

Long boring facts incoming in following posts.


Mike Grouchy

1773-1783 (1). Use violence and terrorism rather than academic discussions.

1773-1774 France, Jacobins, Reign of Terror

1783-1793 (2). Preach “Liberalism” to usurp political power.

1783 with the Treaty of Paris, in which the British recognized American independence.
The American Revolution (1776-1783) further contributed to the definition of liberalism.

1793-1803 (3). Initiate class warfare.

The Bristol Bridge Riot of 30 September 1793 began as a protest at renewal of an act levying of tolls on Bristol Bridge, which included the proposal to demolish several houses near the bridge in order to create a new access road, and controversy about the date for removal of gates. 11 people were killed and 45 injured, making it one of the worst massacres of the 18th century.

1803-1813 (4). Politicians must be cunning and deceptive – any moral code leaves a politician vulnerable.

Bailyn asserts it simply represented a contradiction with Jefferson, that he was “simultaneously a radical utopian idealist and a hardheaded, adroit, at times cunning politician.

1813-1823 (5). Dismantle “existing forces of order and regulation.” Reconstruct all existing institutions.”

East India Company Act 1813 (Charter Act)
asserted the sovereignty of the British Crown over the Indian territories held by the Company;
required the company to maintain separate and distinct its commercial and territorial accounts

1823-1833 (6). Remain invisible until the very moment when it has gained such strength that no cunning or force can undermine it.

The greatest fossil hunter ever known was a woman from Lyme Regis named Mary Anning.
Her work contributed to the fundamental changes in scientific thinking about prehistoric life and the history of the earth that occurred in the early 19th century.

1833-1843 (7). Use Mob Psychology to control the masses. “Without absolute despotism one cannot rule efficiently.”

Democratic Propaganda: by Auguste Blanqui 1833
marxists.org...

1843-1853 (8). Advocate the use of alcoholic liquors, drugs, moral corruption and all forms of vice, used systematically by “agenteurs” to corrupt the youth.

"The News of the World", first published on 1 October 1843, by John Browne Bell in London. Priced at just three pence (equal to £1.04 today), even before the repeal of the Stamp Act or paper duty, it was the cheapest newspaper of its time and was aimed directly at the newly literate working classes. It quickly established itself as a purveyor of titillation, shock and criminal news. Much of the source material came from coverage of vice prosecutions, including transcripts of police descriptions of alleged brothels, streetwalkers, and "immoral" women.

1853-1863 (9). Seize properties by any means to secure submission and sovereignty.

1853, the state legislature used the power of eminent domain to seize the space necessary for Central Park
Exercise of eminent domain powers by privately owned railroads

1863-1873 (10). Foment wars and control the peace conferences so that neither of the combatants gains territory placing them further in debt and therefore into our power.

Lee surrendered his Army of Northern Virginia on April 9, 1865, at the McLean House in the village of Appomattox Court House. In an untraditional gesture and as a sign of Grant's respect and anticipation of peacefully restoring Confederate states to the Union, Lee was permitted to keep his sword and his horse, "Traveller".

1873-1883 (11). Choose candidates for public office who will be “servile and obedient to our commands, so they may be readily used as pawns in our game.”

4,036,572 votes Rutherford B. Hayes he lost popular vote (electoral 185)
4,284,020 votes Samuel J. Tiden, won popular (electoral 184 lost the election)

1883-1893 (12). Use the Press for propaganda to control all outlets of public information, while remaining in the shadows, clear of blame.

In 1883, Pulitzer, by then a wealthy man, purchased the New York World

1893-1903 (13). Make the masses believe they had been the prey of criminals. Then restore order to appear as the saviors.

Yellow Journalism
Yellow Ink. In 1893 Publisher installed color pressed to print the Sunday supplements, and Goddard used them to expand the comics section.
He not only embellished facts but virtually created the pseudo science articles featured in later tabloids, thus increasing the popularity of the Sunday World.

1903-1913 (14). Create financial panics. Use hunger to control to subjugate the masses.

The Panic of 1903 reached its nadir — the Dow dropped to a paltry 42.15 as the stocks of industrial companies plunged to single-digit lows.
Also known as the “Rich Man’s Panic,” the fiscal crisis dragged on for the rest of the year, taking a severe toll on banks, as well as many steel and iron producers.

1913-1923 (15). Infiltrate Freemasonry to take advantage of the Grand Orient Lodges to cloak the true nature of their work in philanthropy. Spread their atheistic-materialistic ideology amongst the "Goyim" (gentiles).

1913 Federal Reserve Act: A list of advisors to President Wilson (Mason) in favor of the act
Carter Glass (33'rd degree) congresman (later became Secretary of the Treasury)
William Gibbs McAdoo (32'nd degree) Secretary of Treasury

1923-1933 (16). When the hour strikes for our sovereign lord of the entire World to be crowned, their influence will banish everything that might stand in his way.

On November 8, 1923 Adolph Hitler led his Nazi followers in an abortive attempt to seize power in Munich in what became known as the "Beer Hall Putsch".

