The Absolute Best Authentications Of The Protocols Of Zion

American Free Press
Idaho Observer
Barnes Review
Free American
Media ByPass
and many others that you may run across

Site Admin
Posts: 7781

The Absolute Best Authentications Of The Protocols Of Zion

Post#1 » Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:03 am

The Absolute Best Authentications Of The Protocols Of Zion
By Leland Lehrman

The following are my nominations for the four top authentications of the Protocols of Zion, including Ivan Fraser's Proofs of an Ancient Conspiracy, Henry Makow's Protocol Forgery Arguments Are Flawed, Paquita de Shishmareff's Waters Flowing Eastward and Peter Myers Protocols of Zion Toolkit, to which I give first prize.

In my research and discussion with Henry Makow, one of the top scholars on the subject, I found Peter Myers' website, an Australian who is perhaps the living master of the subject of the Protocols of Zion. Even Tony Blizzard who worked at the Spotlight (now the American Free Press) and the Barnes Review with the previous world authority Paquita de Shishmareff while she was alive does not have a current mastery like Myers. If you read the article I have linked below, you will understand why I say so.

Myers goes into enormous detail on the technical aspects of the "forgery" argument, explaining the nuances of the arguments as well as demonstrating that only one-sixth [a liberal interpretation according to Makow] of the Protocols by word count can in fact be linked to any earlier document. The other five sixths, including the most egregiously offensive predictions regarding the Russian Revolution and other then-in-the-future events, are completely original, as is the crown jewel, the financial program - painfully evident if you look at our State Finances and the private ownership of all the major Central Banks worldwide.

If you read the Ivan Fraser article, the Henry Makow article, the book Waters Flowing Eastward by Paquita de Shishmareff and Father Dennis Fahey, and the extensive works by Peter Myers, you will come to the excruciating conclusion that the Protocols of Zion are not only genuine, but part of a stream of Masonic, Jewish Supremacist and Luciferian writing that continues to this day in works such as The Jewish Century, by Yuri Slezkine which are quite open about "Jewish" cultural dominance and superiority.

But he truth is that this scam is no more Jewish than banking is. A wise councilor recently showed me the seminal work on the topic of "hydraulic dictatorship" or the control of "scarce resources" as a method of political control: Karl Wittfogel's Oriental Despotism. Temple religions involving a priest/banker/miltary dictatorship, particularly in the Mideast, have existed since before the dawn of history. As my counsel likes to say, "Scams have a life of their own."

The nightmare of world domination and its deity Lucifer, don't give a damn who is manning the controls of the Death Star so long as they are doing a good job. This is why wars within the Illuminati appear to break out every now and then, as when Bush 41 decided to withhold loan guarantees to Israel pending "peace talks."

Although they lay claim to Jewish heritage, those "Jews" who play the world domination game are in effect no longer Jewish by religion in that their strategy is in direct contradiction with the Ten Commandments, the real pillar of the Hebrew religion. That they have "Jewish" genetic heritage is really of no importance, because empirical evidence is conclusive that both God and the Devil are equal opportunity employers.

Manipulating a religious structure in order to use its thoughtforms for domination purposes is common within any religion, and neither Christianity, Islam nor any religion are immnune to such parasitism and corruption. In effect the Protocols are a customized World Domination plan for those who identify themselves somehow with the militant, Talmudic strains of Judaism. One can find such domination plans in other forms when they are written for other audiences. The hidden author of them all is Lucifer, he just tweaks each plan a little in order to appeal to the psychological weakness or sense of identity of the target audience. However, it must be said that Lucifer has found extremely effective executors within his "Jewish" target group, and it is understandable why this should lead some to erroneously believe that somehow "Judaism" is the sole root cause of the "troubles" engendered by Lucifer's plans.

The Protocols themselves acknowledge that their plan hinges on their successful manipulation of existing power personages and that only at the absolute death of the host political organism will they reveal themselves and openly impose their absolute power. It is interesting to note in this context that Revelations hints at the same event, but farther up the change of command. Revelations predicts that at the moment the Jewish Supremacist Cult (Israel) declares its supreme rulership over the world from within a newly constructed Third Temple, Lucifer, the secret parasite within the Jewish Supremacist ideology will utterly destroy "Israel". Ultimately, Lucifer is the one who wishes to take the place of God, and he will not abide any mortal Rothschild descendant in that role.

It is to be expected that manipulated leaders will realize the ultimate intent of their manipulators and attempt to abort the plan. This appears to be happening right now as NSA and CIA whistleblowers reveal the privatization scams and absolute amorality now overtaking what was left of the "Intelligence Community."

Finally, because the works by Myers are so extensive, and I dare not expect you to make it through them any time soon, I have extracted two particularly relevant sections, one related to Dr. John Coleman's research. A former MI6 agent now living in Carson City Nevada, Coleman's Committee of 300 is one of the most quoted books on the subject of Secret History. Check it out at bottom.

And now, the list of the absolute best links regarding the authenticity of the Protocols of Zion:

Ivan Fraser's Proofs of an Ancient Conspiracy:

Paquita de Shishmareff's Waters Flowing Eastward:

Henry Makow's "Protocols Forgery Argument is Flawed:

Peter Myers on the Protocols:

Peter Myers Teaser Passage #1: "Cohn's arithmetic is incorrect. The word-count of the parallel-passages from the Protocols, as listed by Bernstein (at, is 4,361, while the word-count of the Protocols is 26, 496. That is, the parallel passages comprise 16.45% of the Protocols; this is substantial, but still less than one sixth of the total. What Cohn especially omits to mention, is the Protocols' extensive coverage of the world finance system."

Peter Myers Teaser Passage #2:

22. Dr. John Coleman on "Colonel" House from Committee of 300 book.

Dr. Coleman's book Conspirator's Hierarchy, the Committee of 300 [highly recommended] can be read here: ... 0.htm#menu

Anyone who has read much of Lyndon Larouche's material will note great similarity in this 1992 book by Coleman. Both say that the One-World Conspiracy is British, centred on the Monarchy. They "write out" any specifically Jewish involvement, although a number of Jewish bodies get a mention, e.g. the ADL.

Yet the Jewish Defense Organization calls Larouche a Nazi: "Lyndon LaRouche hired Jewish flunkies like Steinberg and Goldstien to do his dirtywork. The name of the game is Yockeyism, crypto-Nazism ... "

So, is there a hidden Jewish theme within Coleman's work?

When one considers the shocking press that the British Royals get (compared to, say, the Japanese or Danish Royals) with the media prying into their troubles, exacerbating them and putting them on the front pages; when one considers that Rupert Murdoch's media, and the Economist, promote the abolition of the British Monarchy; then another force is suspected behind the scenes.

Here's a clue: Coleman writes,

"... Robert Cecil of the Jewish Cecil family that had controlled the British monarchy since a Cecil became the private secretary and lover of Queen Elizabeth I ..." (Conspirators' Hierarchy, p. 201).

Coleman writes in his article King Makers, King Breakers: The Cecils (1985, ? Dr John Coleman, W.I.R., 2533 N. Carson St., Suite J-118 Carson City, NV 89706):

{p. 25} The records at Hatfield House show that the Unity of Science Conferences was the brain child of Robert Cecil, as confirmed by the Dutch Jew, Mandell Huis alias Colonel House, who was the controller of Woodrow Wilson and Wilson's personal representative at the Paris peace Conference; and the special representative of the United States Government at the Inter-Allied Conference of Premiers and Foreign Ministers in 1917; U. S. representative at the Armistice in 1918 and a member of the Commission on Mandates in 1919. Mandell Huis, like the Cecils, professed to be a Christian, but was a Jew by birth and conviction. He was a firm friend of the Cecil clan, and it was Huis who forced Wilson to agree to the July, 1915 arrangement made by Arthur Balfour which gave Palestine to the zionists and brouqht America into the first world war. Americans should be taught these things in schools and universities, but so great is the power of the Black Nobility, the RIIA, the CFR and the Eastern Liberal Establishment gang of traitors, that the majority

{p. 26} of Americans will probably never hear the name of the Cecil family, as one of the names which shaped the destiny of our once free great republican America. Before leaving the subject of "Colonel House" (Huis is the Dutch word for house), let me say that in spite of the many important tasks he was given to carry out, "Colonel House" was never a member of the United States government, nor was he elected to hold any of these important offices by the sovereign people of the United States. Therefore I say to you; "Of what use is our present system? We call ourselves a republic and a democracy, yet, no matter who we elect to the White House, the secret government of America continues to enact its policies, without the slightest regard for our wishes. Of what use then, is our electoral system?" ... {end}

So here is the Jewish theme lurking with the British theme. Yet, in Conspirators' Hierarchy there are only glimpses of this, such as:

"Cecil John Rhodes, a Committee of 300 member who fronted for the Rothschilds in South Africa ... " (p. 134).

"Committee of 300 members Cecil John Rhodes, Barney Barnato and Alfred Beit instigated and engineered the war. Rhodes was the principle agent for the Rothschilds ... " (p. 150)

This reverses Rhodes' usual priority over Rothschild, and puts Rothschild at the helm. Beit, too, was Jewish. Carroll Quigley wrote in The Anglo-American Establishment:

"{p. 134} Even Rhodes ... was not a racist. ... Some of his closest friends {p. 135} were Jews (like Beit), and in three of his wills he left Lord Rothschild as his trustee, in one as his sole trustee."

Here's another important quote from Conspirators' Hierarchy, on ties connecting Walter Lippmann, Edward Bernays (both Jewish), with H. G. Wells and the British Fabian Socialists, who, Quigley shows, were linked to the Anglo-American Establishment via the the Coefficient Club:

{p. 200} In 1928, Lippmann's compatriot Edward Bernays wrote a book called "CRYSTALLIZING PUBLIC OPINION" and in 1928 a second book of his was published entitled simply "PROPAGANDA." In it Bernays described his experiences at Wellington House. Bernays was a close friend of Master Manipulator H.G. Wells, whose many quasi-novels were used by

{p. 201} Bernays to help formulate mass mind control techniques. Wells was not shy about his role as a leader in changing lower class society, mainly because he was a close friend of members of the British royal family, and spent a great deal of time with some of the most highly placed politicians of the day, men like Sir Edward Grey, Lord Haldane, Robert Cecil of the Jewish Cecil family that had controlled the British monarchy since a Cecil became the private secretary and lover of Queen Elizabeth I, Leo Amery, Halford Mackinder of MI6 and later head of the London School of Economics, whose pupil Bruce Lockhart would become MI6 controller of Lenin and Trotsky during the Bolshevik Revolution, and even the great man himself, Lord Alfred Milner. One of Well's favorite watering holes was the prestigious St. Ermins Hotel, meeting place of the Coefficient Club, a club to which certified gentlemen only were admitted and where they met once a month. All of the men mentioned above were members and also members of the Souls Club. Wells claimed that any nation could be defeated, not by direct confrontation but by understanding the human mind-- what he called, "the mental hinterlands hidden behind the persona."

With such a powerful backer, Bernays felt confident enough to launch his "PROPAGANDA":

"As civilization becomes more complex, AND AS THE NEED FOR INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN INCREASINGLY DEMONSTRATED (emphasis added-JC), the technical means have been invented and developed BY WHICH PUBLIC OPINION MAY BE REGIMENTED (emphasis added-JC). With printing press and newspaper, the telephone, telegraph, radio and airplanes, ideas can be spread rapidly, and even instantaneously, across the whole of America."

Bernays had not yet seen how much better television, which was to follow, would do the job.

{endquote} More at british-conspiracy.html.

Is Coleman describing a Jewish conspiracy lurking within the British one and using it as a cover?

If so, this Jewish movement is divided into Internationalist ("Socialist") and Zionist wings. What Coleman says about Socialism applies to the former; he says nothing about the latter.

But the Fundamentalists in Israel are waging their own campaign against the former, which they call the "British" conspiracy (ignoring, for example, the Jewishness of Bill Clinton's cabinets).

The CIA is on one side; Mossad on the other.

The Socialist Internationalists (New Left), who can be considered either the Left faction of the "British", or as the Left faction of the "Jewish" block, are led by George Soros and Noam Chomsky. Both are Jewish; both oppose the war. Both support minority causes of the Gay Marriage type; a part of Chomsky's website is devoted to Gay and Lesbian issues.

Michael Higger writes in his book The Jewish Utopia that "A Jewish Utopia begins where Wells leaves off" (p. 6). jewish-utopia.html

Thus, we now witness a struggle between these two visions of Judaism. Gay Marriage and the World Court are litmus issues that identify the two camps.

"Colonel" Edward House's "novel" of 1912, Philip Dru: Administrator, a model Woodrow Wilson followed; Jacob Schiff's campaigns for Zionism and World Government; and how two Conspiracies, an "Anglo" one and a Zionist one, joined up: house-schiff.html."

Leland Lehrman l


The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion

Wal-Mart 'Open-Minded', Sells The Protocols

Protocols & Zionist Occupied Governments

The Protocols Of Zion Updated

The Harold Wallace Rosenthal Interview

Robert Fisk & The Protocols Of Zion

The US Supreme Court & The Protocols Of Zion

Protocols Of Zion - Origin Of The Bush 'Patriot Act'

'Protocols Of Zion' - A Non-Zionist Jewish Perspective

Supremes & The Protocols - Where Did Our House Go? ... tocols.htm

The Protocols & You - Zionism Unchained

The Protocols Of Zion - Updated

The Protocols Of Zion - A Literary Forgery

Protocols Forgery Argument Is Flawed

Protocols Of Zion - Matters Not Who Wrote Them

Extracts From The NWO Protocols Of Zion

Protocols -The NWO Blueprint?

Did Rothschild Write The Protocols Of Zion?

Ramadan 30-Part TV Special: The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion

Return to HomePage

Site Admin
Posts: 7781

The forgotten American Jewish response to the Protocols

Post#2 » Mon Oct 09, 2006 8:55 pm

The forgotten American Jewish response to the Protocols

Synopsis: Funniest line in the article: "The originators of bolshevism were exclusively non-Jews."
Source: New York Times December 1, 1920; page 17

In November 1920, The American Jewish Committee, the Zionist Organization of America, The Union of American Hebrew Congregations, The Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations, The Independent Order Of B'nai B'rith And The Anti-Defamation League, The Central Conference Of American Rabbis, The Rabbinical Assembly Of The Jewish Theological Seminary and The United Orthodox Jewish Rabbis Of America all agreed on something: The Protocols were a forgery, the Bolsheviks weren't Jewish (but the Mensheviks were) and Henry Ford was a dupe (of whom, they never said). Needless to say, these groups rarely agree on anything, unless it's to parrot the Tribal chatter about Israel and the like.

For some reason, the American Jewish groups that are still around don't mention this particular "refutation" of the Protocols today. Any semi-literate person reading this 86-year old article will see why.

Maybe someday the ADL, The AJC, B'anana B'reath and a bunch of rabbis will get together and refute the "Neocons are Jews" canard.


National Societies Protest Against a "Campaign of Slander" Directed at Their people.


Statement Issued to Public Declares It Was Inspired by Foreign Reactionary Forces.


No Such Organization as the "Elders of Zion," to Which It Is Credited.

Public Statement.

NEW YORK, Nov. 30, 1920.
A conference to discuss the widespread campaign of secret anti-Jewish propaganda in the United States was called by the American Jewish Committee. This conference was participated in by the foremost national Jewish organizations, and authorized the issuance of a public statement in which the so-called "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" now being circulated in large numbers by secret agencies are condemned as a forgery, and the charge that Bolshevism is part of a conspiracy of Jews and Freemasons to secure world domination is denounced as a malicious invention inspired by foreign reactionary forces for the purpose of breeding suspicion and hatred of the Jews and Freemasons in the United States in order to discredit "free government in the eyes of the European masses and thus facilitate the restoration of absolutism in government."

The signatories of the declaration, which is addressed "To Our Fellow Citizens," include the following representative Jewish organizations; The American Jewish Committee, the Zionist Organization of America, the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations, the United Synagogue of America, the Provisional Committee for an American Jewish Congress, the Independent Order of B'nai B'rith, the Central Conference of American Rabbis, the Rabbinical Assembly of the Jewish Theological Seminary and the United Orthodox Jewish Rabbis of America. The complete address follows:
Text of the Address.

To Our Fellow-Citizens:

During the war, by secret agencies, a document variously called "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," "The Protocols of the Meetings of the Zionist Men of Wisdon" and "The Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion," was clandestinely circulated in typewritten form, among public officials and carefully selected civilians, for the purpose of giving rise to the belief that the Jews, in conjunction with Freemasons, had been for centuries engaged in a conspiracy to produce revolution and anarchy, by means of which they hoped to attain the control of the world by the establishment of some sort of despotic rule. Some months ago this document was published in England. More recently it has appeared in print in the United States and thousands of copies have been circulated with an air of mystery among legislators, journalists, clergymen and teachers, members of clubs and indiscriminately to the general public. The London Morning Post has given out a series of articles as commentary upon The Protocols, in which the charge of an unholy, conspiracy between Jews and Freemasons is elaborated, and Bolshevism is characterized as a movement of, for and by the Jews and is declared to be a fulfilment of The Protocols. These articles, whose authorship is not disclosed, have now appeared in book form under the title "The Cause of World Unrest." During the past six months there have been sent forth weekly in Henry Ford's organ, The Dearborn Independent, attacks of extraordinary virulence upon the Jews. These assaults upon the honor of the Jewish people are all founded on The Protocols and on the discredited literature of Russian and German anti-Semitism, inspired by the minions of autocracy. Parrot-like, they repeat the abominable charges long since conceded to be unfounded by all fair-minded men. Ford is employing his great wealth in scattering broadcast his fulminations, regardless of consequence.

When the Jews of the United States first learned of these malevolent prints, they deemed it beneath their dignity to take notice of them, because they regarded them as mere recrudescence of mediaeval bigotry and stupidity, showing upon their face their utter worthlessness. These publications have, however, been put into circulation to such an extent that it is believed that the time has come, humiliating though it be to them, for the Jews to make answer to these libels and to the unworthy insinuations and innuendoes that have been whispered against them.
Protocols a Forgery.

Speaking as represetatives of the Jewish people, familiar with the history of Judasim in its various phases and with the movements, past and present, in Jewish life, we say with all solemnity:

(1) The Protocals are a base forgery. There has never been an organization of Jews known at The Elders of Zion, or The Zionist Men of Wisdom or The Wise Men of ZIon, or bearing any other similar name. There has never existed a secret or other Jewish body organized for any purpose such as that implied in The Protocols. The Jewish popele have never dreamed of a Jewish dictatorship, of a destruction of religion, of an interference with industrial prosperity or of an overthrow of civilization. The Jews have never conspired with the Freemasons, or with any other body, for any purpose.

From the time of the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem by Titus, the Jews have had no political state. For centuries they were forced to wander from land to land, to flee for refuge wherever they might find it against bitter persecution. They were pent up in ghettoes, were deprived of even the shadow of civil or political rights, and were made the objects of every possible form of discrimination. It is little more than fifty years since the Jews of Western Europe becamse politically emancipated. - Until the outbreak of the World War the Jews of Eastern Europe, constituting a majority of all the Jews of the world, were not even permitted to exercise the rights of citizenship in lands where they and their ancestors had dwelt for generations. The great mass of Jews were hampered in every way in their efforts to earn a livelihood. Far from desiring to govern the world, they were content with the opportunity to live. Numerically they constitute less than 1 per cent. of the population of the earth; and more than one-half of them are on the verge of starvation. The suggestion that, in their feebleness, they have been planning in secret conclave to seize absolute power and to dominate the 99 per cent. non-Jews upon the globe is a ridiculous invention than which even madness can conjure nothing more preposterous.
Questions Unanswered

Where is the habitat of these so-called Elders of Zion, by whatever name they may be called? Who are these hidden sages? Whence do they come? What is the nature of their organization? The distributers of the protocols are silent on that subject. Whence come these pretended protocols? There have been various versions. One Serge Nilus, of whose identity little is known, a Russian mystic and an ardent supporter of Czarism, claims to have received them in Russia, in 1901, in manuscript form, from a Russian officeholder, who stated that the manuscript had been originally obtained by a lady, whose name is not given, and who, he said, obtained them in a mysterious way. In what language they were written is not stated. Where that manuscript now is does not appear. Nilus asserts that he submitted the protocols to one of the Russian Grand Dukes, who, after examination, returned them with the despairing message, "Too late." Apparently there was no room for them in the Russian archives, and they suggested no task for the Czar's ubiquitous police to perform. In 1905 Nilus published at Tsarskoe Selo a second edition of a mystical book entitled "The Great in the Little," the first edition having been published in 1901. Into this later edition he incorporated for the first time the protocols, which he claimed to have had in his possession for four years. In January, 1917, he published another book under the title "It Is Near, at the Door." purporting to foretell "the coming of the Anti-Christ and the Kingdom of the Devil on Earth." In his book he announces that he had only then learned authoritatively from Jewish sources (what they were is not explained) that these protocols were nothing other than a strategic plan for the conquest of the world, of putting it under the yoke of Israel, "the struggler-against God," a plan worked out by the leaders of the Jewish people during the many centuries of their dispersion, and finally presented to the Council of Elders by the Prince of Exile, Theodor Herzl, at the time of the First Zionist Congress summoned by him at Basle in August, 1897. He delared that the protocols were signed by the Zionist represtatives of the thirty-third degree of initiation; that they were secretly removed from the complete file of protocols that pertained to the first Zionist Congress; that they were taken from the secret vaults at the main Zionist office, which, it is said, "at present is located in French territory."
No Signatures to Protocol.

The protocols as published bear no signatures. The indentity of the Zionist representatives by whom they are claimed to have been signed is left untold. The location of the main Zionist office and of the secret vaults from which the protocols were secretly removed remains a secret. It is, however, a matter of history that the first Zionist Congress was publicly held by Jews who came from various parts of Europe for the purpose of considering the misery of their brethren in Eastern Europe and of enabling them to find shelter in the Holy Land. Theodor Herzl was a distinguished journalist, a man of true nobility of character. He presided at the Congress, all of whose deliberations were held in the light of day. The insinuation that there was a thirty-third, or any other, degree of initiation in this organization is merely a malicious effort to bring the Jews into parallelism with the Free Masons and thus to subject them to all the fanciful and fantastic charges that have from time to time been laid at the door of Free Masonry, oblivious of the fact that fifteen Presidents of the United States, including Washington, and many of the leading statesmen of Europe and America, have been members of that order.

Nilus and his associates belonged to the Russian bureaucracy. In 1903, through the Black Hundreds that body sought in every way to crush the Jews and to prevent the liberalization of the Government. The time was propitious for the perpetration of a political forgery by a Government that habitually resorted to the employment of agents provocateurs, a Government which only a few years later, against the protest of the enlightened clergy of the world, ineffectually sought to convict Mendel Beilis on the charge of ritual murder. It is significant that one of his prosecutors has been active in distributing manuscript copies of the protocols throughout the United States.
What an Analysis Shows.

Irrespective of this history, bristling with suspicion, an analysis of The Protocols shows that on their face they are a fabrication and that they must have emanated from the bitter opponents of democracy. They are replete with cynical references to the French Revolution, and to the conceptions of liberty, eqaulity and fraternity. They uphold privilege and autocracy. They belittle education. They condemn religious liberty. They assert that political freedom is an idea and not a fact, and that the doctrine that a government is nothing but a steward of the people is a mere phrase. These are the very doctrines that one would expect from the protagonists of autocracy. Nothing can be more foreign to Jewish thought and aspiration than these brutal theories of reaction. That the Jews, whose very life has been a prayer for the blessings of liberty and equality, should hold them in contempt is unthinkable.

The document throughout is farcical in its absurdities. In the Russian original there is a passage, significantly omitted from the translation, to the effect that the English are the descendants of the Lost Tribes of Israel and the British Government is violently attacked for its liberalism. If climax there be to all this folly, it-lies in the idea set forth in The Protocols that "the world ruler is to spring from the dynastic roots of King David," and that "the King of Israel will become the real Pope of the Universe and the Patriarch of the International Church," whatever that may mean.

It is needless, however, to elaborate when one considers that the editor of The London Morning Post, in his introduction to "The Cause of the World Unrest," himself doubts the genuineness of The Protocols, and that the anonymous author of that book, after using them as his text, is unable to give them any higher certificate than that they may or may not be genuine. Indeed, he goes so far as to say:

"We have said that this document flashes a blaze of light, and so it does, but whether this document is genuine or not, whether the blaze of light is true of false, can only be judged by internal evidence and probabilities. We may say at once that Nilus advances nothing in the nature of real evidence to prove the document, and that his account of how it came into his hands consists of assertion only, without evidence to support it."
Indicts an Entire People.

And Yet a document, thus discredited by its sponsors, is made the basis of an indictment against an entire people.

(2). The contention that the genuineness of "The Protocols" is established by the outbreak of Bolshevism in Russia twelve years after their publication, and that Bolshevism is a Jewish movement, is absurd in theory and absolutely untrue in fact. As well might it be said that a forged deed is genuine because twenty years after its date a relative of the person whose name is forged is falsely charged with being a disturber of the peace.

To say that the Jews are responsible for bolshevism is a deliberate falsehood. The originators of bolshevism were exclusively non-Jews. While it is true that there are Jews among Bolshevists, notably Trotsky, they represent a small fraction of the Jews and of the followers of Bolshevism. Lenin, who belonged to the Russian aristocracy and has not a drop of Jewish blood in his vains, was the creator as he has been the motive power of the Soviets. Tchicherin, who has conducted their foreign affairs, Bucharin, Krassin and Kalinin, all non-Jews, are, with Lenin, the brains of the Communist Party.

The Bolshevist Cabinet, known as the People's Commissars, consists of twenty members of whom Trotsky and Sverdlov are the only Jews, and they are Jews merely by birth. Of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, including Trotsky, there are four Jews out of thirteen. The so-called Extraordinary Commission, whose function it is to suppress opposition to the Bolshevist regime from within, is directed by a triumvirate consisting of a Pole and two Letts, none of whom is of Jewish origin. Although Trotsky is the head of the War Department, his General Staff is composed exclusively of non-Jews.

In "Cause of World Unrest" a list of fifty names is given, most of whom are classified as Jews and Bolshevists, in order to establish the thesis that "nearly all of the Bolshevist leaders are Jews." An examination of the list shows that ten of the Jews included in the list are the leaders of the anti-Bolshevist movement in Russia; that a number of those who are classified in the list as Jews are not Jews at all; that a large proportion of those classified as Jews are men who are so obscure and hold positions so inconspicuous that whether or not they are Jews is not only uncertain but unimportant. They are certainly not leaders.
Foes of Bolshevism.

On the other hand, the leaders of the Mensheviki, who are the sworn foes of Bolshevism, are to a large extent Jews. Among the chiefs of the Constitutional Democratic Party of Russia, who are Vinaver, Sliosbert, Pasmanik, Kaminka, Landau, and Friedman, all prominent Jews. Among the leaders of the Peoples Socialist, the Socialist Revolutionary, and the Menshevik section of the Social Democratic parties, bitter opponents of the Bolsheviki, are a large number of Jews. The leading anti-Bolshevist newspapers, which of necessity are published outside of Russia, have Jews upon their editorial staffs. An overwhelming majority of Russian Jews have been ruined by the coercive measures of the Soviets. They have submitted to the confiscation of their property and are undergoing unspeakable hardships. The Orthodox Jews, whose numbers preponderate, remaining loyal to the faith of their fathers, regard the Bolsheviki as the enemies of all religion, and, therefore, hold the doctrines of Bolshevism in abhorrence. With comparatively few exceptions the Jews are looked upon by the Bolsheviki as belonging to the hated bourgeoisie and as favoring capitalism. The Zionists, who constitute a numerous and important element of the Jews of Russia, have been denounced by the Soviets as counter-revolutionary, and many of them have been cast into prison and threatened with death-Zionists, we repeat, who are the followers of Herzl.

If the Jews are to be condemned because of a Trotsky, who has never in the slightest degree concerned himself wtih Judaism or the welfare of the Jews, then there is not a people that has ever lived that might not with equal right be condemned because in its membership there were men who are alleged to have advocated hateful doctrines. The Jew has traditionally stood for religion, law, order, family, and the right of property. It is, therefore, the height of cruelty to charge him with responsibility for Bolshevism, when its doctrines, should they prevail, would inevitably lead to the destruction of Judaism. It is especially a brutal charge when one considers all that the Jew has suffered from the oppressive and discriminatory laws of Russian autocracy and from its effort to suppress every aspiration that the Jew had for freedom.
Tribute to Patriotism.

It is a great tribute to the patriotism of the Russian Jews that, in spite of the indignities that they had to undergo, hundreds of thousands of them fought under the banner of the Czar, loyally and gallantly, and in large numbers laid down their lives in the Allied cause. The rosters of the army and navy of the United States contain the names of tens of thousands of Jews born in Russia who served so faithfully under our colors that they gained the unqualified approval of their officers, and propotionately many of them were awarded decorations of honor by a grateful country.

We have refrained from commenting on the libels contained in The Dearborn Independent. Ford, in the fulness of his knowledge, unqualifiedly declares the Protocols to be genuine and argues that practically every Jew is a Bolshevist. We have dealt sufficiently with both of these falsehoods. It is useless in a serious document to analyze the puerile and venomous drivel that he has derived from the concoctions of professional agitators. He is merely a dupe.

What is the motive of those who have set in motion this new onslaught of anti-Semitism? It is the motive that again and again has actuated autocracy and its adroit supporters-that of seeking a scapegoat for their own sins, so that they may be enabled under the cover of a false issue to deceive the public.

It is an attempt to drive into the solidarity of the citizenry of our country that has been its pride and its strength the wedge of discord, by arousing suspicion and inciting overt acts not only against those of Jewish origin but also against Freemasons, in the hope of discrediting free government in the eyes of the European masses and thus facilitate the restoration of absolutism in government.
Manufactured in Russia.

The protocols were manufactured in Russia under the bureaucracy, and the ammunition with which the campaign is conducted has been furnished out of the arsenal of imperialistic Germany and by those who are seeking to restore the Hapsburgs, the Hohenzollerns, and the Romanoffs on their former thrones. Ancient hatred and unreasoning prejudice and a failure to understand and know what the Jew really is, are likewise responsible for the readiness with which these falsehoods have been accepted by those who are ever willing to believe evil of their fellow-men.

We have an abiding confidence in the spirit of justice and fairness that permeates the true American, and we are satisifed that our fellow-citizens will not permit the campaign of slander and libel that has been launched against us to go unreproved. There is enough for all of us to do in the great task of building our common country and of developing the principles on which it is founded. Let not hatred and misunderstanding arise where peace and harmony, unity and brotherliness, are required to perpetuate all that America represents and to enable all men to know that within her wide boundaries there is no room for injustice and intolerance.
By Louis Marshall, President.
Cyrus Adler,
Julius Rosenwald,
Vice Presidents.
Isaac W. Bernheim, Treasurer.
Samuel Dorf,
Abram I. Elkus,
Albert D. Lasker,
Irving Lehman,
A.C. Ratshesky,
Horace Stern,
Oscar S. Straus,
Cyrus L. Sulzberger,
Mayer Sulzberger,
Isaac M. Ullman,
A. Leo Weil,
Executive Committee.
By Julian W. Mack, President.
Jacob De Haas, Secretary.
By J. Walter Freiberg, President.
George Zepin, Secretary.
By Herbert S. Goldstein, Secretary.
By Elias L. Solomon, President.
Charles I. Hoffman, Secretary.
By Nathan Straus, President.
Morriss Rothenberg, Chairman Executive Committee.
Stephen S. Wise
Bernard B. Richards, Secretary.
By Adolf Kraus, President.
By Leo M. Franklin, President.
Felix A. Levy, Secretary.
By Max D. Klein, President.
Samuel Fredman, Secretary.
By M.S. Margolis, President.
The American Jewish Committee.

The American Jewish Committee, 31 Union Sqauare West, New York, is a national organization instituted in 1906 and incorporated by an act of the New York State Legislature in 1911, "to prevent the infraction of the civil and religious rights of Jews in all parts of the world; to render all lawful assistance and to take appropriate remedial action in the event of threatened or actual invasion or restriction of such rights, or of unfavorable discrimination with respect thereto; to secure for Jews equality of economic, social and educational opportunity; to alleviate the consequences of persecution and to afford relief from the calamities affecting Jews wherever they may occur." It's officers are:
President, Louis Marshall; Vice Presidents, Cyrus Adler and Julius Rosenwald; Treasurer, Isaac W. Bernheim; Executive Committee: Cyrus Adler, Philadelphia, Chairman; Isaac W. Bernheim, Louisville; Samuel Dorf, New York City; Abram U. Elkus, New York City; Albert D. Lasker, Chicago; Irving Lehman, New York City; Louis Marshall, New York City; A.C. Ratshesky, Boston; Julius Rosenwald, Chicago; Horace Stern, Philadelphia; Oscar S. Straus, New York City; Cyrus L. Sulzberger, New York City; Mayer Sulzberger, Philadelphia; Isaac M. Ullman, New Haven; A. Leo Weil, Pittsburgh.

- New York Times December 1, 1920; page 17

Site Admin
Posts: 7781

Nesta Webster on the Protocols

Post#3 » Mon Oct 09, 2006 9:01 pm

Nesta Webster on the Protocols

Synopsis: So-called predecessors to the Protocols are probably taken from a common authentic source
Author: Nesta Webster

by Nesta Webster

Contrary to the assertions of certain writers, I have never affirmed my belief in the authenticity of the Protocols, but have always treated it as an entirely open question. The only opinion to which I have committed myself is that, whether genuine or not, the Protocols do represent the programme of world revolution, and that in view of their prophetic nature and of their extraordinary resemblance to the protocols of certain secret societies in the past, they were either the work of some such society or of someone profoundly versed in the lore of secret societies who was able to reproduce their ideas and phraseology.

The so-called refutation of the Protocols which appeared in the Times of August 1922, tends to confirm this opinion. According to these articles the Protocols were largely copied from the book of Maurice Joly, Dialogues aux Enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu, published in 1864. Let it be said at once that the resemblance between the two works could not be accidental, not only are whole paragraphs almost identical, but the various points in the programme follow each other in precisely the same order. But whether Nilus copied from Joly or from the same source whence Joly derived his ideas is another question. It will be noticed that Joly in his preface never claimed to have originated the scheme described in his book; on the contrary he distinctly states that it "personifies in particular a political system which has not varied for a single day in its application since the disastrous and alas! too far-off date of its enthronement." Could this refer only to the government of Napoleon III, established twelve years earlier? Or might it not be taken to signify a Machiavellian system of government of which Napoleon III was suspected by Joly at this moment of being the exponent? We have already seen that this system is said by M. de Mazeres, in his book De Machiavel et de l'influence de sa doctrine sur les opinions, les mceurs et la politique de la France Pendant la Rivolution, published in 1816, to have been inaugurated by the French Revolution, and to have been carried on by Napoleon I against whom he brings precisely the same accusations of Machiavelliliam that Joly brings against Napoleon III. "The author of The Prince," he writes, "was always his guide," and he goes on to describe the "parrot cries placed in the mouths of the people," the "hired writers, salaried newspapers, mercenary poets and corrupt ministers employed to mislead our vanity methodically" — all this being carried on by "the scholars of Machiavelli under the orders of his cleverest disciple." We have already traced the course of these methods from the Illuminati onwards.

Now precisely at the moment when Joly published his Dialogues aux Enfers the secret societies were particularly active, and since by this date a number of Jews had penetrated into their ranks a whole crop of literary efforts directed against Jews and secret societies marked the decade. Eckert with his work on Freemasonry in 1852 had given the incentive; Cretineau Joly followed in 1859 with L'Eglise Romaine en face de la Revolution, reproducing the documents of the Haute Vente Romaine; in 1868 came the book of the German anti-Semite Goedsche, and in the following year on a higher plane the work of Gougenot Des Mousseaux, Le Juif, le Judaisme, et la Judaisation des Peuples Chretiens. Meanwhile in 1860 the Alliance Israelite Universelle had arisen, having for its ultimate object "the great work of humanity, the annihilation of error and fanaticism, the union of human society in a faithful and solid fraternity" — a formula singularly reminiscent of Grand Orient philosophy; in 1864 Karl Marx obtained control of the two-year-old "International Working Men's Association," by which a number of secret societies became absorbed, and in the same year Bakunin founded his Alliance Sociale Democratique on the exact lines of Weishaupt's Illuminism, and in 1869 wrote his Polemique contre les Juifs (or Etude sur les Juifs allemands) mainly directed against the Jews of the Internationale. The sixties of the last century therefore mark an important era in the history of the secret societies, and it was right in the middle of this period that Maurice Joly published his book.

Now it will be remembered that amongst the sets of parallels to the Protocols quoted by me in World Revolution, two were taken from the sources above quoted — the documents of the Haute Vente Romaine and the programme of Bakunin's secret society, the Alliance Sociale Democratique. Meanwhile Mr. Lucien Wolf had found another parallel to the Protocols in Goedsche's book. "The Protocols," Mr. Wolf had no hesitation in asserting, "are, in short, an amplified imitation of Goedsche's handiwork" and he went on to show that "Nilus followed this pamphlet very closely." The Protocols were then declared by Mr. Wolf and his friends to have been completely and finally refuted.

But alas for Mr. Wolfe's discernment! The Times articles came and abolished the whole of his carefully constructed theory. They did not, however, demolish mine; on the contrary, they supplied another and a very curious link in the chain of evidence. For is it not remarkable that one of the sets of parallels quoted by me appeared in the same year as Joly's book, and that within the space of nine years no less than four parallels to the Protocols should have been discovered? Let us recapitulate the events of this decade in the form of a table and the proximity of dates will then be more apparent

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

1860. Alliance Israelite Universelle founded.

1864. 1st Internationale taken over by Karl Marx.

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

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

1866. 1st Congress of Internationale at Geneva.

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

1869. Gougenot Des Mousseaux's Le Juif, etc.

1869. Bakunin's Polemique contre les Juifs.

It will be seen, then, that at the moment when Maurice Joly wrote his Dialogues, the ideas they embodied were current in many different circles. It is interesting, moreover, to notice that the authors of the last two works referred to above, the Catholic and Royalist Des Mousseaux and the Anarchist Bakunin, between whom it is impossible to imagine any connexion, both in the same year denounced the growing power of the Jews whom Bakunin described as "the most formidable sect" in Europe, and again asserted that a leakage of information had taken place in the secret societies. Thus in 1870 Bakunin explains that his secret society has been broken up because its secrets have been given away,' and that his colleague Netchaieff has arrived at the conclusion that "in order to found a serious and indestructible society one must take for a basis the policy of Machiavelli." Meanwhile Gougenot Des Mousseaux had related in Le Juif, , that in December 1865 he had received a letter from a German statesman saying:

"Since the revolutionary recrudescence of 1848, 1 have had relations with a Jew who, from vanity, betrayed the secret of the secret societies with which he had been associated, and who warned me eight or ten days beforehand of all the revolutions which were about to break out at any point of Europe. I owe to him the unshakeable conviction that all these movements of "oppressed peoples," etc., etc., are devised by half a dozen individuals, who give their orders to the secret societies of all Europe. The ground is absolutely mined beneath our feet, and the Jews provide a large contingent of these miners…"

These words were written in the year after the Dialogues aux Enferswere published.

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

This would explain Maurice Joly's mysterious reference to the "political system which has not varied for a single day in its application since the disastrous and alas! too far-off date of its enthronement." Moreover, it would explain the resemblance between all the parallels to the Protocols from the writings of the Illuminati and Mirabeau's Projet de Revolution of 1789 onwards. For if the system had never varied, the code on which it was founded must have remained substantially the same. Further, if it had never varied up to the time when Joly wrote, why should it have varied since that date? The rules of lawn tennis drawn up in 1880 would probably bear a strong resemblance to those of 1920, and would also probably follow each other in the same sequence. The differences would occur where modern improvements had been added.

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

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

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

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

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

Fenelon writes: "The notion that belief in Jewish conspiracy is a fantasy based on the Protocols (for which the claim is made, without proof, that they are partially plagiarized invention) is either a result of sad ignorance or impudent deceit."

Site Admin
Posts: 7781

A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm

Post#4 » Mon Oct 09, 2006 9:02 pm

In a hundred years this too will be called a forgery by the Sabbateans.

A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm

Following is a report prepared by The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000." The main substantive ideas in this paper emerge from a discussion in which prominent opinion makers, including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser participated. The report, entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," is the framework for a series of follow-up reports on strategy.

Israel has a large problem. Labor Zionism, which for 70 years has dominated the Zionist movement, has generated a stalled and shackled economy. Efforts to salvage Israel’s socialist institutions—which include pursuing supranational over national sovereignty and pursuing a peace process that embraces the slogan, "New Middle East"—undermine the legitimacy of the nation and lead Israel into strategic paralysis and the previous government’s "peace process." That peace process obscured the evidence of eroding national critical mass— including a palpable sense of national exhaustion—and forfeited strategic initiative. The loss of national critical mass was illustrated best by Israel’s efforts to draw in the United States to sell unpopular policies domestically, to agree to negotiate sovereignty over its capital, and to respond with resignation to a spate of terror so intense and tragic that it deterred Israelis from engaging in normal daily functions, such as commuting to work in buses.

Benjamin Netanyahu’s government comes in with a new set of ideas. While there are those who will counsel continuity, Israel has the opportunity to make a clean break; it can forge a peace process and strategy based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism, the starting point of which must be economic reform. To secure the nation’s streets and borders in the immediate future, Israel can:

* Work closely with Turkey and Jordan to contain, destabilize, and roll-back some of its most dangerous threats. This implies clean break from the slogan, "comprehensive peace" to a traditional concept of strategy based on balance of power.

* Change the nature of its relations with the Palestinians, including upholding the right of hot pursuit for self defense into all Palestinian areas and nurturing alternatives to Arafat’s exclusive grip on Palestinian society.

* Forge a new basis for relations with the United States—stressing self-reliance, maturity, strategic cooperation on areas of mutual concern, and furthering values inherent to the West. This can only be done if Israel takes serious steps to terminate aid, which prevents economic reform.

This report is written with key passages of a possible speech marked TEXT, that highlight the clean break which the new government has an opportunity to make. The body of the report is the commentary explaining the purpose and laying out the strategic context of the passages.

A New Approach to Peace

Early adoption of a bold, new perspective on peace and security is imperative for the new prime minister. While the previous government, and many abroad, may emphasize "land for peace"— which placed Israel in the position of cultural, economic, political, diplomatic, and military retreat — the new government can promote Western values and traditions. Such an approach, which will be well received in the United States, includes "peace for peace," "peace through strength" and self reliance: the balance of power.

A new strategy to seize the initiative can be introduced:


We have for four years pursued peace based on a New Middle East. We in Israel cannot play innocents abroad in a world that is not innocent. Peace depends on the character and behavior of our foes. We live in a dangerous neighborhood, with fragile states and bitter rivalries. Displaying moral ambivalence between the effort to build a Jewish state and the desire to annihilate it by trading "land for peace" will not secure "peace now." Our claim to the land —to which we have clung for hope for 2000 years--is legitimate and noble. It is not within our own power, no matter how much we concede, to make peace unilaterally. Only the unconditional acceptance by Arabs of our rights, especially in their territorial dimension, "peace for peace," is a solid basis for the future.

Israel’s quest for peace emerges from, and does not replace, the pursuit of its ideals. The Jewish people’s hunger for human rights — burned into their identity by a 2000-year old dream to live free in their own land — informs the concept of peace and reflects continuity of values with Western and Jewish tradition. Israel can now embrace negotiations, but as means, not ends, to pursue those ideals and demonstrate national steadfastness. It can challenge police states; enforce compliance of agreements; and insist on minimal standards of accountability.

Securing the Northern Border

Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon, including by:

* striking Syria’s drug-money and counterfeiting infrastructure in Lebanon, all of which focuses on Razi Qanan.

* paralleling Syria’s behavior by establishing the precedent that Syrian territory is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces.

* striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper.

Israel also can take this opportunity to remind the world of the nature of the Syrian regime. Syria repeatedly breaks its word. It violated numerous agreements with the Turks, and has betrayed the United States by continuing to occupy Lebanon in violation of the Taef agreement in 1989. Instead, Syria staged a sham election, installed a quisling regime, and forced Lebanon to sign a "Brotherhood Agreement" in 1991, that terminated Lebanese sovereignty. And Syria has begun colonizing Lebanon with hundreds of thousands of Syrians, while killing tens of thousands of its own citizens at a time, as it did in only three days in 1983 in Hama.

Under Syrian tutelage, the Lebanese drug trade, for which local Syrian military officers receive protection payments, flourishes. Syria’s regime supports the terrorist groups operationally and financially in Lebanon and on its soil. Indeed, the Syrian-controlled Bekaa Valley in Lebanon has become for terror what the Silicon Valley has become for computers. The Bekaa Valley has become one of the main distribution sources, if not production points, of the "supernote" — counterfeit US currency so well done that it is impossible to detect.


Negotiations with repressive regimes like Syria’s require cautious realism. One cannot sensibly assume the other side’s good faith. It is dangerous for Israel to deal naively with a regime murderous of its own people, openly aggressive toward its neighbors, criminally involved with international drug traffickers and counterfeiters, and supportive of the most deadly terrorist organizations.

Given the nature of the regime in Damascus, it is both natural and moral that Israel abandon the slogan "comprehensive peace" and move to contain Syria, drawing attention to its weapons of mass destruction program, and rejecting "land for peace" deals on the Golan Heights.

Moving to a Traditional Balance of Power Strategy


We must distinguish soberly and clearly friend from foe. We must make sure that our friends across the Middle East never doubt the solidity or value of our friendship.

Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq. This has triggered a Jordanian-Syrian rivalry to which Asad has responded by stepping up efforts to destabilize the Hashemite Kingdom, including using infiltrations. Syria recently signaled that it and Iran might prefer a weak, but barely surviving Saddam, if only to undermine and humiliate Jordan in its efforts to remove Saddam.

But Syria enters this conflict with potential weaknesses: Damascus is too preoccupied with dealing with the threatened new regional equation to permit distractions of the Lebanese flank. And Damascus fears that the 'natural axis' with Israel on one side, central Iraq and Turkey on the other, and Jordan, in the center would squeeze and detach Syria from the Saudi Peninsula. For Syria, this could be the prelude to a redrawing of the map of the Middle East which would threaten Syria's territorial integrity.

Since Iraq's future could affect the strategic balance in the Middle East profoundly, it would be understandable that Israel has an interest in supporting the Hashemites in their efforts to redefine Iraq, including such measures as: visiting Jordan as the first official state visit, even before a visit to the United States, of the new Netanyahu government; supporting King Hussein by providing him with some tangible security measures to protect his regime against Syrian subversion; encouraging — through influence in the U.S. business community — investment in Jordan to structurally shift Jordan’s economy away from dependence on Iraq; and diverting Syria’s attention by using Lebanese opposition elements to destabilize Syrian control of Lebanon.

Most important, it is understandable that Israel has an interest supporting diplomatically, militarily and operationally Turkey’s and Jordan’s actions against Syria, such as securing tribal alliances with Arab tribes that cross into Syrian territory and are hostile to the Syrian ruling elite.

King Hussein may have ideas for Israel in bringing its Lebanon problem under control. The predominantly Shia population of southern Lebanon has been tied for centuries to the Shia leadership in Najf, Iraq rather than Iran. Were the Hashemites to control Iraq, they could use their influence over Najf to help Israel wean the south Lebanese Shia away from Hizballah, Iran, and Syria. Shia retain strong ties to the Hashemites: the Shia venerate foremost the Prophet’s family, the direct descendants of which — and in whose veins the blood of the Prophet flows — is King Hussein.

Changing the Nature of Relations with the Palestinians

Israel has a chance to forge a new relationship between itself and the Palestinians. First and foremost, Israel’s efforts to secure its streets may require hot pursuit into Palestinian-controlled areas, a justifiable practice with which Americans can sympathize.

A key element of peace is compliance with agreements already signed. Therefore, Israel has the right to insist on compliance, including closing Orient House and disbanding Jibril Rujoub’s operatives in Jerusalem. Moreover, Israel and the United States can establish a Joint Compliance Monitoring Committee to study periodically whether the PLO meets minimum standards of compliance, authority and responsibility, human rights, and judicial and fiduciary accountability.


We believe that the Palestinian Authority must be held to the same minimal standards of accountability as other recipients of U.S. foreign aid. A firm peace cannot tolerate repression and injustice. A regime that cannot fulfill the most rudimentary obligations to its own people cannot be counted upon to fulfill its obligations to its neighbors.

Israel has no obligations under the Oslo agreements if the PLO does not fulfill its obligations. If the PLO cannot comply with these minimal standards, then it can be neither a hope for the future nor a proper interlocutor for present. To prepare for this, Israel may want to cultivate alternatives to Arafat’s base of power. Jordan has ideas on this.

To emphasize the point that Israel regards the actions of the PLO problematic, but not the Arab people, Israel might want to consider making a special effort to reward friends and advance human rights among Arabs. Many Arabs are willing to work with Israel; identifying and helping them are important. Israel may also find that many of her neighbors, such as Jordan, have problems with Arafat and may want to cooperate. Israel may also want to better integrate its own Arabs.

Forging A New U.S.-Israeli Relationship

In recent years, Israel invited active U.S. intervention in Israel’s domestic and foreign policy for two reasons: to overcome domestic opposition to "land for peace" concessions the Israeli public could not digest, and to lure Arabs — through money, forgiveness of past sins, and access to U.S. weapons — to negotiate. This strategy, which required funneling American money to repressive and aggressive regimes, was risky, expensive, and very costly for both the U.S. and Israel, and placed the United States in roles is should neither have nor want.

Israel can make a clean break from the past and establish a new vision for the U.S.-Israeli partnership based on self-reliance, maturity and mutuality — not one focused narrowly on territorial disputes. Israel’s new strategy — based on a shared philosophy of peace through strength — reflects continuity with Western values by stressing that Israel is self-reliant, does not need U.S. troops in any capacity to defend it, including on the Golan Heights, and can manage its own affairs. Such self-reliance will grant Israel greater freedom of action and remove a significant lever of pressure used against it in the past.

To reinforce this point, the Prime Minister can use his forthcoming visit to announce that Israel is now mature enough to cut itself free immediately from at least U.S. economic aid and loan guarantees at least, which prevent economic reform. [Military aid is separated for the moment until adequate arrangements can be made to ensure that Israel will not encounter supply problems in the means to defend itself]. As outlined in another Institute report, Israel can become self-reliant only by, in a bold stroke rather than in increments, liberalizing its economy, cutting taxes, relegislating a free-processing zone, and selling-off public lands and enterprises — moves which will electrify and find support from a broad bipartisan spectrum of key pro-Israeli Congressional leaders, including Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.

Israel can under these conditions better cooperate with the U.S. to counter real threats to the region and the West’s security. Mr. Netanyahu can highlight his desire to cooperate more closely with the United States on anti-missile defense in order to remove the threat of blackmail which even a weak and distant army can pose to either state. Not only would such cooperation on missile defense counter a tangible physical threat to Israel’s survival, but it would broaden Israel’s base of support among many in the United States Congress who may know little about Israel, but care very much about missile defense. Such broad support could be helpful in the effort to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

To anticipate U.S. reactions and plan ways to manage and constrain those reactions, Prime Minister Netanyahu can formulate the policies and stress themes he favors in language familiar to the Americans by tapping into themes of American administrations during the Cold War which apply well to Israel. If Israel wants to test certain propositions that require a benign American reaction, then the best time to do so is before November, 1996.

Conclusions: Transcending the Arab-Israeli Conflict

TEXT: Israel will not only contain its foes; it will transcend them.

Notable Arab intellectuals have written extensively on their perception of Israel’s floundering and loss of national identity. This perception has invited attack, blocked Israel from achieving true peace, and offered hope for those who would destroy Israel. The previous strategy, therefore, was leading the Middle East toward another Arab-Israeli war. Israel’s new agenda can signal a clean break by abandoning a policy which assumed exhaustion and allowed strategic retreat by reestablishing the principle of preemption, rather than retaliation alone and by ceasing to absorb blows to the nation without response.

Israel’s new strategic agenda can shape the regional environment in ways that grant Israel the room to refocus its energies back to where they are most needed: to rejuvenate its national idea, which can only come through replacing Israel’s socialist foundations with a more sound footing; and to overcome its "exhaustion," which threatens the survival of the nation.

Ultimately, Israel can do more than simply manage the Arab-Israeli conflict though war. No amount of weapons or victories will grant Israel the peace its seeks. When Israel is on a sound economic footing, and is free, powerful, and healthy internally, it will no longer simply manage the Arab-Israeli conflict; it will transcend it. As a senior Iraqi opposition leader said recently: "Israel must rejuvenate and revitalize its moral and intellectual leadership. It is an important — if not the most important--element in the history of the Middle East." Israel — proud, wealthy, solid, and strong — would be the basis of a truly new and peaceful Middle East.

Participants in the Study Group on "A New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000:"

Richard Perle, American Enterprise Institute, Study Group Leader

James Colbert, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs
Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Johns Hopkins University/SAIS
Douglas Feith, Feith and Zell Associates
Robert Loewenberg, President, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies
Jonathan Torop, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
David Wurmser, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies
Meyrav Wurmser, Johns Hopkins University

Site Admin
Posts: 7781

Makow - Protocols Forgery Argument Is Flawed

Post#5 » Thu Jun 16, 2011 10:38 am

Makow - Protocols Forgery Argument Is Flawed
By Henry Makow PhD

Next to the Bible The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is perhaps the mostly widely read book in the world.

Published in Russia in 1903, it purports to be the leaked master plan for "Jewish world domination." It is the kind of thing that would be studied at secret workshops of an occult society.

In different ways, both Zionists and Nazis have made it synonymous with virulent anti Semitism and genocide.

But surely Jews should not be blamed for the machinations of a tiny secret society. The vast majority of Jews would disavow this master plan if they believed it existed.

Surely one can condemn all racism and genocide in the strongest possible terms and still believe the Protocols are authentic.

In my opinion, the equation of the Protocols with anti Semitism is really a ploy to divert attention away from this master plan.

The plagiarism claim is part of a propaganda campaign waged by conscious and unconscious collaborators in academia and the media.


We are told that The Protocols of Zion is a hoax, a "proven forgery" concocted by the Tsarist Political Police (the Okhrana) to incite anti Semitism and discredit revolutionaries.
But the "proof" is far from convincing.
It consists of three articles published in The London Times (August 16-18, 1921) by Philip Graves.

According to Graves, Protocols is a crude, chapter-by-chapter plagiarism of Maurice Joly's Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu (1864).

It was easy to make this claim while Joly's book was unavailable. Napolean III's police confiscated it as soon as it was published.

But it is available now and I invite you to compare the two texts. In my opinion, they are entirely different in tone, content and purpose. At 140 pages, Dialogues is twice as long as Protocols. Most of it finds no echo in the Protocols.

The crux of Graves' argument is that certain references and passages in Protocols have been lifted from Dialogues. He claims there are 50 of these and produces about a dozen.

Their striking resemblance to the Protocols leaves little doubt that the author did refer to the Dialogues as part of his research. He had no compunction about borrowing or reshaping a few passages that appealed to him.

Indeed Philip Graves is "struck by the absence of any effort on the part of the plagiarist to conceal his plagiarisms."

That's because he had nothing to hide. He was not Graves' "unimportant precis- writer employed by the court or by the Okhrana" to construct a hoax.

He was a diabolical genius crafting an original work. It is simplistic and disingenuous to characterize Protocols as a hoax.


Graves' article smacks of Zionist propaganda. Graves "expose" of the Protocols appeared in August 1921 when Zionists were pressing the League of Nations to turn Palestine into a Jewish homeland under British Mandate.
Philip Grave tells the unlikely story that a "Mr. X" brought the Dialogues to him in Constantinople where he was the Times' correspondent. Mr. X presented it as "irrefutable proof" that the Protocols are a plagiarism.

Mr. X was a White Russian, which seems incredible given the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution. He claims he bought the book from, get this, "a former member of the Okhrana" who had fled to Constantinople.
In The Controversy of Zion, (Chapter 34) Douglas Reed, a Times' staffer, provides additional background.

In May 1920, Lord Northcliffe, a part owner of The Times, printed an article about the Protocols of Zion entitled The Jewish Peril, A Disturbing Pamphlet, A Call for an Enquiry. " It concluded:

"An impartial investigation of these would-be documents and their history is most desirable...are we to dismiss the whole matter without inquiry and to let the influence of such a book as this work unchecked?"

Then in May 1922 Northcliffe visited Palestine and wrote that Britain had been too hasty to promise it to the Jewish people when in fact it belonged to 700,000 Muslim Arab residents.

Mr. Wickham Steed, the editor of The Times of London in 1921 refused to print the article and Northcliffe tried to get him fired.

Somehow Steed was able to have Northcliffe declared "insane" and committed. Later Northcliffe complained he was being poisoned and died suddenly in 1922.

Douglas Reed was Northcliffe's secretary but didn't learn of these events until they appeared in Official History of the Times in the 1950's.

Clearly Northcliffe had offended some "big boys" when he opposed the British Mandate in Palestine. Why was it so important?

Israel is intended to be the capital of the Masonic World Government. They are already constructing the infrastructure. See "The Roots of Evil in Jerusalem"


Philip Graves and the other apologists are incorrect to claim the Protocols plagiarize the Dialogues chapter by chapter.

Graves writes that "the Seventh Dialogue...corresponds with the fifth, sixth, seventh and part of the eighth Protocol. "

At eight pages, these Protocols are twice as long as the Seventh Dialogue.

They mostly contain material not in the Seventh Dialogue, or anywhere else I can find. I will list a few examples from Protocol Five alone.

Protocol Five says "our kingdom will be distinguished by a despotism of such magnificent proportions" that it will "wipe out any goyim who oppose us by deed or word."

In contrast Seventh Dialogue says, "Death, expropriation and torture should only play a minor role in the internal politics of modern states."

Protocols Five says we "robbed [the goyim] of their faith in God" and "insinuated into their minds the conception of their own rights" thereby undermining the authority of Kings. There is nothing comparable in Dialogue Seven.

Protocol Five says, "we shall so wear down the goyim that they will be compelled to offer us international power [allowing us] gradually to absorb all State forces of the world and to form a Super-Government." There is nothing comparable in Dialogue Seven.

Protocol Five says the "engine" of all states is "in our hands" and that engine is "Gold." "We were chosen by God Himself to rule over the whole earth." There is nothing comparable in Dialogue Seven.


The author of Protocols does select a few passages or references from Dialogues that appear unaltered (see Graves) or in different form.

For example, the Dialogues' say: " Everywhere might precedes right. Political liberty is merely a relative idea. The need to live is what dominates states as it does individuals."

In Protocols this becomes, "From the law of nature right lies in might. Political freedom is an idea but not a fact, and one must know how to use it [political freedom] as a bait whenever it appears necessary to attract the masses ... to one's party for the purpose of crushing another who is in authority." (Protocols 1)

Graves leaves out the last part to make the resemblance seem greater than it is.

Dialogues (7) say, "Revolutionary ferment which is suppressed in one's own country should be incited throughout Europe."
In Protocols (7) "Throughout all Europe ... we must create ferments, discords, hostilities." There is no reference to suppressing these in one's own country.

The author of Protocols is not a forger creating a hoax, but a conspirator forging an original work.


Both books belong to the "immoral school" of political theory. Machiavelli pays homage to a long list of rulers "who are progenitors of my doctrine." Both preach might makes right, good comes from evil, and the end justifies the means.

But the similarity ends there. The tone of the Dialogues is dry and theoretical.
It is a debate between fictional political theorists: Montesquieu a champion of democracy and Machiavelli, a champion of tyranny. Dialogues is considered a critique of the reign of Napolean III.
Montesquieu asks how to quell the spirit of anarchy in society. Machiavelli prescribes a "monster called the state" which maintains a democratic artifice but is actually controlled by the "Prince." He talks about how to suppress secret societies.

On the other hand, Protocols is the product of a secret society. It is frankly conspiratorial and subversive and pays homage to Lucifer. Protocols is a "strategic plan from which we cannot deviate without running the risk of seeing the labour of many centuries come to naught." (Protocol 1)

Unlike Dialogues, we are struck by a sense of relevance when reading Protocols. We recognize its baneful influence in today's world. See my articles "Did Rothschild Write The Protocols of Zion?" "Protocols is the NOW Blueprint" and "Protocols Dominates Our Culture."


Since Graves' articles, there have been a number of books arguing the "forgery" thesis. The latest is Norman Cohn, Warrant for Genocide (1970).

Graves and Cohn admit that "the Financial Programme" (Protocols 20-24) which the author calls "the crowning and decisive point of our plans" is largely original.

For serious researchers, Australian researcher Peter Myers presents pro and con views.

Goebbels said that propaganda is effective only when the reader doesn't realize it is propaganda. It follows that dupes write the best propaganda. For example, see Rick Salutin, Protocols of Zion's Critics. ... ws/TPStory


One hundred million people were slaughtered in the last century but no one considers that the human race might have been subverted.

War is hell but no one thinks Satan worshipers might be behind it.

I suspect the Second World War was a battle for racial superiority between Jewish and Aryan wings of the Illuminati who in fact are united at the top.

The private central bankers of England, the U.S. and Nazi Germany made the war possible. They worked as one at the Bank of International Settlements in Switzerland. (See Charles Higham, Trading With the Enemy.)

The purpose of the war was to degrade, defraud and demoralize humanity. The Holocaust provided a rationale for the establishment of Israel as headquarters of the New World Order. Aryans, Jews and many others were sacrificed and exploited.

In my opinion, the outlawing of Protocols on pain of death in Bolshevik Russia and its execration in the West today proves its authenticity.
Mankind is in the grip of a diabolical conspiracy. In order to make good people do bad things, truth must be tailored to fit the political purpose. This is Communist and Feminist teaching.

I would like to be proven wrong, but in the case of Protocols, the "forgery" argument is propaganda.

Note to Readers. I am taking a three-week holiday and will be back January 4.

Compliments of the Season to all!

Henry Makow Ph.D. is the inventor of the board game Scruples and author of "A Long Way to go for a Date." His previous articles on feminism and the New World Order are found at his web site He enjoys receiving comments at



This Site Served by TheHostPros

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest