Israeli Public Relations Group Leads Lynch Mob Against Black Professor

Oberlin College’s Joy Karega Pokes 800 Pound Zionist Gorilla

karegaBy James F. Tracy

A professor at an elite liberal arts college in Ohio has been targeted as “anti-semitic” and labelled a “conspiracy theorist” for observing in social media posts that Israel was behind 9/11, the November 2015 Paris terror events, and the rise of the Islamic State. Jewish groups and major media outlets have joined forces to publicly assail Joy Karega, an assistant professor of composition, and her employer Obelin College, for voicing “kooky theories,” FoxNews reports. Yet Oberlin administrators have not capitulated to the mob-like calls for Korega’s de facto lynching. The entire controversy can be traced back to a single source.

JSIL
Prof. Karega’s “hate speech”: “And I stopped letting folks bully me with that ‘you’re being anti-semitic’ nonsense a long time ago. Just a strategy to shut folks up …”

However unorthodox or politically incorrect Professor Karega’s perspectives may appear, there’s abundant evidence to substantiate the veracity of her observations (e.g. here, herehere, here, here, here, here, here, and here). And one need only look to cases such as Israel’s attack on the USS Liberty or the 1992 and 1994 “attacks” in Argentina to recognize the nation state’s long history of supporting false flag terror. Or simply consider for a moment the powerful Israel intelligence agency Mossad’s guiding philosophy: “By way of deception.”

The media frenzy was sparked in late February when The Tower, an organ run by pro-Zionist public relations group The Israeli Project (“TIP”) published an inflammatory article highlighting Karega’s extracurricular commentary.

Screen Shot 2016-03-05 at 10.22.50 AM

 

When Oberlin refused to chastise or terminate Karega TIP’s The Tower published a followup article, essentially setting the agenda for other Israeli publications and the pro-Zionist corporate media to pile on. (Note that The Tower refers to the “controversy” it was responsible for generating around Karega and her university.)

 

Screen Shot 2016-03-03 at 12.00.58 AM

 

Screen Shot 2016-03-03 at 12.03.11 AM

Screen Shot 2016-03-03 at 12.01.48 AM

Screen Shot 2016-03-02 at 11.23.51 PM

Screen Shot 2016-03-02 at 11.24.26 PM

Because of this starkly provoked “controversy” (see my “An Open Letter to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel“) Karega and her academic home are being intimidated by the most powerful and efficient propaganda system in the West.

“This is the worst kind of anti-Semitic rhetoric,” said Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, director of the Shurat HaDin—Israel Law Center, an Israeli-based civil rights organization. “It is not acceptable for the dean to hide behind academic freedom and claim this is freedom of speech. “She (Karega) is not a tenured professor,” she added. “She needs to be thrown off campus immediately.”

Contrary to this contempt for free thought and speech, the First Amendment grants US citizens the right (and for true Americans the duty) to take issue with how their government’s affairs, as well as those its tax dollars support. Salaried intellectuals who have certain protections should be compelled to take on such controversial subject matter, yet very few actually do.

First Amendment experts note how Korega’s views are protected under the rudimentary free speech tenets. “As wacky and weird these comments may be,” George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley observes, “they were made by an academic outside of their classes and express her political and historical viewpoint … It is in fact free speech and there are academic protections for unpopular speech. The college is right. However, there is a growing concern over the test being applied to academics based on the content of such speech.”

Along these lines, Stanley Fish, the Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University Professor of Humanities and Law at Florida International University, explains to Inside Higher Ed that “Karega is free to say whatever she wishes on social media or in her own scholarship, even if it’s untrue and relates directly to her subject area –provided she “doesn’t attempt to present it in class as a fundamental truth (and there’s a sound pedagogical reason for presenting it at all).”

Fish said that the Steven Salaita case at the University of Illinois, for example, should have hinged entirely on Salaita’s teaching record — not uninterrogated fears about what his controversial, anti-Israel tweets might mean about his ability to teach.

“Are you trying to inform your students about the various views or perspectives that are out there or are you trying to enlist your students in some kind of political agenda?” Fish asked. “It’s very simple, and if you keep those other questions out of it, a lot of confusion can be avoided.”

While Oberlin’s administration has stood behind its young faculty member one can safely conclude that the university will experience acute pressure from alumni and donors who have been provoked by the coordinated propaganda campaign. Add to this the activities of paid trolls who are at surely at work showering the young professor and her university with profane and threatening emails and voice messages, as her posts below indicate.

karega-twitter

karega-facebook

Karega and her colleagues will by now have received plenty of such communications. This is but one component of a psychological campaign to terrorize and isolate the professor from her peers. “Journalists” will similarly telephone and visit her office and residence with “interview” requests, further pressuring her into silence and conformity. Editors of academic journals and book series in her field may blacklist her for fear of being linked to a potential contributor with “anti-semitic” and “conspiracist” views.

In the end Karega will likely function as an example for other academics for uttering that which what must remain “unspeakable,” as author Jim Douglas calls it, a fitting term for the painful truths failing to pierce the comfort of willful ignorance.

These strictures characterize and define the modern state of academe and its often gutless approach to today’s most urgent social and political problems. Intellectuals recognize as a right of passage how they must tiptoe around concrete geopolitical and historical realities, lest they draw the ire of today’s thought police and face the potential consequences: financial deprivation and professional ruin. In this way what was once higher education has become yet another racket for high finance.

0

Leave a Reply

261 thoughts on “Israeli Public Relations Group Leads Lynch Mob Against Black Professor”

  1. Memory Hole Blog links are buggered. I get this:

    Oh no! This blog’s domain memorygap.org expired yesterday!

    Unfortunately you cannot access this blog from memorygap.org any more. This domain name expired on Friday, March 4, 2016 and will soon be canceled.

    Help the owners of this website by reminding them to renew this domain or, even better, by renewing it for them as a gift – before it’s too late:

  2. The link take me here:

    [image: Inline image 1]

    *Michael Riesterer*

    On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Memory Hole wrote:

    > MHB Administrator posted: “Israeli Public Relations Group Leads Lynch Mob > Against Black Professor By James F. Tracy A professor at an elite liberal > arts college Ohio has been targeted as “anti-semitic” and labelled a > “conspiracy theorist” for observing in social media posts tha” >

  3. When I press Read more of this post I am taken to this page… http://memoryholeblog.com/2016/03/05/joy-karega-pokes-800-pound-jewish-gorilla/ Oh no! This blog’s domain memorygap.org expired yesterday! Unfortunately you cannot access this blog from memorygap.org any more. This domain name expired on Friday, March 4, 2016 and will soon be canceled. Help the owners of this website by reminding them to renew this domain or, even better, by renewing it for them as a gift – before it’s too late: Renew now for only $18 Don’t worry, you’ll still be able to view the content of this blog at this web address: memoryholeblog.com.   “and the light shines on in the darkness and darkness could not overcome it.”John 1:5 

  4. This is just the tip of the iceberg in exposing the crimes of militant Zionism a.k.a. militant Judaism against U.S. citizens for their perceived anti-Semitic views.

    Here is another example of criminality in the militant Zionist jihad:

    http://www.whale.to/b/adl.pdf

    My research indicates that countless thousands of innocent individuals and countless hundreds of innocent families have been targeted because of their perceived anti-Semitism, or, even suspect distant family relations. These attacks include blacklisting and full-blown gang stalking, sometimes against entire extended families, having such a weak basis in fact, that most are just witch hunts, The author Gloria Naylor explored this in her novel 1996, and, several MSM pieces about her beliefs were borderline slanderous.

    1. Ya gotta love Turley’s wording about “weird and wacky comments”. I’d wager Turley is not from County Cork…..

      1. 99 percent of of mainstream intellectuals accept a standard cannon of truths. These are really “well-intentioned lies” and willful blindness. They are craven, weak and cow-towing to the elites. 9/11 truth, examination of false flags, Holocaust revisionism are beyond the scope of legitimate inquiry. This is no different than a German who questioned the terrorist burning of the Reichstag in the Nazi era. Even the blogosphere is infiltrated and corrupted by controlled opposition. All one can do is keep disseminating the truth. Trust no one, but have faith in the principle that the truth will set you free.

      2. Yea, it’s called “poisoning the well”. Funny how these types impose their world view under the pretense of sharing info. They’re very proficient in the used of Logical Fallacies.

        1. Very often you’ll get a reply to a comment which questions one of the fake terror stories of our time, and the person will in a drive-by sort of way state that you must be a Holocaust denier and someone who thinks the moon landings were faked, as though all of those things naturally go together because at some web sites they do.

          This results of course in deflecting questions about recent events which one might have gone through in real time, were concerned enough to check them out, and discovered they could not have happened as they say they did.

          I cannot go back in time to the Holocaust, but my knowledge that it happened as a widespread murder of a group of people (and other groups too) comes from meeting some of the survivors, including a gypsy man whose language needed a translator and whose arm number tattoos were huge because they had been given to him before he was full-grown. He was not begging me for anything – he was set up sharpening knives in a public square in Budapest, and he laughed when it was interpreted that I said his bicycle-driven sharpener looked like an exercise bike. Then there was my mother-in-law whose panic attacks overcame her sometimes, and who told her story in the Shoah project run by Spielberg. She would not be led to say things which were stereotypical either. But I guess you call her a survivor because they tried to starve her to death and they killed most of her family. They also scarred her psyche for life, and she carried the psychic wounds to her death.

          I cannot walk on the moon and see if they left anything behind.

          But I can look at recent events and tell if someone is blowing smoke. That’s about all the expertise I have, but I know the truth from the false once the evidence has been presented – and the non-evidence, and the back-pedaling stories to account for all the holes, like Swiss cheese, in something like the martial law exercise that was the Marathon bombing. So many script revisions, so much packed into a few days of very bad scenarios.

          But that’s the technique to discrediting someone who expresses doubt. Either write them off as “mad” because they don’t accept the media’s account or call them antisemites, today’s scarlet letter “A”. Lack of evidence for same is no problem when evidence is no problem.

      1. I believe that most accounts of high tech harassment are bogus controlled opposition disinformation. FFCHS is a perfect example of these wild, self-marginalizing claims. Wikipedia also removed MSM and government FOIA data from its group stalking sub-article, and conflated gang stalking with “conspiracy mind control theories and DEW ray guns”.

        I do believe that a minority of these harassment claims of sophisticated, satellite and military grade equipment are true. Naylor is one claim I believe was authentic. It’s good to keep in mind that militant Zionism is on the lookout for “Amalek” among minorities as ferociously as it seeks to eliminate enemies in Machiavellian fashion among the majority population of white Christians. Naylor’s case is interesting because it is a perfect example of an authentic black intellectual, not co-opted by the Jewish establishment orthodoxy in academe, who rose from being the grandchild of poor Southern sharecroppers to an acclaimed novelist and Cornell Professor. This attack on perceived anti-Semitism of the Mittelklasse is characteristic of the ADL, JDL, etc. Jewish extremism is no less forgiving than Nazism.

        Another example of authentic high tech harassment was the late entrepreneur Harlan Girard who was himself politically connected enough to bad mouth Bush and Cheney to the wrong people.

        It is noteworthy that former Missouri state representative Jim Guest communicated with many alleged victims, and examined claims of technological harassment from, inter alia, university professors. Guest’s investigation ended shortly after the FBI paid him a visit to discuss the matter.

        1. PeaceFrog, you’re on a roll with your writing in this thread. I’m enjoying it. So much compelling info to research, too. Thanks.

    2. Thank you for this article-I urge ALL Americans to read this very important work, it clearly shows the terrorist acts of the ADL, infiltrating POLICE agencies across the country!
      This is just the tip of the iceburg-the Zionists are operating their terrorist organizations across our land, while their Zionist schills infiltrarte blogs and discussions to deny, harrass, disinform and generally act as 5th column enemy agents in our society

      1. That looks like a pretty good article,
        I too question a lot of VT’s past but like all alternative news one must cross reference and vet all reports

        1. Is he talmudic? This is interesting,
          its a little out of place for a Jew to make so many Jewish self-serving opinions as Duff often does,
          also, the location of VT is troubling to me, which is as far as I understand is one of the biggest banking centers in the world, which in and of itself raises questions

  5. “I should be able to judge you, but you should not be able to judge me”.
    “I believe in free speech but you should have to pay for your free speech”.
    “You should never talk about anything that is not proven to be the truth”.

    1. …and your reply to this Patrick? Is this former Israeli Minister a “loon,” too? Or would you describe her using a pejorative – “self-hating?

      1. A few things. Of course, the complexities of Israeli politics are far beyond the scope of this forum, but I’ll touch on some of it.

        First, she’s a Left-wing Israeli. The worst enemies of Israel in Israel are Left-wing Israelis. Many of their organizations truly share Hamas’ goal of eliminating Israel’s existence, and always side with Israel’s enemies. I don’t know if this lady goes that far, but she definitely runs with that pack.

        Second, there is definitely truth in what she says, but it can be interpreted differently. Israel is hated, and has a very successful world-wide gang-stalking program targeting it for destruction. People who hate Israel think it should just remain silent and accept being destroyed; those kinds of people think any strategy to fight back is simply terrible. Since no one wants to listen, Israel has had to be very creative about how it can FORCE her world to listen.

        As I have argued here many times in recent weeks, I approve of Israel using tactics that sound on the surface different than they really are. Some people I consider friends can’t seem to capture my meaning when I present my case, as when I describe why I think it’s a great thing when Israel fights back by demanding its enemies be silenced–Israel knowing full well it will never happen, because the world hates not only Israel but Jews in general. I approve of the tactic for two reasons, the most important being that it is really about forcing the world to acknowledge the very serious things Israel needs to fight back against–the evidence that they are being gang-stalked; the second reason is that the silencing is certain to not to happen (it would be a true catastrophe if censorship of speech were to result from Israel’s strategy). I suspect that if they tried to raise the issue any other way, no one would pay attention. It’s a brilliant strategy. So the world, forced to pay attention, and resenting it, calls Jews perennial cry-babies. From Israel’s point of view, that’s a small price to pay.

        So the tactics of fighting back she mentions don’t sound so reprehensible when you sympathize with the victim of a bully. Even if the reaction of the surprised bully after being punched in the nose is to call his victim the REAL bully.

        This leads me to this (it will best be understood in the context of my reply to Tyrranynews (http://memoryholeblog.com/2016/02/19/free-form-friday-xi/comment-page-1/#comment-108330) in Free Forum Friday XI, where I describe the history of the “separateness” of the Jews. For various reasons, the world has had a visceral distaste for them, and often the feeling has been reciprocal. Now that they finally have a place where they are not “outsiders,” where they are in control, where no-one can expel them, or make into dhimmies, they are even MORE hated–because God made them to be separate when He created them as a nation, supernaturally. They HAVE been persecuted throughout the last two millennia, driven out of countries, made to live in ghettos, murdered en masse. You can hardly blame them for being paranoid. This woman makes the use of that paranoia as a tactic to defend themselves look like cynicism. She’s no doubt right about that, but so what? Are they supposed to simply give up the will to live as a race, after all these centuries?

        Is there another small ethnicity that has survived for thousands of years, against the odds the Jews have faced? No. Because God has a purpose for them to play. And God gets His way.

  6. Perhaps I am mistaken, but it strikes me that some of this is to do with the philosophy of university, what it is supposed to be. Why would any individual be hired at a given college? What is the purpose they would be expected to advance?

    Certainly, this case cuts close to the bone for James Tracy. Which I suspect makes it a little difficult for him to be an objective analyst. What inspires that thought is this quote in the piece:

    “Fish said that the Steven Salaita case at the University of Illinois, for example, should have hinged entirely on Salaita’s teaching record — not uninterrogated fears about what his controversial, anti-Israel tweets might mean about his ability to teach.”

    I don’t think so. The question is, do you actually want to hire a guy like that in the first place, and is it too late to back out of a mistake, now that he’s slipped up and shown his hand? I think they got really lucky, and did not have to be saddled with that mistake (just as Notre Dame dodged the bullet with the most dangerous Islamist in the world, Tariq Ramadan–imagine, a Catholic school having a guy like that indoctrinating its students).

    The quote goes on,

    ” “Are you trying to inform your students about the various views or perspectives that are out there or are you trying to enlist your students in some kind of political agenda?” Fish asked. “It’s very simple, and if you keep those other questions out of it, a lot of confusion can be avoided.” ”

    That’s fine, once you’re stuck with the hire. The best option is, not hire a dangerous loon in the first place.

    My point is, this does not relate to James Tracy. He’s not in the category of Ramadan or Salaita, hires that clearly should not be made in the first place, because they are absolutely inappropriate, or Joy Karena, apparently, who seems to have a political agenda completely unrelated to her teaching task. Karena, apparently, teaches “composition” (does that mean she’s an English teacher, giving classes in writing?). She is using her position to launch a public persona as a political grandstander, trumpeting a position, and that agenda, that program she has assembled, is entirely unrelated to her field (if I understand the term “composition” properly in this context).

    That is to say, James Tracy’s field is media criticism, and what he has done outside the classroom in entirely congruent with the expertise he was hired for possessing. He has examined media promotions and pageants, objectively, as an academic. No sensationalism. No self-promotion. No politics.

    It strikes me that this woman is precisely the opposite. It is dubious, in my opinion, to call it “courageous” of Oberlin, which is one of the most “liberal” (which in our Orwellian era means illiberal) and anti-Israel places in America, to defend her promotions, which fit right in with the thought that prevails there. Indeed, I’d be shocked if they treated her the way Tracy’s college treated him–it would cause the academy across America to denounce how they punished her for “telling truth to power,” or some such platitudinous nonsense.

    Tracy, on the other hand, had to be destroyed because he was genuinely pointing out the corruption modern America has had eating away at its core. Pointing out the evils Israel perpetuates is not a threat to the system at all. It fits right in with academic fashion. She is indistinguishable from any of the rest of academics who tolerate/promore “Israel Apartheid Week” and the BDS movement Hamas and the PLO have going on in those places. All of these people agree with her.

    What James has been doing is precisely the opposite: if people start paying attention to his work, the whole system comes into question. It’s an existential fear he generates in the breast of the established order academia has transmogrified into.

    1. Of course, Patrick, we could expect you to be “objective” in the case of Muslim faculty. There is not only anti-Islamic sentiment on U.S. campuses, but the FBI actively seeks to eliminate Muslim faculty on the slightest suspicion.
      You seem to cherry pick in your advocacy for free speech. Hey, if its the pro-Zionist speech you agree with that’s great. However, the First Amendment exists to protect unwanted, hated speech.
      Because it is a private college, Oberlin is in a better legal position to fire the professor than FAU was with Tracy. The standard is lower than is the case for government employees and public institutions:

      http://www.upi.com/Archives/1987/06/25/Court-upholds-right-to-cheer-Reagan-shooting/3868551592000/

      https://www.thefire.org/pdfs/710f0f022e1745ed1e1924fb278aa379.pdf

      1. I don’t know where you get that idea, Peace. People can say anything they want, and I have no desire to stop them. They could read the Koran out loud, and the Hadith, too–you can’t get any more hateful a brand of speech than that. I don’t care. What made you think I did?

        What I DO love is Israel making the world take notice of the coordinated smear campaign of lies against it, to perhaps flush some of the rats out hiding. I wonder how many parents were aware of the nature of the people Oberlin hires to indoctrinate their kids? I wonder if a bit of negative publicity can get some of those sleepy parents to do a little due-diligence for a change, instead of being surprised when after a half-decade of bank account drain their flesh and blood return home as hate-filled enemies of what they tried to raise them to be.

        One can only hope.

        1. Having been through dozens of courses in college and on the graduate level, I believe that it is beyond naive to expect that indoctrination is not part and parcel of that process. As long as the professor has an ego,his or her worldview will be fed to the students. I cannot think of a single professor whose personal views remained unknown after teaching a semester long course.So, we can all believe in the big lie that we are not indoctrinated or propagandized on campus, however subtly, or, we can call a spade a spade, and, admit that certain indoctrination is accepted while sharing other views are attacked.

          Personally, I believe that both the government and corporations would prefer an academic environment in which there is little or no core liberal arts teaching. I believe that what they want is the production of technocratic drones whose powers of keen perception are limited by the strictures of their major area of study. This would transform the university into a longer version of trade school. An example of this at present is an expedited one year or slightly longer MBA.

        2. Isn’t that my point, Peace? These places have to choose who they hire to indoctrinate the pocketbooks’ kids. They need to be vetted.

          If you are Notre Dame, which is consciously a Catholic institution, the very idea of hiring Tariq Ramadan is simply insane. What were they thinking? If you are University of Illinois, you have less skin in the ideological game, and Steven Salaita only becomes an issue when he reveals his true heart in public, embarrassing them just before being finalized. I guarantee that the State of Illinois, whose organ U of I is, does not feel offended by Salaita’s hate–only by bring found out when the world discovered that this was the sort of fellow U of I thinks should be filling young minds with his ideas.

          Oberlin, as I said, is one of the most illiberal institutions in America. They probably knew full well what that woman believed when they hired her; they hold the parents of the kids they indoctrinate in utter contempt.

          What does it take to blast that scam wide open? To get people to Just Say No to colleges like Oberlin, and force them either into bankruptcy, or into fundamental restructuring? If Israel can do it, I’d love to watch the process unfold.

        3. I’ve always wondered how my husband got his job. Granted, he teaches at a community college, but he was also offered a tenure-track position at a 4-year school, too (he chose the CC: he loves teaching over research, and wanted to be a bigger fish in a smaller pond, rather than vice-versa). He’s well-trained with a broad and long teaching history, but he’s unapologetically principled and conservative/libertarian. Plus, he’s a white male. That’s four strikes against him.

          Women tend to like him, and his department is almost all women; that worked in his favor. Also, he was hired in the ’00s…things were different, even just then. Still, I look at immenently qualified teaching candidates like Mary Grabar (and now Dr. Tracy) and wonder what’s to become of us.

          Even at the CC level there’s political wrangling (it’s a microcosm of the larger picture), and it is UGLY.

          I think we’ve devolved.

        4. Right. The issue, to me, is not one of free speech. People can say whatever they want. The question is, why is a person hired as a college professor?

          In my opinion, a large part of it should be to do with good character and sound philosophy. The goal, after all, is the maturation of minds. Crazed loons and people with axes to grind should simply not be considered, and certainly not hired.

          But colleges have become political institutions in our time. Consider this insane example: https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/02/08/christian-college-to-part-ways-with-hijab-wearing-professor/

          Wheaton is an evangelical college. People send their kids there because the college agrees with the family doing the sending about the nature of Christ, the Trinity, and the Bible. Yet this loon thinks that just because she tricked them into hiring her, she can spring the trap and indoctrinate those young evangelicals in the finer points of heresy. And then complain loudly, and rudely, when the college discovers the horrible mistake it had made.

          And the press is on the PRETENDER’S side.

          As I say, these institutions should have a core, a principled agenda of furthering education as the Western tradition understood it for 1,500 years. Which means, scandals like the one this MHB article is about should never happen. That woman should never have been hired in the first place.

        5. Then I hope that you would agree that the same standard could be used to dismiss a yamaka wearing Jew. The EEOC allows a person who is not affiliated with a person in a protected class to assert the others rights by proxy, and themselves be protected. However, the professor probably could assert a claim under Title 7. Even if her performance was not great- a jury could find a nondiscriminatory reason to be an unprotected pretext. Hence, a “confidential agreement”, i.e., a “payoff”.

        6. My point has nothing to do with performance. It is to do with content. If a teacher is teaching things in direct contradiction to the things the institution stands for, they hired the wrong person, and the mistake is corrected by firing that person. That person could be the best teacher in the school (which would only make the need to terminate that much more urgent).

        7. I really think that college professors’ speech should only become an issue when they present it as incontrovertible fact in the classroom. This is close to the line attributed to Dr. Fisher. I.e., if a professor chooses to discuss details of 9/11 having nothing to do with U.S. foreign policy, or, examines mass shootings only as false flags, or, examines the Holocaust using the 6 million dead figure then that professor must allow students full classroom debate and counter speech. This is basically the application of the Brandeis rule to controversial speech, i.e., the full and fair opportunity for counter speech. The Hegelian dialectic of thesis, antithesis and synthesis should apply, and, faulty ideas be exposed and corrected. The politically correct model is designed to further government and interest group monopolies on speech that inevitably justify official lies and witch hunts against those expressing views outside of a narrowly defined acceptable range.

        8. Well, my point pertains even more than ever in your model: the philosophy of university, what it is supposed to be, why would any individual be hired at a given college, and what purpose should they be expected to advance?

          I’d like the classical university model to be restored, where everyone was expected to adhere to the principles of Western Civilization, and teach the texts that made it, and nothing else. Dream on.

          So, given what we have, we need to vet these people really thoroughly. How wildly divergent from classical Western standards should the new hire be allowed to be? What do we want the next generation to know? What do we want them to believe? If these postmodern ideas pertaining to pedagogy are to prevail, a college has to keep out the most pernicious ones. (All that alliteration was unintentional.)

          Tracy, as I say, is the right kind–which makes him the WRONG kind, in the world we live in today.

          Given that, parents need to vet the colleges intensively. Angela Davis has been teaching for most of her adult life. In college. Believe it or not. So has Billy Ayers, who should have spent his adult life in prison–or have been executed for his crimes. No one is fired for those travesties of insane hiring. No one is even embarrassed. “Israel Apartheid Week” is celebrated on campuses across the country, and no one gets fired for it. It’s sickening.

          The vetters (i.e. administration) vet sickeningly, which is why universities are increasingly worthless. They throw away Tracy, when they should be finding more like him. And they retain worthless people who have the “right” political opinions. We live in a looking-glass world.

    2. patrickchatsamiably, you have an extremely biased and propagandized view of reality, which is not reality at all.

      1. “…you have an extremely biased and propagandized view of reality”

        You bet. And guess what? Joy Karena does, too.

        So what?

        The greatest thing about MHB is it is a venue where we can learn exactly HOW we are being propagandized. The truth, as God says, will set us free.

        I am EXTREMELY biased. On the side out the truth (which is the genuine reality). I spend so much time here because I wish to reduce the degree of propagandization I suffer from.

        Tracy taught that process in college. This “composition” teacher he writes about strikes me as a great propagandist for the lies Hamas’ BDS promotion is inflicting upon colleges everywhere. Couldn’t be more opposite.

        And, unless you missed it, that’s my point. The academy defends a loon like her, and can’t find the remotest impulse to defend him. Why? Because they agree with her. Israel is the sexiest hate-object going.

        Truth about false-flags ushering in the New World Order? Uh, take a number…don’t call us, we’ll call you.

        Tracy can point out that this silly person was defended when he wasn’t, but he really should point out why.

        Talk about bias. This bias, incidentally, is not in his favor. He’s doing himself no favor by siding with the “Israel Apartheid Week” types. It won’t get them to come over to his side, and defend him. That was my point, after all.

        James Tracy is standing alone. He can’t get them to come to his side, ever, because he’s revealing the nature of the game. And clearly, this element of the situation, he is not aware of. They will never see the equivalency; she is on the side of the angels, from their point of view, and he threatens to end the system they expect to carry them through retirement and beyond.

        The Israel-hating Left are the same people who are ushering in the New world Order. They THINK they are opposed to “zionism” (not the nationalism-meaning of the term, the return to the land, etc.). Hatred of Israel is part of the game our masters are forcing the world to play. Israel is the standard-issue “bad guy,” straight out of central casting. These people have no clue how they have been played.

        In general, James Tracy stands outside this silly game. It is disappointing when he falls for these easy traps.

        Academic freedom is good. The First Amendment is good. But these things can and are used as propaganda. Tracy, of all people, should detect it when it is being promoted.

        1. Patrick noted:

          “The Israel-hating Left are the same people who are ushering in the New world Order. They THINK they are opposed to “zionism” (not the nationalism-meaning of the term, the return to the land, etc.). Hatred of Israel is part of the game our masters are forcing the world to play. Israel is the standard-issue “bad guy,” straight out of central casting. These people have no clue how they have been played.”

          Not everyone who hates Israel is on the Left. I consider myself to be a conservative Christian, and I DESPISE Israel! I am simply amazed that everyone doesn’t feel this way. Here is just one of countless reasons that I hate Israel, or more properly the ANTI-CHRIST JEWS!

          https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9-11/Israel_did_it

          You say you are biased “on the side of truth”. So, in view of the contents of this article, has this changed your beliefs in any way? If not, why not?

        2. The article is wrong. It provides no proof that “Israel did it,” and it does not explain why they would want to “do it.” It does, however, contain this quote, under the heading Netanyahu Openly Gleeful of 9/11 Terror Attacks:

          “Apparently Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu is so confident in Zionist control and domination that he haphazardly stated publicly that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were “good” for US – Israeli relations, and would generate “immediate sympathy” for the Israeli cause of ethnically cleansing the Palestinians.”

          Any time someone writes something along the lines of “the Israeli cause of ethnically cleansing the Palestinians,” you know they are deceiving you, because it is a vicious lie. No one who talks that way ever offers specific evidence, because there is none. “Ethnic cleansing” is the forced removal of one part of a mingled population so that that ethnicity is no longer present. The happiest Arab population in the world is the million or so Arab citizens of Israel, who enjoy all the rights of every other Israeli citizen. There are no plans to remove them, and no desire to do so.

          This quote reveals an agenda.

          Israel did not “do” 9/11; we don’t know who “did” 9/11. We know many of the players, and the article gives us some of them. I have long been familiar with this material. I have often mentioned here at MHB that Israel is ruled by Shabbateans, and has been from the start. I am no apologist for Shabbateanism; I consider it a monstrous evil. Not long ago, I invited the reader to examine the Vigilant Citizen’s description of the Israel Supreme Court building (http://vigilantcitizen.com/sinistersites/sinister-sites-israel-supreme-court/. If any place is more evil than that, I don’t know of it (except perhaps the District of Columbia.

          The people of Israel have been victimized by the Shabbateans who run the country, just as the people of America have been victimized by the monsters who run America. I do not hate America; I hate Washington, and all its evil. There is a difference between Israel and the Shabbateans who have control over it, just as there is a difference between America and the boundless evil of Washington.

          You say “I consider myself to be a conservative Christian, and I DESPISE Israel! I am simply amazed that everyone doesn’t feel this way.” By your logic, you should be “simply amazed that everyone doesn’t” DESPISE America, you being a conservative Christian and all.

          If you believe the Bible, you know that we are obviously approaching the last of the last days; Israel is God’s time-clock. It was led by evil people the first time Christ came to dwell with us, and the Bible is clear about it being the same way the second time, too.

          Don’t throw the baby out with the bath-water.

        3. Patrick wrote:

          “Any time someone writes something along the lines of “the Israeli cause of ethnically cleansing the Palestinians,” you know they are deceiving you, because it is a vicious lie. No one who talks that way ever offers specific evidence, because there is none. ”

          There is tons of evidence of ethnic cleansing going on in Palestine. Just take 5 minutes to watch these videos.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NANqcKIrbV0
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKs86hmJXzI
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oDxVsIUJXQ

          There were people in those buildings – innocent men, women and children. Your tax dollars are paying for this mayhem and destruction. If you don’t have a problem with this, then not only are you not a Christian, you’re not even human.

        4. Weird.

          Mr. Smith, you apparently can’t comprehend what you read. Or you didn’t read what I wrote. I wrote this:

          ” “Ethnic cleansing” is the forced removal of one part of a mingled population so that that ethnicity is no longer present. The happiest Arab population in the world is the million or so Arab citizens of Israel, who enjoy all the rights of every other Israeli citizen. There are no plans to remove them, and no desire to do so.”

          You show three videos of buildings blown up in a war. And think you have proved this is Israel engaging in “ethnic cleansing”?

          Are you mentally impaired?

        5. Patrick says:
          “There are no plans to remove them, and no desire to do so.”

          https://behindthenewsisrael.wordpress.com/2016/03/08/poll-nearly-50-of-israeli-jews-support-transfer-or-expulsion-of-arabs-from-israel/

          Poll: Nearly 50% of Israeli Jews support transfer or expulsion of Arabs from Israel

          “A new poll has revealed that nearly half of Israeli Jews are in favor of the expulsion or transfer of Arabs from Israel.

          The survey, conducted by leading polling group the American Pew Research Center between the end of 2014 and mid-2015, concluded before the current wave of terror broke out. The Pew Center published its results on Tuesday.”

        6. No, but evidently you are. I wasn’t counting on the videos becoming “embedded” here when I posted to URLs for them. Had you gone to YouTube, as I was thinking would happen, you would realize that all of these videos are of Israelis bombing Palestinians in Gaza.

          Now, are you going to apologize for insinuating that I am “mentally impaired”? I’m not holding my breath on that. Nor am I expecting you to retract your ridiculous statement that Arabs in Israel enjoy all the rights of every other Israeli citizen. You are obviously getting all your information from Israeli, or at least Zionist, sources. These are biased, to say the least, if not flat-out lying, as these videos clearly show.

        7. You say: ” …you would realize that all of these videos are of Israelis bombing Palestinians in Gaza.”

          I DID realize that. Here’s what I said: “You show three videos of buildings blown up in a war. And think you have proved this is Israel engaging in “ethnic cleansing”?”

          It was a war. Buildings get blown up in wars. Hamas was launching rockets from residential neighborhoods, specifically hospitals and schools, goading Israel in the gleeful hope that when Israel retaliated, children would die, so that they could complain to the world press about the cruelty of Israel.

          You seem to believe that Israel does this routinely, not just in that specific few weeks when Israel invaded to put a stop to the terror rockets (and to find and destroy the terror tunnels).

          The war against Hamas terror was not “ethnic cleansing.” The fact that you can’t see the difference is what made me suspect you have a cognitive issue. It’s not hard to see that they are two distinct things. Israel endured many months of rocket attacks from Gaza before finally going to war over it. When the war was over, and the attacks stopped, Israel no longer had to buildings.

          You say: “Nor am I expecting you to retract your ridiculous statement that Arabs in Israel enjoy all the rights of every other Israeli citizen.”

          It is not ridiculous. It is the truth. Of course I’m not going to retract it; that’s like asking me to say that American blacks son’t have the same rights as whites.

          Here is a fine recent article on the subject: https://pjmedia.com/blog/israel-apartheid-state-or-blessing-to-the-arabs/

          Here’s another: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/arabstat.html

          It is true that Arab Israelis suffer social discrimination, but they have all the rights of any other Israeli; they sit on the Supreme Court and in Parliament.

          This is not difficult information to find out.

          You say: “You are obviously getting all your information from Israeli, or at least Zionist, sources. These are biased, to say the least, if not flat-out lying, as these videos clearly show.”

          There can be no question of bias here. Either Arab Israelis have the same rights an any other Israeli, or they don’t. It’s a matter of fact, and it makes no difference who states the facts.

          The videos, as I pointed out, show no such thing. All they show is footage from a very short war, the exact same kind of footage one sees from any war anywhere in the world. But more to the point, Gaza is not Israel. The Arabs who live there are not Israeli citizens. Don’t you know that?

        8. Patrick, are you totally BLIND, or just what is it? The destruction shown in these short video clips was COMPLETELY unwarranted. Did you see any rockets, mortar fire, snipers etc. shooting at Israel from these residential apartment buildings, before Israel completely annihilated them with what had to have been 500+ pound bombs? No, you didn’t, because THERE WAS NO THREAT TO ISRAEL FROM ANY OF THESE BUILDINGS!

          Damn, you say you read the Bible. Aren’t you familiar with the passage: “There are none so blind as those who WILL NOT SEE?”

          Yes, I am aware that Gaza is not part of Israel. What are you saying here? Are you saying that these acts were justified because Gaza was not part of Israel?

          Yes, I’ve heard all the horror stories about Hamas’ rockets. Vastly overblown. Can you show me any videos showing damage that these rockets did to settlements in Israel? I doubt it. I have yet to see ANY damage from these rockets. Certainly nothing on the scale of what Israel is doing to Palestinian homes and apartments. The two scenarios simply cannot be compared.

          You should be aware that Hamas was deliberately created and managed BY ISRAEL. Its purpose initially was disband Yasser Arafat’s PLO, which was a real thorn in the side of the Israelis. Now it serves the function of being the “bogeyman on call”. As this article

          http://henrymakow.com/israelcreatedhamastoavoid.html

          points out:

          “undermining the peace process has always been the real target of Hamas and has played into the political ambitions of Likud. Every time Israeli and Palestinian negotiators appeared ready to take a major step forward achieving peace, an act of Hamas terrorism has scuttled the peace process and pushed the two sides apart.”

          Israel does not want peace with the Palestinians – it wants the Palestinians to permanently LEAVE. So it orders Hamas to launch puny bottle rocket attacks on largely uninhabited parts of Israel, in order to justify all-out retaliation in the form of 2,000-pound bombs hitting residential buildings.

          The motto of the Israel Mossad is: “BY WAY OF DECEPTION, thou shalt do war.” Israel, and for that matter Jews in general, are constantly practicing deception on us, a la 9/11, Sandy Hook, and all the other false-flag attacks you can name. Jews are the ones doing these things. Or perhaps they get Freemasons like Craft International to do their dirty work, like the Boston Bombing or San Bernardino. They are always blaming Muslims for what THEY DO! ISIS or the Islamic state is yet another Israeli creation (why are all the ISIS leaders get treated in Israeli hospitals for their battle injuries?)

          Patrick, you need to shut off the idiot box and quit reading Time magazine. Both these media outlets are totally controlled by the Jew World Order. By watching or reading them, you are getting brainwashed into believing a huge pack of lies, which are only serving to finalize a Satanic world government, which as a Christian you should be totally opposed to.

        9. Toni: the survey you link to does not specify if the question involved stripping Israeli Arabs of their citizenship and expelling them, or if it had to do with pushing out Arabs who are not citizens. If I had to guess, I’d bet they were thinking about the latter. Here’s why: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2016/03/09/whoa-israeli-stabbed-in-the-neck-pulls-knife-out-of-his-neck-and-kills-palestinian-terrorist-with-it-n2130615?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm&newsletterad=

        10. Here’s another one, Toni, that makes me suspect that the people of Israel are reaching the breaking point when it comes to enduring terrorism: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2016/03/10/american-killed-by-palestinian-terrorist-was-a-west-point-grad-served-in-iraq-and-afghanistan-n2130997?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm&newsletterad=

          “Palestinians are celebrating his murder in the streets of Gaza and the West Bank and the terrorist who carried out the attack is being celebrated as a martyr by Palestinian political leadership.”

          “From the River to the Sea.” Just imagine being an Israeli. The fear. You can’t trust the people you see on the street not to randomly kill you.

        11. Patrick,
          Your article says, “Hamas announced that they’re celebrating their martyrs last night.”

          HAMAS. As in the false political organization constructed by Israel to undermine the PLO.

          Quoting Mr. Smith now, quoting Henry Makow, (as you’ve undoubtedly read):

          “You should be aware that Hamas was deliberately created and managed BY ISRAEL. Its purpose initially was disband Yasser Arafat’s PLO, which was a real thorn in the side of the Israelis. Now it serves the function of being the “bogeyman on call”.

          As this article
          http://henrymakow.com/israelcreatedhamastoavoid.html
          points out:

          “undermining the peace process has always been the real target of Hamas and has played into the political ambitions of Likud. Every time Israeli and Palestinian negotiators appeared ready to take a major step forward achieving peace, an act of Hamas terrorism has scuttled the peace process and pushed the two sides apart.”

          I wouldn’t take the truth of the story of West Point Graduate Taylor Force from your source, Patrick. Force might be dead, and if he is, God forbid, it’s for political reasons that are tragically never brought to the surface.

          As we are told boldly and outright by those who do not have our interests at heart, war is done by deception.

          I’m sorry you think it’s a “giant hate-fest” to say so. The same could be said of your opinions.

    1. This is an utterly treasonous act in Washington that should put politicians in PRISON for allowing such a practise by elected officials, could there be any better evidence of the coup that the the Zionist have accomplished than this???

  7. Some one is messin with MHB. There have been telltale signs for several days.

    If there is any way to fortify the security of MHB I suggest this be done right away.

    1. Yes, I noticed that too. This morning the website appeared to have vanished completely. I took a screenshot of the message on the page that popped up whenever I tried to access MHB. The message made no sense at all.

  8. Karega, as Turley says, is entitled to write any drivel she wants on her personal media, even if it’s trite and totally unoriginal. Let’s get real about blacks and the Jews. The so called investigative media refused to comment that Hillary won over Bernie down South because generally blacks don’t like Jews, especially down South. None of these sources even had the gumption to out Hillary, but they attacked Rubio like mad for his louche past. If any media, besides one small article on the DM, featured what Hillary’s personal preferences are, which we know don’t include Bill, then she may not have gotten all those votes in the South either. I wager that going forward no investigative or mainstream media will expose Hillary either.
    Here are forty committed professors at Columbia who aren’t being fired for their anti-Semitic/Israel rants. So clearly James’s being fired has no legal basis – except that the funds for the drills, as James points out, would clearly be seen as fraudulent, which isn’t the case of Karega or the Columbia fervent ranters. No loss of funds with their opinions.

    http://columbiaspectator.com/news/2016/03/01/40-faculty-sign-petition-solidarity-columbia-university-apartheid-divest

    1. I agree with everything you say here, Marzi, except that drill money is only a small part of the problem Tracy represents for the bad guys.

      I argue in my comment yesterday that Tracy’s outside work was perfectly congruent with his classroom work; that is, they hired a media analyst, not a man dragging a soapbox for self promotion and political pontification. And that’s exactly what they got.

      It’s the CONTENT of his focus on media promotions that was the problem. He relentlessly drives closer and closer to the core of what is going on in the world, what the evil is. This is unacceptable.

      Daniel, just above you, concludes his remarks with this paragraph:

      “As another way to put this and to offer Karega some respectful and constructive advice, if she truly believes 9/11 to be a JIZM job, she may be more effective–and personally safer?–denouncing the Ku-Klux-Klan, Amy Goodman, CAIR, CodePink, Hamas, the Iranian theocrats and many others for failing to educate their members, followers, supporters, or subjects on 9/11’s JIZM connection. She may even be more effective by starting at the beginning and faulting them for not affirming 9/11’s essence as a transparently covered self-evident false flag.”

      Now, there is no question that there is a large “JIZM” element in the 9/11 event, and his advice to Karega could apply equally to any of the Columbia zealots: focus on the silence of the gatekeepers.

      In the fantastic first season of the television show True Detective there is a thread of clues referencing The Yellow King. The AVCLUB.com is a web site that does in depth analysis of complex, well-written shows like that, and sometimes you need a resource like that. One of the articles linked to a “must read” piece that tells us what the Yellow King is a reference to. It is from a 19th century book of essays which all have to do with a play. Only the first act of that play is reproduced, because, the story goes, reading any more of it will drive a human being insane. It is about an evil so monstrous as to be unthinkable. No one is capable of facing it.

      That book about the Yellow King influenced many writers of VERY disturbing literature, HP Lovecraft being one. I only read one book of Lovecraft stories, in my teens, and it troubles me to this day.

      We don’t know who the masked faces belonged to in Eyes Wide Shut. We don’t know who rules the world just below Satan and just above the Masons. But THAT’S who was behind 9/11. It’s who Paul is talking about in Ephesians chapter 6.

      The powers we can see are bad enough; the things that go on in the dark councils that energize those powers are so evil to know about those things will drive a mortal man insane. And they DO NOT want to be known by people like James Tracy or the people who follow his work–and they CERTAINLY don’t want an accredited university to lend such endeavors a patina of respectability.

      As I have said many times, James Tracy fulfilled his calling too well. He’s a true scientist, not a ham-handed repeater of half-conspiracies, like this Karega woman. They can allow her to function without fearing exposure, because it’s all surface with people like that. Tracy’s work is a genuine threat. They didn’t know that they really WERE hiring the right guy for the job. As I said yesterday, this is to do with the philosophy of university; the people colleges hire can make trouble for those institutions in different ways. Drawing Israel’s attention by the ham-handed pontificating of a lowly English teacher is easily dealt with. They could even endure the heartburn that comes with a Salaita or Ramadan. But a tenured professor who is looking for the Yellow King? Well, that’s a bridge too far.

    2. That is utterly ridiculous. Jews founded the NAACP and funded (and illicitly orchestrated) most of the ‘Civil Rights’ movement for blacks. The facts simply don’t support your assertions.

      Bernie Sanders isn’t the most well-behaved jew, which, alongside Hillary’s complete succoring of the most extremist factions of the Snivel Rights Establishment, accounts for his losses to her. Sanders actually has some authenticity in his socialism; Hillary is pure mercenary for the elites and their partners in parasitism. Sanders isn’t totally controllable (I don’t support him regardless).

      Get real.

      James Tracy struck at the heart of the nexus of power by exposing the collusion between government and media, both of which have become oligopolies which serve jewish interests above all else at the direct expense of europeans’.

      1. “That is utterly ridiculous. Jews founded the NAACP and funded (and illicitly orchestrated) most of the ‘Civil Rights’ movement for blacks.”

        Yep, When they decided in 1965 to do a 180 and co-opt the Blacks.
        But the “they” is ALL of them.

        These so called called “Jews” have a lot of help from Traitors of all Races and and religions…They are All Guilty

      2. If by blacks one means “people who think Al Sharpton represents them as a group,” not one in a hundred thousand gives a gig if some dilettantes from the race they viscerally hate tried to help them a lifetime ago. If you were to stand in front of Freddy’s Fashion Mart, as the enraged mob was about to burn down the place, and tried to remind them of that history to calm them down, they would probably murder you, too.

        After Barry Soetoro moved into the White House, Jeremiah Wright commented that can’t talk to him anymore because “them Joooz” won’t allow it. Wright speaks for most blacks when he spits out the words “them Joooz” as if he found a cockroach in his barbecue sandwich.

    3. “Let’s get real about blacks and the Jews…” Your gross generalities about “blacks” – at least – are trite, myopic, and ignorant. “Blacks” in the South who have a bias against Jewish people are merely continuing to, in a feeble attempt to curry favor, mime a centuries-old animus of Jewish people espoused by those who enslaved them. The animus continues as does the hope for Black people that adopting the behaviors and beliefs of “Whites” will garner them a modicum of privilege, thus separating them from their peers.

  9. Karega seems to be taking personal risks indeed, alas for a limited purpose.The idea that 9/11 was a Jewish/Israeli/Zionist/Mossad–or any “JIZM” combination thereof–job is assuredly closer to reality than the myth based on Osama bin Laden’s airplanes, but is based on a narrow and woefully insufficient comprehension of the 9/11 conspiracy.

    It bears repeating that the most alarming and most promising 9/11 subconspiracy is neither the false flag–even though the televised controlled demolition of the Twin Towers was an outrageously large criminal undertaking–nor its amateurish cover-up behind Osama bin Laden’s aerial ballet–even though this was necessarily a complex project involving many different government agencies–but the censorship thereof. The 9/11 censorship is the permanent and worldwide process by which institutions, potentates and opinion-makers of all kinds refuse to adapt their messages to 9/11’s essence as a false flag. The 9/11 project was literally unthinkable without guarantees that the 9/11 censorship would have worked as impeccably as it has.

    Accordingly and paradoxically, the most formidable and most dangerous 9/11 agents are not the very competent demolitionists and public servants (JIZM or other) who prepared, executed, and covered up 9/11, but the countless bully pulpits who ostensibly oppose the unbridled U.S. warmongering and other policies inspired by 9/11. These include governments, mass media, schools and religious organizations with few sympathies toward JIZM.

    As another way to put this and to offer Karega some respectful and constructive advice, if she truly believes 9/11 to be a JIZM job, she may be more effective–and personally safer?–denouncing the Ku-Klux-Klan, Amy Goodman, CAIR, CodePink, Hamas, the Iranian theocrats and many others for failing to educate their members, followers, supporters, or subjects on 9/11’s JIZM connection. She may even be more effective by starting at the beginning and faulting them for not affirming 9/11’s essence as a transparently covered self-evident false flag.

    Love,

    1. Your point that the real story is about how those who criticize that which was done in the name of 9/11 can never cut to the chase and dismiss the entire event as fabricated, due partially to a climate of political correctness, is very pertinent to the discussion of the false flags which seem to have multiplied. It’s like a bag of popcorn, slow at first, then accelerating. The fact that the popcorn as it were is salted with designated story tellers, vetted ahead of time, is something one can hardly miss.

      The effect of the discussions about whether or not some war, some torture practice, some new form of warcraft like drones, is consonant with our values and heritage can consume large amounts of energy while ignoring basic causes. The justifications of TSA searches, of martial law shut-downs, etc. arise out of a belief in the genuineness of these incidents, and rouse the public to a fury against “the terrorists.”

      “They went that a way” is a common diversionary tactic, but the older one of blaming one group for a concerted attack is also common. It never gets at the underlying truth. But that is thought its advantage. Truth is a dirty word and truthers are madmen in the post 9/11 world constructed by the masters of deceit who have been at work.

      Many reasons have been found to explain why it happened when it did. Some, like Mike Ruppert, believed the motive was peak oil and the end of the petroleum based economy more than a century old, that made our lives so convenient and allowed our population to expand. Others feel it is about Israel trying to control the Middle East. Others see it as pure power out for what it can get.

      Before one can assign all the causes, although this may comfort those who need to find a reason, the real problem is that things move forward on false premises. We are living a lie. It is a modern lie, and there are those alive today who made it and are enjoying the game. But throughout history, men have been ruled by lies, almost universally. The difference is, this one is ours to pass on or to refute. This is our time in history.

