Ariel Sharon and the Talmudic Mentality

THE FILE ON ZIONIST WAR CRIMINALS

Ariel Sharon and the Media's Talmudic Mentality of Holocaust Denial

By Michael Hoffman

www.revisionisthistory.org

______________

The Butcher of Beirut is dead.

Ariel Scheinermann (known as “Sharon”) died January 11, 2014. He was born of parents who emigrated to Palestine from Belarus, in the heart of the Khazar diaspora of Eastern Europe. His face was a road map of Khazaria, sharing the physiognomy of the Kagans and the rest of the Turkic tribe who masquerade as the progeny of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and are accepted as such by the “faithful" in the pews.

Scheinermann/Sharon is not infamous as the “Butcher of Beirut” in the way that certain Germans are universally derided as the “monster of Malmedy,” the “butcher of Warsaw” and other Allied and Judaic sobriquets. Talmudic Khazarians are a protected caste and war crimes cannot be laid at their door, no matter what the actual circumstances.

Sharon the mass murderer has landed on his feet in obituaries and eulogies throughout the West as a man who ended his career “seeking peace” and “angering the Israeli right wing.” What a masterful charade.

After Winston Churchill had gleefully instigated the incineration of all the major German cities during World War II, and 500,000 German civilians had been turned to ash, he had the wit to register his regret at the conflagration that engulfed Dresden, the Allies' last major German cosmopolitan crematory, which happened to have been perpetrated on Aschermittwoch (Ash Wednesday), by the good Christians in the American and English bomber planes. 

Most biographers and historians subsequently report that “Churchill regretted the bombing of civilians in German cities,” the way most journalists in early 2014 reported that Ariel Sharon was a  “hawk” (Israeli war criminals are styled by that mild euphemism), who supposedly turned toward peace. Actually, what Sharon did was engage in a little theatre for the benefit of the yahoos in America who are willing to accept that a token compulsory withdrawal of Israeli settlers from a few patches of stolen land, is tantamount to a "policy for peace."

The settlers, however, don’t go in for withdrawals, token or otherwise, and they arranged for Orthodox rabbis to place the pulsa d’nura Kabbalistic curse on Sharon, who succumbed to a coma afterward (like the victims of Haitian voodoo he may have fallen victim to his own belief in superstitious, rabbinic mumbo jumbo).

Ariel Sharon is presented in the media as not a villain, exactly, but an ambiguous, shades-of-gray, existential anti-hero, unlike the completely rotten, no-good Iranian and German war criminals. According sort the story line we are spoon-fed, no loyal “Jew” (so-called) can be wholly or even predominately evil. This is the dictate of the Talmudic mentality which governs the American media.

We anticipate the groans: Aw, c’mon, Hoffman, the media barely know what the Talmud is.

Perhaps. Nevertheless, with remarkable similitude the establishment media mirrored the Talmudic mentality. The “reasonable” and “august” exemplar of the American press, the New York Times, in its January 12, 2014 edition, devoted less than one sentence to Ariel Sharon's mass murder of civilians in Beirut in 1982:

"...the Israeli invasion seemed not to end but to take on an increasingly punishing nature, including the saturation bombing of Beirut neighborhoods..." 

That’s all the "newspaper of record" had to say about the Israeli terror bombing of a major Arab city for several weeks in the summer of 1982. (cf. "Israeli Hawk Sought Peace His Way, New York Times, Jan. 12, 2014, p. A12). 

Notice that no casualty figure is given (tens of thousands of Lebanese were killed). This is a callous form of holocaust denial — the denial of crimes directed by Ariel Sharon.

If tens of thousands of Israelis had been incinerated in Beirut, whatever non-Jew who perpetrated that “cosmic evil unparalleled in the annals of the modern history of the Middle East,” would be branded with the Mark of Cain for the rest of his life and in lurid detail in any obituary in the corporate media.

Not so with one of the bloodiest butchers in Israeli military history who “sought peace his way.” The “reasonable, liberal” New York Times wants us to remember “The Holocaust” (i.e. every detail of what they say happened to Judaic people, circa 1938-1945), while the Times devotes exactly twenty-two words to Sharon’s mass murder of Arabs in Beirut. Obviously the massive loss of Arab life doesn’t matter count.

In the Talmud, a special category of evil is reserved for goyim and Christians. Roman emperors are burned up, reanimated and burned again, perpetually. Jesus of Nazareth boils forever in hot excrement. Rabbis, meanwhile, give God orders and defeat Him in debate.

By now some readers may be banging their heads in frustration at the chutzpah, the sheerly wrong and unjust nature of the media's hypocrisy concerning Sharon’s savage crimes — similar to the hypocrisy which the man who the Talmud situates being macerated in feces — exposed on numerous occasions some 2,000 years ago. Yet, while frustration and anger can be motivators they are not educators. Therefore, let us peer deeper into the Talmudic dictatorship over the western media.

If we were to summarize the Talmudic mentality in one word, we would describe it as pilpul, which can be detected any time a New York Times editor or a Fox News pundit is committed to "prove" his point regardless of the evidence in front of him.

Reason is not the point when pilpul rules the rhetorical roost. What counts is the establishment of a fixed, immutable position that can never be disputed: viz. Ariel Sharon cannot be a war criminal.

In this context, evidence is not primary; the status of the judge is what registers. 

Ergo, Michael Hoffman, offering evidence of the media’s double standard on Israeli war criminal Ariel Sharon doesn’t count, because Hoffman has zero status in the establishment media. 

Consequently, “history” as written by the New York Times or broadcast by Fox News, is extra-factual; it exists without regard for the documentary record. To protest this Wonderland phenomenon would be —  you guessed it —  “anti-Semitic."

The Talmudic mentality as embodied by pilpul makes rational analysis impossible. Any dissent is criminal because it casts doubt on a point that has already been established to the satisfaction of the Talmudic media. There is no use trying to dissent inside the perimeters established by the controlled press, because any contradictory points will be twisted to validate the already-fixed position, and demonize the dissenter as either a “closet” or a “blatant anti-Semitic extremist."

What makes this process possible, in part, is the cowardice of executives in the media who see through the double-standard and are privately infuriated by it. How do we know? We have letters from some of these executives. They give us an epistolary pat on the back on occasion. Someday (when they retire) they say that they will expose the Zionist enterprise. Yeah, well, after they retire there are their wives and husbands and adult children who will advise them "not to bring ruin on us,” so these executives, who know the score, may very likely go to their graves with their tails between their legs.

This is one reason why we have some respect for the Zionists. Though they are completely wrong, they fight for their errors with all their heart, soul and pocketbook, and risk everything for it. As William Butler Yeats observed, “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are filled with passionate intensity.”

God Cried, pages 10 and 11

Tony Clifton's book God Cried, represents the main body of published photographic documentation of Sharon’s terror-bombing in Beirut in the summer of '82, when clearly marked schools, hospitals and apartment blocs were deliberately and mercilessly obliterated. Tens of thousands of civilians died in this now forgotten holocaust. There is still some notice taken of Sabra and Chatila, the September massacre of Palestinians by the Lebanese Phalangists under Israeli direction, but the far more horrid and extensive massacre represented by the indiscriminate aerial bombardment of the civilian neighborhoods of Beirut is almost completely forgotten, seemingly even by many Lebanese, and certainly by the US media. But until the last copy of God Cried is stamped out, the evidence of the ocean of blood on Sharon’s hands is in those pages, as it must also surely reside in the hearts of many of the unsung survivors.

In defiance of the Talmudic mentality, we protest this holocaust denial on the part of the pompous apportioners of German, Palestinian and Iranian guilt.

Post-script: Beloved children’s author Roald Dahl was appalled by Sharon’s savage bombardment. A year afterward, in August 1983, he wrote a review in praise of God Cried for the English magazine, Literary Review. If you pay a fee you can read his review online. Dahl was to be knighted by the Queen but the proposed knighthood was withdrawn after his review was published. A huge uproar against Dahl burst forth. You can read about it here.

For further research:

Dossier on Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s Bigotry, Racism and Incitement

Michael Hoffman is the author of Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare; Judaism Discovered;  They Were White and They Were Slaves; Usury in Christendom; The Great Holocaust Trial; Judaism's Strange Gods; The Israeli Holocaust Against the Palestinians, and 107 issues of Revisionist History newsletter. 

Michael’s books are available here and here, as well as at this link 

Browse back issues of Michael's newsletter, Revisionist History® 

This column is financially supported by donations from readers

***

A Judaic woman escapes misogyny and mind control

A Judaic woman flees misogyny and mind control

_____________________

One Hasidic Housewife's Inspiring — and Unusual — Journey to College and Beyond

By Frimet Goldberger

Jewish Daily Forward | January 9, 2014

=  Excerpt  =

...I was born in Kiryas Joel, the exponentially growing epicenter for Satmar Hasidim in upstate New York. I attended the village’s only girls school through 11th grade, which is when Satmar girls graduate and begin preparations for their betrothal. Even before I pulled on my first pair of thick blue tights at the age of 3, I knew that a woman’s role is tending to her husband and children at home. Most women who worked were either supporting the family while their husbands studied in the kollel, the yeshiva for married men; some provided a supplementary income for their growing families. These latter women were the exception, not the rule.

The lives of Satmar women weren’t always so cloistered. My mother was among the first generation of Satmar-educated girls in America. She grew up in Brooklyn’s Williamsburg, the daughter of Holocaust survivors, in those early years when the Satmar community was finding its footing. Her academic and cultural experiences were radically different from mine: New York City public school teachers staffed the English department of Bais Rochel, the Satmar girls school. My mother spoke English with her siblings and peers, read secular literature, visited the library regularly, attended movies occasionally, listened to the radio and dressed fashionably.

As the Hasidic community shifted rapidly toward extremism, so did the curriculum in Satmar schools. Gone were the qualified public school teachers, replaced by recent Satmar graduates. Yiddish replaced English as the language spoken in school. My classmates and I were taught Judaic studies, starting with the aleph-bet in kindergarten and continuing with the weekly parsha, or Torah portion, stories in Yiddish. In maintaining the traditional ban on substantive Torah lessons for girls, biblical studies in Hebrew were forbidden, and knowledge of Hebrew texts was restricted to prayers.

Secular studies were limited to the rudiments, and focused on practical learning for becoming a successful balebuste. Math, beyond simple home budgeting, was considered unnecessary; Shakespeare and other classic or contemporary literature a waste of precious time that could be spent learning how to keep house, and science — aside from raising difficult questions about creation — an abomination. We had no access to the library, the Internet or any secular materials. Our textbooks were highly censored with permanent markers and crayons to block out material perceived as a threat to our sheltered brains.

...One snowy morning in December 2008, my husband and I packed our fragile belongings into our old, tan Buick and headed onto the road. Our destination was Airmont, N.Y. — just a 30-minute drive from Kiryas Joel, but truly a world away.

Our move was the culmination of years of questioning our radical community and the complete conformity required to live and breathe there. The friendships we’d forged with Orthodox couples living considerably less stringent lives outside Kiryas Joel also catalyzed the modest, incremental changes toward our more progressive Orthodox lifestyle. But the straw that broke the camel’s back was an incident the summer before our move, when a group of Satmar modesty enforcers threatened to expel my 3-year-old son from the only boys school in the community if I didn’t shave my head. I went home that night and buzzed off my long hair. But it was too late to go back to a strict Satmar lifestyle. The following morning, my husband and I decided to leave...

[Emphasis supplied] Read more at: http://forward.com/articles/190267/one-hasidic-housewifes-inspiring-and-unusual-j/

Michael Hoffman's Afterword 

Frimet Goldberger writes that the Hasidic Judaics "shifted rapidly toward extremism" after having risen from the ashes of World War II. Actually, the zeitgeist of the 1940s and 50s in America created pressure on the Hasidim to broaden their horizons, just as Goldberger describes. The extremism that was later imposed was a return to what Talmudic Judaism had always been before Christians and gentiles pressured Talmudic Judaics in Europe in the late 18th century to abandon the Talmud's superstition, misogyny, and hatred toward goyim. The result was the "haskalah" and the rise of Reform Judaism. Consequently, what Goldberger witnessed growing up in Satmar was not an anomaly. It was what every Talmudic-observant ("frum") Judaic woman experienced from the mists of antiquity.

Frimet Goldberger writes of her entrance into an allegedly more liberated Orthodox Judaism. Granted, modern Orthodoxy is more permissive and less suffocating than Hasidism, but as long as the Talmudic laws of Niddah are imposed on Judaic women (as they are even among the modern Orthodox), women who are captive to those rules remain slaves of one of the most severe and oppressive forms of micro-management of female behavior on earth. This is another taboo area where the self-censoring establishment media choose not to tread.  (Cf. Judaism Discovered, pp. 729-748, for documentation concerning the Orthodox rabbinic laws of Niddah).

The Zionist media, from the New York Times on down, has nurtured a feminist resistance movement inside Christianity and Islam. They have published many stories undermining Islamic fundamentalism, while much of the establishment media's focus on Talmudic fundamentalist Judaism has consisted in supporting it against critics, and whitewashing its overwhelming misogyny. (Cf. Judaism Discovered, pp. 41 − 44, for documentation of this media double standard).

Evelyn Kaye in her classic, now out-of-print book, The Hole in the Sheet, and Deborah Feldman in her recent work Unorthodox, offer further documentation of the misogyny and mind control of Talmudic Judaism.

_____________

NY Times reports that Saudis support Al-Qaeda linked jihadists

The New York Times reports that Saudi Arabia supports Al-Qaeda linked terrorists in Syria

“...the kingdom now supports Islamist rebels in Syria who often fight alongside Qaeda groups like the Nusra Front. The Saudis say they have little choice...they believe they must now back whoever can help them defeat Mr. Assad’s forces and his Iranian allies.”

End quote from the NY Times, January 5, 2014, p. A10.

Michael Hoffman’s question: Since the US has expended trillions of dollars and thousands of American lives purportedly battling Al Qaeda as part of President George W. Bush’s War on Terror (waged by President Obama as well), how is it that Saudi Arabia, an American-supported “ally” is not under sanctions or threat of diplomatic or military action in view of the fact that its proxy troops are fighting alongside Al Qaeda terrorists in Syria? If Al Qaeda was responsible for the 9/11 terror attacks in New York City, how can the US government in any way continue to support Al Qaeda-linked Saudi Arabia?

Walt Disney’s "unsavory parts"

Rebecca Keegan

Los Angeles Times

202 W. 1st St.

Los Angeles, CA 90012

January 3, 2014

Dear Rebecca Keegan

In your article about Walt Disney and the film "Saving Mr. Banks," you lament the fact that Mr. Disney's alleged "unsavory parts" were not disclosed.

As evidence of his supposed iniquity you cite his association with "anti-semitic" personalities.

When was the last time you took a film to task for covering up the "unsavory parts" of Hollywood moguls who associate with anti-German, anti-Arab or anti-goyimitic personalities?

Why is one form of bigotry more worthy of protest or notice than another?

Sincerely,

Michael Hoffman

__________________

Famous rock musician speaks out on Israeli racism and violence

Rock star Roger Waters Speaks Out on Israeli Supremacists 

Roger Waters is the co-founder of the rock band Pink Floyd, whose music album "Another Brick in the Wall (Part II)" topped the Billboard chart in the U.S. for fifteen weeks. "The Wall" ranks number three on the Recording Industry Association of America's list of the all-time Top 100 albums, with 23 million certified units sold in the U.S.

Here is an excerpt from an interview with Mr Waters conducted by CounterPunch magazine:

Waters: "I have nearly finished Max Blumenthal’s book Goliath: Life and Loathing in greater Israel. It’s a chilling read. It’s extremely well written in my view. He is a very good journalist and takes great pains to make sure that what he writes is correct. He also gives a voice to the other side. The voice, for instance, of the right wing rabbinate, which is so bizarre and hard to hear that you can hardly believe that it’s real. They believe some very weird stuff you know, they believe that everybody that is not a Jew is only on earth to serve them and they believe that the indigenous people of the region that they kicked off the land in 1948 and have continued to kick off the land ever since are sub-human. The parallels with what went on in the 30’s in Germany are so crushingly obvious...

"...where I live, in the USA...the propaganda machine that starts in Israeli schools and that continues through all the Netanyahu’s bluster is poured all over the United States, not just Fox but also CNN and in fact in all the mainstream media. It’s like a huge bucket of crap that they are pouring into the mouth of a gullible public in my view, when they say 'we are afraid of Iran, it is going to get nuclear weapons…'. It’s a diversionary tactic....no Israeli government has been serious about creating a Palestinian state since 1948. They’ve always had the Ben Gurion agenda of kicking all the Arabs out of the country and becoming greater Israel. They tell a lie as part of their propaganda machinery..This has been a very hard sell particularly where I live in the United States of America. The Jewish lobby is extraordinary powerful here and particularly in the industry that I work in, the music industry and in rock’n roll as they say. I promise you, naming no names, I’ve spoken to people who are terrified...if they stand shoulder to shoulder with me..."

Michael Hoffman’s Afterword

We are witnessing momentous change in the anti-Zionist Left which used to believe the legend that Israeli Zionism was a violation of the religion of Orthodox Judaism’s ethics. Now writers like Max Blumental and observers such as musician Roger Waters perceive that “right wing (i.e. Talmudic) rabbis" are behind the violence against the Palestinians and the land grab, justifying it on the basis of rabbinic texts such as the Mishnah Berurah, Shulchan Aruch, and of course the Gemara (Talmud).

To be fair, those who claim that Israeli injustice is also rooted in the Old Testament should read Prof. Alexander McCaul’s masterwork, The Talmud Tested: A Comparison of the Principles and Doctrines of Modern Judaism with the Religion of Moses and the Prophets and then see if they still think that Judaic nationalism and chauvinism are supported by the Bible.

***

"Dangerous Speech Project"

REVISIONIST NEWS FROM MICHAEL HOFFMAN

www.revisionisthistory.org

December 18, 2013

I. In a case in Russia where a Judaic person, Mendel Beilis, was not guilty of ritual murder, the innocent accused person was acquitted by decent gentiles: http://forward.com/articles/189185/blood-libel-trial-of-mendel-beilis-reverberates-a/ (Pay attention to the disparaging (but instructive) remarks in this article about Malamud's novel "The Fixer" - a book worth reading).

This does not signify that every accusation of Judaic ritual murder is not true, a claim refuted by Prof. Ariel Toaff in his book "Blood Passover," before he was forced to recant his thesis due to threats to his academic career and even his freedom.

II. Borrow a copy of today's Wall Street Journal and turn to page A15 in the first section and read the editorial column, "A Prelude to Murder: Calling Humans Vermin.”

Susan Benesch, founder and director of the “Dangerous Speech Project"

In the column, Susan Benesch, a fellow of the US Holocaust Museum (she founded something called the “Dangerous Speech Project”), and her co-author Michael Abrahamowitz (a US Holocaust Museum director), offer as examples of hate speech-purveyors, Nazis, Buddhists, Greek Rightists, and Iranians who refer to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu as a "rabid dog.”

Benesch and Abrahamowitz have not a word to say about influential rabbis such as Ovadia Yosef who declare their desire to annihilate the Arab people and subjugate the goyim. Benesch and Abrahamowitz give the impression that hate is being spewed by one broadly caricatured class of miscreants tracked and exposed by high-minded Judaic persons who are morally positioned to judge the offenders -- and exempt the rabbis.

"Dangerous Speech Project":
http://www.worldpolicy.org/content/dangerous-speech-along-the-path-to-mass-violence

Dossier on Rabbi Ovadia Yosef's Hate Speech:
http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2013/10/rabbi-ovadias-record-of-hate-speech.html

________________

Revisionist News is a service of Independent History and Research, Box 849, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83816 USA. Please send a donation to help to underwrite this service. Thank you.

________________

In Defense of Norman Rockwell

By Michael Hoffman

 Copyright ©2013 www.revisionisthistory.org

How our enemies despise the world that Norman Rockwell conveyed! In particular the innocence, the family values and the gay old times (before that word was ruined in our time).

We are grateful for the many hours of time-traveling marvels which Mr. Rockwell has afforded us – peering into the window of America's past, when the innocence of children was closely guarded; the machine had not yet devoured our taste, sensibility and proportion; and the permanent Communist revolution which grinds slower under the Republicans and faster under the Democrats – but grinds all the same – was not yet marching so inexorably on behalf of "change," our nation's great god. One Christmas in the mid-1990s we wrote a short story for the season inspired by the Rockwell magazine cover "Shuffleton's Barbershop." 

In November 2013, Farrar, Straus and Giroux published a book, American Mirror: The Life and Art of Norman Rockwell, by the racist anti-goyimite Deborah Solomon, whose hideous libels against gentile artist Rockwell are monstrous to behold. Solomon, who usually wields her poison pen for the New York Times, has a filthy mind, and with her Freudian (or should we say Fraudian) perspective, she claims to have detected a pattern of pedophilia in Rockwell’s nostalgic depictions of boys at play in fields and streams and ponds; on baseball diamonds and football fields; and oh yes, in a physician’s office. In Mr. Rockwell’s beloved scenes of American boyhood, Deborah Solomon believes she has caught a dirty old man, leering and drooling over them. “Solomon is always alert to possible homoerotic themes in Rockwell’s work” (Christopher Benfey).

Solomon puts forth her scurrilous allegations on zero evidence. There is no letter, diary or document of any kind to support her perverted libel. How then can Solomon be so unfair?

In the canonical rabbinic texts that determine the laws which Judaics are to scrupulously obey and observe, the principles of fairness only apply between Judaic persons. “Gentiles do not necessarily respect these principles and, hence, there is no obligation to show them such consideration in return” [Rabbi Ezra Basri, Chief Justice of the District Court of Jerusalem, Ethics of Business (Haktav Press), vol. 2, chapter 13].

Imputations of the inherent moral turpitude of gentiles is a dogma of Orthodox Judaism. The gentile is always suspect (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 167:15), even when he tries to do good. Rabbi Eliezer Shach was described by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz as “the ultimate authority in the ultra-Orthodox world in Israel for the past quarter of a century.” Rabbi Shach stated in Michtavim uMaamarim, vol. 1: “Regarding this non-Jew, today he shows you a smiling face for some political consideration and within his heart he lays plots...The voice is the voice of Yaakov (Jacob) and the hands are the hands of Eisav (Esau).” 

All gentiles have the status of Esau in the recondite teachings of the rabbis of Orthodox Judaism. They are all suspected of robbery (according to Maimonides, cf. Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 369:6), and murder (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 168:17). 

Norman Rockwell, by offering to the world a picture of American gentile life in the 20th century suffused with goodness and decency, could not be allowed to continue to enjoy an unsullied reputation. He had to be dragged down into the primeval mud, into the stench and decay where all gentiles are consigned.

Is Deborah Solomon a close student of dogmatic rabbinic texts? Probably not. Is she a product of the culture distilled from that protozoic slime? It would seem so in the case of a benign artist undefiled during his lifetime by the degeneracy nowadays promoted from the White House to the dog house that is our media-driven milieu, and who Solomon felt impelled to defame and reduce to a figure of revulsion.

Prof. Patrick Toner of Wake Forest University has done yeoman work deconstructing Solomon’s libel.  He writes, "Solomon says, twice, that there is no evidence that Rockwell acted on any pedophilic impulses. The problem is that there is no evidence that Rockwell ever had any pedophilic impulses. Throughout the book, there are many insinuations and suggestions that Rockwell had 'pedophilic impulses.” Read “False Portrait," his critique of her book. It can be accessed here.

Michael Hoffman, a former reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated Press, is the author of ten books of history and literature, including Judaism Discovered: A Study of the Anti-Biblical Religion of Racism, Self-Worship, Superstition and Deceit 

_______________

On the Contrary blog is reader-funded. It comes to you today thanks to donations from truth-seekers, and the sale of Michael Hoffman's books, newsletters and recordings. 

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

Donations

Browse our Bookstore

_______________

Schönborn: Zauberlehrling of the Black Nobility

The "Sorcerer's Apprentice” 

Cardinal Christoph Schönborn and the Black Nobility 

To understand Roman Catholic Austrian Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, a scion of the Black Nobility and a product of the Joseph Ratzinger (future Pope Benedict XVI) school of theology, one must understand the extreme Left/Liberal Austrian milieu. For example, the pontificating Austrian Catholic bishops and cardinal were in favor of the government of Austria's imprisonment for more than a year of English historian David Irving, even as they pose as champions of civil liberties and human rights.

Furthermore, the Austrian Catholic Church in this century has a shameful track record of Orwellian re-writing of history to please not Christ but the rabbis who execrate him. After the ritual murder in Austria of a little Catholic child named Andreas of Rinn (Anderl von Rinn) by Judaics on a rock ("Judenstein"), a Catholic church was built around the rock. Andreas was later beatified. In 1985, under Pope John Paul II, the bones of the martyr were removed from the church and in 1994 veneration of the "Child of Judenstein" was officially banned by Austrian Bishop Reinhold Stecher [1921-2013] of Innsbruck.  

"Especially, he (Bishop Stecher) wanted to make sure that we would visit the village of Rinn, where for a couple of hundred years the faithful had gathered to commemorate the martyrdom of a little boy who had supposedly been murdered by a group of Jews in the 15th century.  The Anderle cult, as it was known, caused immeasurable pain to Jews in the region. Stecher considers it one of the major triumphs of his tenure as bishop that he was able to have this cult officially stopped and the anti-Jewish plaques in the chapel replaced by appropriate markers.” —Source. (An old postcard of the "Jew stone” can be seen here).

Austrian Catholicism is heavily influenced by its former leading position in the Holy Roman Empire, which in 1700 banned Johann Andreas Eisenmenger's Entdecktes Judenthum which, after the New Testament, is the most revealing volume ever written about Judaism (Entdecktes Judenthum was a book which the Austrian Adolf Hitler mysteriously ignored in favor of the promotion of the disputed and vastly inferior "Protocols").

Cardinal Schönborn served as Cardinal Archbishop of Vienna, Austria under Pope Benedict XVI, a pontiff described in the media as an arch-conservative.

Schönborn remains Cardinal Archbishop of Vienna under Pope Francis, a pontiff described in the media as an arch-liberal. 

Last October Cardinal Schönborn was honored by B'nai B'rith, a Judaic masonic lodge charged with thought control and suppression of freedom of speech and inquiry.

Catholic Herald: "...Austrian Cardinal Christoph Schönborn is often described as a reformer who comes out of Pope Benedict’s intellectual tradition. Nicknamed the Zauberlehrling (“Sorcerer’s Apprentice”) he studied under Joseph Ratzinger (future Pope Benedict) in Regensburg and is an active member of the Ratzinger Schülerkreis, a group of the Pope’s former students who meet annually with the Holy Father to discuss theological issues. He was secretary of the body which put together the compendium of Catholic teaching in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, first published in the 1990s."

Cardinal Schonborn's press secretary is Erich Leitenberger:

"...a Schönborn spokesperson told National Catholic Reporter Aug. 22 (2006) that '...all historians are of the opinion that Mozart was a Mason. There is much evidence for this,' Erich Leitenberger said. 'But at the same time it is necessary to understand that Freemasonry in the 18th century was a completely different thing from [that of] the 19th or 20th centuries. There was no problem to be a deeply convinced Catholic and a Mason at the same time, as is illustrated by the examples of many priests, abbots, etc. [who were Masons] in the late 18th century.' In other words, according to Leitenberger, Cardinal Schönborn’s position is that Mozart was a Mason, but he was fully Catholic too.” 

From the blog of our colleague Maurice Pinay:

"Schönborn is a descendant of old nobility of the Holy Roman Empire known for its sheltering of usurers, rabbis, intelligencers and the Talmud itself (see: Judaism Discovered) and peddling of alcohol on credit via Judaic front-men to the poorest of Christian peasants.

"The Schönborn clan was made at Kazenelnbogen, coincidentally (or, rather, not), where the Katzenellenbogen rabbinic dynasty originates, whose descendants allegedly include the Rothschilds, Karl Marx, Rabbi Abraham Heschel, 'Messiah' Schneerson, among many others (see: The Unbroken Chain by Neil Rosenstein, himself allegedly a descendant of Katzenellenbogen..."

Read more of Pinay's research on Schönborn here.

__________

On the Contrary is reader-funded. It comes to you today thanks to donations from readers like you, and the sale of Michael Hoffman's books, newsletters and recordings. Join other truth-seekers in giving something back for that which you have received, thereby helping to ensure the continuation of this service.

Michael Hoffman • Box 849 • Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83816 USA 

Donations 

Bookstore

*** 

Debunking PBS television's NOVA “Cold Case JFK”

Fifty years later and the coverup continues

The latest coverup:

PBS TV's Nova "Cold Case" on JFK

Debunking the Public Broadcasting System’s shameful propaganda:

PART ONE

"Cold Case JFK" vs. Cold Hard JFK Facts

http://www.ctka.net/2013/nova.html

PART TWO

NOVA Cold Case JFK: A Case Study in Cherry-Picking and Misrepresentation

http://themysteriesofdealeyplaza.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/nova-cold-case-jfk-case-study-in-cherry.html

______________________

Pope Francis: Judaism is not engaged in idolatry; serves the true God

"Evangelii Gaudium of the Holy Father Francis"

A Palimpsest of Papal Prevarication

By Michael Hoffman • Copyright ©2013 

On Nov. 24 Pope Francis issued an "Apostolic Exhortation." Two sections in the 50,000 word-document are of interest. One is centered on the Money Power, but Francis, like all his predecessors since the Renaissance, merely issues a lot of hot air and toothless semantics. The empty rhetoric will mollify some activists no doubt, but it will do little or nothing to curb the power of the corporate-financier elite or the bought-and-paid for churchmen who have been serving them since the days of the Medici. The only way to curb the Money Power is to restore the infallible doctrine that charging interest on loans of money is a mortal sin and absolution for this sin of theft requires restitution in the form of a return of the ill-gotten gains. Then the Overlords of the Cryptocracy would howl and then Francis would feel their wrath, rather than their adulation.

The "Apostolic Exhortation" also contains a section on Judaism, rendering it immune to missionary activity, which is the non-negotiable demand of the rabbis to which Rome has submitted, as promulgated by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. Hence, there’s nothing particularly new from Francis here, though his post-Vatican II colleagues presented this revolutionary distortion of St. Paul with far more guile and sophistication, whereas Francis blurts it out without much theological embroidery:

247. "We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked, for “the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable” (Rom 11:29). The Church, which shares with Jews an important part of the sacred Scriptures, looks upon the people of the covenant and their faith as one of the sacred roots of her own Christian identity (cf. Rom 11:16-18). As Christians, we cannot consider Judaism as a foreign religion; nor do we include the Jews among those called to turn from idols and to serve the true God (cf. 1 Thes 1:9)." [Source: Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium of the Holy Father Francis to the Bishops, Clergy, Consecrated Persons and the Lay Faithful on The Proclamation of the Gospel in Today's World].

The historic Church never taught this distortion of Romans 11:29, though it is a fixture of the theology of the soon-to-be-saint John Paul II and the supposedly arch-conservative counter-pope to Francis, Benedict XVI. JP II and Benedict were firmly in the Talmudic/rabbinic camp and Francis is no different. Twisting Romans chapter 11 into a saved-by-race pledge of eternal security is about as anti-Christ as it gets. If the Jews of first century Palestine had an irrevocable covenant with God, why would the Son of God have bothered to incarnate on earth and be crucified for their sake?

Jesus declared to the Jewish Pharisees, whose ideological descendants today are the rabbis of Orthodox Judaism: “If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God.” (John 8:39-40). 

Why didn’t Jesus speak as the popes of Rome do, and acknowledge the Pharisees on the basis of their flesh, and their racial prestige? Jesus rejected the doctrine of salvation by race. He taught that the children of Abraham are those who do the works of Abraham. 

By Our Lord’s definition, the spiritual heirs of those who have built a religion on the refusal to accept Jesus as the Messiah of Israel, are most certainly not the children of Abraham. The modern popes are guilty of contradicting Christ. They obstinately continue to disseminate the same error as the Pharisees, that the racial prestige of “Jews,” whether of the first or the twenty-first century, is sufficient to qualify them as heirs of the promises which God made to Abraham in Genesis 12:3. 

John the Baptist, the greatest of the prophets (Luke 7: 26-28), declared to the Jews:  “Do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’ for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham. Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.” (Matthew 3: 9-10).

“Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also.” (1 John 2:22-23).

Why are so many persons strongly deluded into believing that those who deny Jesus Christ, are somehow Abraham’s children? Because: "...they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” (2 Thessalonians 2:10-12).

Bob Burrdige writes, "In the time between Abraham and Jesus, the tree was the nation of the Jews. In the time after Jesus, the tree is the Apostolic church, God’s Spiritual Israel (see Romans 9:6). As the elect from all nations are evangelized and brought in, the tree grows toward fulness. As the apostate and unbelieving are removed, the tree improves in purity. It is in this way that all of God’s true Israel will be saved. The New Testament Church does not replace Israel. The Church is Israel in her completed form."

This was the infallible official teaching of the Church until the coming of Popes Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI and the now rather uncouth Francis, who is not quite as adept at accompanying the betrayal of the Gospel with high-falutin' theological dissembling, and therefore the hellish papal doctrine of Jew-worship is more obvious in his pontificate than in previous ones that had undeserved reputations for "conservatism."

We have saved the most flagrant papal lie for last. In Evangelii Gaudium Francis exhorts: "...we cannot...include the Jews among those called to turn from idols and to serve the true God." 

Pope Francis insists that the "Jews" do not follow idols and have not rejected the true God. Really? What did we just read in 1 John 2: 22-23? What are the words out of the mouth of Jesus Himself in John 8: 39-40? And from John the Baptist in Matthew 3: 9-10? All of those Scriptures have to be abolished or explained away in order to claim that contemporary “Jews” are not engaged in idolatry. Moreover, the rabbis are witnesses against themselves in this matter of idolatry:

"Since God already gave the Torah to the Jewish people on Mt. Sinai we no longer pay attention to heavenly voices. God must submit to the decisions of a majority vote of the rabbis.” —Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 59b.

Let's see now, the rabbinic halacha declares that Judaics no longer pay attention to heaven and that God must submit to them, and the pope of Rome declares that Judaism gives service to the true God and is not engaged in idolatry.

The only people who could possibly fall for this risible papal bunkum are those who want to be deceived, who "take pleasure in unrighteousness" and who "refuse to love the truth and be saved." 

Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.

______

On the Contrary is reader-funded. It is published today thanks to donations from readers like you, and the sale of Hoffman's books, newsletters and recordings. Join other truth-seekers in giving something back for that which you have received, thereby helping to ensure the continuation of this service.

Michael Hoffman • Box 849 • Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83816 USA 

Donations   |   Bookstore

***