1933-1943 (17). Use systematic deception, high-sounding phrases and popular slogans. “The opposite of what has been promised can always be done afterwards... That is of no consequence.”

1933 Franklin D. Roosevelt, The New Deal

1943-1953 (18). A Reign of Terror is the most economical way to bring about speedy subjection.

The Holocaust
Pulicizing the same through Nuremberg trials

1953-1963 (19). Masquerade as political, financial and economic advisers to carry out our mandates with Diplomacy and without fear of exposing “the secret power behind national and international affairs.”

After authorizing $385 million over the $400 million already budgeted for military aid to Vietnam, U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower warns against United States intervention in Vietnam.

1963-1973 (20). Ultimate world government is the goal. It will be necessary to establish huge monopolies, so even the largest fortunes of the Goyim will depend on us to such an extent that they will go to the bottom together with the credit of their governments on the day after the great political smash.”

George Harrison of the Beatles Playing Monopoly While on Tour in the USA September 1964
General Electric
AT&T
In the period 1964–66 alone, in connection with the American aggression in Vietnam, the gross profits of the US aerospace monopolies increased 1½ times, amounting to nearly $2 billion.
1964 Esso advertizing campaign "Put a tiger in your tank" Esso later becomes Exxon.
Lyndon B. Johnson succeeded to the presidency following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, completed Kennedy's term and was elected President in his own right, winning by a large margin in the 1964 Presidential election.

1973-1983 (21). Use economic warfare. Rob the "Goyim" of their landed properties and industries with a combination of high taxes and unfair competition.

1974 Economic recession
Nixon opens China 72, then Resigns 74
Despite the failure to control inflation, controls were slowly ended, and on April 30, 1974, their statutory authorization lapsed.

1983-1993 (22). “Make the 'Goyim' destroy each other so there will only be the proletariat left in the world, with a few millionaires devoted to our cause, and sufficient police and soldiers to protect our interest.”

The Forbes 400 or 400 Richest Americans (first published in 1982)
Publishers at the top This year's "Forbes 400," like last year's, give us some fascinating insights into some of the country's wealthiest families--including a good number whose fortunes have come from publishing activities. In fact, publishing continues to rank third as the source of "400" family income, following oil and real estate.

1993-2003 (23). Call it The New Order. Appoint a Dictator.
2003-2013 (24). Fool, bemuse and corrupt the younger members of society by teaching them theories and principles we know to be false.
2013-2023 (25). Twist national and international laws into a contradiction which first masks the law and afterwards hides it altogether. Substitute arbitration for law.”

a reply to: SargonThrall

No, the Protocols are not "damn accurate". Go on, what's accurate?

Accurate enough?


Mike Grouchy

a reply to: mikegrouchy

To call those quotes 'true' with respect to the Protocols is nonsense - how many of them are actually based on anything that is singular to Judaism? Sheesh, some of them could just have easily have been penned by Machiavelli......

Actually, two minutes googling just confirmed that many passages are exactly that. If I could give myself a star I would.

I do not know who is casting the spell.

But someone is casting it.


Mike Grouchy

[Excerpted from your full post, Bold Mine]

originally posted by: bjarneorn
a reply to: Dark Ghost


Let's just start with the Bible, old testament ... there is a story there about Moses. Who with the Staff of God, made the oceans part and his people were able to escape.

Do I have to "argue" that the story above is a load of bs? not, if the audience is at least semi-intelligent.

So, we can basically dismiss the entire story of Moses ... we don't even have to try be scholars, and make an anology between Moses and Rameses. We can just dismiss it ...

A few points - they happen to apply to the example of this post, but even if you are correct that the story is a load of bs, it's still an example of thinking in absolutes based on assumptions.

1) "not, if the audience is at least semi-intelligent" -Being closed-minded to possibilities when your beliefs on a matter are based on assumptions and conjecture is very much an example of a lack of intelligence - or at the very least a demonstration of a very poor application of intelligence. It is entirely possible that the story of the parting of the Red Sea could have happened, FOR REAL, even without any supernatural help. Sure, the part about the staff involves the supernatural, and was most likely an unnecessary embellishment, but the actual event of the "Parting of the Sea" has a potential valid, natural explanation, and thus could have actually happened. See here: Red Sea Parting

2) "we can basically dismiss the entire story of Moses" - Why would we dismiss an entire account (especially one that is thousands of years old) based on a snippet? In the US, our first President was George Washington - unless we assume that the entire story of George Washington as president is false. After all, the story of the cherry tree was a complete and total fabrication. See here: Is this enough to erase George Washington from the history books?

3) "We can just dismiss it" - You can if you wish. I and others who aren't at least "semi-intelligent" tend to be a bit more diligent and careful of making sweeping decisions based on anecdotal assumptions.

originally posted by: mikegrouchy
Accurate enough?

Brilliant. A superb lesson in selectively plucking bits of history to make a fiction look like a fact. Really quite good.