  10. I read about Joy Karega a few days ago in an article on insidehighered.com (which also mentions Tracy http://tinyurl.com/znbh8hf), but I didn’t realize right away that it was quoting the actual Stanley Fish. Probably because I didn’t realize Florida International University was an actual school. Doesn’t it sound like a cruise ship, or an “eCampus,” or something?

    I’m familiar with Stanley Fish because he’s a major John Milton scholar and because he was one of the first to demonstrate that the reader’s response to a text is a valid critique. Both are subjects close to my heart.

    So after I read the article, I did some research on him and was unprepared to discover that free speech is an area Fish is trying to colonize, in order to assert political control. In fact, political control is how Fish defines free speech. Listen to this:

    “ ‘Free speech’ is just a name we give to verbal behavior that serves the substantive agendas we wish to advance; and we give our preferred verbal behaviors that name when we can, when we have the power to do so, because in the rhetoric of American life, the label, ‘free speech’ is the one you want your favorites to wear. Free speech, in short, is not an independent value but a political prize, and if that prize has been captured by a politics opposed to yours, it can no longer be invoked in ways that further your purposes, for it is now an obstacle to those purposes.”

    I found this quote in an essay Fish wrote with the following frontispiece:

    http://imgur.com/jdbUH92

    In the quote from Fish in the above article, the relevant phrase is: “…if you keep those other questions out of it, a lot of confusion can be avoided.” Even though the rest of the paragraph sounds like he’s endorsing the freedom of teachers to teach, Fish’s buried assumption is that their speech will be regulated and politically predetermined.

    So it seems to me that Patrick is wrong to think he disagrees with Fish. To the contrary, the two are in perfect alignment. Even their examples of the kind of speech needing to be regulated are the same, consisting mostly of criticism of Israel.

    I think Fish can be a disingenuous writer. Here’s another example, this one from the essay I referenced. Fish uses Milton’s Areopagitica to back up his assertion that free speech exists only in a space “carved out” by suppressed speech. In the Areopagitica, Milton denounces the censorship by the Catholic Church under which he suffered. He calls for their censorious policies to be “extirpated” in the same way they have sought to extirpate the free exchange of ideas. Milton writes:

    “I mean not tolerated popery, and open superstition, which as it extirpates all religious and civil supremacies, so itself should be extirpated.”

    Here’s how Fish describes the thinking of his supposed hero:

    “…after having celebrated the virtues of toleration and unregulated publication in passages that find their way into every discussion of free speech and the First Amendment, John Milton catches himself up short and says, of course I didn’t mean Catholics, them we exterminate.”

    By substituting the word “exterminate,” with its 20th Century allusions, for the word extirpate, Fish dishonestly conflates the suppression of censorship with the killing of people. He then goes on, in apparent approval of this sentiment, to use this mischaracterization of Milton as justification to underwrite his own call for the regulation of speech.

    I don’t think this is a “silly game,” and I don’t think Tracy is outside of it. I think he’s standing right in the middle of it where he belongs. I was extremely heartened to read his spirited defense of Kerega this morning. He is forceful and quite correct in all his assertions. It must be gratifying to her, too, to have such support from a fellow academic.

    I hope Karega can be interviewed on Tracy’s radio show.
    .
    .
    Here’s a source link to Fish’s illiberal essay:
    http://www.english.upenn.edu/~cavitch/pdf-library/Fish_FreeSpeech.pdf

    1. Professor Fish is a career sophist, but his position on this matter, that professors can express their controversial views, as long as they do not present them to students as being fact, is most reasonable.

      1. The trouble I see with Stanley Fish being the go-to guy for a quote in a free speech story is that he doesn’t believe in the First Amendment.

        He gets the final quote in the Inside Higher Ed article as though he’s the authority, the voice of reason who liberally allows academics their say as long as they keep it out of the classroom. One could attack the merits of that assertion, but the point is, his emphasis is on policing their speech, which he wants to broaden in authority.

        He won’t stop at classrooms. He openly advocates for laws like the Canadian system in which a person can be imprisoned for speech. He supports campus speech codes.

        He literally argues that free speech is defined by the speech you don’t allow. Please read the pdf; maybe I didn’t explain it well.

        I think it’s pernicious that Fish has taken over “center” stage for free speech stories, so that his position will be mistaken for normative. That’s why I described it as colonizing the issue. He wants to be the authority, but he’s an infiltrator with the intent of subverting the First Amendment.

        1. I’ll have to take a closer look at the pdf. His bio on wiki makes him out to be a sophist who is for p.c. conduct codes, and very much anti-free speech (defining free speech as its opposite in classic doublespeak). However, if he is being accurately quoted here, then he is supporting Tracy and the Oberlin professor and others-as far as that goes, if his only caveat is that they do not use their classes to proselytize, then he is right on that point. He is a bad representative of the First Amendment, agreed, but, one has to look at the issues somewhat surgically. Goebbels was not a good man, but his prediction about an iron curtain descending upon half of Europe was spot on. What I find most offensive about the article is the assumption that everything stated by Tracy, the Oberlin professor and one other named dissident professor, is false. A journalist printing that controversial issues, condemned in the press are ipso facto false is a state of affairs in which journalism becomes a rubber stamp of political orthodoxy. This is journalism defined as anti-journalism. The press, as a fifth estate, is supposed to function as an overseer of and cynical questioner of government. The press now is a largely a mouthpiece of political establishment, and a harsh critic of those who question government- a core job function that it has abandoned.

        2. I totally agree with your assessment of the characterizations of Tracy and Kerega in the article and the indictment of journalism it represents. That is a big story.

          But I still think Fish is using reasonable sounding language as a political strategy. If we accept that professors can be censored in their classrooms, we’re helping to carve out that space Fish describes where one person’s “free speech” trumps that of another. Once that cultural precedent is established, all that’s left is renegotiating that space to ever expanding boundaries. That’s the political strategy, I think.

          On a personal note, when I was in college, some of my professors would say anything to get a response. I mean anything. Outside of their expertise? They went outside of their ken. As students we responded as provoked, with a lot of hooting and mock outrage as I recall.

          It was meant to set up an adversarial relationship that was fun and non-threatening, where you could challenge your teachers and be challenged and learn to defend your position. You certainly didn’t accept everything they had to say, because it was understood that even they didn’t believe everything they said.

          I don’t remember any concern at all about indoctrination.

      2. Why can’t controversial views be the truth? Has the Holohoax been presented as the truth and is thus OK to feed to gullible, controlled students?

      3. Professors should be able to present their controversial views to their students as fact, if they are, in fact, fact. Enuf already.

        1. Unless the two comments by Toni and Vivian are purposely moved in a direction other than the article’s content, the fact is, Joy Karega’s comments appeared only within the realm of social media and were not made in a classroom setting.

    2. “So it seems to me that Patrick is wrong to think he disagrees with Fish. To the contrary, the two are in perfect alignment. Even their examples of the kind of speech needing to be regulated are the same, consisting mostly of criticism of Israel.”

      Again, I don’t think any kind of speech should be regulated, and I don’t make an exception for Israel. I have stated this many times.

      What I DO think is that Israel is undergoing the largest gang-stalking operation the world has ever seen, and I can’t blame them for fighting back. I enthusiastically support victims of bullies when they punch the bully in the face.

      That does not mean that I advocate prior restraint of bullying.

      All (just about) college campuses are intensely accommodating to anti-Israel speech. The internet is saturated with calumnies against Israel and ridiculous defenses of the Arabs who seek to eliminate Israel. I do not advocate forcing colleges to impose silence on Israel’s detractors, or to “regulate” the internet in such a way that hate-speech regarding Israel is banned, or that pro-Hamas propaganda be banned either.

      What I whole-heartedly endorse is when Israel takes up the propaganda challenge, and fight back using that same tool. Point out in the most public way the lies, and counteract the poisoning of the minds of the broader populace, fight back on the internet by countering lies with truth.

      If part of that propaganda campaign to make everyone take notice of the concerted, coordinated, attempt to destroy Israel’s legitimacy includes the tactic of a demand that liars be silenced, I approve of that tactic only because it is a certainty that that silencing will never happen–and if by some catastrophic chance it DID happen I would be horrified, and seek to reverse that terrible effect.

      The propaganda demanding the coordinated campaign of calumny be ended is, in my opinion, a fine thing only to make the world aware of the campaign, and chasten the world for its support of it. The gang-stalking should not be considered justified; the stalkers should be shamed, and humiliated, not silenced. The only way to do that is, as I keep saying, counter fire with fire. Propaganda. Make the world aware of the bullying in any way possible.

      The thing is, this Karena woman fits right in at almost any university. Everyone thinks like her. No one even knows there’s another side to the story. Israel is evil and the Arabs are saintly. Duh. How to point out the fact that it’s simply not true? That’s a tough task. It’s about time, as I say, Israel is fighting back. Raising awareness of what is being done to it.

      I hope I can expect this to be the last time I need to make this clarification. It’s becoming tedious.

      1. It would appear that confining comments to Israel and not the Diaspora is very much limiting. Israel is not behind the Karega lambaste, the American jews are, for the most.

        1. It’s all of a piece. The good news in your comment is that more than one agency is combatting this gang-stalking episode. Hopefully, the publicity will do the trick, and the stalkers will be shamed, and back off.

          I’m not optimistic about that. Zechariah tells us that Jerusalem will become a “cup of trembling” for the whole world in the days before Jesus returns. Considering that it was an empty backwater no-one in the world cared about just a little over a century ago, we are in for quite a ride.

          The haters all need to ask themselves why Tibet is never going to become a “cup of trembling” for the whole world, but what happens to Jerusalem, which is not even a sea port is of intense interest even to ignorant college students who couldn’t pass the simplest quiz on its history, and know nothing but lies about its current reality in law and day-to-day life.

          The Bible foretold all of this. The people were regathered to the land, an empty land, from North, South, East and West–and opponents were regathered there too. The opponents have been indoctrinated to believe that their grandparents were not economic migrants, indeed that they are a “people.”

          The show is beginning. Make sure you have a seat, and your popcorn. It won’t be long before the worst wars in history will be fought in that land that only yesterday no one cared about. I’d advise you to read the book, though, before watching the televised movie; it’s all described in advance.

      2. Patrick, you have everything precisely backwards. You are blinded to truth because you have not shed yourself of your beLIEfs. Israel is clearly the aggressor against Palestine, ever since the very day they were unlawfully “given” Jerusalem in 1948 by the Brits, who had no right to do so. The Jews are ruthlessly killing women, children and other innocents, while still claiming to be the victim.

        WHO ARE THE JEWS ?
        We invented Communism.
        We are behind radical feminism.
        We are behind homosexualism and “gay marriage”.
        We are behind multiculturalism.
        We are behind anti-Christianity.
        We are behind a one world government.
        We are the “divider and conqueror”.
        We are the race baiter and the slave trader.
        We are censorship of free speech & the Truth.
        We are anti-gun.
        We are open borders.
        We are eminent domain.
        We are against English as the official language of the government.
        We are a dual citizen with no loyalty to your nation.
        We are the reason your daughter has low self esteem and desperately dresses like a whore.
        We are the Federal Reserve, Wall Street, central banking and big corporate money.
        We are usury, fractional reserve lending, world currency and fiat money.
        We are AIPAC, NareBLA, ACLU, ADL, NAACP, SPLC.
        We are the MSM, Hollywood, tabloid journalism and pornography.
        We are the corrupt judicial system that frees the guilty and imprisons the innocent.
        We are the nation’s high end drug dealer.
        We are the re-writer of history to our advantage.
        We are the military industrial complex.
        We are an unregulated nuclear state.
        We are an international terrorist.
        We are the WTC ’93, OKC ’95, 911, the Lavon Affair and the USS Liberty incident.
        We are “war by way of deception”.
        We are the aggressor, yet always the victim.
        We are the eternal radical.
        We believe that chaos equals cash and that gray equals green.
        We will defraud your country without conscience or consequence.
        We legislate from the bench, not from the Constitution.
        We contrive to make the simplest notion complicated.
        We succeed when you fail.
        We have murdered more innocents than any others.
        We are your last, your current and your next war.
        Who are WE?
        “It’s the JEWS, stupid” !!!

        1. You have obviously not read the Bible, much less studied it, THX. If you had, you’d know something of the people you cultivate such irrational hatred for. And you clearly know nothing of the history of Modern Israel.

          The first Zionists came to that portion of the Ottoman Empire in 1879. There were very few people there. It was a barren waste. The water resources of the North were unmanaged, resulting in vast regions of swamp land, and vast regions of desert. No one could make a functioning country out of the place, for centuries. Every time the Turks transported a new bunch of aliens to the region to try, they quickly drifted away because they could not make a go of it. But the Zionists tamed the streams of water, and irrigated the desert, creating a lush, beautiful country that attracted Arabs from the surrounding region. Yasser “that’s my baby” Arafat’s family, for example, came from Egypt. These alien Arabs came there for economic opportunities the Zionists were creating, for the first time in millennia.

          So when you say “Israel is clearly the aggressor against Palestine…” you sound like an ignoramus. Zionism CREATED “Palestine,” and Israel inherited it.

          And when you say “…ever since the very day they were unlawfully “given” Jerusalem in 1948 by the Brits, who had no right to do so”, you compound the demonstration that you know nothing of which you speak. First, they were not “given” it; they TOOK it from Britain, by declaring independence–just like we did here in America. They had to do this, because the British were breaking the law by refusing to give it to the Jews. The League of Nations Mandate Britain was legally tasked to implement was to create a country for the Jewish people in “Palestine,” which was defined as all of what today is Israel, Gaza, the so-called “West Bank,” as well as what today is called Jordan. Not only did Britain have the “right” to hand all those areas over to the Jews, they were required to do so BY LAW.

          Finally, there’s THIS bit of wonderful fantasy: “The Jews are ruthlessly killing women, children and other innocents, while still claiming to be the victim.” The only reason you believe these lies is the success of the coordinated gang-stalking Hamas and the terrorists who created it, the Moslem Brotherhood, have successfully been conducting for the past few decades. The world hates Israel for completely irrational reasons.

          “Ruthlessly killing.” It’s the same old Blood Libel, in a new form, the Jews have been accused of for a dozen centuries. Why is it so easily believed? If you knew your Bible, the answer would be obvious.

        2. Ah, Patrick. You continue to show you true colours my old friend. Which “Law” do you refer to ? in regards to the Britain handing over Jordan and Palestine to the Zionist.

          The League of Nations, you say created mandates ? Where those of Anglophilia and imperialist guile ?
          Your history is very tainted, and reeks of zionist victimhood, and definitely not the teaching of Jesus.

          Since you love to throw in bible quotes, here is one for you, “There is a way that seems right to a man, but the end is the way of death” Proverbs 14: 12

          I love to see people like you, get all excited about the coming war regarding “Jerusalem” but you are twisted and deceived in thinking how it going to play out. Revelations 3: 9 best describe your predicament.

          Oh, before I go and enjoy today beautiful weather, I assumed you think “Benjamin Freedman” was a bitter ,jewish nutjob. Enjoy your American evangelical delusion.

        3. Well, Ted, ole’ buddy, I’d have to say International Law is what I’m referring to. The decision of the League of Nations to have Britain create a homeland for the Jews in that portion of the Ottoman Empire in the aftermath of its demise.

          Now, you might say that there is no such thing as International Law, which would be fine with me, and in any event the United States never joined the League of Nations–but most of the rest of the world DID, and Britain considered itself under its command. And certainly, something had to be done about all the vast lands the Turks were no longer going to rule after the First World War. The job had to go to someone; in that portion of the Turks’ former realm, it fell to Britain. If that way is “right to a man, but is the way of death,” fine with me. Lots of laws should not be enacted, and not enforced, and plenty of lawmakers are unworthy of the role. Was this one of them? That’s not my business. When empires die, new arrangements have to be made, and will be.

          Incidentally, I am not “excited” about Armageddon. All I know is what the Bible tells me is going to happen—whether I like it or not. I am evangelical not because I am deluded, but because I believe the Bible.

          Here’s some proof that what I’m saying is true, that I know what I’m talking about. Since it is true, and I’m right, these two samples are just the tip of the iceberg. I enjoin you to investigate further, if you never knew about the Mandate:

          This article from TIME magazine (http://time.com/3445003/mandatory-palestine/) talks about the tension between Arabs and Jews in 1929, after the British had dithered and not fulfilled their assigned mission. It does not talk about how actively Britain had been flooding Mandatory Palestine with illegal Arab immigrants, and systematically blocking Jewish migration. Still, it’s a decent overview.

          Here’s Wiki, on the subject:

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine_(legal_instrument)

          Establishment of a national home for the Jewish people[edit]

          “Zionist Rejoicings. British Mandate For Palestine Welcomed”, The Times, Monday, 26 April 1920, following conclusion of the San Remo conference.
          The preamble of the mandate document declared:
          Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.[37]

        4. I have a slew of rational evidence to disprove your insane beLIEfs, Patrick, but instead, I’m going with James Tracey’s advice:

          “You can’t reason someone out of a position they weren’t reasoned into in the first place. “

        5. Too bad. I like to reason. If you could prove my evidence false, I’d change my opinion.

          Would you? I think I have proved YOUR case false, beyond doubt. But if you won’t bother to present the wonderful evidence you possess, I guess the court will have no choice but side with me.

        6. So you trust Time Magazine to properly inform you, Patrick? Of for that matter Wikipedia, started and run by Zionist Jews? Surely you are familiar with what David Rockefeller said in a secret meeting of the Council on Foreign Relations in 1991? His speech was later made public. Here is what he told the CFR:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F27l6cNG6kU

        7. Expulsions of Jews from host districts, cities and countries:

          554, Diocese of Clement (France)
          561, Diocese of Uzes (France)
          612, Visigoth Spain
          642, Visigoth Empire
          855, Italy
          876, Sens
          1012, Mainz
          1181, France
          1290, England
          1306, France
          1348, Switzerland
          1349, Heilbronn (Germany)
          1349, Hungary
          1388, Strasbourg
          1394, Germany
          1394, France
          1422, Austria
          1424, Fribourg & Zurich
          1426, Cologne
          1432, Savory
          1438, Mainz
          1439, Augsburg
          1446, Bavaria
          1453, Franconia
          1453, Breslau
          1454, Wurzburg
          1485, Vincenza (Italy)
          1492, Spain
          1495, Lithuania
          1497, Portugal
          1499, Germany
          1514, Strasbourg
          1519, Regensburg
          1540, Naples
          1542, Bohemia
          1550, Genoa
          1551, Bavaria
          1555, Pesaro
          1559, Austria
          1561, Prague
          1567, Wurzburg, Genoese Republic
          1569, Papal States
          1571, Brandenburg
          1582, Netherlands
          1593, Brandenburg, Austria
          1597, Cremona, Pavia & Lodi
          1614, Frankfurt
          1615, Worms
          1619, Kiev
          1649, Ukraine
          1654, Little Russia (Ukraine)
          1656, Lithuania
          1669, Oran (North Africa)
          1670, Vienna
          1712, Sandomir
          1727, Russia
          1738, Wuerttemburg
          1740, Little Russia (Ukraine)
          1744, Bohemia
          1744, Livonia
          1745, Moravia
          1753, Kovad (Lithuania)
          1761, Bordeaux
          1772, Jews deported to the Pale of Settlement (Russia)
          1775, Warsaw
          1789, Alsace
          1804, Russian villages
          1808, Russian villages and countrysides
          1815, Lubeck & Bremen
          1815, Franconia, Swabia & Bavaria
          1820, Bremes
          1843, Russian border with Austria & Prussia
          1862, Tennessee (USA), by military order of General Grant
          1866, Galatz, Romania
          1919, Bavaria (foreign born Jews)
          1938-45, Axis-Nazi controlled lands
          1948, Arab countries.

    3. I always had trouble with John Milton as an promoter of free speech.

      The Puritans, of which he was one, once they established themselves in the Bay Colony(Massachusetts, and parts of present day Maine and New Hampshire) as victims of persecution, set up a system which was grossly intolerant. Each town required individuals seeking to live there to pass a religious test of principles, and also for them to adhere to certain beliefs about the parliamentary politics back home. If you didn’t agree, you were sent packing. This helped colonize large geographical areas in Connecticut and Rhode Island, for sure. But there were also hangings for people who would not abide by the banishment and kept up their defiance.

      The fact is that 17th century England and New England straddled the middle ages and the modern age, and very often reverted to the former when faced with popular hysteria. They were winging it as far as the church was concerned, having thrown off a lot of what restricted them in their practices and having (here is the free speech part I guess) substituted the old set of dogmas for a new set which because of its varying nature, led to this ongoing war of ideas.

      Having seen first hand at Boston many academics caving in to the narrative of the Marathon Bombing by participating in public memorial pageants and also by accepting a huge memorial at MIT grossly inappropriate to the event, the proper area of discourse was mapped out by metes and bounds like a Puritan town, with its living saints those who accepted the common story and its exiles those who raised a word against it.

      When an academic tells us free speech is conditional on groupthink (“a political prize”), then he has accepted this turf-based state of affairs and is acting as an enforcer. He calls free speech a “behavior” which would confine it to the present moment and the present company. Whatever his background, he seems to feel a totalitarian state is no problem, as long as one adheres to its codes and makes sure one is always ahead of the curve, winning all the political prizes and making sure your friends have them too. Because if someone were to have a contrary opinion, that person would jeopardize the carefully constructed status quo of yes men nodding to the dogmas.

      But as you point out, the basis of much of academia today is the flow of money and the creation of obligations of students to pay it back, which can influence the entire course of their lives long after graduation. The enslavement of a large part of the young generation – with or without a military draft or community service – and the ability to cut off their ability to start families and create secure homes – is implicit in the situation. The special deals made between academia and the loaning agencies whereby many students can never get free of this obligation, will privilege some people far higher than others, beyond any merit. Choices will be possible to some but not to others, after the experience of four years of college. The dead hand of the past will lie upon them, as Jefferson warned. That is one reason why free speech matters – free speech in its original constitutional sense of vigorous, contentious debate on all subjects, particularly on those affecting public policy.

      Fish became a Milton scholar by choice, I suppose. It may be that those who rebelled against the King in New England were of Puritan stock, but eventually the reality of struggling with a harsh environment banished most of the descendants of Oxford and Cambridge dissenting dons from the tight groves of academe, into the wilderness. By the time of the Revolution, the colony was full of contentious debate and differing viewpoints. Not everyone had arrived in the New World as a Puritan, but all had to be accommodated. The tensions which built up between a Puritan past and one based on a system of aristocratic privilege broke out in civil war less than a century after the first shots at Lexington and Concord. But the country did not die of political correctness. No, in those days it was not suicidal. It was not some Plato’s Republic run by “the best and the brightest.” Whenever it is, whenever such people try to rule over it, it falters and gets into disasters (like Vietnam). The erosion has been going on for some time. The only question is when it can be stopped. There are no obvious solutions except for more free speech, in the way it is rationally understood, and not in some Pickwickian sense.

      When an academic substitutes the word “exterminate” for “extirpate” and puts it into the mouth of someone dead for three hundred forty-one years, something is afoot. It’s such an anachronism that the mistake is clearly used to give justification for something he wants out of his poet. The dead hand of the past can be reanimated, apparently, to strike down one’s enemies.

    4. Americans don’t need to be taught what free speech is,
      we are the people that constantly protect and keep alive this element of our culture and society,
      and the people that we have always fought have been establishment leaders and spokesmen,
      who are in turn expressing the wishes of their handlers and the monied interests that elected them to do their bidding

  11. Interestingly, this was also on the scoopfeed as a piece written by Jonathan Turley, while ad hominem attacking her for the content(obviously didn’t research the topic), did acknowledge this professor’s right to express herself on social media. But more importantly: doesn’t this sort of stuff happen to people when they’re “over the target”?

  12. Yep! When you are God’s Chosen People you can do what ever you want. So the other religions can put their head between their legs and kiss their beliefs goodbye. Stopped going to religious shops along time ago when I did not want the cheap lost leader and found the other items to high a price to pay morally. Man has progressed technically but regressed as a species headed back to the stone age still believing their group is better than that group over there, and that group over there, and on and on. And while we are at it, kill, rape, plunder, lie, cheat, anyone who gets in our way. So I would expect to see groups leaving their store fronts soon chanting, we’re number 1, we’re number 1, much the same as after spectators do after one of the bread n circuses provided by the controllers do for the sheep.

    image: http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/religion101/files/2012/07/religion101-v2.jpg
    Religion 101
    image: http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/religion101/files/2012/07/religion101-v2.jpg
    12 7 0 0 31
    How MANY Religions Are There? (Part Five: The Hard Numbers)
    posted by Reed Hall
    In my last blog entry, I continued to ask (or perhaps dance around) the simple question: How many religions are there in the world? Now, at last, I shall meet the question head on.
    Never mind about all of the myriad bygone religions of the remote past. We touched upon them briefly in Part One; let’s just focus instead upon asking how many religions exist in the world today.
    Never mind about the fact that many people tend to think exclusively of their own religion alone as solely and genuinely qualifying as “authentic” religion, regarding all other faiths as something less than “true” religion. The trouble is, every religion can think like this (which gets us nowhere fast). We also covered that in Part One.
    And never mind about those Christians who sometimes object to calling their religion a “religion” at all, arguing instead that Christianity is “not a ‘religion,’ but a ‘relationship’.” It’s still a religion. We covered that in Part Two.
    And never mind about those faithful who assert that their own religion is uniquely unlike all other religions because their own religion is “not just a religion, but a ‘complete way of life’.” Of course, the obvious problem here is simply that other religions are also “complete ways of life,” too. We covered this in Part Three.
    And lastly, never mind about those who tend to regard each and every single separate sect, subgroup, school, subdivision, branch, movement, or denomination within all of the major religions as if they each constituted “religions” of their own. (They don’t.) We covered all of that in Part Four. For our purposes here, counting denominations as separate standalone “religions” per se would vastly overinflate (and distort) any answer that we might give as to how many actual religions (not sects, branches, or denominations of religions) in fact exist in the contemporary world.
    So, with all of these preliminary “never minds” finally out of the way at last, we can now begin to respond directly to that seemingly simple question: how many religions are there, in the world today?
    Whenever the topic comes up in the popular press, or in informal (yet fairly informed) casual conversation, the “big five” are perhaps the most commonly mentioned: Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. These five highly prominent and influential global faiths are probably what most people think of first, when they set out to enumerate the major living religions of the world.
    Those who are also familiar with the ancient and venerable religious traditions native to China will be quick to add two more to the list: Confucianism and Taoism. This brings our total to seven major world faiths.
    Of course, there is also Shinto, the major native faith of Japan. And we certainly must not neglect two additional smaller but important and influential faith traditions of India: Jainism and Sikhism. Additionally worth mentioning is Zoroastrianism, today a tiny and dwindling minority religion but once the religion of the mighty Persian Empire.
    So, that brings us to a grand total of eleven major world religions (“major” whether in terms of sheer size, or in terms of sheer historical significance and cultural impact). Is that it?
    Not quite. These eleven may be widely considered to be the “major players” among the world’s global faith traditions, but by no means are they whole story when it comes to contemporary organized human religiosity.
    For instance, there are also the many new religious movements currently carving out their own modest niches on the contemporary religious scene.
    Far younger (and generally much smaller) than the long-established “mainstream” world religions, these numerous newer “alternative” or “emergent” faiths run the gamut from Baha’i (founded in the mid-1800s, with perhaps 7 million adherents) to Rastafarianism (founded in the 1930s, with about 1 million followers today) to Scientology (founded 1954 and today claiming 8 million members, although critics suggest the actual number to be as low as 100,000 or less) to Wicca (a 20th century revival or reconstruction of ancient European paganism, with perhaps 1 million followers today), to name just a few of the biggest and best-known.
    Such often-marginalized “new religions” may number in the hundreds or even thousands worldwide — depending, of course, upon how one defines, classifies, or counts each one — and bearing also in mind that a great many of them are exceedingly small and obscure, so that the total global number of adherents of such young “minority” faiths still remains quite small, compared to the much older and far larger major faiths. (One source estimates the total combined population of all such “new religions” as these at only about 100 million people, or so.)
    Even so, if we are merely concerned with counting up the actual total number of religions that currently exist in the world, then the vast diversity of all of these innumerable smaller and younger faiths increases that bottom-line total exponentially.
    And then there are still the innumerable individual indigenous religions which are scattered across the planet today. These are the many native, local, ethnic, or “tribal” folk religious traditions of the many so-called “indigenous” cultures found worldwide: the various Native American religions, the varied African traditional religions, Australian aboriginal religions, Siberian shamanists, and so forth.
    Each of the aforementioned broad regional categories also masks a vast amount of underlying diversity; many of the numerous individual tribes or other subgroups within each such broad category have quite distinct religious beliefs, practices, and traditions of their own.
    Additionally, the transatlantic African slave trade (during the New World’s colonial period) eventually resulted in syncretic Afro-Caribbean blendings of traditional indigenous West African religions with the Catholicism of the colonists. This creative blending process gave birth to such altogether new religions as Santeria (in Cuba), Candomble (in Brazil), and Voudun or Voodoo (in Haiti).
    Given the immense number of unique indigenous cultures worldwide, the number of corresponding indigenous religions (also numbering in the thousands) once again raises our cumulative grand total of currently extant religions to an increasingly uncertain (but certainly vastly higher) final number.
    As you can see, it’s complicated — perhaps too complicated to supply a single, clearcut, precise, universally agreeable, conclusive total.
    But whatever that grand total number of religions in the world might actually be, it’s clearly immense. Religious diversity is probably far more complex and variegated than most people ever imagine.

    Read more: http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/religion101/2012/10/how-many-religions-are-there-part-five-the-hard-numbers.html#ixzz427QiZo7t
    Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/religion101/2012/10/how-many-religions-are-there-part-five-the-hard-numbers.html#rLRcM38c7rydYOG7.99

  13. One possibility does not seem to be on the table.

    Is Joy Karega the real deal?

    Could she be another “crisis actor” playing out a scene written by the usual script writers?

    Just sayin’.

  14. This article about Stanley Fish explains to some extent what I am getting at in this discussion.

    This Korega matter seems made to order for Stanley Fish types, just a bit too made to order. Korega herself may be the real deal but she is being used in a dialectical play.

    I understand that Professor Stanley Fish specializes in the “reader-response” form of literary criticism. That sounds like criticism based on dialectics, not objectivity.

    This article by E. Michael Jones gets at what I am trying to get at.

    http://www.culturewars.com/2003/Skin.html

    Culture Wars: Skin and Discourse

    Skin and Discourse

    by E. Michael Jones

    E. Michael Jones, Ph.D. is the editor of Culture Wars. 
    
    This article was published in the December, 2003 issue of Culture Wars. 
    

    Excerpts

    ” Which brings us back to Stanley Fish and his revolutionary friends. In order to understand why some people can say some things and others cannot say the same things without being accused of being bad people, we have to understand the revolution in literary criticism which took place during the 1970s. According to Fish, there is no objective truth to any statement. The only “truth” (a word he would not use) which a statement possesses is what the reader or listener assigns to it. Does that mean that I (a lonely graduate student at the time he was my teacher) get to determine meaning, I asked during my class with him in the ’70s. No, Fish replied, meaning is determined by “interpretive communities.” Does that mean, I continued, things like the English department at Temple University, where I was studying at the time? No, it meant elite institutions like Johns Hopkins, where Fish was teaching at the time. And how can we tell whether a university is an elite institution? Well, if Stanley Fish is teaching there. That means that, in short order, first Duke University and then the University of Illinois at Chicago Circle became elite institutions. What Stanley Fish really meant to say is that the interpretive rabbis have complete hegemony over the Torah and any other text.

    And why does Professor Fish feel this way? Because he grew up in post-World War II America during a period in which the rabbis from Hollywood and Madison Avenue began to exercise more and more draconian control over discourse of every sort. Fish is a sophist, and like all sophists he recognizes power when he sees it. ”

    “In a world governed by sophists, Thrasymachus will always have the last word when it comes to defining truth. Truth is the opinion of the powerful. The powerful cannot get into trouble for anything they say. The fact that certain people do get into trouble for what they say is simply an indication that they are not that powerful, or on their way down, probably because they offended someone with real power. Rush Limbaugh, who was discovered to have a drug problem shortly after making an insensitive remark about the race of Philadelphia’s quarterback, seems to be a case in port.

    Mel Gibson is another case in point. Why is Mel Gibson being portrayed as an anti-Semite by the Anti-Defamation League, when just about everyone — Jews and Gentile alike — who has seen his film on the last hours of Christ says that it isn’t anti-Semitic in the least? The simplest answer to the question is that the objective statements in the movie have nothing to do with the charge being leveled. The imputation of anti-Semitism is taken seriously not because of anything in se but because of the power of the man leveling the charge. Abe Foxman is powerful. Truth, as Thrasymachus said, is the opinion of the powerful. Hence, Mel Gibson is an anti-Semite, no matter how many Jews or Christians he gets to see his movie. ”

    “By now it should be obvious that there is no defense against the charge. The charge is true if the person making it is more powerful than the person who is accused. There is no other operative definition of discourse as it is practiced today. To say there is involves an appeal to the world of objective fact, which the powerful hold in contempt.”

  15. I wrote above about the practice in Puritan Boston of hanging Quakers who would not stay banished from the Bay Colony, which had its own brand of correctness and has left its descendants with tendencies to invoke it in order to exercise power over the spirits and words of those in academia, both faculty and students.

    Today’s punishment in the US is not yet hanging or imprisonment, merely expulsion (in spite of any traditions of academic professional independence).

    Some advocate a society which jails those who deny certain doctrines or wish to revise certain framings of historical or quasi-historical events. The justification for this in Central Europe was to punish people who had invaded other countries and snatched their inhabitants into their death camps. It was feared that allowing people to deny these crimes would lead to more of them.

    But the justification today is prophylactic, they say, at least in the US. Europe and Canada are seen as the civilized gold standard, and America as a howling wilderness with dirty water not just in abandoned cities. It is also to keep the flow of resources running in certain directions and not others. It cannot be justified on constitutional grounds in the United States, so a harking back to pre-Revolutionary times is necessary to establish how venerable a tradition the punishment of free speech has been.

    Here is a fine quote from a Quaker of 17th century Boston who escaped the hangman’s noose in the nick of time:

    “Do not think to weary out the living God by taking away the lives of his servants.” Wedlock Christisin. He pointed out that since he is God, he can raise up ten more for every one that you take. He is all about truth, you see. And nobody mocks him for long.

  16. Beliefs
    ARE WE SLAVES TO OUR BELIEFS?

    By T. C. Fry

    Beliefs will make you a slave. Beliefs are inherently wrong and imprison us to the degree that we give them loyalty. That which is true and proper to our lives is known and does not have to be believed. If you believe, you believe without proof. Truth always serves us.

    Belief is a different animal altogether. Belief demands we serve it, not the other way around. This camouflages its basic character as an exploitive and enslaving device. The nature of every belief system is to demand acceptance and obedience. Not only does it tend to suppress and destroy differing belief systems, forcing, if it can, all to adopt its concepts, but it also seeks to suppress the truth as well.

    Most people are in love with their beliefs to the exclusion of the striking and self-evident truths in their lives. By their very nature, all belief systems are false and inhuman. Simply, the truth does not have to be believed. Truth is always evident and easy to know, especially that which is relevant to ourselves and our environment.

    All belief systems are concocted in the minds of men and women. While virtually everyone disbelieves every system but their own, in some areas, notably so-called medical science, the mass of people accept it as above question or reproach.

    We do not have to believe the truth. Truth is verifiable. It can be known. Beliefs are not verifiable but are absurdly easy to disprove. The truth always stays around regardless.

    All the belief in the world does not change one truth! For instance, it was only a few hundred years ago that everyone believed the earth to be flat. For uttering the heresy that the earth was round, the Catholic Church burned scientists of the time at the stake.

    But all the beliefs notwithstanding, the earth was not thereby flattened a bit. To insist that your beliefs are true is sheer arrogance and nonsense. Please do not confuse beliefs with theories. Theories are temporary while beliefs have a habit of being final.

    Beliefs are really illusions and delusions. It is said that the hardest person in the world to face is yourself. Likewise, most in our world are the victims of deep-seated beliefs and refuse to face the fact that they are enslaved and exploited by and through them.

    Mental laziness is exemplified in our refusal to face up to the fact that we are easily exploited by beliefs we accept uncritically, which have usually been implanted in us when we were young and impressionable. It is mental laziness when we refuse to take steps to discover the truth that would cast off the shackles of beliefs or slavery. Thus, by default, we continue our slavish, harmful and deleterious ways, affecting not only ourselves but those with whom we’re associated.

    http://rawschool.com/beliefs/

    1. The Zionists have a long list of terrorist activities around the world:
      1982 ” massacre of the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps was committed. Where over 2,500 Palestinian women, children and elderly people were slaughtered in cold blood. Even the Israeli high court held a number of the Israeli military officers, including Sharon, responsible.

      http://rense.com/general21/pastzionist.htm

      1. Remember that it was the Christian Phalangists that wen to to murder the Palestinian refugees in the Shantilla refugee camp. Apparently the Christians had some score settling issue with the Palestinians that enticed them to commit this crime. Israel was found guilty of not intervening strongly enough to prevent this massacre.

        1. That event, in which Israeli guards watched passively, began to make me question the good intentions of Israel and their right to some moral high ground in the world. I had been aware of the My Lai incident, and how individuals could make a difference. Also, who has not been taught that the Nuremberg trials were about moral responsibility.

          What were the Israelis doing involved in Lebanon? The Phalangists, who did the murders, were Israeli allies and the IDF ordered them to “clear the PLO out of the camp”. Order had broken down in Beirut, and the IDF was present, moving through the area. But they did give an order, didn’t they? The resulting deaths of innocents might have been anticipated, since there had been a recent assassination and the Phalangists were out for revenge. The fact that the people being killed had already been sent packing from their own land – well it would be like an Indian reservation being attacked by enemies and having the US cavalry say they didn’t know the men they ordered into it would go so far.

          It just left me with the feeling the Israelis were just as cruel as anyone else and had zero moral superiority, for all their self-advertisement. It’s not that hard to be good to your own. The true test is whether you can behave with justice towards your rivals and your enemies. To me that determines whether you have the qualities of leadership that can create a better society.

          I note with interest on reading a dialogue about that day in 1982 – Don McCullin, the famous war photographer, was present. Heavy. To him it was distressing that the Phalangist who was killing an old lady who pleaded with him not to kill her was himself wearing a crucifix. But remember, he was following orders – sort of.

        2. Typical Zionist response to any party who whistelbows on Israeli crimes,
          The Israelis are about as innocent in this as the Neocons in Washington who use terrorist groups to accomplish their crimes in secret, the Israelis provide direct aid and support for ISIS-

        3. “What were the Israelis doing involved in Lebanon?”

          The PLO had essentially taken over Lebanon. The land beneath Beirut had been hollowed out like swiss cheese, with tunnels. These tunnels were filled with arms. Russian arms. The Israelis could not believe the size of the arsenal. It was an existential requirement for Israel to expel Arafat’s army from Lebanon,

          One must keep in mind the nightmare PLO terrorism represented at that time. And also after that. One must remember Leon Klinghoffer.

          Israel won that war, and Arafat’s murderers were expelled from Lebanon (they found a haven in Tunisia), which reduced the immediacy of the existential threat to Israel, but it didn’t stop the murders; Klinghoffer was murdered three years later.

          What Israel had gone through in the years leading up to 1982 was extremely traumatic. No one who lives in quietness can imagine what constant terrorism surrounding one does to one’s soul. I imagine that had something to do with Sharon’s heartlessness when he allowed another of the PLO’s enemies to take a revenge that turned out to be excessive.

          Then again, war is Hell. Bad things happen in war, Unconscionable things. But then, Israel didn’t start it. The PLO did. And the PLO had acquired the means to destroy Israel, and fully intended to use it.

          All the fashionable hatred of Israel we see the world reveling in today, all the fashionable sympathy for “the Palestinians,” all the righteous moral superiority of campus idiots who think they are on the high ground when advocating a boycott of Israel’s economy, is informed by none of this backdrop. The PLO, and Hamas, to this day uses the phrase “from the River to the Sea” to describe the future–a future with no Israel.

          The evil men ruling Israel allowed Arafat and his murderers to leave Tunis, and actually invited them to relocate in the lands Israel won from Egypt and Jordan in the Six Day War, with America’s military actually training them in more effective militancy, arming them to boot. In exchange for “peace.” What they got instead was lots more terrorism. Very coordinated terrorism.

          I think it would make me feel like Charles Bronson in Death Wish, were I Israel.

        4. The only way the death of Leon Klinghoffer can justify the inaction of Israel went it sent Phalangists into a refugee camp and they began killing innocent women and children under their eyes (there were IDF witnesses) is something out the Bronze Age Bible, where this kind of thing was scripturally justified. It also sounds like the campaign platform of Donald Trump who talks about wiping out the entire families of terrorists.

          Frankly, I’d have thought the most civilized had come farther than that, but you can always choose to revert to more primitive justifications for what you do. That was basically my point – you might get what you want out of it, but nobody else should concede to you the moral high ground or the ability to teach you. That the Phalangists are Christian is an instance of how meaningless the actual teaching of that religion seems to have been for the. Sometimes however it is important to chuck whatever text you are going by and simply find within yourself human decency.

          My Lai was justified by people stating that they had it up to here with booby traps and they did not know who was friend or foe. So what? When it came to killing unarmed elderly, children, etc. — it was still a crime against humanity, as was Sabra and Shatila.

        5. First, I pointed out that Klinghoffer was murdered three years after the PLO was banished to Tunisia. I said it was evidence that even though Israel had gotten out of the frying pan by getting Arafat out of Lebanon, it landed in the fire anyway. The PLO’s arsenal might have been confiscated, and its platform on Israel’s borders might have been removed, but they learned that the world’s press could always be counted upon to side with the monsters against their victims–when Israel is the victim.

          My second point was that it is impossible to know what being subject to constant terrorism does to the mind. I know that Arafat was the most evil person his victims had encountered since WWII, and they were traumatized, which is why Israel was compelled to extract the dirty little man from his castle.

          I also said that what happened in that refugee camp was an example of war being Hell, and unconscionable. I don’t justify it, but I understand how these things can happen. You, yourself, just the other day, related the trauma your mother in law endured in WWII; her mind was shattered, and she never was the same again. So you have personal experience with this phenomenon. I only know it from historical research. Which tells me that you should know my point is true better than I do.

  17. The National Interest web page, an important CIA foreign policy voice, also attacked the professor. Below is my comment. They quickly hid the attacking article.

    folktruther • 5 days ago

    Faithful to its Republican heritage, the National Interest is in favor of firing anyone who tells the truth which subverts the untruth of American power and its media. Especially if they are non-White and uppity.
    Anti-Zionism is quite different from anti-Semitism, supported by many Jews, including myself. Israel is a apartheid power, and should be singled out instead of supported by US power.
    There is abundant evidence that ISIL was supported by US and Israel, an Israeli colonel being captured leading ISIL troops, and both US and Israel economically supporting ISIL while Proclaiming they were opposing it.
    US and the West is largely ruled by an oligarchy of bankers, mostly non-Jews but including a large fraction of Jews as well . I think some of Dr Karega’s reported assertions are untrue, but the media is so corrupt that one cannot rely on it to report them honestly. In any case, they could not possibly be as untrue as the usual media bullshit.

    5 △ ▽

    Reply

    Share ›

    1. I think you are making a mistake by taking up the term “anti-semitic,” this term was created by the Zionist/Jews as a kind of “mind control,” as a shield against Zionist crimes, to use it is to fall into the Zionist trap of giving meaning to a term that was created to stifle debate, a creation of a “monster” that no one wants to be known by (“ANTISEMITE!” Askenazis are not semites),
      the term is a result of Jewish think tanks creating a specialized language that asserts their militant/subversive/criminal pursuit of the conquest of their host nations

  18. The National Interest web page, an important foreign policy voice associated with the CIA, also attacked the professor. I defended her but my reprinted comment was not published, the usual case recently on this blog.

  19. It looks like Oberlin may be changing its stance on Prof. Karega, according to “Inside Higher Ed”:

    https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/03/07/oberlin-releases-statements-seemingly-contradict-earlier-statements-supporting

    …after officials met with “third party groups, including the Jewish Federation of Cleveland, the Cleveland Hillel Foundation and the Anti-Defamation League.”

    But wait – why is there only a dark dark fuzzy photo of her available? Only this can be found at google images, at media sites, on Oberlin’s website, and on her facebook page. And why does she not have a single article uploaded at academia.edu?

    Is there something odd about Joy Karega?

    1. These are unusual features. Not everyone uses academia.edu. As you know there are other ways of confirming Karega’s career background, of course, such as the dissertation, professional affiliations, conference presentations, and so on. Apparently she recently finished her graduate work at Louisville, and this institution plus her grad committee could also confirm her presence in a program of study.

      For example, here is the abstract of the dissertation:

      http://ir.library.louisville.edu/etd/725/

      1. So why don’t we take this same expert advice from personal experience that James just displayed above and apply that to Sandy hook? Anyone?

        You see how James had processes that were likely unknown to us lay people about how to confirm employment, her dissertation, grad school, etc? Why can’t we do tha t with Newton?

        1. “Unknown to us lay people”

          Really? I found it myself on google. No unknown processes or expert advice needed.

    2. No other pics of her on her FB page and no Facebook friends. The page has an entry of a picture of a guitar dated 2014. I believe anything could be a PSYOPS.

      1. Here’s her last Facebook post:

        Joy Karega
        March 5 at 9:08am •

        I will no longer be making any statements concerning my situation at Oberlin. We have reached a point where it is time for me to defer to my legal counsel. And I gladly do so. Those of you who know me know that I have been and will continue to be firm in my convictions and resolve. I will still receive Facebook messages here. The messages of love and support have been overwhelming. Keep those coming. I read them all. AND I also read the messages filled with slurs, harassment, and threats too. Those messages have been overwhelming as well. Keep those coming too. I catalog and save them. Right along with the emails and phone messages. Again, I remain firm in my convictions and resolve.

        https://www.facebook.com/jakare01/posts/810828432354604?pnref=story

        1. “AND I also read the messages filled with slurs, harassment, and threats too.”

          Too / also redundant.

        2. This Professor rocks,
          a true American Hero,
          the tide is turning,
          and the Zionist takeover of the US Government is crumbling,
          time for fear and trembling for the traitors in our government that are being exposed,
          I’m sure there will be a mass exodus of criminals fleeing to Israel,
          which is the safe haven for Zionist/Israeli criminals and spies, like Marc Rich, who Clinton pardoned, receiving huge cash sums for doing so (one of many)

  20. I have been an active participant in the conversation here at MHB, practically from its start. It has been a congenial space. I have made friends here. We talk about conspiracies, and learn from each other. Investigate. Add to the body of knowledge.

    Of late, unfortunately, it has become a hotbed of open Jew-hatred. In the past, there was an undercurrent of that, as one expects when dealing with conspiracy investigators, but it was not a prominent feature of the site.

    We have a new presence amongst, a Mr. Smith, in recent days, who typifies this recent trend. I suspect that he’s Langley. MHB is in the crosshairs, is how I read it. Making this place a giant hate-fest is a great ploy. It certainly will drive people like me away. That day is drawing close.

    I don’t know if James sees what’s happening. These Jew-haters are taking over the place. It’s his place. It’s his choice.

    1. I’m CIA… wow, that’s rich! Everybody and his uncle knows that the CIA works hand-in-hand with the Israeli Mossad, as well as the Jew-controlled MSM. They are joined at the hip.

      I’m sorry if my arrival here has made life unpleasant for you, Patrick, but I’m not here to “chat amiably” like you apparently are. I’m here to reveal some hard and bitter facts. These are bitter pills for everyone to swallow, but eventually we all had to learn that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny didn’t really exist. It’s a process called maturing into adulthood. I suggest you get on the bandwagon.

    2. You are taking the usual approach that suggests any discussion of the eternal victims is somehow “hatred” unless discussed in the most glowing terms. We have all been to that rodeo many times. It is a tried and true method on many low brow type forums. It probably won’t fly here. Take another approach and try discussion. It works well.

      It is about the professor and the forces arrayed against her, those that would deny her free speech, something that seems anathema to you unless it deals with your brand of bible thumping.

      The professor will now feel the full force of the Sanhedrin and the mafia. It is a tried and proven method. It is difficult to discuss this without mentioning your favorite people. Have you ever considered a forum where this is not allowed such as the freepers or Drudge.

      1. “You are taking the usual approach that suggests any discussion of the eternal victims is somehow “hatred” unless discussed in the most glowing terms. ”

        I do not agree with all you say, Dub, but I do recognize some truth in that statement.

        There can be no objective discussion of the “eternal victims” not even from alternative bible exegesis other than the “discussion” offered by the overwhelmingly most frequent user of the H word in this thread.

      2. “You are taking the usual approach that suggests any discussion of the eternal victims is somehow “hatred” unless discussed in the most glowing terms.”

        No, I’m not. I am extremely harsh, here and everywhere, concerning Israel’s leadership, which is Shabbatean, and therefore perfectly evil. I have never written differently.

        “It is about the professor and the forces arrayed against her, those that would deny her free speech…”

        No, it is not. It is about schools who betray their code. No one has a “right” to teach college courses. Colleges sell something. Parents purchase that “something.” It is a question of “bait and switch.” You, Mr. Mick from Dublin, may well agree with this loony negress in her hatred of Jews. Lots of people around here do, apparently. But is that what college is supposed to be? She’s an English teacher. She’s obviously an obsessive on a topic entirely unrelated to English composition, so much so that she wants everyone to listen to her opinions. Do you honestly believe that if I were her student, and submitted to her the writings you have read from me, the she would score them honestly? No one can accuse my writings of being anything less than skilled.

        She is an ideologue. She should not have been hired. English teachers are not hired to be ideologues. Parents don’t bankrupt themselves, in tensionally, to have people like that poison the minds of their children. She can speak as freely as she wants. She just doesn’t have a right to be paid to do it, under cover of false pretenses.

        “…something that seems anathema to you unless it deals with your brand of bible thumping.”

        Again, wrong. Truth is truth. Falsity is falsity. No “branding” required.

        “The professor will now feel the full force of the Sanhedrin…”

        Since no such thing has existed for 2,000 years, she has little to fear about that, even if she lived in Israel.

        “…and the mafia.”

        Now, this is a new twist. What have you heard, Mick? Are the Italians on the job? Who put out the contract on her? Do tell.

        “…It is difficult to discuss this without mentioning your favorite people.”

        I can see why, Mick. You can’t, after all, find a way to a Swiss connection here, although I’d like it if you did; it bothers me that they have gotten away from the gold standard, and seem to be capitulation to the nightmare of the EU in ways that deeply pain me. Perhaps you have some insight. My second most favorite people, it should be obvious, are native Hawaiians, but again, I can’t see the connection. Am I missing something? Maybe you were thinking of the Irish, because of my name, but still, I can’t glean your meaning.

        “Have you ever considered a forum where this is not allowed such as the freepers or Drudge.”

        Yep, you lost me. What are you talking about?

        1. The point is Patrick, this discussion is of itself probably beyond your grasp. You are here to engage in simplistic analysis, keep the discussion at a boringly low level and discourage intelligent readers. You are a very rare type that can be counted on to arrive at the wrong conclusion the majority of the time. You are very shallow, misinformed and it is up for grabs if this in unintentional are part of a design.

  21. Let’s start at the top, the last column having grown too long.

    Replying to Toni.

    Hamas is NOT a “false political organization,” although it indeed started out as a project to divert Arafat’s supporters. I am well aware that it was created by Israel, for the purposes you mention, but it is today quite real. It is a monster that Israel does not have control of. As always, these things are far too complex for this forum; either one knows far too much or far too little. We don’t know which we are talking to, when writing these remarks at MHB. YOU, of course, I know to be one I can trust to know plenty enough to know what I’m talking about, whether you agree with my assessment or not. It’s all the other listeners I have doubts about. (I like you, incidentally, even when you don’t agree with me.)

    You say:

    Quoting Mr. Smith now, quoting Henry Makow, (as you’ve undoubtedly read): [Indeed, I have]

    “You should be aware that Hamas was deliberately created and managed BY ISRAEL. Its purpose initially was disband Yasser Arafat’s PLO, which was a real thorn in the side of the Israelis. Now it serves the function of being the “bogeyman on call”.

    I repeat: Israel no longer has control over it. It is a Frankenstein’s monster. The PLO was evil, but it was not Islamic. Hamas draws its energy from the Moslem Brotherhood, which is Islamist. I don’t know how deep the evil of Israel’s creation of Hamas goes (I know that Israel’s leadership is bottomless in its evil), but I DO hold as a working theory that they thought a “religious” competitor to Arafat’s gang of murderers would create a manageable operation. Then Sharon handed Gaza over to the people who live there, abandoning the place. Hamas was quickly voted in as its rulers. Israel has absolutely no presence in Gaza. It is now out of control.

    You quote Henry Makow:

    “undermining the peace process has always been the real target of Hamas and has played into the political ambitions of Likud. Every time Israeli and Palestinian negotiators appeared ready to take a major step forward achieving peace, an act of Hamas terrorism has scuttled the peace process and pushed the two sides apart.”

    The leadership of Israel has been purely evil from the founding of the State. Stipulated. But the truth is, if the Arabs of Gaza were to agree that Israel has a right to exist, and ask for Israel’s help in becoming a Singapore-on-the Med, Israel would in fact do it. Of course, this will not happen. There is no solution to this problem.

    I’m sorry you hear hate in my voice, Toni. I really do chat amiably, if occasionally rancorously.

    Since I see the times we live in through a Biblical lens, I see the situation Israel represents from a distance. Clinically. Anthropologically. I have been there, of course, so I know that Israel is a normal country very much like our own; the people live lives just lie ours. Except that terrorism truly looms, in a way that only the denizens of the slum districts of cities like Chicago and Los Angeles ever experience. I know a woman who now lives here, whose husband insisted on driving a route that Arab murderers routinely accosted Israelis on, out of defiance. She respected his defiance, in principle, but she was always afraid for her life, and that of her children, and hated having to endure that.

    The Bible is quite clear about what will eventuate. It is going get a lot worse. Israel’s leaders are not going to become good, but Israel’s people are not bad. Just like America.

      1. Yes, Mr. Smith. Exactly the way these people are representative of the Americans: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OT0nFx1-FIE

        ADVISORY WARNING: you will see very ugly Americans if you click on the link. You might never get the stench out of your nostrils. Kind of like listening to Mr. Langley, er, Smith, express his hate.

        I think I need a shower after interacting with this fellow too many times today. I’d prefer these disgusting rappers, come to think about it.

        1. Patrick, you would prefer listening to those disgusting rappers that listening to me? I hope you understand that is a MASSIVE insult! All I am doing is presenting you with the TRUTH. Evidently you have a a lot of problems with the truth. It has nothing at all to do with me.

          Now, I would suggest that you kick back and listen to the following, instead of “Uncle Tuna” (who is not an American but someone who should be deported back to Africa).

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Tr0otuiQuU

        2. My point of course is that you did not present a representative example of the people of the country you despise; you wish to convince yourself that you are right to despise it, however you can. I showed you how absurd is your “proof.”

        3. Patrick, read my latest comment(s). I AM showing you a representative sample of the Israeli population. If this isn’t sufficient for you, I can provide even more. I don’t know what it is going to take, however, for you to understand that the Jews are the anti-Christ, and that no Christian should ever be supporting “doers of iniquity”, like I imagine all evangelical Christians like you do.

          Confer Matt 7:15-23, John 3:19-21, Ephesians 5:10-12, 2 Corinthians 6:14,15 if you don’t believe me.

        4. Patrick never lets the facts get in the way of his opinions. 🙂

          Patty you should consider just moving to Israel and getting it over with.

          I suspect you are Langley Patrick, not Smith, and your goal is to lower the vibration of discussion to drive away those with an I.Q. over room temperature.

        5. This is my last reply in this last column cage–Mr. Smith, go to the top of the page (after the new endless wait for moderation clearance).

          Mick, you prove that you have nothing to do with Dublin when you call me “Patty.” It’s “Paddy.” Unless you’re calling me a girl–and if that’s your taunt, look at my picture; it’s been many a long year since that kind of jibe would bother me.

          Yes, Mick. Everyone knows about the CIA. What’s your point? They hire people like Mr. Smith to disrupt places like MHB. That’s MY point, not yours.

          Until recently, MHB was not a hate-fest. But after years of clean living, suddenly the place is full of open, cheerful, enthusiastic Jew-haters, who all are constantly chit-chating one to another about their obsession. This sudden development cannot be a coincidence.

          Truth be told, I suspect that the newcomers who hate the Jews so fulsomely really DON’T. It’s just a way to destroy the goodness we have enjoyed, for the paycheck. Their hatred is exactly as sincere as that of the Move On Dot Org people last night in Chicago, who only succeeded in making Donald Trump even more popular. They don’t really care about the content of their hired messaging, so long as the check they were handed cashes.

          Then again, plenty of people really DO hate the Jews, and would act that way for free. That, too, must be taken into account.

        6. Evidently Patrick thought that my previous video was not at all representative of typical Jewish Israeli attitudes toward Christians. Shall we have a further look? We won’t have to look very far to see that this rampant all over Israel.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jG6kJm-50k

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlT3ARuUSGc

          I can produce much more of the same. My point is that you will NEVER see these videos like this shown in the Jew-controlled mainstream media here in the States. And it’s small wonder that will never see them, because they have an awful lot to hide from us. Not just about typical Israeli attitudes toward Christians, but all manner of other serious problems caused directly or indirectly by Jews.

    1. I guess all of the end times prophesies have not come true in our era after all, then. Wow. I wonder how in this guy’s surrealistic model they ever will?

      Zechariah 12, for instance. Hosea 5:15-6:2. Revelation 7:4-8.

      I was under the impression that God had regathered them to their ancestral homeland already, from North, South, East and West, just as predicted. When will that actually happen, if this guy is right?

      I guess it’s a sheer coincidence then that we are poised on the verge of a world government, and a cashless society where no one will be able to buy or sell without taking a mark. A false alarm. It’s all going to happen some time in what can only be a distant future.

      Still, it DOES look an awful lot like Revelation is coming true in our time, along with all the rest of the Last Days scriptures. I think I’ll stick to the Bible, and consider what it says about false prophets: test them. I find this one wanting.

      1. There are 2 things I know. Not too many years ago at 54 I had to throw out all I knew or thought I knew when I came to realize everything I learned had been a lie. Then I came to learn that the more I learn I realize how much I DON’T know.
        So I humbly ask you to pray for me that I will come to know all the truth, knowledge and wisdom that you have.

        1. Oh, don’t pray that. I learn new things every day. And I often find that everything I thought I knew about a subject is wrong. Which means that tomorrow, much of what I think I know today on that topic will have to be walked away from. So you don’t want to pray to get stuck with what I think is true today; I might have left it behind tomorrow, and we would disagree about those ideas, were we to meet.

          Keep on keeping’ on, elfmom, yourself. Don’t rely on me.

  22. THAT’S A MAN, MAN! Seriously. how in the flying f@#king hell did you all fall for this? I’ve read your comments. Seems to be a bit of a background whitehole.
    You all can’t put 2+2 together and figure out that that IS A DUDE, DUDE!
    C’MON!!!

  23. What’s the matter with all of you? You can’t deduce that the pic your looking at is a pic of a DUDE?
    Sure, pics these days aren’t snapped digitally. They always look like they were taken in colorful Technish!t.
    That’s a MAN, MAN! And you all completely missed it.
    Scholars the lot of ya.

  24. Have I been banned from this site? My last three comments are still “awaiting moderation”. I can assure you that I not a CIA plant, like Patrick seems to think. I have nothing but admiration for your work as well as that of Jim Fetzer. If you would like for me to “tone it down” re the Jews, I will do that. I was only trying to set Patrick straight on this subject. That said, I still believe Jews are responsible for most if not all of the world’s problem.

    I believe Jim Fetzer may know me from Facebook. My real name is Stephen Smith, FB profile is https://www.facebook.com/stephensmithAL.

    Please respond to scsmith2@bellsouth.net.

  25. Let’s start at the top, the trap of the last column being an especial annoyance to me.

    First, No, Mr. Smith, as you can now tell, you were not “banned.” Tracy must have been very busy the last day or so, and never tended to the moderation queue.

    In reply to your missive, beginning with the words “Patrick, read my latest comment(s). I AM showing you a representative sample of the Israeli population. “:

    Well, my dear Mr. Smith, you apparently know your way around some of the New Testament. Good for you. Your point in these references is an accusation that I am “supporting doers of iniquity.” That’s funny.

    I suspected from the start you had some cognitive difficulty. Now I know it. That is, if you continue to insist that these videos represent the country as a whole. You really need to go there. You will find the scales falling off your eyes.

    In reply to your missive, beginning with the words “I’m CIA… wow, that’s rich!”

    Well, maybe. It just seems like a real coincidence that the new crowd of haters all descended so recently. And mine being a suspicious mind, I connect the dots. Is it possible, sez I to myself, that this new feller, Smith, a real enthusiastic hater, just stumbled into this place, and swaggers around so boldly? If the secret government wants to destroy MHB—and they no doubt do—fellers like Mr. Smith are a great way of doing it, because amiable Patrick won’t stay around for long in the kind of toxic waste dump it seems to be turning into.

    You say that “everybody and his uncle knows that the CIA works hand-in-hand with the Israeli Mossad.” I say that all sides want MHB to cease to exist—especially its comment section. So you make my point for me.

    “I’m sorry if my arrival here has made life unpleasant for you, Patrick…”

    Thanks for your sympathy, Mr. Smith, but you misunderstand me. It is the loss of MHB I am regretting. You might indeed be a random stumbler into this space, as you wish me to believe, but it is waaaaay coincidental if that’s true. It looks to me like you are the fish wrapped in paper telling us that Luca Brasi Sleeps with the Fishes

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7RMKq8RQj4&w=560&h=315%5D

    Your so-called “bitter facts” are platitudes. The Bible’s final prophesies are coming true as we speak, and Israel is the central element of that scenario. You might find that fact bitter, but you will not be able to escape it.

    In reply to your missive, beginning with the words “Evidently Patrick thought that my previous video was not at all representative….”

    You betcha.

    “We won’t have to look very far to see that this rampant all over Israel.”

    Well, you didn’t try very hard. Your two examples remind me of The Amazing Racist’s jokes:

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joMffCDjyEI&w=420&h=315%5D

    Going to ultra-orthodox neighborhoods in Israel is kind of like going into a black slum district in an American city. If you want trouble, it’s easy to generate. 99% of the country, not so much.

    “I can produce much more of the same.”

    I’m sure you can—just not from 99% of Israel, where they all love Americans, and have no interest in what religion we hold to.

    If someone wants American Negroes to murder them it’s easy; just behave like this guy did, on Chicago’s West side, or in South Central Los Angeles.

    You aren’t proving anything about the nature of the Israeli people’s attitudes toward Christians with these videos, Mr. Smith. If you actually visited the country, you would know how silly your position is. It’s a normal country, just like ours, with evil people running it, just like ours, and a subset of haters, just like ours.

        1. Umm, sorry but I seem to have missed something here. Namely the part of Sarah Silverman’s “comedy” act that was in my video, but was strangely removed from yours.

          What’s your point, Paddy?

        2. You are right about that excision, which I did not notice. Sorry about that. Still, my point stands. The part of the joke your clip included was just the set-up. It was not a hate joke, as you want people to think, is my point. It is a joke about the ridiculousness of hate. You present it as a “proof” that her people hate us. I don’t like her, but I would never misuse her jokes that way. You should not, either.

      1. Do you really think this is any kind of evidence in support of your case, Mr. Smith? It’s funny. They don’t agree with us, and joke around about it. We don’t agree with them, and joke around about that, too. Or, alternatively, some of us develop a genuine hatred for them, which they have to react to–which often does not turn out too well.

    1. Patrick, I can see that I am wasting my time with you, because you’re obviously going to act like an arrogant prick, for which I have absolutely NO USE!

      I don’t know what it is about certain people like you. You’re not the first one I’ve “met” like this. I can think of one other on another blog. I just had to give up with him also, because no matter what I pointed out, no matter how many times I pointed to Jews 1) establishing communism, 2) destroying Christianity, 3) fomenting wars for Christians to die in, 4) promoting gun control, 5) promoting open borders, amnesty, and multiculturalism, 6) lying about the HoloHoax, 7) pulling off false-flag terror attacks like 9/11, 8) feeding us garbage on TV and in the movie theaters, 9) promoting homosexuality, 10) promoting alcoholism and drug use, 11) ripping us all off to the tune of trillions in unconstitutional income taxes based on usury, in spite of all of the above, you and this other person will ALWAYS rally to the defense of the Jews.

      I honestly don’t get it. Yes, you must be right. I must be dim-witted. I cannot for the life of me understand where you are coming from. There seems to be an unbridgeable communication barrier here. So, I’m not going to waste anymore of your or my time on this subject.

      Funny, I guess that means I won’t be getting my weekly pay check from Langley anymore. But hey, money isn’t everything.

    2. Ever heard of Jonathan Pollard, Patrick? He stole over 10,000 pages of U.S. nuclear weapons secrets and just GAVE them to Israel, who later SOLD them to RED CHINA! It cost about $25 billion to retrofit our nuclear defense system from the damage that Jonathan Pollard did.

      Today Jonathan Pollard is celebrated as a hero in Israel. They actually have streets named after him.

      Can you explain this, Patrick? Or do you think there is nothing wrong with what Jonathan Pollard did, like evidently the typical Israeli does? Streets don’t typically get named after traitors, without massive protests.

        1. I admit that Lying Butcher Johnson was fully complicit with the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty in June of 1967, but the fact remains that Israel was the one who actually carried out the attack, which resulted in 34 American sailors dying and over 171 wounded. You seem to want to gloss over this key fact. Are you aware of how close this event came to precipitating a nuclear war? There were nuclear-equipped bombers launched from aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean that were prepared to nuke Cairo, Egypt that day. Thankfully, someone (not sure who) called them back before Armageddon could officially get started.

          I don’t know about you, but I have no sense of humor about this. Call me an old fuddy-duddy if you want, but that’s how I see it. Israel is an absolutely out-of-control mad dog state.

        2. You are definitely not stupid, Steven, nor cognitively impaired, so I will dispense with the jocularity.

          You say “the fact remains that Israel was the one who actually carried out the attack,” and tell me I wish to gloss overheat fact. This is false. Numerous times here at MHB I have made it clear that Israel was the hit man in a contract killing. Murder is murder. Murder for hire is murder for hire. You need to face the difference.

          The war that loomed was not Israel’s choice: it was Johnson’s. Israel was ordered to attack that American ship, by America. If you can’t face that, you can’t look for the Yellow King. And that case, you don’t belong here.

          But I suspect that you do belong here, and that I have been too harsh with you. You take the testing well, grasshopper.

          Still, you sound like a completely ignorant person when you say “Israel is an absolutely out-of-control mad dog state.” There is nothing to justify an irrational statement like that.

          I myself defended Libya’s Gaddafi against nonsensical talk like that, for years, and for the same reason: it is stupid talk. No evidence to back it up. But in both cases, it is only about hate. Irrational hate.

          If you read the Barry Chamish article about Pollard, you will see where the search for the truth in these matters leads a person.

          For the listening public, who knows nothing of the truth about Libya, search for The Great Man Made River. For those who want to know the truth about Israel, read everything Barry Chamish has ever written.

        3. Patrick said:

          “The war that loomed was not Israel’s choice: it was Johnson’s. Israel was ordered to attack that American ship, by America. If you can’t face that, you can’t look for the Yellow King. And that case, you don’t belong here.”

          I’ll ignore your openly hostile remark (and you call ME the hater here?), and kindly and respectfully ask you to provide EVIDENCE that Johnson was the one who gave to order to attack the USS Liberty. I fully acknowledge that he was involved in calling back the rescue aircraft, as well as the subsequent cover-up much later. But he ORDERED the Israeli attack? Not even I would go that far, and believe me I am no friend of Lying Butcher Johnson. He wanted me to die in Vietnam.

          I suppose you will tell me that you got this from Barry Chamish. That would stand to reason (not that I agree with it).

          My understanding was that the attack took Johnson and SecDef Robert McNamara by surprise, and one or both of them ordered rescue aircraft initially. But then they called back the rescue aircraft, once they learned that Israel was the attacker. LBJ said, “I want that ship to sink to the bottom – I will not embarrass our friends (meaning the Israelis).”

          With “friends” like that, who the heck needs enemies?

        4. @Patrick

          Do you ever get anything right?

          Patrick nobody cares who you think should be here or not and very little about your spurious conclusions. You are legend in your own mind, all hat and no cattle.

          Lyndon Johnson is crytp and so is one of your heroes most likely, Bible Billy Graham, who liked to chase prostitutes and rape women. In fact he and LBJ were big buddies. Billy’s boy fought in the six day war in Israel.

          Yeah sure everybody was responsible for the USS liberty other than those who bombed it. Johnson actually ordered American military to stand down as he did not want to hurt the feelings of our great ally. (translate that money masters).

          Kathleen Sullivan was raped by Billy Graham and he used to wear wigs to concerts to pick up prostitutes.

          When Graham’s family migrated to Turtle Island they were named Franks but changed that to a Scottish name to go under cover. Billy Graham’s daughters lived in Israel.

          https://dublinsmickdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/bible-billy.jpg?w=640

          https://dublinsmickdotcom.wordpress.com/2016/03/12/bible-billy-graham-and-the-prostitutes/

        5. Billy Graham is (was? is he still alive?) a 33rd degree Freemason. Certainly not anyone I would call a real Christian. But that also goes for practically ALL of the televangelists. Others include Pat Robertson, Oral Roberts, Jerry Falwell (possibly), Bishop Fulton J. Sheen (I think), and numerous others. These people have one mission: to make a mockery of Christianity and thereby destroy it. They have done a masterful job of that.

          I was gonna mention: I wonder why Patrick identified himself as an “evangelical”, but didn’t tack the usual “Christian” onto that word. I thought that was peculiar. Care to enlighten us, Patrick?

        6. Is the term “evangelical” ever used to modify any other noun? It’s like saying “rudder” instead of “ship’s rudder”; everyone knows what you’re talking about. It’s a very common usage. But you knew that.

        7. I’m familiar with Barry Chamish. I used to “kinda” like him, back before I became fully “Jew-wise”, evidently a step you have yet to take. Now I wouldn’t trust anything he says. The man is a liar, pure and simple. But that’s true of most if not all Jews.

          So Jonathan Pollard exposed Iran-Contra, huh? How come Barry Chamish is the ONLY one who has ever said that? There seems to be no mention of that in either the conservative press

          http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-truth-of-jonathan-pollard/

          Nor the liberal press

          http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/21/world/jonathan-pollard-released.html?_r=0

          So why should I believe Barry Chamish?

        8. Interesting quote from the first article I cited (the American Conservative). Mind you, this is not me talking here, but people very high up in the U.S. government (before it was fully hijacked by Israel, I suppose):

          In January 2014, M.E. “Spike” Bowman, who was at the time the liaison between the Departments of Defense and Justice and coordinator of the damage assessment, wrote an op-ed entitled “Don’t Trust This Spy” for the New York Times and also provided his assessment of Pollard in a paper presented at the March 7th 2014 National Summit to Reassess the US-Israel Special Relationship. Bowman confirmed the unique damage done by Pollard, observing that there has been no other American spy who provided “information of the quantity and quality that Mr. Pollard has.” To cope with the volume, the Israelis had to install high speed copiers in a safehouse apartment they used with Pollard and it is estimated that he stole 360 cubic feet of documents, enough to fill a room. And it was nearly all information that was beyond secret, meaning top secret and SCI or codeword, which is the most sensitive information that the United States government possesses. The Israelis were delighted and were able to request specific documents from a Defense Intelligence Agency catalog of available intelligence reports that had been given to them by another of their spies in the government, who has never been publicly identified but is generally believed to be a top-level official who served in both the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. Pollard’s high-level clearance meant that he could get his Israeli Washington Embassy-based case officer Colonel Avi Sella, who was also running spy Ben-Ami Kadish at the Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, anything that he wanted.

          For those who hint at anti-Semitism to make their claim that Pollard was treated with disproportionate rigor Bowman notes that it was not a normal espionage case. The conviction was under a special statute (18 US Code 194) that protects information related to “…nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack; war plans; communications intelligence or cryptographic information.” In other words, information that would make the United States vulnerable to attack by an enemy or would limit its ability to respond.

          Pollard had provided intelligence to Israel relating to nearly every one of the key national security elements detailed in 18 USA Code 194 and, most particularly, had provided the Radio Signal Notations Manual, which contained details of how the United States collects signals intelligence as well as the known parameters of the systems used by the Soviet Union. The information would enable an adversary to avoid collection by American codebreakers and, if in the hands of a sophisticated adversary like the Soviets, would permit penetration of U.S. systems. Former CIA Director William Casey and others believed that the Israelis provided at least some of the stolen information to the Soviet Union in exchange for the expedited emigration of Russian Jews.

          It should also be recognized that the focus on Pollard has obscured the duplicitous behavior by the Israeli government and its proxies in the U.S. I recall when I was in Turkey shortly after Pollard was arrested a delegation of the American Jewish Committee came through town and met with the Consul General and later the Ambassador, insisting that Pollard was some kind of nut and assuring all who would listen that Israel would never spy on the United States. That spin prevailed in much of the media and among the punditry, calling it a “rogue operation,” until Tel Aviv finally ‘fessed up in 1998. The fact is that the Pollard spy operation was approved at the highest levels of the Israeli government and to this day Tel Aviv has reneged on its agreement to return all of the material stolen to enable the Pentagon to do a complete damage assessment. And Israel continues to spy aggressively on the United States, ranking first among “friendly” countries in that category.

        9. Oops, I left out another key paragraph from that article:

          When Pollard was awaiting sentencing his lawyers sought to influence presiding Judge Aubrey Robinson into agreeing to minimal jail time, claiming that the espionage was really only a misguided bid to aid a beleaguered friend and ally Israel. Pollard’s wife Anne also appealed directly to the Jewish community to support her and her husband, claiming on “60 Minutes” that “our moral obligation was as Jews.” Secretary of Defense Cap Weinberger responded to the pleas by submitting to the judge a letter, which is still classified, detailing precisely the immense damage that Pollard had done. After reviewing the letter, Judge Robinson refused to consider any mitigation and immediately sentenced Pollard to the maximum possible sentence.

        10. “How come Barry Chamish is the ONLY one who has ever said that?”

          Odd. Since his whole report was quotes from published reports other people wrote.

          When people don’t actually read the things I provide to prove what I’m saying is accurate, I start not to like them.

    1. You, and all the rest of the gang. How many times has this been posted here?

      It reminds me of this

      [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZMuBIJxmnA&w=420&h=315%5D

      What power! What total control! How worthy of trembling before the power of Landru!

      Obviously, this person is Landru’s Voice. She is real. Landru is real. She MUST be. I saw it on the internet. She talks nice. I guess if I could talk nice on the internet, everyone in the world will think I control the world too, just because I say it. I could be the Voice of Landru, too.

  26. @I have some real bad news for you Paddy, The identities of king David and king Solomon can’t be found anywhere. Jerusalem back then was little more than a village. Most celebrated of the supposed Talmudic kings can’t be found in history. The tanakh is complete fiction and David and Solomon could not possibly have existed.

    It is just another story about the Egyptians who actually did exist and their elusive gold mine was in Ethiopia.

    http://www.ancient-origins.net/opinion-guest-authors/king-solomon-s-mines-discovered-kings-and-pharaohs-part-i-005500

      1. Patrick, I don’t know how you allowed yourself to be goaded into spinning your wheels with those who have taken to the path of least resistance – loathing for the Jewish people and Israel. Having said this, though, I have great admiration for your defense of the JEWISH Scriptures (old AND new testaments).

        We are in time of great deception, where the vociferous voices of the enemy of mankind will rise above all others. Eventually, this is the atmosphere which will necessitate and facilitate the coming of the lawless one (boy, will THIS man hate the Jews…).

        I wont do homework for lazy people. They can search the Scriptures themselves and see for certain that no human being who ever lived was more Jewish than Jesus. Pilate was certainly convinced, as he had JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS affixed to His cross, in Aramaic, Latin and Greek, for all to see.

        And for good measure, they throw in that there was never a David (and therefore, never a Solomon). Strategic, because if true then there is no fulfillment of 2 Samuel 7:16; Psalm 45:6,7 (referenced in Hebrews 1:8).

        Its soooo easy. No Jewish David, no Jewish Solomon, so HEY, no Jewish Jesus.

        Another frequent tactic of the enemy is to get humanity to focus on ethnicities, social standing, and gender. The apostle Paul steers us away from this trap, in Romans 10:10-13, Galatians 3:26-29, and Colossians 3:10,11.

        And on a side note, I never encourage any believers to latch onto personalities like Billy Graham, or any other TV personalities. I don’t trust anyone who doesn’t have a real job, and takes money to preach or teach.

        My apologies, JFT, for the theological diversion here. I abhor false information, whether it is Scripture or government false flags.

        1. Thanks, Joseph. Greatly appreciated.

          It seems like a thankless task, but I regard it as a ministry. If not me, who? Who at MHB, outside of me, stands up? The enemies of the Prophets have an open forum at MHB, and someone has to be Paul at Mars Hill.

          I have made friends with readers here who do not comment as you are doing, but tell me I am not alone. Still, it’s good to hear your voice, out loud, here. And the specifics of what you write.

          But one quibble: you should have added Romans 11.

          In fact, I advise everyone reading this to make a bee line either to a Bible or to your search engine and read Romans chapter 11. And then tell me what you think it means. (Although chapters 9 and 10 set the stage, so after reading 11, read all three in sequence before writing back.)

          Anyway, Joseph, I’ve gotten over the fear of diverting into theology here at MHB, since the haters are so enthusiastic about hijacking the place. The truth needs to counter the lies. Someone has to do it. And I wouldn’t choose any other thing to do, but that.

  27. I don’t mean to be sour grapes here, but others have had their comments approved, and I still have 5 comments “awaiting moderation”. What gives? Is Patrick the moderator here?

    1. I happens to many of us. Sometimes a link will send it to spam or a very lengthy response. They usually show up later.

      No Patrick is not the moderator. For most of us this is fun forum to visit occasionally. For Patrick it is a job, he gets paid for this. He is on call 24/7 to enforce the company line. It is the only way you can explain being incorrect 90% of the time.

      His tool kit is focus on Shadrach and Obednego and molech is good people.

      1. Here here paid pozer is probably right
        I would love to see that documentation on Billy Graham and his background, first I have heard of it
        thanks for some great info
        Sun

    2. I am not a moderator. So far as I know, only James Tracy has any role to play in that. He, I’m guessing, sets triggers that send comments to moderation, and then he has to review them and either release them or choose not to. He does this when he does it. Yesterday, it was more than a full day.

      My comments go to moderation too. I try to guess what words might trigger that, and avoid using them. I don’t always guess correctly. Sometimes they can’t be avoided.

      I am almost certain that the name of the people-group Steven Smith hates with such passion is one of those words. I’m betting that my careful avoidance of its use right now will enable Steven to see this message before his comments are released from moderation.

      I don’t like hate. It bothers me. I believe the Bible. Israel was predicted, in many, many places in the Bible, to be reconstituted. It has been. I consider that the most important fact in the world we live in today. To hate the people who represent that fulfillment of prophesy is in my opinion a very foolish choice.

      The end is near. Choose wisely.

        1. I can’t believe what I am reading about Billy graham in your article:

          “The actual heritage and name of Billy Graham: There is a connection between Marxism and a group of Satanists called Frankists. One of the strongest satanic cults to take control over the Jewish population was called Sabbatianism. Jakob Frank assumed the role of leader of this group, and afterward this brand of satanism was called Frankism…Billy Graham’s family when they originally came over to this nation were of the Frank family which is related to Jakob Frank”
          Wow the only thing that’s going to be stranger than this is if I conclude that the Apollo program was a complete fraud…

        2. The Apollo moon landing WAS a complete fraud! There are dozens of videos showing this on YouTube. Just search for “moon landing hoax” there.

  28. Steven Smith said:

    “The war that loomed was not Israel’s choice: it was Johnson’s. Israel was ordered to attack that American ship, by America. If you can’t face that, you can’t look for the Yellow King. And that case, you don’t belong here.”

    I was being “openly hostile” here? What are you talking about?

    You ask for evidence. I have provided it here a few times in the past. I hate repeating myself, and I’m certain the readers hate re-reading the same things over and over. Do a search using these words: “I want that god damned ship liberty Johnson”. The question you must ask yourself is WHY Israel would attack its prime benefactor? The country was not even 20 years old. It still needed America (it does’t anymore), as it was still growing its economy. We were Israel’s best friend in the world, too. Israel was extremely popular with Americans, and vice versa. What you are suggesting is insane.

    Now, ask yourself what was in it forJohnson? Getting into a war by means of a false flag was his style (Gulf of Tonkin), and he REALLY wanted to get into Egypt, and kick out the Soviets. His scheme was to use Israel as a henchman to sink an American ship monitoring the war and blame it on Egypt.

    You say “I suppose you will tell me that you got this from Barry Chamish.” You would be correct about that; no one knows the dark side of Israel’s leadership better than Barry. But that search I suggested you make will give lots of sources telling the same story.

    Your position makes sense only when viewed through a lens of irrational hatred. Mine has the benefit of fitting Lyndon Johnson’s temperament, strategy, tactics and track record perfectly. Indeed, were it not for the hate you cultivate for Jesus’ kin, you’d probably see my position as a blinding flash of the obvious.

    1. Patrick, Jesus was not a (J-word)! You had better learn the difference between Israelites of the Judahite tribe, and Edomite/Canaanite demon-seed children of Cain (aka (J-word)s). THEY ARE POLAR OPPOSITES, sworn enemies of one another!

      If you are open-minded enough to read more on this subject, start here:

      http://anglo-saxonisrael.com/content/jesus-was-not-jword

      Correct the spelling of “jword”.

      You know, actually I was prepared to totally leave this blog, before this comment from Patrick. I don’t like being told that “I’ve said enough” anywhere. James Tracy, you have lost a potential ally here. I would think that you of all people would understand my position.

      Patrick, it might interest you to know that I am sincerely interested and open to your contention that LBJ orchestrated the USS Liberty attack. I can easily see how he might have actually done that. I’ve known about his saying “I don’t care if that ship sinks to the bottom” for quite some time now. But you also totally blew it with me when you treat me (a newcomer here, who can’t possibly know everything you’ve written on this site) with as much scorn as you have. You continue to call me a “hater”. No, it is YOU that is hateful here – towards ME. I’m sick of it.

      So I’m gone from here. I hope that at least proves to you that I am not a CIA operative, which was patently absurd to begin with.

      1. Apparently, I treated you better than you deserved. Your first comment to me was the claim that you are a conservative Christian, and that that is not incompatible with an all-consuming hatred of Israel.

        Now, after considerable back-and-forth, you purport to “prove” that pretty much the whole Bible is false, presenting as evidence one of the insane made-up histories people concoct simply because they want to claim to be Christians but can’t abide Jesus having any family connection to the people they hate so enthusiastically. For people like you, all the fulfilled prophesy is just a sheer coincidence. Everyone in the world today is not descended from Noah. Anything to escape Jesus’ genealogy.

        Here’s a Bible Code a large percentage of conservative Christians know about (I’ll bet you don’t, because you choose to believe that preposterous Cain crap): “Man appointed mortal sorrow, but the blessed God will come down, teaching the despairing that His death shall bring comfort/rest.”

        Check it out: http://www.khouse.org/articles/1996/44/

        The people you hate with such brio would never embed that message in the names of the lineage that led to Noah, because it proves both that Christianity is true, and that the whole of the Old Testament was inspired by the creator of the universe. The whole of history was foretold by the people you so despise–and they didn’t even know it.

        Likewise, they would never knowingly include Zachariah 12, or Hosea 5:15-6:2. Or countless other prophesies. But you don’t believe the Bible, Steven Smith. You lied to me. You hate Jesus’ kinfolk, and are willing to believe the wildest nonsense to justify that hate. You told me you are a conservative Christian, but you don’t believe the Bible.

        And then you manufacture dudgeon toward me, calling my calling you out the REAL hate going on here.

        I laugh.

        1. “Apparently, I treated you better than you deserved. ”

          Incredible… dripping with arrogance and superiority. This is not a Christian attitude, Patrick.

          ” Your first comment to me was the claim that you are a conservative Christian, and that that is not incompatible with an all-consuming hatred of Israel.”

          Let’s get one thing straight at the outset. The current-day state of Israel is in no way, shape or form related to the children of Israel in the Bible. I have no argument at all with the latter. In fact, I count myself as PART OF the latter, along with all other white Christians of European descent. WE are the true Israel of the Bible. The “Jews” are descended from Esau and through his intermarriage with Canaanites, from Cain. The “Jews” are false Israel/Judah. They are mixed-race hybrids, not pure-blooded Adamites. They are impostors, to put it plainly.

          “Everyone in the world today is not descended from Noah.”

          I totally agree with that. Noah’s flood was not worldwide.

          “Anything to escape Jesus’ genealogy.”

          Putting words into my mouth, Patrick. I do not escape Jesus’ genealogy, quite to the contrary. Jesus’ genealogy is of the utmost importance.

          “The people you hate with such brio would never embed that message in the names of the lineage that led to Noah, because it proves both that Christianity is true, and that the whole of the Old Testament was inspired by the creator of the universe. The whole of history was foretold by the people you so despise–and they didn’t even know it.”

          I honestly cannot discern what you mean here. I have no problem at all with the Bible, contrary to what you seem to think. I believe it is, both in the Old and New Testaments, the inspired word of God (who I prefer to call Yahweh).

          I am pretty sure that you are scratching your head now, wondering how could I just say that, and still hate the Jews? It’s because you don’t understand my fundamental point, which is that the Jews are NOT the Israel of the Bible, but are instead descended from Edomite/Canaanite tribes and (later) the Khazars, who merely converted to Judaism in 740 AD. This is why the Jews REJECT Jesus Christ (aka Yahshua) as their Messiah, because they are NOT OF HIS FLOCK, i.e. they are NOT his kinsmen.

          I am trying my best to be civil here with you, Patrick. I have not called you any names, nor have I talked down my nose to you (as you have done to me). I hate the Jews because the Jews are Yahweh’s (and Christ’s) enemies. I hate them because Yahweh hates them. As Yahweh said: “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.” (Malachi 1:3, Romans 9:13).

          If the Jews were the Israel of the Bible, can you explain why we don’t see the word “Jew” even ONE TIME in all of the first 5 books of the Bible (the books of Moses)? And yet we can count over 500 occurrences of the word “Israel” in those books. The word “Jew” doesn’t appear anywhere in the Bible until you get to II Kings 6:16, better than one-third of the way into the Bible. And then it was almost as an afterthought: “The Syrian king drave the Jews from Elath”. This could not have been mighty Israel.

          And practically everywhere in the book of John, you see Christ condemning the Jews, especially at John 8:44, saying quite plainly that “Ye are of your father the devil…”. Make no mistake, Christ was addressing the Jews (see John 8:48). And yet here you are condemning ME for exactly what Christ did! That’s pretty warped, Patrick.

          You sure you aren’t a Jew? You act like one.

      2. I wouldn’t be in a hurry to leave over a few comments,
        and while there is no question that their were conspirators in the US Government its silly to try to deflect blame for the Israelis bombing killing and staffing American sailors in the water-WE KNOW THE ISRAELIS BOMBED THE USS LIBERTY and its about time Americans were told officially and the Israelis answer for it

        1. Totally agreed here. In addition though, I would like to know precisely who in the U.S. government (and probably media) was responsible for covering this whole thing up for almost 50 years now. Very few Americans today know anything about the attack on the USS Liberty. That is an absolute disgrace, and heads should be rolling over it. I regard anyone who would cover this up to be an absolute traitor to America and her people. There are evidently a lot of traitors in the U.S. government. Were they Jews? I don’t know and frankly I don’t CARE! They should be weeded out and punished for this act of treason! I don’t care what their ethnicity is.

        2. The sailors were sward to secrecy, and the term of that oath only expired in recent years. Some of them have indicated that they were told that if they breathed a word about it, they would be killed, and perhaps their families, too.

          This sort of imposed omertà could only come from the very top. It is obvious why: Johnson had been a key player in the murder of John Kennedy, but that was completely covered up. But he was terribly unpopular for the war he was running on the other side of the world, and all the dead Americans he was responsible for. He cared about his reputation, though (which is why he decided not to run again in 1968–he wanted to retire without scandal).

          With this in mind, imagine if the world knew that he ordered the sinking of an American ship, to get into ANOTHER war. He would be the most hated man in American history. He’s replace Mud as the person everyone immediately thought of when a reputation is lost permanently.

          Let’s say he agreed that the people should know, but he tried to blame Israel, saying it was a surprise attack. Everyone in the country would immediately be suspicious–because Israel had no motive, and Americans overwhelmingly loved Israel still (there was not yet a PLO, much less a Hamas, to poison that love, relentlessly, in the press).

          Likewise, the deal Johnson made to get Israel to act so despicably involved keeping Israel’s role a secret. The event was supposed to have been done by Egypt, to get America into another war. If Johnson broke that promise, Israel would be certain to let the world know what really happened. Johnson would be ruined. He’d be impeached, and probably jailed. The two scandals that were certain to send him to prison, that Kennedy’s murder had made to vanish, would be dredged up–call it the revenge of Billie Sol Estes. The vast fortune he had made while president would be investigated. It would be the greatest crisis America ever saw.

          THAT’S why no one was allowed to know about it.

        3. “The sailors were sward to secrecy, and the term of that oath only expired in recent years. Some of them have indicated that they were told that if they breathed a word about it, they would be killed, and perhaps their families, too.”

          Precisely, and who was it that gave those sailors death threats? Admiral Isaac Kidd, a CHOSENITE.

          “With this in mind, imagine if the world knew that he ordered the sinking of an American ship, to get into ANOTHER war. He would be the most hated man in American history. ”

          Yeah, uh-huh, agreed, no argument from me. So why do you think Johnson would be so incredibly stupid as to actually give Israel such orders to sink an American ship, if the consequences of this becoming widely known would get Johnson hanged for treason? Do you really think Johnson was that stupid, Patrick?

          “Let’s say he agreed that the people should know, but he tried to blame Israel, saying it was a surprise attack.”

          Hold on a minute here. What did you just say? You appear to be saying there WAS an attack on the USS Liberty, but that Johnson (falsely?) blamed Israel for the attack. In other words, Egypt of someone else actually attacked the ship? But everybody knew that it was Israel who attacked the ship. There was no disguising or denying that. THE ISRAELIS THEMSELVES ADMITTED THAT THEY DID IT. But they just claimed it was a case of “mistaken identity”, claimed they thought the ship was an Egyptian freighter (but which was much smaller than the Liberty and had no massive array of antennas, had no American flag like the Liberty, and was not broadcasting on frequencies dedicated only to American naval vessels.) Yeah, right.

          “Everyone in the country would immediately be suspicious–because Israel had no motive, and Americans overwhelmingly loved Israel still (there was not yet a PLO, much less a Hamas, to poison that love, relentlessly, in the press).”

          How could the PLO or Hamas “poison” American love for Israel? I would think they would only strengthen it – and probably did.

          Isntreal DID have possibly several motives for attacking the Liberty: 1) because it was an NSA spy ship, the Liberty probably could overhear them murdering Egyptian prisoners in the Sinai, simply because they didn’t have any prisons to take them off to. and 2) The Isntrealies used unmarked planes, specifically for the purpose of tricking the Liberty crewmen into thinking these were Egyptian aircraft. That would have brought the US immediately into the war on Isntreal’s side. I believe this was the prime motive. But it was way too bold a maneuver for the Isntrealies to pull off, and they eventually fessed up.

          “Likewise, the deal Johnson made to get Israel to act so despicably involved keeping Israel’s role a secret. The event was supposed to have been done by Egypt, to get America into another war. If Johnson broke that promise, Israel would be certain to let the world know what really happened. Johnson would be ruined. He’d be impeached, and probably jailed.”

          There is something missing from your logic here, Patrick. You’re claiming Johnson ordered Israel to attack the Liberty, and promised that he would keep that a secret and blame Egypt instead? That was why he wanted the ship totally sunk, with no survivors? Possibly. I’m not saying that wasn’t possible. I’m just saying that was not the most likely possibility. Especially given the extreme risk Johnson would be taking if the anything went “wrong” – which it did (from LBJ’s perspective, when the Liberty was NOT sunk and there were over 100 survivors).

          I would like to suggest a third explanation which even I hadn’t thought about until just today. Johnson was heavily involved in the JFK assassination, and according to Michael Collins Piper, so was Israel. Israel was peeved because JFK was refusing to let them have the Bomb (they eventually got hundreds of Bombs anyway, due to their relentless spying on the US – or more likely, LBJ just let them have the technology). Israel had the goods on Johnson, and could put him away in a heartbeat if he didn’t fully cooperate with them – a tactic very frequently used by the Chosenites. (they’re such nice people – always bribing and blackmailing to get their way). So what really happened was Israel told Johnson to “stand down” while they sunk the Liberty, otherwise he was kaput. Johnson had no choice but to go along.

          I can’t prove that this happened, but I think this explanation makes more sense than Barry Chamish’s.

        4. I said, and you quote, “The sailors were sworn to secrecy, and the term of that oath only expired in recent years. Some of them have indicated that they were told that if they breathed a word about it, they would be killed, and perhaps their families, too.”

          You answer that a lowly Admiral would be capable of making that decree and enforcing it. If you believe that, you know nothing.

          You ask “why do you think Johnson would be so incredibly stupid as to actually give Israel such orders to sink an American ship, if the consequences of this becoming widely known would get Johnson hanged for treason? Do you really think Johnson was that stupid, Patrick?”

          The answer is, he got away with it once, at the Gulf of Tonkin, without even really having to do it. He was not stupid; he was a gangster. He got away with killing the president. He got away with the Warren Commission. The Sabbateans who ruled Israel certainly would not betray the trust he had in them. There was little chance the deal would go bad.

          You say:

          “Let’s say he agreed that the people should know, but he tried to blame Israel, saying it was a surprise attack.” Hold on a minute here. What did you just say? You appear to be saying there WAS an attack on the USS Liberty, but that Johnson (falsely?) blamed Israel for the attack. In other words, Egypt of someone else actually attacked the ship? But everybody knew that it was Israel who attacked the ship. There was no disguising or denying that. THE ISRAELIS THEMSELVES ADMITTED THAT THEY DID IT. But they just claimed it was a case of “mistaken identity”, claimed they thought the ship was an Egyptian freighter (but which was much smaller than the Liberty and had no massive array of antennas, had no American flag like the Liberty, and was not broadcasting on frequencies dedicated only to American naval vessels.) Yeah, right.

          This takes a little unpacking. You said, “You appear to be saying there WAS an attack on the USS Liberty…”. Well yes. Of course. No one denies that fact. You act as if that is some shocking admission on my part. Then you said “but that Johnson (falsely?) blamed Israel for the attack.” Of course, I did not say that. I said, hypothetically, if he did not choose to use the awesome power of the federal government to make history have no record of the event, but instead allowed the people to know something happened, obviously, he’d have to throw Israel off the side of the train. But he did not do that (because he knew he could not get away with it). He never acknowledged the attack even happened. No one was allowed to acknowledge it, under penalty of death.

          You ask how I think the PLO and later Hamas was able to poison a large part of the American people’s instinctive love for Israel, but you didn’t notice that I told you how: the press. The media have in the ensuing decades become completely sold out, in defense of Israel’s Arab enemies.

          You say: “Isntreal [sic] DID have possibly several motives for attacking the Liberty: 1) because it was an NSA spy ship, the Liberty probably could overhear them murdering Egyptian prisoners in the Sinai, simply because they didn’t have any prisons to take them off to….”

          You are unhinged. This is completely ridiculous. It is evidence you know absolutely nothing of those Six Days, or of Israel’s relationship with America, not to mention the Sabbateans who ruled Israel, and America’s dealings with them. You are an ignoramus.

          “…and 2) The Isntrealies [sic] used unmarked planes, specifically for the purpose of tricking the Liberty crewmen into thinking these were Egyptian aircraft. That would have brought the US immediately into the war on Isntreal’s [sic] side. I believe this was the prime motive.”

          You only believe that because of hate. You can’t reason. It’s stupid. Israel did not NEED us to help out in the war. Israel defeated all those Arab countries, effortlessly, in a mere six days, because they were fighting ARABS, armies that were like toy soldiers. On the other hand, America needed to get into the war if we were to use it as cause to get the Soviets out of Egypt, and we had to do it fast—because the Arab armies were going to fold like a cheap card table. We needed Israel’s help, and made a deal to get it.

          You say “But it was way too bold a maneuver for the Isntrealies [sic] to pull off, and they eventually fessed up.”

          When was that, now? I never heard about that. Fact is, no one else has either. You’re just making it up. Israel was silent as the grave until recently, when the sailors themselves finally were allowed to talk.

          In the next section you tell me there is something missing from my explanation of the true history of that event, but you never tell me what it is. Maybe you don’t know what a false flag is, and thus do not understand the logic of such strategies. When the tactic went wrong, and the ship limped away to Cyprus full of witnesses, the War Room devised a way to keep those angry men from saying what they experienced. The strategy had been to get us into someone else’s war at the last minute, but the ship proved too tough, and the Israeli pilots and sailors too pro-American to finish the job. Johnson had to deal with failure; imposing silence is how he did it.

          Finally, Michael Collins Piper is wrong. Israel got nuclear secrets from America in the 1950s, in exchange for cages filled with Sephardic children who were shipped across the the Atlantic, never to return, for radiation experimentation unto death. A truly ugly, but typical, bit of Sabbateanism. If you want to know that story, read Barry Chamish.

          If you want to know the truth about Pollard, read Barry’s research report that I linked to. Your eyes will be opened about the genuine evil ruling both countries.

          As for me, reading your shallow take on these events over the last few days, I can assure you, you have no idea how bad is the problem we face.

        5. “You say: “Isntreal [sic] DID have possibly several motives for attacking the Liberty: 1) because it was an NSA spy ship, the Liberty probably could overhear them murdering Egyptian prisoners in the Sinai, simply because they didn’t have any prisons to take them off to….”

          “You are unhinged. This is completely ridiculous. It is evidence you know absolutely nothing of those Six Days, or of Israel’s relationship with America, not to mention the Sabbateans who ruled Israel, and America’s dealings with them. You are an ignoramus.”

          I’m sorry, Patrick, but this is NOT ridiculous, and I am not making it up. I had simply assumed that you had previously seen the same documentary that I had about the attack, “The Loss of Liberty”. Here it is:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZluFfyQ7sAI

          Fast forward to 42:24 and listen to James Bamford say exactly what I wrote. He said this was obtained from Israeli war historians.

          So I hope that you will now acknowledge that I am not “unhinged”, and maybe even go as far as apologizing for calling me an “ignoramus”. But I am not holding my breath on either one, because you are not the type to ever say you’re sorry.

          You really ought to go about presenting your case in a different way, Patrick. You might gain more adherents to it, or at least listeners. But when you look and talk down your nose at people, like you have me here, you’re not going to win over people. You really need some lessons in basic Christian humility.

          And I will say once more (although I’m not sure if J.T. ever permitted it to be seen), my position regarding the “Jews” is that the “Jews” are false Israelites. They are Edomites descended from Esau instead of Jacob/Israel. This is even admitted in the Jewish Encyclopedia.

          I have no problem with the Israelites, none whatsoever. Why should I? I am one.

    2. The US does not order anybody to do anything. Alphabet agencies are paid through the IMF to what is known as the Washington D.C. corporation which is considered bankrupt and under the crown regardless of what Joe six pack has been lead to believe.

      https://dublinsmickdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/star.png

      The reasons for the attack are now clear. The Israelis hoped that the Americans would think Egypt attacked the USS Liberty and that this would draw the US into the war, just like the false claim of an attack on a US ship drew the US into a war in Vietnam. This is why the jets attacking the ship were unmarked.

      The attacking jets called in and told their base that this was a US ship, and had them repeat the orders to attack it, twice.

      This attack happened, with the FOREKNOWLEDGE of certain people in the US and Israeli governments. If the ship had been sunk and all hands lost, the US could have said Egypt did it, with Soviet backing and the US would have been drawn into the war.

      http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/12/uss-liberty-attack-was-it-false-flag.html

      1. That’s not a very persuasive theory, Mick. Israel did just fine. In six days. Israel loved us, and our people loved them. They would have everything to lose by trying something so stupid.

        On the other hand, America was deep in the Cold War. We had a monster running the show, who desperately wanted the Soviets out of Egypt. Why would Israel care about the Soviets’ friendship with Egypt?

        Your theory is foolishness. It is simply a justification for hate. If you did not feel that hate, you would not doubt my legitimate history for a moment.

        1. You really need to look up the word. “Facts.” You are unfamiliar with its meaning, but you like using the word. Lies are not facts, and justifications for hate, no matter how ridiculous, are lies, not facts. You are an enthusiastic defender of this category of lies, Mick. Your web site is hilarious. Facts are not your strong suit.

        2. Time to turn the page of your manual Paddy. It is obvious you want to keep the Abrahamic religion paradigm front and center as well as any factual evidence that even a wino in the alley could see. Israel is great, Israel is innocent of any wrong doings ever. etc etc.

          By the way my website is approaching one million viewers in close to three years, averaging 1000 to 1500 hits a day. How is yours doing?

        3. Don’t be gross, Mick.

          And don’t mistake my silence on any of your nonsense as consent or agreement; I’m just not willing to argue with you the way Patrick is. Pearls before swine, and all that.

        4. “That’s not a very persuasive theory, Mick. Israel did just fine. In six days. Israel loved us, and our people loved them. They would have everything to lose by trying something so stupid.”

          You cannot deny that Israel attacked the USS Liberty on June 8, 1967, in the midst of the six-day war with Egypt, killing 34 American sailors and wounding 171 others. Israel itself admits that they did this. But you are saying “Israel did just fine” now, Patrick? “Israel loved us, and our people loved them”? Perhaps most Americans did still love Israel, but that was ONLY because the Zio-media in this country NEVER TOLD THEM ABOUT THE ATTACK on the USS Liberty! I myself didn’t ever learn about it until 2005, THIRTY-EIGHT YEARS after it happened!

          Do you honestly think Americans would love Israel as much as you do, if the media in this country were only doing its job properly? I don’t.

        5. Who denies that Israel tried to sink our ship? Certainly not me. Lucia Bracci does deny that he is a hit man, after all.

          [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Za3vgqxQDHE&w=420&h=315%5D

          Obviously Israel did fine. Israel whipped all those armies in six days; it didn’t need us–we needed Israel. If Johnson was going to find his way into Egypt, he had to act fast, and he needed to call in some chits to make it happen.

          Now we find a place where your irrational hatred makes you think irrationally:

          “Israel loved us, and our people loved them”? Perhaps most Americans did still love Israel, but that was ONLY because the Zio-media in this country NEVER TOLD THEM ABOUT THE ATTACK on the USS Liberty! I myself didn’t ever learn about it until 2005, THIRTY-EIGHT YEARS after it happened!”

          We are talking about the time prior to the war, Steven. BEFORE Johnson ordered the sinking of the Liberty. No one could hold that action against Israel at that time, because it hadn’t happened yet.

          And no one else ever heard about it, either. You are not alone. The system protects itself, as I wrote earlier today. If ANYONE were to be allowed to find out about that false flag operation, the whole structure would collapse.

          That’s what I’m trying to tell you.

          I referenced the Yellow King before. Look into that.

        6. Perhaps, your being a bit slow, I should spell out the idea a little more loathe as I am to repeat myself.

          If, after the failure to sink the ship, the president chose not to force a state of complete secrecy to protect himself and his legacy, his only option would be to blame the hit man. He had intended that the world would accept that Egypt did it, but he couldn’t get away with that now.

          But no-one would believe that Israel spontaneously tried to ruin its relationship with its best friend in the world, the country it needed the most help from and whose people shared a deep mutual affection.

          It would take decades to generate a believable cloud of suspicion against Israel in the minds of Americans. The press gradually circled the wagons in that regard, slowly transforming the image of the scruffy monster Arafat into a sort of “statesman.” At the time, were Johnson to say that Israel for no reason attacked our sailors, sinking one of our ships, no one would believe he had nothing to do with it–especially when Israel recognized that it was now freed from its promise to keep the operation secret. Johnson, and America, would be stripped naked.

          Didn’t I already say that?

        7. “Perhaps, your being a bit slow, I should spell out the idea a little more loathe as I am to repeat myself.”

          Patrick, I am sick and tired of your patronizing me. If I appear to be “a bit slow” to you, it is only because you are presenting a totally bizarre theory here, one which makes no sense at all.

          Why would Johnson command Israel to attack and sink an American ship? What possibly could motivate him to do that? So he could have an excuse to go to war against Egypt? Why? Where is the benefit? And what about the risk? The Soviet Union was Egypt’s ally. If we responded to this incident by attacking Egypt, what do you think the Soviet Union’s response would have been?

          Now you seem to be saying that Johnson was not only stupid but totally insane as well, willing to risk blowing up the whole world. For WHAT, Patrick? I honestly can’t think of reason for him acting that crazy.

          And why would Johnson take the risk that Israel would be unsuccessful at sinking the Liberty, as actually did happen? The only thing I really agree with you about was that that would totally embarrass Johnson and would force his resignation. Why on earth would he want to take the chance on that happening?

          So yeah, I’m slow as molasses at accepting this insane theory. I bet everybody else here is too.

        8. “Patrick, I am sick and tired of your patronizing me.”

          You make it too easy. Look, Steven. You say you are a conservative Christian who hates Israel. We’ve spent some time exploring the roots of your obsession, and the more I learn about what you think and believe, the more open you become to ridicule. I can’t help myself, sinner that I am.

          Conservative Christians believe the Old Testament. You don’t. You think Jesus is not Jewish. You believe the ridiculous claptrap of Christian Identity™ . I can’t help but mock you. Sue me.

          (But it does make me curious as to who you believe Paul was talking about in Romans 9 & 10–but especially 11. Who, precisely, was he talking about in verse 7, when he said “the rest were hardened”? And in verse 25, when he says he does not want us to be uninformed about “this mystery…that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the gentiles has come in and thus all Israel will be saved.”– Maybe you shouldn’t read verses 26 and 27, which quote the Old Testament; you might feel like the need to wash your eyeballs.–Who is he talking about, and where are they today? Also, if the people Paul was talking about ceased to exist, and were replaced by another ethnic group, as you believe, how did they cease to exist, and how is it that their replacements became exclusively Hebrew speakers? That would be truly unique in history.)

          The idea that the Zionist Movement did not regather the people Paul was talking about in their ancestral homeland in our time is foolish to anyone who believes the Bible, and believes that the God who created the universe gave us the Bible so that we would know what He wants us to know. I have in recent days presented many texts that demonstrate this point, none of which you seem familiar with. In this regard, I get easily bored with people who don’t actually want to know that which I try to impart, so I admit that I toy with you out of that boredom. Still, refuting your pernicious doctrines is important, for the sake of all the others who read what I write. It can’t be allowed to stand without being knocked down from scripture and genuine historical truth. So if I am going to that trouble, the cat finds himself tormenting the mouse in the process sometimes. As I say, I am prone to sin.

          You say “Why would Johnson command Israel to attack and sink an American ship? What possibly could motivate him to do that?”

          I keep telling you that, but your ears are not functioning. It was the Cold War, Steven.

          Continuing, “So he could have an excuse to go to war against Egypt? Why? Where is the benefit?”

          I keep telling you THAT, too. I don’t like repeating myself; I suggest you re-read my earlier comments. Sheesh.

          “And what about the risk? The Soviet Union was Egypt’s ally. If we responded to this incident by attacking Egypt, what do you think the Soviet Union’s response would have been?”

          Johnson was a very reckless man, as I have pointed out, a kind of gangster/danger-junkie. He always got away with everything. Sociopaths’ minds are not comprehensible by normal people.

          “Now you seem to be saying that Johnson was not only stupid but totally insane as well, willing to risk blowing up the whole world. For WHAT, Patrick? I honestly can’t think of reason for him acting that crazy.

          I just told you. But I also told you more than once before.

          “And why would Johnson take the risk that Israel would be unsuccessful at sinking the Liberty, as actually did happen?”

          No military operation is guaranteed to be successful. All incur that risk. Apparently, the removal of the Soviets from the Middle East was, to the American Councils of Evil, worth the risk. And in any event, when the operation failed, they were successful in silencing all the witnesses until such a time as no one would care any more.

          It is not a theory, and it is not insane. What WOULD be insane is the idea that Israel spontaneously attacked America, for no comprehensible reason. The only people who entertain that weird bizarro-thought do so because they are motivated by irrational hate. These are the same people who brush off the constant raining down on Israeli towns of missiles by Hamas, and the dozen or so invasion tunnels Hamas used humanitarian aid to build into Israel. People who misunderstand the term “ethnic cleansing,” and use it to characterize the surgical bombing of the missile launch platforms Israel (very) reluctantly found itself forced to take out.

          I can’t extractive hate from your heart, Steven. Only God can do that. I hope, though, that I have helped lay that groundwork for you.

        9. My God in Heaven above, you are the most arrogant, sanctimonious [well, I won’t use the word I originally wrote here] I have encountered in a long while, Patrick.

          I’m am seriously at the end of my rope with you. I have tried my best to reason with you, but you aren’t having any of that. You keep putting words into my mouth, and keep attributing beliefs to myself that I SIMPLY DO NOT HAVE! This latest one is that I don’t believe in the Old Testament. Where did I ever say that? Can you point out where I said that? No, you can’t, because I have NEVER said, because I simply DON’T BELIEVE IT. I’m not going to SAY something that I do not BELIEVE, Patrick. But you’re going to go ahead and BELIEVE that I DO believe that, simply because you seem to think you have some kind of God-like omniscience, and an ability to KNOW everything there is to know about myself. When in fact you don’t know hardly anything, other than my first and last name. Which by the way, I would appreciate if you would spell correctly. It’s with a “ph” rather than a “v”, as in STEPHEN.

          I have now reached the conclusion that you are NOT a Christian, but rather a Jew, Patrick. This is partly why I asked you why you left the “Christian” out of “evangelical”, when you described yourself. Believe it or not, I actually discovered an evangelical Jew for the first time just a few days ago. Here is a YouTube video of him:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2h5Ylr4EPH4

          I have now found my second evangelical Jew, and that appears to be yourself. I suspect John Hagee is as well, and Joel Osteen. And I suppose now, thanks to Mick, Billy Graham has now been identified as a true evangelical Jew. Perhaps the first of his kind.

          They appear to be crawling out of the woodwork. Could that be because the light of truth is finally beginning to be shown on them?

          Here is what finally convinced me that you have to be a Jew, Patrick. Are you familiar with a guy named Harold Wallace Rosenthal? He’s dead now, but as you could probably guess, he was a Jew who worked as a legislative aide for Senator Jacob Javits of New York in the mid-1970’s. He gave a fascinating interview around 1976 with Charles Weisman, in which he revealed the true political intentions of the Jews. They are quite shocking, to put it mildly, and (I will freely admit) DO account for much of the “hatred” that you perceive in me towards Jews. I think I have pretty good reasons for that, as I believe anyone (except for maybe some Jews like yourself) will agree once they read this entire interview. Here is the complete transcript of the interview:

          https://thetruthisfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/06/27/jews-worship-and-adore-satan/

          Notice first that the title of this article is “Jews worship and adore Satan”. Well, according to Mr. Rosenthal, they do, as he admits towards the end of it.

          “After the tape machine had been turned off, I accused Harold Rosenthal of not living up to our agreement in replying truthfully to my question as to why Jews claim to be the “chosen people.” He replied: “We are a chosen people. Most Jews do not like to admit it but our god is Lucifer and we Jews are his chosen people. Lucifer is very much alive.”

          But I don’t want you to pay too much attention to that. Here is what I want you to pay attention to, and why I in an instant thought you were Harold Wallace Rosenthal reincarnated. You stated:

          “I have in recent days presented many texts that demonstrate this point, none of which you seem familiar with. In this regard, I get easily bored with people who don’t actually want to know that which I try to impart, so I admit that I toy with you out of that boredom. Still, refuting your pernicious doctrines is important, for the sake of all the others who read what I write. It can’t be allowed to stand without being knocked down from scripture and genuine historical truth. So if I am going to that trouble, the cat finds himself tormenting the mouse in the process sometimes. As I say, I am prone to sin.”

          Compare what you said to what HWR said 40 years ago:

          “The credulous nature of Americans drew only contempt from him. The interview continued on an almost omniscient plane. “We Jews have put issue upon issue to the American people. Then we promote both sides of the issue as confusion reigns. With their eyes fixed on the issues they fail to see who is behind every scene. We Jews toy with the American public as a cat toys with a mouse.” ”

          I wonder if you can see yourself in this guy, Patrick. You are almost like a spitting image of him, in my mind. You have an extremely cold, almost reptilian way of talking to ordinary people. Just like HWR.

          I would encourage, if not yourself, at least everyone else on this blog reading these words to read the entire Harold Wallace Rosenthal interview. It is easily one of the most chilling things I have ever encountered. But not a whole lot different from reading Patrick’s comments here.

        10. @Patrick

          (But it does make me curious as to who you believe Paul was talking about in Romans 9 & 10–but especially 11. Who, precisely, was he talking about in verse 7, when he said “the rest were hardened”?)

          Paul never met Jesus, he supposedly had vision on the highway. He was instrumental in distorting the message of the heart brought by Jesus and establishing the control system brought about by Constantine 300 years later when he had his minions plagiarize vedic scripture and bring us the bible.

        11. “He was instrumental in distorting the message of the heart brought by Jesus….”

          Provide ANY Scripture which demonstrates that the apostle Paul, in any way, shape or form, contradicted ANY doctrine of Jesus Christ.

          Paul never “met” Jesus?” Oh, ok…then…Moses never met YAHWEH, God never revealed prophecy to Simeon (Luke chpt 2), Stephen never saw the glory of God (Luke chpt 7) and on and on and on and on….

          Jesus had been crucifed and glorified, yes. But the supernatural meeting took place, and can be understood by reading Acts chapter 9. If you do not believe God can acquaint Himself, even after being nailed to a cross and dying, with anyone whom He chooses to reveal Himself to, then put the bible down and back away from it.

          It is apparently not getting through to you at this time.

        12. Joseph Charles Miroddi said:

          ““He was instrumental in distorting the message of the heart brought by Jesus….”

          Provide ANY Scripture which demonstrates that the apostle Paul, in any way, shape or form, contradicted ANY doctrine of Jesus Christ.”

          This was probably an honest mistake on your part, but I was not the one who said these things about Paul. That was Mick. So far, I find myself agreeing with Mick on about half the issues, but disagreeing with him on the other half. This is one issue I disagree with him about.

          That said, however, I would vastly prefer to deal with Mick than I would with Patrick. At least Mick probably respects me somewhat. Patrick does not do that at all. And the only reason he doesn’t is because he (incorrectly, IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION) equates the Jews with the Israelites of the Old Testament. My contention is that the Biblical (aka Sephardic) “Jews” were the children of Esau (who God hated) and not Jacob/Israel (who God loved). There is much circumstantial evidence to support this theory, but it cannot be presented in just a few paragraphs. You have to really study the background, and you have to be aware that the Bible has been incorrectly translated (by Masoretic Jews living in the 10th century AD) in certain strategic places, probably with the intention of misleading Christians (who these Jews despise).

          For more on the issue of Jews not being Israel, please read

          http://anglo-saxonisrael.com/content/jesus-was-not-jew

          in it entirety. Also research the writing of Willie Martin, although WM makes the mistake of saying Edomites are “false Jews”, whereas Israelites are “true Jews”. No, Jews of ANY sort are not of Israel or Judah. They are impersonating Israelites, and more specifically Judahites (counting on the similarity between the sound of “Jew” with “Judah”, even though these two groups are not only different but are in fact bitter enemies of one another.) The true israel and Judah are the white Caucasian European people who for the longest time were the ONLY Christians in the world. This was because they were responding to their KINSMAN REDEEMER, Jesus Christ. Edomite Jews scorned Jesus, because He was not of their bloodline, and His words made no sense to them.

          And if you want to know who is behind the genocide of white Europeans (as well as white Americans) now, look no further than the Jews who are promoting open immigration policies into (formerly) white countries ONLY – not China, or Japan, or Africa, or Latin America. White countries and ONLY white countries are being flooded by TURD-WORLD immigrants now. And Jews are the ones responsible for it, because they actually hate true Israel, namely white people.

      2. But, America didn’t “take the bait”.

        The Mil. Ind. Complex were happy with all the “Orders” of weapons they were getting from the Vietnam War Front it it’s height in 1967.

        1. I think the Israelis thought LBJ might just go for using another “Gulf of Tonkin II” as an excuse for war because “they knew” but he didn’t.

          If LBJ wanted to start another “Front” with Egypt he would have. He Didn’t. But as I said, The Mil. Ind. Complex were happy with all the “Orders” of weapons they were getting from the Vietnam War

        2. I’ve been gone all weekend and catching up here.
          You Guys have really been going for it and not in good productive way.

          Why can’t we simply say”In My Opinion” I think this about this or that?. “I’d love to here what you think and why you disagree”. “Maybe we both can learn something together from each others studies into the subject matter?”

          Oh, sorry. this is Planet Earth

          (sound of cheap wine pouring from a “box”)..

        3. Gotta be “PC” and correct my Grahamer Crackers:

          Substitute “Hear” instead of “Here” line 4 paragraph 2..Copy 1st draft.

  29. My cents…

    This discussion, set of arguments – whatever – has long reached the stage of futility. There are no arguments with “believers” – evangelicals.” Once, through “belief” a person has ceded any and all personal responsibility for their part in the happenings of the world around them, their very raison d’etre is of no viable use to the rest of humanity; the cards were dealt long ago and the hand will be played according to Hoyle whether we like it or not. Yet these same people will aver that as tools of some wholly incalculable entity, they are, as Frank Zappa said, “the crux of the biscuit…”

    The unfortunate fallacy in this line of thinking is that believers exist everywhere in every facet of our socio-cultural construct. Most people who are not believers of the evangelical sort are, nonetheless, have attached their personal responsibility kite to something, be it government or “space brothers/sisters.”

    However, upon closer inspection at a distance there is one tie that binds ALL belief — power. And the trick to power lies in that trick of a word, “authoritarianism.” As authoritarians are thought of as psychopaths hungry to devour any and everything around them for their own benefit, authoritarians are also more individuated people who fall yearn for outside control mechanisms by which to order their lives… everyone, in some form and function, ceding personal responsibility.

    Think of “the trick” another way. Think of respecting that we are all different, though we are told, that, within our “groups” (control mechanism), we look the same. But then rather than cede to those differences as irreconcilable, think of how the trick is altered if we then seek out our commonalities; that our differences represent our collective strength, rather than that which keeps us apart.

    The trick begins to be turned in its head. The Personal begins to be bolstered. The Collective begins to be perceived with hope. Power, in its positive manifestation begins to be understood as a concrete reality. With this, boots quake, authoritarianism begins to shed like dead skin.

    And maybe, just maybe, even the some staunchest of believers in a destiny outside of humans’ control might come to realize that it is just a thin piece of easily-pulled wool over their eyes —- and not some impenetrable veil.

    1. Sorry, but this doesn’t “wash” with me at all. The greatest mass murderers of humanity have atheists – Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the list goes on and on. The reason that these people were as authoritarian (and merciless) as they were was precisely because they rejected any notion of divine authority, which might otherwise have restrained their hand. When you don’t fear consequences in the Hereafter, there is basically nothing to keep you from committing unspeakable acts. Period.

      1. Most people lived a decent, reasonable peaceful existence with other people, because they learned collectively that this simply was “a better way to live,”
        they learned a long time ago one person against a pack of wild dogs didn’t stand a chance,
        together they could survive, find food and be safe,
        its was also in their genetic makeup to succor one another,
        mother to child, man to woman,
        out of this sprang humanity,
        religion came a long time after this.
        The art of storytelling grew around the campfire
        curious and intelligent they were
        they mused about the stars, where they cam from
        where they went when they were no more
        In all packs there is a natural hierarchy
        the ruling leaders naturally looked to their own desires
        civilizations were spawned
        new methods of harnessing the pack were devised
        storytelling had become fundamental,
        the life blood of social discourse
        a new story was told,
        but now only a specially appointed group of elders could tell these stories,
        these stories were majik
        and had the power to mesmerize the pack
        soon this group of leaders developed laws to give more power
        to these codes and customs,
        these leaders taught the people that these codes and custom came from the heavens,
        from alpha leaders that were beyond and leader in the villages,
        these leaders taught the people that these ‘gods” required
        meat for food
        and in return the deer herds would grow large and the fish in the stream would be plenty
        soon that was not enough
        .
        .
        .
        Pt I

      2. scsmith2 – I never said all authoritarians are religious, I’m unsure what you missed. In fact, I separated authoritarians and authoritarianism from religious belief. The “greatest mass murderers” you mentioned – all from the past – are the same as the greatest mass murderers of any period in time; they are all psychopaths – part of the psychopath power elite.

        1. dwil, read what I said again. I said just the opposite of what you are imputing to me. I said authoritarians are that way because they are NOT religious, not because they ARE religious. Because they don’t believe in a “higher power” than themselves, they don’t feel like they will ever be punished for their actions, and so they go and commit some of the most heinous crimes ever seen. This really should be obvious to everybody.

          However, I will, on second thought, concede that SOME religious types, particularly Muslims, have committed extremely violent crimes to all manner of non-Muslims over the course of 1,400 years. They believe their god Allah actually commanded them to do these things. Contrary to what Patrick might think, I am not all in favor of this! In fact, for this reason alone, I strongly believe that no Muslim should be allowed in white Christian countries (both Europe and America). Their religion is incompatible with Christianity and (in the case of America) incompatible with our Constitution (Sharia Law violates the 8th amendment, and Islam in general violates the 1st amendment rights to freedom of religion and speech).

          So I will agree with you, but only in part.

        2. Duh! I understand… sorry. As far as fearing the consequences keeping a person from such heinous acts unless every person in history who has led people into a war is a psychopath your statement cannot, unfortunately, be true.

          We need look no further than the psychopath mimetics surrounding, following and supporting Donald Trump to understand that that persuasiveness of the authoritarian can lead people who, psychically use authoritarianism to exist, to make choices that lead to gruesome outcomes just as does the authoritarian (and to my perception, psychopath).

          Look at the foot soldiers of Hitler; Bibi Netanyahu. Even the soldiers who found their conscience and walked away first carried out atrocities before doing so. Now think of someone with conscience ruling – a president – over an entire nation, like the U.S., where walking away means certain death for the president. The reason JFK is thought of as the “last real president” is because he was willing to walk away from Vietnam, willing to tax the powerful (cancelling the dangerous waters, oil transport tax break and taxing oil companies commensurate with their profits), printing of silver certificates, setting into motion what became the Civil Rights Act, etc.

          That willingness to walk away, turn his back on the psychopath power elite, earned him a nightmare on Elm St.

        3. dwil wrote:

          “We need look no further than the psychopath mimetics surrounding, following and supporting Donald Trump to understand that that persuasiveness of the authoritarian can lead people who, psychically use authoritarianism to exist..”

          I don’t know why you’re singling out Trump supporters as somehow being “psychopathic”. My God, remember ACORN and what they did during the Obama campaigns? Btw, they are still causing all the trouble at Trump rallies, but the media is blaming Trump supporters for it. No, it’s really “George Soros-funded MoveOn.org, Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, Hispanics hoisting Mexican flags and cop-haters carrying filthy signs to show their contempt for police”, as Pat Buchanan noted just today, that are causing all the trouble. I have yet to see any Trump supporter get hostile or violent. What they ARE getting is enthusiastic and empowered (for once), and I personally like to see that myself.

          You and I may disagree here. 🙂

        4. “I don’t know why you’re singling out Trump supporters as somehow being “psychopathic”. My God, remember ACORN and what they did during the Obama campaigns? Btw, they are still causing all the trouble at Trump rallies, but the media is blaming Trump supporters for it. No, it’s really “George Soros-funded MoveOn.org, Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, Hispanics hoisting Mexican flags and cop-haters carrying filthy signs to show their contempt for police”, as Pat Buchanan noted just today, that are causing all the trouble. I have yet to see any Trump supporter get hostile or violent. What they ARE getting is enthusiastic and empowered (for once), and I personally like to see that myself.

          You and I may disagree here. :)”

          Trump = recent and expedient EXAMPLE of people mimicking psychopath behavior of an authoritarian member of the psychopath power elite.

          Then you turn this into some sort of partisan politics tit-for-tat game to the point of the ascribing to virtual page most overt lie – that Trump-miming lemmings are non-violent? Really??? Outside of identifying them as psychopaths, I do not give a s**t about George Soros — or Sheldon Adelson, or Donald Trump, for that matter. If you bothered at all to think about what I initially wrote that should have been baldly apparent.

          That politics is nothing more than a fool’s errand for anyone other than those who seek to use it to maintain control over a given populace should be well apparent – but isn’t – by now, particularly for those who allege themselves to be enlightened as to the machinations of the power elite and their minions.

          What is apparent, though, is that your aim is not at all to address my initial comment but to use obfuscation to draw the conversation as far away from my comment’s message as possible.

          Have fun encasing yourself in fasci… “Pat Buchannon” —– wow.

          Oh, and don’t bother to reply, I’ve nothing more to discuss with you (though I’m sure you can’t help yourself but to do so). Games of the sort you’re attempting to play bore me.

        5. “I don’t know why you’re singling out Trump supporters as somehow being “psychopathic”. My God, remember ACORN and what they did during the Obama campaigns? Btw, they are still causing all the trouble at Trump rallies, but the media is blaming Trump supporters for it. No, it’s really “George Soros-funded MoveOn.org, Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, Hispanics hoisting Mexican flags and cop-haters carrying filthy signs to show their contempt for police”, as Pat Buchanan noted just today, that are causing all the trouble. I have yet to see any Trump supporter get hostile or violent. What they ARE getting is enthusiastic and empowered (for once), and I personally like to see that myself.

          You and I may disagree here. :)”

          Trump = recent and expedient EXAMPLE of people mimicking psychopath behavior of an authoritarian member of the psychopath power elite.

          Then you turn this into some sort of partisan politics tit-for-tat game to the point of the ascribing to virtual page most overt lie – that Trump-miming lemmings are non-violent? Really??? Outside of identifying them as psychopaths, I do not give a s**t about George Soros — or Sheldon Adelson, or Donald Trump, for that matter. If you bothered at all to think about what I initially wrote that should have been baldly apparent.

          That politics is nothing more than a fool’s errand for anyone other than those who seek to use it to maintain control over a given populace should be well apparent – but isn’t – by now, particularly for those who allege themselves to be enlightened as to the machinations of the power elite and their minions.

          What is apparent, though, is that your aim is not at all to address my initial comment but to use obfuscation to draw the conversation as far away from my comment’s message as possible.

          Have fun encasing yourself in fasci… “Pat Buchannon” —– wow.

          Oh, and don’t bother to reply I’m done with this discussion with you (though I’m sure you can’t help yourself but to do so). Games of the sort you’re attempting to play bore me.

        6. Let me guess who you voted for in 2008 and 2012 – Barack Hussein Obama. Correct? Not that I don’t personally know a lot of people like you. In fact, I used to be a liberal, like you. That was true up until the summer of 2006, when Nancy Pelosi announced that the Dems were not going to impeach Bush and Cheney, if they took the House later that year, which they did. And she lived up to her promise. But, by November of that year, I had already thrown in the towel on the Democrats. I realized that we lived in a one-party country, and that was the “War Party”, which was exactly what that “fascist” Pat Buchanan called it. He was (and still is) right.

        7. FYI. I did not – do not – “vote.” The ruse that is our political system is not at all lost on me. And most importantly before any news media issued their thoughts I was the first person in the U.S. to write at length about Obama’s first appointee – Rahm Emmanuel – and how was a portent for for his presidency; what we now can see has transpired. I was writing sports at the time.

          Your and other’s attempts to pigeonhole me will always fail.

          A hint: understanding the nature of the Deep State and its symbiotic relationship to the power elite is a rarity today. It helps, though, if a person has come through childhood to adulthood within and aware of its machinations and its ability to so easily confound and influence the public.

  30. As usual, starting back at the top, the last column having grown too long.

    “I wonder if you can see yourself in this guy, Patrick.” Ha! Good one, Steph.

    I have a policy of not taking too seriously the surreal, but I do have a reaction to share.

    You say “I have now reached the conclusion that you are NOT a Christian, but rather a Jew, Patrick.” As if that’s a bad thing. It’s not true, of course, but so what if it were? Would my defense of scripture be any less valid (scriptures you scrupulously avoid responding to, incidentally)?

    After saying that you embed a very interesting sermon by a Messianic Jew, as if by doing so you have “proved” something bad about Jews–a real head-scratcher. I guess you disapprove of Jews accepting Christ while retaining cultural Jewishness? Whatever. (Don’t bother correcting my speculation; your pathological hatred is growing increasingly uninteresting to me.)

    Then you link to an interview with a dead psychopath who claimed that organized Jewry is systematically constructing the New World Order, and that it holds the rest of us in utter contempt. Knock me over with a feather! I never heard that before. And straight from the horse’s mouth!

    This is a fascinating insight into what you believe. Very troubling.

    Steph, you being new around here and all, I guess you are unaware of my position on this subject, so I will summarize it for you.

    It comes down to the Bible–as so many things do. We are going to have a One World Government, a Satanic One World Religion, and a cashless One World money system. The Devil will be winning, having enslaved the entire human race. Jesus said in Matthew 24: 21 “For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will. 22 “Unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short. ”

    The trigger for His return is Hosea 5:15-6:2; the Jews have to ASK him to rescue the human race, which they will only do when it is on the edge of being too late. This will be done by the 144,000 of Revelation 7, who will have fled to Jordan from Israel. Read the chapter and note their names.

    Of COURSE the conspirators worship Satan, and of COURSE they are Shabbateans. It shows good character to hate them vehemently. We all should: they are going to have their way (and pretty soon, at that), and the description given in Revelation of those days is too horrible to contemplate–which is probably why so much of Christianity either ignores it or makes up weird reasons not to take it seriously.

    But these people are a tiny percentage of the Jews (and there are lots of gentiles in that club, never forget). Most Jews have no idea who Shabbatai Tsvi or Jacob Frank were, and know nothing of the Talmud. They are the people we see depicted on Seinfeld. They can be converted to Christianity, because they DON’T hate us. I’ll bet the guy in the video is an example of that.

    The Bible foretold thousands of years in advance that the Jews would be scattered throughout the world, and be regathered in the Land a second time (the first time was out of Babylon). You apparently don’t believe that it has happened in our time, but claim to be a “conservative Christian,” which is weird. I have asked you who Paul was talking about in Romans 11, but if you think you know who it is, you have not told me.

    After the Bar Kochba Revolt, Rome completely obliterated Jerusalem and rebuilt it from scratch–and barred Jews from the new city, forever. They were already disbursed around the Empire, complete with synagogues, and this is where the banished Jews went. There is an unbroken continuity in these communities as they migrated around the world, keeping their culture, their language, and their sacred books. In America, they assimilated into Western culture, losing their distinctiveness, trading Judaism for Socialism. Bernie Sanders is exhibit “A”.

    Jew hatred being thus incompatible with belief in the Bible, people such as yourself need to concoct and cling to crazy theories that deny the Jewishness of the Jews today (this usually involves a denial of the continuity I just mentioned, imagining that they have been replaced without explaining where the originals went), or, in your case, the EXTREMELY strange idea that they were never the Jews, ever, even in Jesus’ time But holding such strange ideas means you can’t believe Biblical prophesy.

    Too bad.

    1. Addressing your video post, Stephan, claiming that the case is closed that Israel did 9/11.

      This astounding power you attribute to Israel is very difficult for me to understand anyone believing, so forgive me if I again slip into sarcasm (I will do my best to restrain myself).

      The video is a facile, almost mindless, example of why most conspiracy criticism is so easily dismissed by normal people.

      First, three buildings were not destroyed that day. SEVEN buildings with WTC in their names were destroyed. That the video maker does not know that presents a real problem, if one is to take the presentation seriously.

      Second, WTC1 and WTC2 were not destroyed by explosives. They were “dustified,” transformed into dust, which blew away. Judy Wood postulated a technology that has not been disclosed to the public was used; others claim that “we” have nuclear weapons the size of footballs, and that they were strategically placed to vaporize the buildings. I don’t know which it is, but it has to be something like that. Steel and porcelain do not turn into dust when explosives are applied to them. The video maker apparently knows nothing about this essential truth.

      Third, the “bathtub” was not damaged–not even the shopping mall just below street level, well above the bottom of the “bathtub”. If the “bathtub” had been breached, the Atlantic ocean would have rushed in, flooding all the subway lines and tunnels in New York and Eastern New Jersey, and pretty much every basement, too. New York would never recover. Whoever engineered 9/11 knew that the mass of the Towers could not be allowed to crash to the ground, and had access to a technology that could make all that mass go away without blowing them up.

      Fourth, I have little use for Michael Ruppert, but his book Crossing the Rubicon is valuable in that it documents that 16 (if I recall correctly) training exercises were going on at the same time that morning, all having to do with terrorism and airplanes.

      Whoever did 9/11, in other words, not only possesses an advanced technology we have never been told about, and wished to remove all 7 WTC buildings, but they also had complete control over NORAD, Air Traffic Control, the Pentagon, every aspect of the media, as well as the federal government and the governments of New York City and State. Among other things.

      To claim that “Israel did it” is preposterous. No one with sense, knowing how deep and complex the operation was can say such a thing. Obviously, Israel was a key player–just as it is in the creation of the New World Order–but it’s only a part.

      We don’t know who “did” 9/11, because the people who did it have power beyond our comprehension, and they don’t want to be known. I think 9/11 was a test, just as Sandy Hook was a test. Who and why these tests are conducted is what MHB exists to explore.

      1. Then why is it that everywhere we look for suspects in 9/11, we keep finding Zionist Jews? Considering that Jews are only 2% of our population, the odds of finding two dozen or more of them all with key links to the event are almost infinitesimal, if this were merely a coincidence. Admittedly that other video didn’t name names. Here is one that does:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9EDkwWwz4U

        That one is 10 minutes long. But if you can spare 2 hours, this one goes into much more depth:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl4CDScgvy0

        Also, I’m not saying ONLY Israelis were involved in 9/11. In fact most of the people who were involved were dual Israeli-Americans citizens, living in the U.S. Here is another video about these dual citizens.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijJipyk1ZFw

        You will find that most of the people mentioned in this last video also were named in the first two. Coincidence? I don’t think so.

    2. Patrick wrote:

      “You say “I have now reached the conclusion that you are NOT a Christian, but rather a Jew, Patrick.” As if that’s a bad thing. It’s not true, of course, but so what if it were? Would my defense of scripture be any less valid (scriptures you scrupulously avoid responding to, incidentally)?”

      Obviously your definition of “Jew” and my definition of “Jew” are not the same. You assume that the “Jews” are the Israelites of the Bible. I completely and emphatically disagree with this! “Jews” are NOT the children of Jacob/Israel, but are rather the children of Jacob’s renegade brother Esau, who disobeyed Yahweh’s commandments, forsook his birthright, and went off to intermarry with heathen Canaanite tribes. These people are literally the descendants of Cain. This accounts for Jesus telling (the Jews) in John 8:44: “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. HE WAS A MURDERER FROM THE BEGINNING…” Cain was the first murderer, and so are the Jews who are wholesale slaughtering Palestinians as well as 3,000 Americans on 9-11. How anyone can defend these people and still call himself a Christian is totally beyond me. And why anyone would actually WANT to be a Jew, when Jews are clearly the anti-Christ, is equally beyond me. Christian Zionism makes absolutely no sense at all!

      “After saying that you embed a very interesting sermon by a Messianic Jew…”

      Your words, Patrick, but definitely not his. I happen to know the author of this essay personally, and he would take great offense at your calling him a “Messianic Jew”, or any other kind of Jew for that matter!

      “Steph, you being new around here and all, I guess you are unaware of my position on this subject, so I will summarize it for you.

      It comes down to the Bible–as so many things do. We are going to have a One World Government, a Satanic One World Religion, and a cashless One World money system. The Devil will be winning, having enslaved the entire human race. Jesus said in Matthew 24: 21 “For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will. 22 “Unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short. ”

      I don’t disagree with any of this, except for your spelling of my first name, which is STEPHEN (as in the Apostle). It’s NOT “Steph”, or “Steven”, or “Stephan”, as you have used at various times in the past. Please be a little less sloppy and more respectful, PATRICK.

      “Of COURSE the conspirators worship Satan, and of COURSE they are Shabbateans. It shows good character to hate them vehemently. We all should…”

      So what is your problem with me? That’s all I’m doing! But you act like I DON’T have “good character”.

      “But these people are a tiny percentage of the Jews (and there are lots of gentiles in that club, never forget). Most Jews have no idea who Shabbatai Tsvi or Jacob Frank were, and know nothing of the Talmud. They are the people we see depicted on Seinfeld. They can be converted to Christianity, because they DON’T hate us. I’ll bet the guy in the video is an example of that.”

      I’m not sure which guy you’re referring to here. The guy with the whisky bottle in his hand, who said he was going to “kill you and the Palestinians”? Sorry, I disagree. That guy DOES hate us, and he CANNOT be reformed. He will NEVER repent.

      As for Seinfeld, I don’t know. I can tell you that I at least DON’T hate him. I think he’s pretty funny (as are a lot of Jewish comedians). But I would submit that that is part of the deception. What is comedy but the act of making fun of someone else’s misfortune? It’s not happening to you, so you can laugh at it. Basically what it is slowly ingraining in us is an inability to feel compassion for others’ suffering. This is very much against the teachings of Jesus Christ. It is a process that I call the “Judaization” of America (and Europe). It’s why there are so many Zionists in the world today. They don’t care about Palestinians’ suffering, they just like to see Israel “whup ass”. This is EXTREMELY un-Christian! And frankly it shocks and repels me.

      “The Bible foretold thousands of years in advance that the Jews would be scattered throughout the world, and be regathered in the Land a second time (the first time was out of Babylon). You apparently don’t believe that it has happened in our time, but claim to be a “conservative Christian,” which is weird. I have asked you who Paul was talking about in Romans 11, but if you think you know who it is, you have not told me.”

      What you call “Jews”, Patrick, I call “Israelites”. These are not the same people, not even remotely close. The “Israelites” WERE scattered, but LONG BEFORE 70 AD. This happened from approx. 745 BC to 701 BC, when the Northern Kingdom of Israel was taken captive by the Assyrians and relocated to Media, just south of the Caucasus Mountains. They escaped this captivity and wandered north and west into modern-day Europe. They became known as the European people (the very name “Europe” means “land of the white people”, and white people are often called “Caucasians”, because that was their (apparent) point of origin.) But they are really the 10 Lost Tribes of (Northern) Israel, who were the first (and for a long time, the ONLY) people who adopted the Christian religion. They all recognized the Jesus Christ was their KINSMAN REDEEMER, totally unlike the Edomite/Canaanite/Khazarian Jews, who were not even Semites, much less Israelites, and thus rejected Christ as their Messiah.

      The Bible asserts that Israel will “forget its identity” up until the Last Days. Well, we must be in the Last Days now, because (some of us at least) are realizing who we really are. And the impersonators of Israel (the Jews) are impostors, pretending to be us. But many of us are much slower to see this….

      I re-read Romans 9-11 this morning. I’m afraid that I cannot comment on this fully right now, because it is a VERY COMPLEX SUBJECT, one which I don’t believe even you are aware of. The true meaning of these verses is highly distorted by the use of the words “Jew” and “Gentile”, which are incorrect translations. Anytime you see Paul speaking about the”Jews”, you should assume that he is really referring to “Judahites”, and NOT the Edomites/Canaanites who had taken over the southern Kingdom of Judea (King Herod was an example, as were the Pharisees who murdered the Judahite priesthood and assumed their identity). These Pharisees convinced certain Judahites (like Paul, who was of the tribe of Benjamin) that they the preservers of the Word, when in fact they were the opposite. They were teaching the “commandments of men” (making stuff up, adding to and subtracting from Laws of Moses), and Christ condemned them for doing this. Paul eventually “saw the light” and repented of his sin for ever following these Pharisees, and so he tried to wake up his fellow Judahites, who were still deceived by them.

      These Pharisees eventually codified these false commandments in the Babylonian Talmud, which was completed around 500 AD, more than a millennium BEFORE Shabbatai Tsvi or Jacob Frank (or for that matter, Mayer Amschel Rothschild, Moses Hess, or Karl Marx) were ever born.

      You want me to believe Shabbatai Tsvi was responsible for all the Jewish wrongdoing. He was clearly a demented psychopath, but that fails to explain why he had so many followers. Why would anyone follow a clearly demented psychopath? I would suggest that this was because of the followers’ bloodline, which was not of Yahweh, but of the adversary Lucifer. These are the people you seem to want me to glorify and adore. Sorry, but that won’t happen, never in a million years.

      What I’m saying is that the Jews were never Israel. They were instead descended from fallen angels. The “regathering of the lost tribes” didn’t take place in Palestine in 1948. It took place in America in 1776.

      I allow some time for you to chew on that last statement. I wonder if you’ve ever even heard it before.

      1. Clearly, we cannot agree. I’m sorry if my innate repugnance for Jew-hatred has inspired in me an unpleasant reaction to your ideas in this conversation. I simply don’t tolerate it, as you can see. You have a right to hate. That’s fine. It’s just that it’s a relatively new thing at MHB many open, cheerful Jew-haters have been gathering here in recent months, and I’m very close to leaving because of it. It brings out the worst in me, I guess.

        The Messianic Jew was the guy in the video you embedded, not the written interview. I rather liked him, although the racial idea that he promoted in it seems a little far fetched. Could be true. Certainly novel.

        Sorry about not getting your name right, Stephen. And again, I apologize for treating you with such disrespect overall. You are clearly a serious thinker. I happen to completely disagree with you about certain things, and those things make you sound to me like a nut, so I have been reckless in my responses to your strange ideas. Obviously, you believe them, which is your right.

        I happen to believe the Bible. Which means that I think that every human being is descended from Noah. Cain is thus meaningless, as are all the other people whose families were lost in the Flood. So when you say: “…went off to intermarry with heathen Canaanite tribes. These people are literally the descendants of Cain…”, you are wrong if the Bible is true. Additionally, you apparently mistake the superficial similarity of sound in English between the millennia-later name for the land of Canaan and Cain, the son of Adam. There is no connection between the two. And in any event, the Jews came out of Egypt and conquered the Canaanites; they were two different people-groups, by definition.

        You wish to believe very strange theories to disprove the Jewishness of the Jews, which I have made fun of because they are in my opinion, as a believer in the Bible, preposterous. You you cling to the ridiculous 13th Tribe theory, that even though the man who proposed it renounced it later in his life, and retired to Israel. The Jews spread around the world, but the Jews of Europe developed a language over time, Yiddish, which is a combination of German and Hebrew. It has no Turkic root-words in it. That a Turkic people could have completely replaced the Jews of Europe, and completely abandoned their culture and language to mimic the culture and adopt the language of the Jews is so silly that only reflexive hate of that people could inspire anyone to consider it as a possibility.

        You believe that Jesus is not a Jew, even though the entire Old Testament, the history of the Jews, requires Him to be Jewish. This kind of thing makes me laugh, so naturally, I mocked you, it all being so foolish in my opinion. I have spent a lifetime studying these issues, and people who cling to this kind of irrational hate are funny to me. I should not have made sport of you. I should like to persuade you that your beliefs are wrong, just as I would like to persuade Jews that their kinsman, Jesus, is their redeemer. But I treated you less respectfully than I do Jehovah’s Witnesses who knock on my door, whom I invite in, and reason with from the scriptures.

        But, in many ways, your beliefs are wronger than those of the JWs–because Daniel 12 really is coming true in our time, as is Revelation 7 (all of Revelation, actually), and Zechariah 12 and Hosea 5:15-6:2. The Jews have returned to their ancestral homeland, just as the Bible foretold. Pretending they are not really the Jews, or that there never were any Jews, or any other casuistry, will not do, for someone who believes the Bible.

        You have every right to hate the small percentage of Jews who rule Israel, just as Jesus should be admired for hating the small percentage of Jews who ruled His country when He came here the first time. But it is offensive to me that you feel justified in hating the country itself, or its people. If you believe the Bible, you should recognize that all of current history is going to increasingly focus on it. Zechariah tells us that Jerusalem will be “a cup of trembling for all the world.” Indeed, it is become that. No one could have guessed that would be true, even a few decades ago.

        Every prophesy will be fulfilled. The Bible can’t be wrong, because it was inspired from outside space/time.

        That is my position. You can hold to a different one, if you wish. I treated you as a silly person, because you sounded that way to me. You are not. I can’t abide your hate, but I can offer you respect, and my apologies for my mistreatment of you.

        1. Well, for once I can honestly say that I appreciate your treating me with more respect personally, even if you don’t agree with my positions.

          I run into this a lot, since I realize that my position is not the “popular” mainstream position. I’m well aware of that. I haven’t always believed what I do today. In fact I really only started believing this way less than 4 years ago. When I first encountered it, I thought like you and most everybody else does, that this was a preposterous position. In fact I put it aside for about 6 months before I re-examined it, because it just didn’t seem remotely possible.

          However when I did start to re-examine it, it started to make an amazing amount of SENSE. Here is one thing that has always puzzled me: If the Jews were really “God’s chosen people”, then why do the Jews reject God’s only begotten Son as their Messiah? Does this make any sense? It never has to me. Why would God look favorably on the Jews for rejecting his Son?

          1 John 2:23 tells us “Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.” (KJV) Jews deny that Jesus is the Christ, therefore according to the Bible itself, they could not receive God’s blessing, much less be His chosen people. This is further confirmed in any number of similar verses, e.g. John 5:23, John 8:19, John 16:3, 1 John 4:2, 1 John 4:15, 1 John 5:1, 2 John 1:9. and probably others.

          So why is anyone blessing the anti-Christ Jews? This has never made any sense to me at all! I’m frankly amazed that every Christian doesn’t feel the same way.

          There’s lots more that I could say here, but for now I’ll leave with this to ponder.

        2. “Here is one thing that has always puzzled me: If the Jews were really “God’s chosen people”, then why do the Jews reject God’s only begotten Son as their Messiah? Does this make any sense? It never has to me. Why would God look favorably on the Jews for rejecting his Son?”

          Well, that’s the story of the Bible, isn’t it? The Jews constantly failing, and God’s constantly dealing with it. Just like an Earthly father. Just like with us, individually.

          The “chosenness,” obviously, is to do with their separation/creation at the Deuteronomy 32/Tower of Babel event. That they continue to cling to that identity simply indicates how real that separation from the rest of humanity was/is. The prophets had to be sent to them to warn them of the consequences of refusing to live up to their special role, and the prophets also told them that they would not listen to those warnings, and would suffer the consequences.

          Doesn’t that ring exactly true of all of us, though? They are the perfect example of sinful human nature. God can reveal Himself to us as a physical man, and send messengers from the Spirit realm, and give us visions and miracles, and we will STILL act out of our fallen nature.

          So YES, it makes perfect sense.

          And God continues to look favorably upon them because He’s a father. That’s what a perfect father does. He knew they would fail, utterly, which is why the Plan was set up before the experiment at Eden was even launched. But so what? All of us are just along for the ride.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *