This Paul Gottfried article is not merely incisive; it is also courageous. It is the kind of article telling hard, ugly truths that gets you smeared and ostracized in such a fiercely philoSemitic age and nation. Who knows, but this could be the article that makes Gottfried suspect even to the LewRockwell crowd.

What most interests me most about it are not the major points about what Foxman’s successes in fundraising say about Jews and their indispensable role in the cultural Marxist that is simultaneously cancer metastasized and gangrene fast approaching the hip. What interests me most are Gottfried’s comments about American Protestants. For some 4 or 5 years, I have responded periodically to an article or book of his noting that if he would only recognize that sola fide is an inherently liberal theology that births an inherently liberal set of inter-related philosophies, which reproduce increasingly liberal politics, and then also recognize that the Anglo-Saxon Puritans were the most savagely self-righteous Judaizers to emerge from the Protestant Reformation, then he would have the basic answer that makes sense of the various phenomena he observes.

In this article, Foxman notes, “Evangelicals have been moving toward the social left (that is, in Foxman’s direction) on moral issues and is currently fixated on human rights, missionizing for democracy, and the presidential nomination of socially liberal Republican Rudolph Giuliani.” After noting that then Christian Coalition director Ralph Reed had publicly apologized for the Spanish Inquisition, Gottfried admits, “What did not surprise me was that an Evangelical leader did the predictable groveling.”

The only person who should not be surprised by such Anglophonic Evangelical conduct is one who does not know or refuses to accept either of the two premises I make two paragraphs above.  First, because sola fide is inherently liberal, it breeds more liberalism: theological, philosophical, cultural, and political liberalism. Second, because the Anglo-Saxon Puritans were imperialistic Judaizers (natural forerunners of Zionists) and they made an indelibly defining mark on all subsequent English culture and defined New England culture, and then through osmosis with Quakers to form a kind of a-doctrinal cultural Protestantism came to define Northern (Yankee) culture, and after that through the War Between the States came to be the mandarin culture of America, the main fruits of their hegemony must necessarily involve forms of philoSemitism benefiting preponderantly from their theological liberalism (become primarily heresy long ago) that breeds never-ending political liberalism and cultural suicide: the Thanatos Syndrome of Walker Percy.

Whether he is willing to acknowledge, Gottfried seems to be coming around to my assessments. Perhaps he was at this point long ago and refused to so acknowledge because my larger case is focused not on theology, but linguistic and folk culture.  However sincere Gottfried is in his defense of Anglophonic Protestantism (and the more sincere, the more self-contradictory he is), he is rather openly as anti-Irish as any old fashioned Philadelphia lawyer WASP, and my focus always takes account of the fact that in the Indo-European family, Celtic is the most conservative in everything (linguistics, folklore, material culture, etc.), and it emphasizes the defining Celtic cultural heritage of the South against the theologically heretical and culturally liberal Yankee WASP world.

It aint no mistake that every form of cultural liberal – including the Neocon form that is little more than a Jewish focused grandchild of Lincoln and the original Republican Party advancing liberal WASP culture through sanctimonious gunpoint - hates the Celtic-Southern thesis and acts to stop its transmissions. Those who wish to know more should see my book ‘How Celtic Culture Invented Southern Literature.’

Thanks for another great article, Dr. Gottfried.

THE PHANTOM CAPTAIN

This is our country and our fathers made it free
But we are rarely heard or seen
Foreign favorites seem to steer our country’s course
Risking our own security

They kept us busy, just trying to survive
Working hard to make ends meet
We paid no mind to things like Palestine
And the injustice that it reeks

The enemies are among us
Or so they say, the cells are nearly everywhere
Religious fanatics, always ready to fight
The Phantom Captain leads us there

We watch the car bombs and the gore on TV
The patsy always is the same
Mercenary death squads and spooks behind the scenes
Deception always is the game

The old ones warned us about foreign friends
Washington told us long ago
And Ike saw the industry of military might
He warned us it was going to grow

The enemies are among us
Or so they say, the cells are nearly everywhere
Religious fanatics, always ready to fight
The Phantom Captain leads us there

Our complicit Congress ignores the peoples will
They feign withdrawal to appease
We imitate our favorites and occupy their lands
and set ablaze the Middle East

And if the Captain tries to take us to war
Let him not do it in our name
We will take his ship from him and sail to peaceful shores
Tend to our country once again

The enemies are among us
Or so they say, the cells are nearly everywhere
Religious fanatics, always ready to fight
The Phantom Captain leads us there

The East Asian columnist under the moniker of “Spengler” also talks of the Jewish instigation of Protestantism. It was Oliver Cromwell that let the Jews back into England and it was Jewish money that financed the American revolution which was a continuation of the Grand revolution, i.e. the English Civil War. Spengler also writes that Spanish were right to hold an Inquisition. Protestantism does much to Judiaze the faith and I agree with Mr. Cantrell’s thoughts. Western Culture and Civilization is being deconstructed so multiculturalism can take its place. Let’s remember if there was no Karl Marx, no anarchists, no Lenin, no Rosa Luxemberg, no Victor Adler, there would be no 1939 and even then the Jews were told to leave Germany. 1939 did not come about in a vacuum (which we are supposed to think it did). The same destructive elements of the Weimar are here now in America and in Europe--Cultural Marxism and the destruction of the Old Order.

The Jews were told to leave Germany in 1939?  By whom?  They were prevented from leaving Germany in most cases.

Herr Wheeler has posted some incoherent thoughts that would better fit on some Nazi page.  Why not blame the assassination of JFK on the Jews too? How about the recent financial market meltdown since, as Wheeler would surely assume, the Jews run the global financial markets?  Perhaps Herr Wheeler should read Marx’s “The Jewish Problem” before he sticks sein Fuss further in sein Mund.

MGB- hey it’s the comments section.  What are ya gonna do.  At least they aren’t starting topics.

at any rate, It’s obvious to everyone that Foxman is hyposcritical here.  I noticed he has a book coming out meant to undermine the impact of “the israel lobby” which is due to come out in september.  This blocks that effort nicely.

It should be obvious to my readers that I am not
condemning everyone who has ever been nice to Jews,
out of moral decency or (horror of horrors!)a high
regard for the Old Testament. I am just fed up with
those who let the victimologists tear them apart,and
I find those who are susceptible to the claims of
special treatment for American Jews as victims of
Christianity to be contemptible as well as
ridiculous. Foxman has a helluva lot of Christian
enablers, who may be more important than his Jewish
ones.

Paul Gottfried ends his comments with this sentence: “Foxman has a helluva lot of Christian
enablers, who may be more important than his Jewish
ones.” I will go him a step more and assert that Foxman’s enablers who are professed Christians (many of them are utterly heretical) are easily more important than his Jewish enablers. Foxman’s heretical Christian enablers are logical and inherent products of the Anglo-Saxon Puritan revolution and the subsequent culture wars to spread that perverted culture world wide by hook and crook.

Christophobia and Judeophobia are two moral evils.  And one breeds the other.

thank you mr Gottfried, excellent article.

paul johnson wrote modern times...and intellectuals has this to say in his book

“one of the principal lessons of our tragic century which has seen so many millions of innocent lives sacrificed in schemes to improve the lot of humanity is this, beware intellectuals, not merely should they be kept well away from the levers of power, they should also be objects of particular suspicion when they seek to offer collective advise, beware committees conferences and leagues of intellectuals, distrust their public statements issued from their serried ranks, discount their verdicts on political leaders and important events. For intellectual far from being highly individualistic and non conformist people follow certain regular patterns of behavior, taken as a group they are often ultra conformist within the circles formed by those whose approval they seek and value, that is what makes them en masse so dangerous, for it enables them to create climates of opinion and prevailing orthodoxes which themselves often generate irrational and destructive causes of action. Above all we must at all times remember what intellectuals habitually forget that people matter more than concepts and must come first, the worst of all despotisms is the heartless tyranny of ideas.”

GREAT photo!

(and article!)

To Dr. Gottfried: reading your revealing article, I am astounded that Abraham Foxman has the power “to block congressional action to condemn the mass murder of one million Armenians in 1915 by the Turkish military divisions, because such an action would supposedly not have been in the interest of Israel.” I can only attribute his “power” to the pathetic legislative vacuum created by the cowardice or corruption of members of Congress—which doesn’t say much for democracy or republicanism, or the American citizenry, for that matter.  For the honor of Jesus Christ, for the sake of justice and historical truth, I repudiate his claims; as does James Cantrell and WLindsayWheeler in their replies.  Since Foxman is a liar. a deceiver, a social dissenter, and a promoter of Zionism he needs more than an intellectual challenge.  He needs to face a real physical challenge, because he hides too much behind the shield of so-called victim-hood of Jews.

Methinks that MGB protests too much against WLindsayWheeler hoping that we’ll all drop the subject of which he describes.  No, sir. The comparison between the Weimar Republic and contemporary America are too obvious, especially, if one has any knowledge of history.  In America, who influences culture?  Hollywood, a Jewish domain?  The media, Jewish owned or influenced?  The government, wherein we find an undue Jewish influence regarding foreign policy.  This is as it was in Weimar, Germany during the 1920’s.  What is the purpose of Jewish watchdogs such as the ADL, the ACLU, and the SPLC?  What is the reason for AIPAC?  Is the welfare of America and its citizens, mostly Christian, their concern?

Poor America, the land where the shit really has hit the fan…
If it makes you people any happier I can inform you that the situation in Europe is rapidly becoming the same.

Not really wishing to start a new topic here I nevertheless am curious about this rivalry, or even hatred, that american Protestants seem to feel for Catholics. Why? What is the problem? And please don’t start telling me about pedophile priests. It’s not that.

Maybe a link that explains it all?

I could also ask why Jews are so extremely paranoid and touchy when criticized, but I don’t dare. Someone may send an ADL case officer to “check me out”. Or to plant a bomb in my car. It has happened before.

Thank you Dr. Gottfried for a summation that would
hold up in any courtroom. If Mr. Tin Tin would like to
know about why the protestants feel the way they do,
there’s a very fine book by Hilaire Belloc titled
HERESIES which presents a very thorough synopsis of
protestantism and islam and other heretical erros
that continue to plague us. Just keep in mind that
more Christians were murdered during the reign of
the apostate and heresiarch Henry VIII than during
all of the inquisitions combined but your friendly,
local, non-Catholic elitist will never tell you that.
Probably because he doesn’t know either....

@Rin tin tin.

As to why Jews are so paranoid, you can blame it on
Hitler who taught them that THE PARANOIDS WHO SAID THEY
ARE COMING TO KILL US WERE RIGHT. A lesson like that
is not forgotten in less than a century.

Jusk ask the Irish how well they forget what the
English did to them…

Christians at one time got very efficient at killing
each other, and at one time, some Christians thought of
enlisting Jews as allies, as Luther did. Since the Jews
did not go along with Luther’s notions, he wrote a very
poisonous program of what was to be done with Jews, a
program that later Hitler claimed he was putting into
practice.

As for Foxman, he is a man who makes a living out of
feeding other people’s paranoia. Not a nice guy at all.

By the way, Mr. Meng’s comments are not the kind that
will allay any Jew’s paranoia, but feed it. So, you may
say that, objectivelly, Mr. Meng is Mr. Foxman’s ally.

Rin Tin Tin wants to know the source of the American Catholic/Protestant rivalry. It is merely a continuation of the same basic cultural conflict from the British Isles. It is a matter of the culture (which most conveniently is labeled WASP in America) birthed by the revolutions of Henry VIII and the Anglo-Saxon Puritans making certain that the one great intellectual and spiritual source of refutation to it (the great ethno-cultural source of refutation to it is Celtic) must be opposed, must be traduced.

James Cantrell:Celtic is the most conservative in everything (linguistics, folklore, material culture, etc.), and it emphasizes the defining Celtic cultural heritage of the South against the theologically heretical and culturally liberal Yankee WASP world.

Some of that is true but the Irish have been the most left wing European ethnic group in American history. From the moment they arrived on American soil they have gone against the interests of old stock WASPs time and time again. Even today they are highly represented in the pro-illegal alien forces with Ted Kennedy and the Catholic Church leading the way, as usual.

WLindsayWheeler:The East Asian columnist under the moniker of “Spengler” also talks of the Jewish instigation of Protestantism

“Spengler” is almost certainly Jewish.

Not intending to be rude I nevertheless must say I’m not satisfied with the answers supplied. Maybe I posed my question in a fuzzy way? I’ll try again.

What are the PRESENT day reasons for the animosity between the Protestants and the Catholics? Surely most people of both camps aren’t that versed in old history and the slights accompanied with it?

If you’re a Protestant and someone asks you to name three reasons why you dislike Catholics, what would those be?

And what would a Catholic reply when asked the same about Protestants?

Also, I don’t buy the Hitler thing for Jews. Hitler and his movement have been dead and buried for 60+ years. The paranoia and hatred that so many modern Jews display so fiercely for the rest of us Gentiles merely uses Hitler as an excuse. We all know for sure that the overwhelming majority of us Gentiles aren’t nazis and wont have anything to do with them. So, again, what is the problem here?

Let me also mention that I haven’t seen much of such hatred among Poles, Russians and other nations that have suffered greatly from German nazism.

The people who still hate the Germans most, beside Jews, seem to be the French. Probably because the Germans made the French feel worthless, invading them so easily.

This could also be the explanation to why immigrants from (backward) muslim counties hate their host nations so much. We make them feel worthless.

“undue Jewish influence regarding foreign policy”
-- Meng

By way of preface and caveat: (1.) I do NOT regard Mr. Meng a Judeophobe, or malicious at all; I enjoy reading his contributions.  (2.) Mr. Gottfried’s remarks about Foxman need to be followed by a similar inquiry by someone into Rev. Hagee so as to not to arouse suspicion that a Czarist pogrom might be underway.

That said, I greatly fear that the defeat in Iraq will prompt an outburst of Judeophobia and Anti-Semitism—a sort of American conflation of “knife in the back” and the Dreyfus Affair. Let’s be on guard against this.  Indeed, were such to happen, Zionists would have even more reason to argue that Jews need their own country. Let’s burn Drumont and instead follow Washington’s policy—GEORGE Washington’s to the Hebrew Congregation in Newport RI--; I as all of you know many outstanding men—and outstanding in charity—who are Jews.

The question of Catholic and Protestant antagonism is vast.  Just a few points.

1. Does something like “Protestantism” still exist?  I see its classic form (Lutheran and Reformed) now dead. The “Neo-Orthodox” movement among Protestants (Barth et al.) also seems dead. In its place are two very opposed movements who oppose each other with vastly more fury than any anti-Catholic feeling:  (i) Liberal Protestants (Social Gospel, “Main Line") and (ii) the Evangelicals (including Fundamentalists, Pentecostals, and Dispensationalists).  Both, when not anathemizing each other, are hostile to Catholics, the former increasingly so when “Vatican II” didn’t turn into the Liberalization of Catholicism, a fact now obvious with Benedict. 

2. Historical-critical method, when taken to an extreme, caused a crisis for sola scriptura, at least for Liberal Protestants.  Fr. Ronald Knox said that Protestants had the habit of beating Catholics with the Bible; then suddenly the Bible fell apart in their hands.  How “Biblical” Protestants really were is open to question, with the de-emphasis on the Bible’s cultic material, the Wisdom Tradition, and even the Psalms. For the Church already has a hymnbook: the “book” of Psalms, 40% of which are laments.  One wonders if the Benedictine tradition is in fact more Biblical.  Not that I wish to depreciate worthy Protestant Biblical scholarship, mind you.

3. The Ecumenical Movement, still a part of the Magisterium, was launched in the 60s and now is in ruins.  It was poorly executed from the start. Liberal Catholics were only interested in talking to Liberal Protestants.  There were nonetheless many evangelicals—I know them—who were not fanatical and were eager to learn from Catholic traditions, especially Arminian Evangelicals. Alas, Catholics—Liberal and Authentic— didn’t make the effort, perhaps with memories of being denounced by the fanatical as “mackerel-snappers”, bead-clickers”, “cracker-eaters”, and “toe-kissers”.

4. In the same vein, I wish Rome would make some hay out to the mess among the Whiskey-Palians (to continue with some other Baptist lingo) and invite the anti-sodomite wing into the Church with their own rite.  Rome is to be credited, on the other hand, for bending over backwards to appeal to the Eastern Church, and I suspect the Regensburger Zinger was an effort at this.  Alas, I wonder, with its autocephalous structure and the subordination of the Patriarch to the Emperor, if the Eastern Church has fallen victim to 19th C nationalism, some of it rather extreme. All the same, at least that church didn’t destroy its liturgy!

Tribalism, plain and simple, defined by “faith.” Catholicism vs Protestantism, Judaism vs Islam.  When not joined to fight their common adversary, they split to fight each other.  Traditional vs Novus Ordum, Methodist vs Baptist vs Lutheran vs so many minor sects, all supposedly worshiping the one god, Reform vs Orthodox judiasm.  A quick reading of Dr. Henry Makow’s article, “The God Who Serves the Jews,” might go far to explain the Abe Foxmans of the world.

Andrew,

If you believe that the Irish are the most left wing group in American history, then you are remarkably ignorant of the Irish and of Jews, blacks, Quakers and other 100% heretical groups birthed by the English reformation. The alleged Irish liberalism, almost always summed up with pointing Ted Kennedy, began with simply being forced, by the processes of British imperial history, to live in a world in which your culture is derided and you are expected to assimilate in order to live anywhere but the very floor. In such a society, your politics becomes ‘liberal’ in the sense that it is opposed to the status quo, a status quo that is the fruit of people destroying your culture. In British terms, the Irish became anti-imperial, including when living in the Empire (take the Irish out of the equations, and there is not enough sentiment for independence to even ease a type of Home Rule for Canada or Australia).

Is opposing a perverted empire and demanding as much de-centralization as possible conservative or liberal? If you wish, for whatever reason, to conserve that empire and all its ill-gotten gains and its increasingly rotten inherent fruits that poison hordes of people, then you will condemn such stances as the worst of liberalism.

If you refer to the Irish in America, then you had best start studying history. When the Know-Nothings use terror against Irish immigrant neighborhoods, as well as the many legal activities, they NEVER do so because they claim the Irish are too liberal. In fact, the very opposite is asserted. The Irish were recognized as being religiously and culturally conservative in ways that would stand in opposition to the essence of liberal WASP democracy. Condemnations of the Irish and then other Catholic immigrants, especially the Poles, were the same right through the 1920s: they were too conservative, and their conservatism was retrograde and could only be anti-American, which would mean they would be anti-WASP.

If you know anything about the abortion fight in New York state in the early and mid-1960s, you know that the Pro-abortion side was uniformly Jewish and WASP and the anti-abortion side was uniformly Catholic, with the vast majority of leaders being of Irish ancestry.

So then how did we get to Teddy Kennedy and other Irish descended politicians of recent vintage? David Hackett Fischer in Albion’s Seed shows how: assimilation. Fischer uses the Massachusetts Kennedys as Exhibit A of his case that all subsequent groups coming to America ultimately would assimilate to one of 4 16th century local British cultures: two of those together formed Southern culture, and 2 formed Northern culture. Fischer declares that the 1960s and after Kennedys act in cultural terms exactly like the ethnically pure Anglo-Saxon Protestants of Brahmin New England, who hated Irish immigrants even as they welcomed Jews as business partners and partners culturally to oppose Catholics and saw blacks as their permanent toy to uplift, and exactly like the great-grandparents of those quintessential WASPs.

Fischer recognizes the obvious: Teddy Kennedy is exactly like the ultra Liberal New England Brahmins of the antebellum era because of assimilation. Teddy has Irish genes and an Irish surname, and he remains a Catholic by affiliation (though he is about as good a Catholic as Henry VIII), but Teddy is a 100% cultural WASP.

As a Roamn Catholic whose family has been well-connected in the Vatican for centuries; I do not feel nor do I see any overt hostility between Protestants and Catholics in England, Germany, the Benelux and the Scandinavian countries. I think we agree that the break with the English was more a question of Henry the Eighth’s loins than religious differences. Martin Luther had grievances of a theological and spiritual nature, but for the Elector of Hanover who hated paying outrageous taxes to the Church, the differences could have been patched up even after the inflammatory denunciations of Luther at the Diet of Worms. One must always follow the money trail. No one has mentioned the vast financial support Luther received from Suleyman the Magnificent. I consider him the most vital individual in the spread of the Reformation. It suited Suleyman. He wanted total hegemony over Eastern Europe. Divide et Imperat was the best way. Without his backing Protestantism might well have remained a cult.

I am glad that Frau von Fechtmann sees little hostility to Catholics in present-day Protestant Europe (keeping in mind that Belgium isn’t Protestant). That was not my experience when living in Protestant Germany 1972-1980 when Catholics were condemned for the same reasons that Liberal Protestants in the USA hate Catholics: largely reasons dealing sex. The hostile reception that Pope John Paul II received in the Orange Netherlands and Scandinavia also suggests that, at that time, Catholics were not welcome.  If matters have changed, then I’m glad to hear it. Adenauer’s reform of the old Catholic Zentrum into a CDU that made an appeal to Protestants was a good start. In the Orange Netherlands, the Catholic and Protestant parties didn’t merge until the 1990s—or so I’m told. I’ll let others comment on anti-Catholicism in England, Wales, and Scotland. The circumstances in Orange Ireland is, of course, a matter of common knowledge.

If you believe that the Irish are the most left wing group in American history, then you are remarkably ignorant of the Irish and of Jews, blacks, Quakers and other 100% heretical groups birthed by the English reformation.

I said they were the most left wing EUROPEAN ethnic group so blacks and Jews shouldn’t be included. You may have a point regarding Quakers but who are these “100% heretical groups”?

The alleged Irish liberalism, almost always summed up with pointing Ted Kennedy, began with simply being forced, by the processes of British imperial history, to live in a world in which your culture is derided and you are expected to assimilate in order to live anywhere but the very floor

Sort of like the blacks, Jews, Mexicans, and other victimologists.

Ireland had a significant middle class by the time so many Irish were flooding into America and many Irish enthusiastically played a role in the Empire. (More of them fought with the British during WW1 than for their own independence.)

In British terms, the Irish became anti-imperial, including when living in the Empire (take the Irish out of the equations, and there is not enough sentiment for independence to even ease a type of Home Rule for Canada or Australia).

Wrong, there was plenty of “Home Rule” sentiment in those countries particularly the more developed Canada which confederated in 1867. Becoming anti-Imperial and rebelling against the Motherland didn’t make much sense from an Anglo-Celtic/Saxon Canadian or Australian viewpoint.

When the Know-Nothings use terror against Irish immigrant neighborhoods, as well as the many legal activities, they NEVER do so because they claim the Irish are too liberal.

The Know Nothings were old stock Americans resisting a foreign invasion. Cultural liberalism/conservatism had little to do with it. Though defending the religious and ethnic core of one’s nation sounds pretty conservative to me.

Condemnations of the Irish and then other Catholic immigrants, especially the Poles, were the same right through the 1920s: they were too conservative, and their conservatism was retrograde and could only be anti-American, which would mean they would be anti-WASP

That’s like arguing today that the Minutemen and other border control groups are liberals because they are trying to block entry to America by more socially traditional Latinos, Asians, and Muslims.

If you know anything about the abortion fight in New York state in the early and mid-1960s, you know that the Pro-abortion side was uniformly Jewish and WASP and the anti-abortion side was uniformly Catholic, with the vast majority of leaders being of Irish ancestry

Who cares? Those same Irish Catholics who were upset about abortion played a significant role in voting in pro-Civil Rights politicians and those that gave America the 1965 immigration law. Preserving the ethnic core of a nation is far more important than preventing abortions in the ghetto.

There may be some truth to Cantrell’s argument that the Kennedys picked up the worst habits of the New England Brahmins. But what about all the other Irish? I don’t recall the the New England WASPs creating Tammany Hall. They weren’t the ones who wrecked the old New England townhall democracy wherever they went. Today the Irish of the north continue to romanticize Ellis Island and spit at those awful working class WASPs who had the nerve to resent their towns being invaded and wages being threatened. In short the Irish in the North did not completely assimilate. In the South they did because they were thin on the ground, but up north they conquered parts of the country through sheer force of numbers. They have an identity of their own that is distinct from that of the northern WASPs.

Okay, my last comment. In the 1950s JFK, who, like his relatives going back to the 19th century had a chip on his shoulder toward WASP America, wrote an influential pamphlet called A Nation Of Immigrants. In it Protestant America was portrayed as a land of Klamsmen and bigots. Who published his little rant? The Anti-Defamation League!

It is good to see the demarcations that arise ineluctably from WASP culture, and Andrew, who seems to have imbibed every cliché known to the WASP world, shines on them.

Abolitionism tied inextricably to utterly heretical (usually anti-Trinitarian) Protestant groups was birthed exclusively in antebellum New England by ethnically pure Anglo-Saxons, and they were always clear that saw both Irish Catholics and Scots-Irish Southerners as their two main enemies and as inferior peoples to them and to blacks. Feminism was born at the same time and place among the same ethnicity: WASP. The true anti-Semites (who in this are remarkably similar to Abe Foxman and many other Jews), who focus on race exclusively and assume permanent characteristics bound to genes (which means assimilation to other cultural standards and attitudes is never acknowledged in more than lip service), wish to see America’s cultural Marxist slide in matters relating to race and gender as being Jewish in origin, and they hate it when people like me note that the messes are WASP in origin. For Andrew, that means that the very core culture (‘stock’ he calls it) of what he sees as America (it was NOT the core ‘stock’ of the South, nor the core culture, nor even a significant minority culture) was the one and only source of the two most important lurches toward cultural Marxism – and the Yankee WASPs accomplished that before anyone in North America ever heard the name Karl Marx.

That alone makes the Yankee WASP culture utterly indispensable to all subsequent American Leftism. The Irish participated in that as they assimilated to that culture’s hegemony.

But that is the end of the matter. Simply spend time examining what Northern Protestant churches have done since the Gilded Age, and I don’t mean only examine their theological perversions. Examine their roles in all matters relating to the growth of American centralized and socialistic government. E. Michael Jones has written a fine book titled The Slaughter of Cities in which he shows how the WASP Elites (Andrew probably would call them conservatives) allied with Jews began in the 1920s to use big government to destroy Catholic neighborhoods. The purpose, as document after document quoted by Jones shows, was to force these Catholic to assimilate more quickly and fully and become truly liberal Americans.

For me, the most quickly telling detail from history to mark how utterly perverse and liberal is the inherent fruit of New England Anglo-Saxon Puritan culture is the United Church of Christ. It is a fairly recent formation based primarily on the Congregational church, which was the church of Puritan New England. As Thomas Aquinas could have predicted, this church of, for, and by the Anglo-Saxon Puritan people is a cesspool of the extreme left – culturally and morally as well as theologically - that makes the liberal most quarter of the Democrat Party seem normal, even square. Compared to the average UCC leader, Ted Kennedy is prim, however fat and alcoholic.

Ideas have consequences, and cultures are more about ideas than about genes.

Andrew’s many notions are simply too many to undo here, but I have to address one that should demonstrate how ridiculous his positions are. Irish Catholics (which seems to be all that Andrew means by Irish) did not create Tammany Hall. Tammany Hall was a purely Protestant invention and game. The first major player to use it fully was Aaron Burr. It is true that Tammany early on was politically opposed to the New England Elites. Tammany played a key role in keeping John Adams from being re-elected, but that was not about Catholic Irish, because they had zero role in Tammany at the time, and would not for decades. The Irish would not come to control Tammany until 1872, and Boss Tweed was pure Scots-Irish, not Catholic.

To Adriana: ya, dada,dada,dada da.  As much as I respect some of your comments, which show insight, cleverness, and wisdom, I am surprised that you could be so trite with regards to my comments apropos Abe Foxman. Jewish paranoia is an institutionalized convention exploited by Hollywood, the ACLU, the ADL, the SPLC, the JDL, the Jewish World Congress, and all Zionist sympathizers.  For that matter, why are Jews paranoid?  They thrive quite well in America, among other western nations.  The whole world caves into their ambitions, including the U.S. Government. How can I possibly be compared to Foxman?  I merely reiterated historical facts and questions and asked valid questions relative to non-Jews.  The main question is this, dear Adriana, does the world revolve around the Jews and their interests?

To Sid, thanks for your appreciation of my comments, and be assured, I enjoy and am edified by yours.  I take it that you are a well-educated and much traveled man.  I also appreciate your personal judgment that I am not “a Judeophobe...”, because I am not.  That would be anti-Christ.  However, I do admit that I am a sinner, which has its degrees of maliciousness.  Nevertheless, let’s face it, there are several pre-dominating world-views existing in the world, today, and for the past several thousand years.  They can be reduced to two: Catholic and Jewish.  On the one hand, a truly open-minded person would see that the representatives of the Jewish world point of view have been working to destroy the Catholic Church since the beginning (read, especially, the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles).  Abe Foxman is just one of those representatives.  He would love to neutralize it.  On the other, the Catholic Church has been trying to convert the Jews to the true Messiah over the last 2000 years for the sake of personal salvation.  History shows that the Catholic Church has never had a policy of destroying Jews.  This is a libel against the Church.  This is what it all boils down to.

Well, Jerry, While I’m glad that you say you’re not Judeophobic, I urge you to go a step further. To say that Jewish representatives have always been out to get Catholics is what the theoreticians of argumentation call, to put it mildly, a “hasty generalization”. 

My Jewish friends tell me that they feel much closer to Catholics than other religions, and for these reasons, among others:

1. Catholics and Jews have a similar respect for law, unlike (some) Protestants

2. Both also emphasize Grace (I believe the Hebrew word is “hessed” which the RSV translates as “loving kindness” and the King Jimmy “mercy”.  Both believe in merit de gratia (Judaism is not a “works-righteousness” religion).

3. Both reject sola scriptura; both have Scripture AND Tradition. For rabbical Judaism, the Tradition is codified in the Talmud.

4. Both respect and cultivate the wisdom tradition.

5. Both know a lot about cultus (for Jews on hold); or said differently, both consider binding a priesthood, an altar, a sacrifice. And both have the Pascal mystery, the covenant in blood, the covenant community and excommunication from it, the unleaven bread, the Pentecost, fast days.

6. Both are messianic, both are prophetic.

7. Both regard the Saducee’s rejection of life after death as Archheresy

8. Both expect their clergy to be well-educated. Both emphasize the careful study of texts and precision in language. Both have a magisterium.

9 Both use the Psalms (at least Benedictine Catholics)

10. The first part of the Mass is taken from the Synagogue service, the second has its origin in the Passover.

11. Both have ritual washings

12. Both have The Redemption and The Day of Atonement.

13. Both honor the Holy Name.

14. And as for the Trinity, my Jewish friends say they don’t have a problem with it, just that they would prefer not to inquire into The Almighty’s inner nature.

As for “rejecting the true Messiah”, the locus and supreme authority, because it is scripture, for Catholic-Jewish relations with this issue in mind is Romans 9-11.  Let that text set the tone.

@Jerry Meng

You talk about paranoia as if it was under the rule of
reason, while it is a most unreasoning passion. No
one chooses to be paranoid. It is merely endured by
those whose minds are bent by it, and cannot think
straight (the sad part about mental illness is that,
unlike physical illness, the suffered does not know
that he is sick).

The terrible thing is that paranoia, unreasoning as it\
is was given terrible validation. In fact one of the
characteristics of the period beofre and during World
War II was that THE LUNATICS TURNED OUT TO BE RIGHT,
AND THAT SENSIBLE PEOPLE DID NOT KNOW WHAT WAS GOING
ON. Churchill was a crank that no one listened to,
no one paid attention to De Gaulle’s theories which
were seen as too untested. And so on.

As for the Holocaust, like it or not, it was a highly
traumatic event which was designed to feed the mother
of all paranoias. And if you think that it has been
a long while, and that we are in American, why not ask
Irish Americans if they feel more kindly disposed
towards the English and Oliver Cromwell, and about
the potato famine. That was further back, I understand

.

Dear Sid, I wasn’t born, yesteday.  You give a litany of like-minded things shared by Jews and Catholics, but the one thing they do not share, most absolutely and most importantly, is that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, and this is the basis of our differences; this is the basis of Jewish historical antipathy toward the Catholic Church.  C’mon, give me a break, pal.  You wanna be honest, then be honest.  My argument isn’t with race or culture, but with the distortion of the TRUTH (this most likely is why I have sometimes been called anti-Semite).  As for Romans 9-11, I am not sure why you cited it, and I am afraid I do not see how it supports your argument.  There is nothing in that verse which sets the tone about rejection of the Messiah.  It is about God’s predilection in choosing whom He wants.  I quote, “For when the children were not yet born, nor had done any good or evil, (that the purpose of God according to election might stand.)” The reference, here, is about Esau and Jacob.  I have been unable to find a commentary that supports your viewpoint on this verse.  You might, as matter of consideration, provide me with yours.  By the way, I am using the Douay-Rheims Bible.

Jerry C. Meng:

1. By Romans 9-11, I mean chapters 1 through 11 in Romans. And use a Catholic edition of the RSV for an English translation.  Sorry if you were confused by what I wrote. Read these chapters and note clearly what Paul teaches about Jewish-Catholic relations.

2. Both the Council of Orange (against semi-Pelagianism) and the 6th Session of Trent teach and define that faith is a free gift of grace from only Almighty God.  It is not something that we go out and get on our own power (though we can freely will to reject this gift).  If someone doesn’t have gift, then he is not to be faulted.  Nor is anyone other than Almighty God to judge if someone has received this gift or not. Moreover, the same Magisterium teaches that no one can forced to believe or to be a Christian.  Alas, this teaching has been frequently ignored. The teachings of these Councils should also be carefully read.  The Denzinger is the best source for the Magisterium.  Alas, I know of no up to date Latin-English version.  In my Latin-German edition (40th ed 2005, Herder Publishing), the ## are: For the 2nd Synod of Orange (A.D. 526-530) ## 370-397; for 6th Session of Trent (AD 1557) on Justification, ##1520-1583.

Thanks for your imput.

Paul Gottfried,
You make a curious parenthetical statement:
“(Although there are other grounds on the basis of which one might challenge the presentation of the mass murder in question as genocide, I see no reason to go into them here.)”

I’m curious about this.  Do you know something that 90 years of scholarship on the subject has missed?

Regards,
Robert Bedrosian

“I said they were the most left wing EUROPEAN ethnic group so blacks and Jews shouldn’t be included.”

It’s statements like this that result in the histrionics of anomalies like Mr. Foxman. My Jewish ancestors lived in Europe for more than a thousand years. They were thoroughly European. Just ask non-European Americans who hold European Americans responsible for all the ills of the world. They’ll tell you us Jews are European!

I think we Jews are making too much noise these days. Why? Because, in every age, those who have the most guns call the shots, and we American Jews will never have the most guns, especially when our Christian allies desert us and our secular friends dump us. At that time, if the kind of down-home, Celtic version of blut and erde for whose culturally purifying effects Mr. Cantrell seems to yearn ever wins the day, our Jewish backsides will be in for a thrashing or worse. So a word of caution to my Jewish brethern and sistern, including the incorrigible Mr. Foxman: sheket b’vakashah.

Adriana, you have missed my point, dear.  I know that Jewish paranoia is not reasonable, as you emphasized.  My point is that Jewish authorities (Zionist for the most part) have exploited it in the name of a so-called Jewish victim-hood for the sake of their world view, while all others are anathema.  Why would the ACLU fight to rid a judge in Alabama who defended the right of having the Ten Commandments posted on the walls of a court house?  Why is the ACLU ferociously against Nativity scenes in public places?  There are other examples, and I see them as acts of war against Christianity and the Christian world-view.  Please, if you are going to argue this issue, be honest, and not ideological.

James, I knew the first post was by you by the second paragraph, before I ever got to the bottom. We agree on much, but we will never agree on sola fide. Anyway, I think you misuse the term Judaizers. In the New Testament, the concept of Judaizer referred to someone who felt the need to follow certain aspects of the Law – circumcision, observe the Jewish holidays, refrain from eating pork etc. On the other hand, sola fide is accused by Catholics of being antinomian. Well it can’t be both. Both excessively “nomian” (Judiazer) and antinomian. So what exactly are you getting at with the term Judaizer? If you mean friendly to Judaism, then I think some other term is more appropriate and less theologically laden. Same thing applies to Mr. Wheeler.

Jerry, so you think that Jews have no reason to feel
paranoid, even your mention the Weimar Republic and
the influence of the Jews there.

We all know what followed the Weimar Republic.

Forgive me if I say that a post that seems to put
the blame of Hitler on the German Jews is not
designed to abate paranoia, but to fan it.

“The Jews were told to leave Germany in 1939?  By whom?  They were prevented from leaving Germany in most cases.”

The Nazis encouraged and facilitated voluntary Jewish emigration until October 1941.

I must echo Hoffman’s complaint at the censorship of his post (which I haven’t seen) on the (ostensible?) grounds of guilt-by-association with Holocaust revisionism. May I request a more considered/plausible explanation?

BTW, Mike, you once censored a couple of my proffered comments on your own blog. I can’t recall the details, but I was probably asking for greater clarity in defining the Cryptocracy.

FROM THE EDITOR: No, there will be no further explanation. As a private entity we have a right to ban particular posters for any reason whatsoever, or none at all. Readers have the right to waste their time at Stormfront, or National Vanguard, or any other political porn sites. But I’m not going to waste time arguing with them. Cheers!
FJ

Didn’t I tell you guys that soon would make the presence known Judeophobes so bad that they would make the Anti-Dreyfusards blush, and anti-Semites who would embarrass Alfred Rosenberg and out shout Judge Freisler. Bravo, All Hail, Hear! Hear!, Hoch soll er leben - drei mal hoch! Io Triumphe, and Well Done to this website’s editor! 

Now a new prophecy.  “Scientific” racists, extremist Nationalists, advocates of genocide, assorted irredentists, Neo-Futurists (the Italian movement), and Catholic-phobes—groups already lurking—will soon come out of the mire and try the same stunt.  May the editor do the same to them!

I have read today how the Vital Center Liberals of the 1950s bounced Les Rouges out of the bar with a swift kick in the pants.  In 1959 the Bad Gotesburger German Social Democrats followed suit to the Marxists, as did Mitterand in the 70s to the French Commies. St. Pius X and the Orleanist Pretender did the same to the Maurassians.  We paleoconservatives should follow our editor’s sterling example and bounce Die Braunen out of our club.

“Cassandra,” must you continually drum beat the same theme at every website?

Refusal to debate is a concession on the part of those who know they can’t defend themselves.  This is true for the Zionist neocons and the editors of this blog who refuse to give a true account of why they censor Hoffman.

FROM THE EDITOR: That’s right. We can’t defend ourselves. We are helpless puppets of the international neo-Gnostic subliminal Zionist conspiracy--and the Lizard men who rule ALL OF US (even YOU) from under the sea. Please pray for us!

Gottfried’s piece simply underscores the contradictory character of the alliance of the Christian Right with the likes of Abe Foxman and the Anti Defamation League.  Orthodox Christians of every stripe should see the Israeli lobby and the domestic Jewish lobby in the United States as the purveyors of a poison Kool Aid lethal in both foreign policy and domestic cultural developments.

Adriana, regardless what followed the Weimar Republic, if there is blame there to lay then let it be laid.  One cannot censor oneself from the truth to avoid frightening the paranoid.  To champion truth and justice in this world in the model of our saviour Jesus Christ, the just must be able to call a spade a spade.  Guilt does not cancel guilt nor does guilt justify.  The blame of Hitler does not cancel the blame of the Weimar or vice versa.

M. Nucci, you have nailed it, correctly, according to the historical evidence.

so the failure of the Weimar republic is all the Jews’s
fault?

so they deserved what they got?

There was plenty of blame to go around then, but to
single out the Jews for it shows great nastiness
indeed.

One more comment like this from you, and I’ll end up
joining Foxman.

“Spengler” is almost certainly Jewish.

Is she???

James Cantrell’s old fashioned bigoted rants are amusing, though certainly not helpful for keeping a multi-ethnic, multi-religious conservative coalition intact. However, there is one particularly egregious distortion that needs to be addressed:

“For me, the most quickly telling detail from history to mark how utterly perverse and liberal is the inherent fruit of New England Anglo-Saxon Puritan culture is the United Church of Christ. It is a fairly recent formation based primarily on the Congregational church, which was the church of Puritan New England.”

Cantrell fails to mention that the socialist doctrines that permeated the old-line Protestant churches were forced upon them in a top-down fashion by the World Council of Churches, and resulted in tens of millions of WASPs leaving those denominations and starting a movement of conservative, non-denominational churches. The energy of this movement helped bring Ronald Reagan to power and save America from the corrosive effects of the big-city Democratic machines (run by men like Kevin White, Richard Daley, etc) that were bleeding this country dry.

It’s a shame that Catholics didn’t follow the heroic WASP example and start their own non-aligned churches in the wake of the massive pedophilia scandals and coverups.

Anyhow, I’m sure groups like MECHA find all this religious infighting to be extremely encouraging.

FROM THE EDITOR: No, there will be no further explanation. As a private entity we have a right to ban particular posters for any reason whatsoever, or none at all. Readers have the right to waste their time at Stormfront, or National Vanguard, or any other political porn sites. But I’m not going to waste time arguing with them. Cheers!
FJ

Mr. Sarto, commiserations on the above absurdity. I trust it pained you as much to write it, as it did for me to read it.

@Bill Q

The reason why Catholics did not do as Protestants it
is because if they did that they would cease to be
Catholics, and become Protestants.

Catholics are not free to build their own churches, but
have to get their bishop’s approval, and if the bishop
says no, they can 1) obey him and send a protest furhter
up at most, 2) stop coming to Church (lose their faith)
or 3) convert to other religion.

To Bill Q., Catholics don’t start their own churches (except for guys like Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, etc., in a spirit of rebellion and heresy.), because, as Adriana said, to do so would make themselves Protestant—historically speaking—that is what Protestantism is all about.  If you don’t know it, pal, Catholics believe that they belong to the one true Church instituted by Christ Himself, the God-Man.  This belief is supported by Revelation, history, and philosophy.  To Adriana who said, “Catholics are not free to build their own churches, but
have to get their bishop’s approval, and if the bishop
says no, they can 1) obey him and send a protest furhter
up at most, 2) stop coming to Church (lose their faith)
or 3) convert to other religion.” This is nothing but blather.  There is no option, here, because it would be a contradiction.  Of course, your point is a demonstration of pure ignorance of what it means to be Catholic and Catholicism.  Catholic bishops have never given permission to disgruntled Catholics to form their own church based on some point of dissatisfaction.  You might have, for the sake of our edification, cited historical examples whereby various “protestant” churches were given permission to form their own churches by Catholic bishops.

@Jerry

I misspoke. I meant that what would happen if Catholics
did not like the way the Chruch was going around and
complained to the bishop.  Of course, they could not
even dream of starting their own church.

Adriana, you humble me by your own humility.  Thank you for your clarification.  My best to you.

Bill O…what would be the point of leaving the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, as the ephebophila (NOT pedophilia) scandal plagues Protestant and non-Christian denominations as well as the public schools to greater degrees.

Catholics blaming Protestants, Irish blaming the British, we’re doing exactly what they want us to do.

“Catholics blaming Protestants, Irish blaming the British, we’re doing exactly what they want us to do.”

When in doubt, hatemongers can always revert to the default position of blaming “the Jews.” This reminds me of a joke I heard in Russia, told to me by a Russian Jew:

There was a four-way collision in a Moscow intersection.  One car was driven by a businessman, another was a military vehicle, another was a taxi, and another was a politician’s Mercedes.  Who was responsible for the accident?  “The Jews, of course!”

For every Russian Jewish gangster like Berezovsky, there’s a Russian Jewish poet
like the exquisite (and one could argue, essentially Christian in spirit) Boris Pasternak.  Multitudes of American Jews voted against Bush and have expressed opposition to the Iraq War, while many American Catholic politicians supported the war (not to mention abortion).  And Christianity began as an imputed “conspiracy of Jews” against the state’s self-defined interests.

Welcome back, John, I was afraid we had lost you.

Of course, we can always blame the Jews.

Notice that people who are quite willing to blame the
Jews can get touchy when other people blame them, and
with better cause: the Irish blaming the British, or
blacks blaming whites.  They can complain :My family
did not own slaves, or I was born after the Famine, why
should I have to shoulder blame for that?  But Jews
have always to ask forgiveness for any Jewish miscreant
as if Christians never misbehaved themselves.

Also there is a double standard when it comes to complain
about old wrongs. Jews harp too much on the Holocaust,
blacks have to Get Over It about slavery and Jim Crow.
But the Lost Cause of the Confederacy gets lamented
over and over, bemoaning what was lost.

So, you Christians, how about asking forgiveness for
the very much Christian George W. Bush who talks to God?

the Jewish people are paranoid because they have people telling them lies so their cofers can be filled
Look around you to the American Indians their holacaust far exceeds that of the jewish one
10,000,000 million of them perished at the hands of our fore fathers
now look around at what the British did in India another 10,000,000 dead
Do you hear from the American Indians
on a weekly basis
The Jewish people are listening to fear mongering from Foxman and what happened to the Jewish people in Nazi Germany has nothing to do with us in North AMerica keep the hate and fear mongering of the jewish people out of North America
I suggest the Jewish people get another puppet master Abe Foxman is leading them down a path that will have blowback
And the rest of us North Americans don’t want to hear about what happened in the second world war if we want a genocidal
cause to fight for we will fight for the AMerican Indian’s cause thank you
Now the curious thing that comes to mind here is that you dont hear Foxman talk about the American indian’s plight, the Armenian plight the india indian’s plight except to deny they occured So it is obvious that Foxman has an agenda and isnt concerned with humanity when it comes to any body but himself and his people as such his credentials are tainted and he has no credability left
He believes his race and his views are superior when in fact the are the antithesis of humanity
the guy is a freud he is duping other jews that also believe they are superior

The Jewish people outght not to think in terms of AMErican jews but in terms of a AMericans period else they will back them selves in a corner that will end poorly for them
WE should not single the jews out for special treatment nor should they be singled out as targets of hate
but as long as the American jewery do not join humanity’s causes and drop the jewish only causes stance they can never be viewed in a good light
stop the retardedness and join the human race
and kick Abe Foxman where the sun dont shine and through him to the dogs for taking the jewish people backwards towards ww2 instead of forward

What the heck is this guy foxman thinking about the spanish inquisition ? .. if jews were persecuted during this time, the Christian followers were “murdered” for the beliefs they held, tortured to change beliefs and were not responsible for the jews deaths, it was the catholics who did all this back then not the Christians..

This guy needs a history lesson

@James

Catholics are Christians too. There were too many
wars of religion fought over it, and too many good
people killed on either side.

But you are right. It is ridiculous to ask Protestants
to apoligize for the Spanish Inquisition, given that
the Inquisition was quite glad to burn any Protestant
they caught.

@David

There were Jewish organizations involved with the Civil
Rights struggle.

There are now Jewish organizations who participate in the
protests against Christian persecutions in too many
parts of the world.

It is just that the media follows Foxman and no one else.

KUDOs to a thoughtful article.  I don’t really understand what is “liberal” and what is “conservative”, anymore.
These terms are oblique.  No one uses them to mean the same thing.  I tend to ignore them.  I would love to see this article redone in more precise terms.
However, as for Abe Foxman?  I have always felt that he was an ideologue.  I never realized that he was gay, until I read this article.  Thanks for the insight.  It must be the driving force behind Mr. Foxman’s rabid extremism; that cognitive dissonance that occurs when one is a self loathing gay person.
Isn’t it odd, how the mind works?
If the ADL wants to enjoy the support of Jewish Americans, it is too late.
Mr. Foxman has alienated the mainstream.

Google Eric Joh Phelps and listen to his interviews. It will explain the Catholic/Protestant divide.

Also I know about criticizing Israeli policy and having ADL/SPLC thugs harrassing. I posted an article about Irv Rubin and was threatened for months.

The REAL Holocaust is in Gaza
The Real Concentration Camps are in GAZA, as equated by 27 German Bishops recently in YNET News..

Still arguing? It is plain to see religion separates humans
from common sense. Jews are influential because those alive today are the recipients of genetic material that has survived at least 3500 years intact. Only the best and brightest survive to day while cabbbage heads rule in gentile family trees. The stupid peasants of europe or the illogical decendants of christian fantasy lands can’t compete in the marketplace of ideas that rule in an economic system like the US.

@Barry Bennet

About jews being smart, I recall what Golda Meier
said

“ Smart??? Moses spent forty years wandering in the desert and
he ended up in the only place in the Middle East
without oil”

A very enlightening article, mostly enjoyable read.

Until this sentence:"(Although there are other grounds on the basis of which one might challenge the presentation of the mass murder in question as genocide, I see no reason to go into them here.)”

So, it was a “mass murder”, eh? Interesting FRAME.

I do have, as the grandson of an Armenian that survived the GENOCIDE, an issue with how the author frames the GENOCIDE as a “mass murder.” Is Dr. Gottfried not aware the WORD GENOCIDE was specifically coined for the ARMENIAN GENOCIDE? Evidently not required reading for a Doctorate?

Is Dr. Gottfried aware of the religious composition of the “Young Turks”? Perhaps not, as the majority of the leadership of the revolutionary Young Turks were ZIONIST JEWS. Not Muslims, Jews. Contemporaries and allies of ZIONIST JEWISH “Bolshevik” revolutionaries in Russia.

Oddly missing from the article’s allegations?
Foxman’s TRUE motivation: Hiding ZIONIST COMPLICITY in the ARMENIAN GENOCIDE.

Got it?

I think Abe Foxman is RIGHT to be worried about
Christian anti-Semitism. My parents converted to the
Baptist version of Christian Zionism in the late
1970s but we’ve pretty much all left because it really
has been infiltrated by neo-Nazi fascists. They only
support Israel because they want to see it get destroyed.
It’s a very depressing situation. They are all out for another
another Third Reich and since we aren’t the archtypal
Aryan stereotypes, it will fare badly for people
like me and my family. Right-wing Zionists would be happy with
this as it means people get forced to move to Israel,
whether they want to or not and whether they identify
as Jewish or not. Very nasty situation developing but
it’s all part of their ‘ordo ab chao’ plan. My family
are Freemasons too but not like these people.

addendum to comment above by Anthony.  To see video of THE PHANTOM CAPTAIN go here;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zE4-T2sc5Q

Regarding Andrew’s comments and the whole controversy over the conservatism/liberalism of Irish immigrants to America, I would say that a better modern example of the typical Irish political figure in American example is William M. Bulger, not Ted Kennedy. Bulger was a local politician who represented a tightly-knit Irish enclave in the city of Boston, and defended it against the prevailing social left-liberalism of Massachusetts.

If memory serves, Bulger first rose to prominence vehemently opposing forced integration busing in Boston, a practice that destroyed communities like his own South Boston. I think it was Andrew who defined conservatism as defending an “ethnic core”, and however peculiar a definition that may be, that’s clearly one of the things that Bulger’s opposition served to do.

Bulger was also opposed to abortion, even after Roe v. Wade, unlike Democrats such as Ted Kennedy, who changed their position on it in 1973. Bulger ruthlessly skewered John Kerry and other left-liberal politicians.

Bulger’s memory has been a bit tarnished by the fact that his brother and next-door neighbor were ruthless leaders of organized crime, but if you want a feel for what an Irish politician who was more inclined to resist assimilation looks like, Bulger is the best recent example.

I could also bring up Al Smith, who helped found the anti-Roosevelt “Liberty League” after Roosevelt betrayed the Democratic party platform with his New Deal, or Charles O’Conor, son of an immigrant from Roscommon, who opposed Liberal Republican Horace Greeley’s place as the Democratic nominee in 1872 and ran as a Bourbon Democrat. Incidentally, the latter was involved in PROSECUTING Boss Tweed and DEFENDING Jefferson Davis in court cases.