Welcome Information Connoisseurs

Welcome Information Connoisseurs

Wednesday, December 25, 2019

Down Syndrome and the Gift of Innocence

Down Syndrome and the Gift of Innocence

By William McGurn  

Christmas Eve 2019 

Innocence isn’t much prized these days. Yet at Christmas it’s impossible to escape: The splendor of the music, the warm visions of hearth and home, the whole wonder of the season—all rest on the joy brought a weary world by innocence made incarnate. 

Even those of us who lost our innocence long ago sometimes look back wistfully on Christmases past, when as children we believed not only in Santa but in the loving world that went with him: safe, caring, kind. For most of us, this never rises above sentiment or nostalgia. 

But what if someone decided innocence was worth holding onto and built a whole way of life around it?

It might look like the lives led by a small group of contemplative nuns in the French countryside just outside Le Blanc. These are the Little Sisters Disciples of the Lamb, and among religious orders they enjoy a singular distinction: They exist so that “those who are in last place in the world”—women with Down syndrome—can “hold in the church the exceptional role of spouses of Christ.”

In practice this means that able-bodied sisters devote their lives to ensuring their fellow sisters with Down syndrome can live their vocations. Living with Down syndrome is not all sweetness and light, even among nuns. The difference is that these women take this innocence, leaven the difficult and imperfect parts with love, and gift it back to the world in more sublime form through both prayer and example. 

The order was founded in 1985 with a community of two: Mother Line, now prioress, and Sister Véronique, who felt a vocation but could not find an order to accept her because she has Down syndrome. Today there are 10 sisters, eight with Down syndrome. 

“The smiling faces of our little sisters with Down syndrome are a great message of hope for many injured families,” Mother Line tells me. “Our smallness will also say that we are made for very great things: to love and to be loved.” She particularly asks for prayers that able-bodied “young American girls” might consider life among her flock. 

A Christmas confession: I’m a sucker for those Facebook videos showing some basketball team letting the boy with Down syndrome shoot until he sinks a basket, or photos of a high-school senior with Down beaming because her classmates have elected her prom queen. Even the most jaded—maybe especially the most jaded—recognizes, and perhaps even envies, the special joy reserved for the pure of heart. 

Then you pull back and look at the faces of those cheering these things on—the fans at the basketball game, the other couples at the prom. Is their happiness any less? Not to mention the inner rejoicing of a tired mom who has just watched a crowd of people look at her child and see what she sees: a beautiful and unique human being who is a source of delight. 

This is the everyday witness of the Little Sisters Disciples of the Lamb. In the world outside their walls, innocence can be dismissed as childish ignorance or dangerous naiveté. Inside, the nuns choose to cherish and exalt innocence—and the unconditional love and trust that comes with it—as an example of how we are meant to live with one another. 

In Morris West’s novel The Clowns of God, Christ returns to earth, where people have trouble recognizing him. At one point he goes to a school for children with Down syndrome, and picks up a little girl.

“I know what you are thinking,” Jesus says. “You need a sign. What better one could I give but to make this little one whole and new? I could do it, but I will not...I gave this mite a gift I denied to all of you—eternal innocence. To you she looks imperfect—but to me she is flawless...” 

Read more at the Wall Street Journal

For further research:

Monday, December 23, 2019

Blaspheming Mary and the Birth of Jesus in the Talmud

Blaspheming Mary and the Birth of Jesus in the Talmud

By Michael Hoffman

Let us begin by asking about the first Christmas. Does the Talmud teach that Jesus was born the bastard son of a Roman soldier and that His mother Mary was a harlot? Or is that one of those “anti-semitic tropes” that circulate on the Internet?

We shall answer from the documentary record.

In Yiddish “Yoshke Pandre,” is an insulting name for Jesus. Concerning the denotation of the first name, strictly speaking it denotes Yoysif (Joseph), but connotatively it is a play on Jesus’s name in Hebrew, Yeshu (a diminutive of Yeshua, or in long form, Yehoshua). Our primary interest is in the patronymic “Pandre,” which is Yiddish shorthand for “Pandera,” and therein hangs our narrative.

Babylonian Talmud (BT) tractate Shabbat 104b:

“It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer said to the Rabbis: Didn’t the infamous ben Stada take magic spells out of Egypt in a scratch on his flesh? 
“They said to him: He was a fool, and you cannot cite proof from a fool. That is not the way that most people write. 
“Incidentally, the Gemara asks: Why did they call him ben Stada, when he was the son of Pandeira? 
“Rav Ḥisda said: His mother’s husband, who acted as his father, was named Stada, but the one who had relations with his mother and fathered him was named Pandeira. 
“The Gemara asks: Wasn’t his mother’s husband Pappos ben Yehuda? 
“Rather, his mother was named Stada and he was named ben Stada after her. 
“The Gemara asks: But wasn’t his mother Miriam the hairdresser? 
“The Gemara explains: That is not a contradiction. Rather, Stada was merely a nickname, as they say in Pumbedita: This one has been unfaithful [setat da] to her husband” (end quote BT Shabbat 104b).

In the preceding Talmud passage we encounter “ben Stada,” “Pandera” (“Pandeira”), and “Miriam the hairdresser.” 

In the Babylonian Talmud, Jesus is the fool/magician, called "son of Stada" and "son of Pandera. 

The Talmud is concerned about the fact that the same person is called by two different names. Rav Hisda (a Babylonian amora of the third generation and an important teacher at the academy of Sura, who died 309 A.D.), states that the person in question had, as it were, two “fathers,” because his mother had a husband and a sex partner, and that Jesus was called ‘son of Stada,’ when referring to the husband, and ‘son of Pandera,’ when referring to the sex partner. 

Shabbat 104b alternately states that Jesus’ mother's husband was not some “Stada,” but rather "Pappos b. Yehuda," (a Jewish-Palestinian scholar of the first half of the second century A.D.), and in fact it was Jesus’ mother who was called “Stada.”

We need to decrypt this code-name “Stada” for the mother of Jesus (another name for her in the Talmud is is Miriam). 

 “Stada” is a grave insult. Peter Schäfer, in his indispensable text, Jesus in the Talmud (Princeton University, 2007), found that “Stada” is derived from the Hebrew/Aramaic root word satah/seté (“to deviate from the right path, to go astray, to be unfaithful”). 

In other words, Jesus’s mother was also termed “Stada” because in the eyes of the rabbis she was a sotah, an adulteress. 

The Steinsaltz version of BT Sanhedrin 67a states: “...the inciter’s mother was Miryam the (woman’s) hairdresser...a promiscuous woman: that one (setat da) strayed from her husband.” (Steinsaltz Talmud [Random House, 1998], vol. XVIII, p. 227.)

So we have Jesus (the “inciter”) as one who “brought forth witchcraft from Egypt,” and his mother, “Miriam the hairdresser” as a promiscuous woman who had intercourse with men other than her husband. 

Prof. Schäfer: “If the Talmud takes it for granted that Jesus’ mother was having sex with someone other than her husband, then it follows that Jesus was a mamzer, a bastard. In order to be categorized as mamzer it didn’t matter whether his biological father was indeed his mother’s sex partner, and not her legal husband, the supposed fact that she had committed adultery made Jesus’ legal status dubious. Hence the uncertainty, in that his father is sometimes called Ben Stada and sometimes Ben Pandera.”

The context of BT tractates Shabbat 104b and Sanhedrin 67a suggest that Mary’s supposedly long and uncovered hair (“megadla neshayya”) was indicative of her allegedly indecent behavior. In the misogynist minds of the rabbis of the Gemara, a woman who appears bareheaded and with long hair, in public, is prone to all sorts of lewd conduct (cf. BT Gittin 90a). 

Of course there is no proof that Mary, the mother of Jesus, ever went about in this manner, but it indicates the resentment the rabbis experienced in the face of the liberty Jesus dispensed to His female followers. Describing his mother as allegedly going about without a head-covering—which remains a Talmudic requirement for many frum (“observant”) female followers of the rabbinic traditions to this day —is one expression of that resentment. 

Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, the one-time nasi of the revived Sanhderin, attempts to deny the Jesus/Pandera links: 

“Christian censors as well as popular tradition identified ‘ben Setada’ and ‘ben Pandera’ with Jesus of Nazareth because of the similarity of several aspects of the two stories. However, Tosafot regarded this identification as impossible because of the chronology” (Steinsaltz’s pilpul is elaborated in a margin note to Shabbat 104b in the Koren edition of the Steinsaltz Talmud: Koren Talmud Bavli [Jerusalem, 2012], vol. 3, p. 120).

Talmudic apologists assert that the Babylonian Talmud’s “Pandera” is a reference to the father of another ancient Jesus, not Jesus of Nazareth. They also allege that the name Pandera is a common one in Latin i.e. “gentile” inscriptions from the period, which is true. But, as Prof. Schäfer points out, the name Panthera/Pandera is highly uncommon in Hebrew and Aramaic usage, “and this fact alone makes the connection to Celsus’ Panthera obvious”).

Prof. Schäfer alludes to the independent evidence of the existence of the Jesus-Pandera teaching in Judaism, in the writings of Celsus, the second century A.D. pagan opponent of Christianity, who attacked it by quoting the calumnies of the rabbis which were current in his lifetime. Celsus's tract, Alethes Logos (“True Word”), repeats the libels cast on Jesus and Mary by the proto-Talmudic rabbinate:

“Celsus opens the way for his own attack by rehearsing the taunts leveled at the Christians by the Jews. They are: Jesus was born in adultery and nurtured on the wisdom of Egypt.” (Encyclopædia Britannica, eleventh edition (1910–1911), “Celsus.”)

Celsus’ works are lost, but we know of him through his third century Christian challenger, Origen, who quoted him at length in Contra Celsum (“Against Celsus”). 

Origen relates that Celsus deployed the teachings of the rabbis concerning Jesus, in his campaign against Christianity, in the form of a Jew about whom Celsus inquires concerning what this Jew may know about Jesus.

The Jew replies: “...he (Jesus) came from a Jewish village and from a poor country woman who was driven out by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, since she had been convicted of adultery. After she had been driven out by her husband and while she was wandering about in a disgraceful manner, she secretly gave birth to Jesus. Because he (Jesus) was poor, he hired himself out as a workman in Egypt, and there tried his hand at certain magical powers on which the Egyptians pride themselves; he returned full of conceit, because of these powers, and on account of them gave himself the title of God.” (Origen, Contra Celsus, Book I, ch. 28).

Writing in 178 A.D., Celsus the pagan antagonist of the Christians, had reiterated precisely the insults toward Jesus and Mary that would be committed to writing in the Babylonian Talmud a few hundred years later. 

Origen analyzes the statement which the Jewish informant conveyed to Celsus:

 “Let us now return to where the Jew is introduced, speaking of the mother of Jesus, and saying that ‘when she was pregnant she was turned out of doors by the carpenter to whom she had been betrothed, as having been guilty of adultery, and that she bore a child to a certain (Roman) soldier named Panthera...those who have blindly concocted these fables about the adultery of the Virgin with Panthera...on account of its extremely miraculous character...It was to be expected, surely, that those who would not believe the miraculous birth of Jesus would invent some falsehood.” (Origen, Contra Celsus, Book I, ch. 32). 

As Origen reports, Celsus’s Jewish informant might as well have been quoting from a volume of the Talmud turned to Gittin 90a and Shabbath 104b. However, as noted, these calumnies would not be committed to writing in Talmud tractates for another few hundred years. This fact indicates that these malicious lies about Jesus, His mother and His patrimony, were well-established dogma in Judaism as early as 178 A.D. They were subsequently and formally institutionalized in the holiest books of Judaism. “It is certain, in any case, that the rabbinical sources also regard Jesus as the ‘son of Pandera.” (Jewish Encyclopedia, v. 6, p. 170 [NY: Funk and Wagnalls, 1912; also cf. BT Hullin 2:22 and 2:24.  

Truth from the documentary record is not “anti-semitic.” 

Truth cannot be “anti” anyone. 

The truth sets all people—be they Jew or goy—free. 

Jesus was Himself a Semite. The defense of His holy name and that of His semitic mother is a pro-Semitic act. This would be plain to see were it not for the fear of the ADL and other thought police instilled in academics, journalists and owners of social media.

Whatever the cost, it is a signal privilege to defend from calumny Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Blessed Virgin Mother at Christmas 2019.
 Michael Hoffman

Michael is a student of the Talmud Bavli and cognate rabbinic writings. He is the author of the textbook, Judaism Discovered (2008), and a condensed edition for the general public, Judaism’s Strange Gods: Revised and Expanded (2010). His Judaica studies continue in the periodical, Revisionist History.
After pressure from the ADL, in August of 2019 YouTube canceled his account and banned all of his videotaped lectures. Michael’s research and writing continues to be made possible through the sale of his books, newsletters, audio and video recordings and donations from truth-seekers.

Copyright©2019 by Independent History and Research

Box 849, Coeur d’Alene, Idaho 83816 USA


Friday, December 13, 2019

Synchronic Twilight Language Signaling

Friday the 13th of December, 2019

It’s not a "coincidence"

Synchronic Twilight Language Signaling

If you havent read Michael Hoffman's book, Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare you may not be able to understand the connection, or recognize the sub-rosa signal to the Group Mind:

December 10: Tragic Jersey City, New Jersey kosher grocery store shootings kill anti-Zionist Satmar Judaics. The shooters who murdered the Satmar exhibited symptoms of mind control. 

December 11: President Trump signs an executive order making radical, Satmar-type exposés of racist, Nazi-like Zionism, illegal in Federal programs. 

On Dec 14, 2019, at 4:01 a.m., Bill wrote:

Re: Synchronic Twilight Language Signaling


I have the book (Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare), I've read the book and I still have difficulty cyphering the twilight language! I'm consigned to bring processed in ignorance. Unless you enlighten me!

Dear Bill

The supposition is that at a hypnotic level of public, subconscious “Group Mind” cognition, a link was made and brazenly shown (within 24 hours) between the attack on the anti-Zionist Satmar Judaics at the kosher grocery store and Trump’s executive order silencing those (like the Satmar), who are engaged in educational efforts demonstrating that Zionism is a racist, Nazi-type ideology.

This twilight language communication is a sort of evil-doers’ joke on the dead Satmar Judaics and all those people, Judaic and non-Judaic, whose humanity is dismissed and are therefore expendable, because they will not idolize the “Holy State” of "Israeli."

There is a surfeit of Jew-haters who adore the Israeli state because they believe it to be a successful prototype for neo-Nazi type of rule in their own nations. They escape being silenced by Trump’s executive order, as well as death at the hands of mind-controlled assassins. Theirs is the establishment-condoned neo-Nazism that operates from the subterranean bowels of the Cryptocracy.

The fact that Hitler’s Nazism is a template for Israeli leaders (religious and secular) is one of the worst-kept secrets of our time. Only the western media profess to know nothing of it. 
Zionist Rabbi Eliezer Kashtiel, Bnei David Academy, 2019 (Israeli media)

Earlier this year, Zionist Rabbi Giora Radler, addressed the elite Bnei David academy for Israeli military youth as follows:  “Let’s begin by asking the question: was Hitler right or not? He is the most correct person there is. He was definitely right in every word he said. His ideology was correct. There is a male world which fights, which deals with honor and the brotherhood of soldiers. And there is the soft, ethical feminine world which turns the other cheek.”

Most people will deny the existence of twilight language. They are misdirected away from detecting patterns, but only consciously. They are directed to the attack on the Satmar grocery and misdirected away from fully comprehending the attack on the Satmar ideology ordered several hours later by Donald Trump, the ventriloquist’s dummy.

I have been fascinated since childhood with stage magic and have attended magic shows in order to study the magician’s misdirection—the foundation of the successful execution of so much of the psychological control-mechanisms by which we are fleeced and enthralled.

Michael Hoffman

Resources and Suggestions for Activists and Researchers

E-MAIL: hoffman[at]revisionisthistory.org

PRAY for us: John 15:16

PURCHASE a revisionist history book, newsletter, CD or DVD:

PUBLICIZE our website: www.revisionisthistory.org

On the Contrary is a public service of 
Independent History and Research 
Box 849, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83816 USA 

Copyright ©2019

Thursday, December 05, 2019

"Hoffman: Jewish Sycophant and Enemy of Historical Truth"

“Michael Hoffman: Jewish Sycophant and Enemy of Historical Truth” 

They are also distributing online a poster, using my photo and the same slogan. 

It doesn’t appear that my book has been read by these critics; nor do they address the facts in the book.

Their attack comes in the wake of the (successful) ADL campaign to ban our videos from YouTube, where they had been viewed 178,000 times.

Both the Hitler cult and the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith are doing their best to libel this writer, reduce our readership and viewers, and terminate our Truth Mission. 
Why am I not surprised? 

Tuesday, December 03, 2019

It Didn’t Start with Prince Andrew

It Didnt Start with Prince Andrew

From the Murder of Princess Diana to the Enabling of Jimmy Savile, the British Royal Family have been true to their occult 007 roots

By Michael Hoffman

007: The Queen’s Conjuror

"Prince Andrew evinced little sympathy for the victims of Mr. Epstein’s predatory behavior...He said he had stayed with his friend at his Manhattan mansion, even after Mr. Epstein had served prison time for soliciting a minor for prostitution, because it was 'convenient.” (New York Times, December 3, 2019, p. 9).

Observe this fake news media outlets sleight of hand:

"Prince Charles, urged the queen to strip him (Andrew) of his public duties, which she did. For the royal family, it was the worst public relations debacle since the aftermath of the death of Princess Diana in a car crash — stirring questions about the aging queen’s control over her family and drawing calls from the British news media for Prince Charles to take a more central role at Buckingham Palace. (Ibid., New York Times).

We’re supposed to believe that Prince Charles is the better man who will restore order and decency — by virtue of the fact that “the British news media” are calling for him to play a “more central role.” According to the New York Times, the questions stirred are about the queen’s control over the royal family. That’s it? The fake news media (they fake news as much by omission as commission), certainly have a short memory, even with digitalized archives that are a mouse click away.  

Here are the questions were stirring, that the legacy media will not: What of the royal murder of Princess Diana? What of the royal enabling and protection of Sir Jimmy Savile, a Satanist who preyed on hundreds of children? 

In October 2012 evidence emerged in Britain that musician Gary Glitter (“The Hey Song”) had been part of Sir James "Jimmy" Savile's child sex ring. The now 75-year-old Glitter is currently in prison serving a sentence of 16 years after conviction on four counts of indecent assault and one count of having sex with a girl under 13. All the crimes were committed in the 1970s and '80s. He was first jailed in 1999 when he admitted to possessing images of child porn. He has been accused of dozens of acts of molestation in Asian countries. In 2008 Glitter finished serving nearly three years in a Vietnamese prison for molesting two children. (New York Times, Aug. 21, 2008, p. E5).

Savile (1926-2011) was indeed a Satanist. The Queen of England awarded Savile the Order of the British Empire in 1971 and she knighted this ghoul in 1990. 

Savile supplied children to elite members of British society for sexual exploitation.  He was known to perform necrophliac acts on corpses and wore rings fashioned from glass eyes taken from the dead

In 1984 Savile was accepted as a member of the Athenaeum, a high society gentlemen’s club in London’s Pall Mall, after being proposed by Church of Rome's Cardinal Basil Hume.  Another clerical member of Savile's pederast ring was the Anglican Bishop of Gloucester, the Rt. Rev. Peter Bell, who was deeply connected to the royal family including Queen Elizabeth and Prince Charles, heir to the British throne

Sir James Savile and the Prince of Wales

Jimmy Savile met Prince Charles through "mutual charity interests." The Prince reportedly conveyed to Savile gifts on his 80th birthday, along with an enigmatic note reading: “Nobody will ever know what you have done for this country, Jimmy. This is to go some way in thanking you for that.”

Savile was a close friend of "conservative" British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher: 

“Correspondence showing the depth of the friendship between Sir Jimmy Savile and former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher is unveiled today in a secret Downing Street file that has been heavily redacted by civil servants following revelations about sexual abuse by the late entertainer. The 21-page dossier released under the 30-year rule by the National Archives shows Savile’s extraordinary access to the highest echelons of British society.” 

Throughout his career as a rapist of some five hundred youth (!), beginning as early as 1955, Savile enjoyed complete immunity from police arrest, Crown prosecution, and imprisonment. He died a multi-millionaire, respected and honored.

In 2009, in a taped interview with his biographer, Savile defended Gary Glitter, convicted in 1999 of possession of child pornography, whom he described as a celebrity being vilified for watching ‘dodgy films...It were for his own gratification. Whether it was right or wrong is up to him as a person... they [viewers] didn’t do anything wrong but they are then demonized.’ The interview was not published at the time, and the recording was not released until after Savile’s death.” Cf. “Jimmy Savile claimed paedophile Gary Glitter ‘did nothing wrong” (Daily Telegraph [UK], Oct. 1, 2012).

In other cases, it is a fact of our media-bombarded lives that we often suffer from attention deficit, as well as compassion fatigue, and what alarmed us yesterday is, tragically, mostly forgotten today, despite the dreadful consequences of such amnesia.

The Crown of England, captured by the occult during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, in the person and networks around the queen’s conjuror and astrologer royal, Dr. John “007” Dee, has been invulnerable to revolutionary overthrow, with one exception — the victory of Republican forces under Oliver Cromwell, which led to the trial and execution of King Charles I.

It looked as though it was coming apart at the seams after Princess Diana’s threats to reveal what she knew about the “darkness” in the royal family. Those revelations were snuffed out with her death. It was thought that Epstein’s murder in police custody would stifle investigations into Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew. 

It remains to be seen to what extent Prince Andrew’s “health” will be “compromised" to protect the queen and Prince Charles who, together with conservative heroine Margaret Thatcher, appear to have enabled the massive crimes against children by Jimmy Savile and his elite cohort — now down the New York Times’ — and the rest of the corporate media’s — memory hole.

Copyright ©2019 by Independent History and Research
Box 849 • Coeur d’Alene, Idaho 83816 USA

[Portions of this report first appeared in our review of the movie, “Joker”]

Michael Hoffman’s investigative reporting is made possible by donations from truth-seekers and the sale of his books and recordings. Help to keep him writing and researching. Thank you.