Saturday, May 26, 2007
Friday, May 25, 2007
Christopher Jon Bjerknes
John Hagee is subverting American interests for the sake of Israel. He is pitting American "Christians" against Islamic nations in order to forward the Israelis' perceived self-interests.
"Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God."—Matthew 5:9
The first President of the United States, George Washington, stated,
"Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."—Matthew 26:52
"Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it? It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?
In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.
So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils? Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.
The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.
Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government. the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.
Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?
It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.
Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.
Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.
In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated."—George Washington's Farewell Address 1796
Listen to John Hagee and his crowd:
Christopher Jon Bjerknes
On the premier broadcast of jewishracism.com radio, I interviewed Jim Condit, Jr. and discussed with him his lecture "The Final Solution to Adolf Hitler" and my book "The Manufacture and Sale of Saint Einstein". Jim's lecture can be viewed for free on Google Video at the following website:
The interview I conducted with Jim Condit, Jr. can be heard at the following links:
Many of the books to which we refer in the interview can be found here:
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Christopher Jon Bjerknes
I have submitted the following statement to "Cosmic Log". Perhaps it will persuade the censors to publish my previous submissions, perhaps not. If not, I will note the fact here and elsewhere.
It appears that I have, for the second time, been censored on this forum. I have submitted two articles to "Cosmic Log", which have not appeared on "Cosmic Log", but which I have posted here:
I will continue to discredit Allen Esterson on my blog, though I will not continue to endure censorship on "Cosmic Log":
Note the ironic fact that I have been repeatedly defamed for standing up for free speech, and that my defense to those personal attacks has been censored. Note further that what you are observing on "Cosmic Log" is absolutely typical of the way Einstein and his advocates have stifled debate with smear tactics and censorship for 100 years. I present many examples of it from the past in my book "The Manufacture and Sale of Saint Einstein":
You have witnessed it before your very eyes.
I will gladly debate Allen Esterson, though I will not submit to a forum in which I am censored while others defame me without my having the ability to respond directly. Now let us see if Allen Esterson will condemn the censorship of my words and join me in a fair forum.
Christopher Jon Bjerknes
and has given personal details not likely to be known by others, which confirm his identity as the author of the defamations against me posted under his name at the Cosmic Log website. He has affirmed that it is wrong to call people "nasty names" including "anti-Semitic" and he has confirmed that he is the author of several articles in which he so labels me. I submitted the following article to Cosmic Log last night at about 3:00AM my time. We will see if it eventually appears on the website.
I thank Esterson for correcting my mistaken attribution of comments to him which were not his, but then we learn that Allen Esterson wrote the following:
"Writing as Jew, [***] Posted by: Allen Esterson at Aug 4, 2005 5:02:25 PM"
"On the one hand we have people perceiving anti-Jewish or anti-Semitic sentiments all around, on the other hand we have the claims of endemic 'Islamophobia', and that 'America and Britain are at war with Islam'. Let's get past this 'victim' consciousness stuff, and challenge or grapple with people's arguments instead of finding nasty names to call them: 'Jew-baiter', 'anti-Semitic', 'Islamophobic', 'fascist'. . . Posted by: Allen Esterson at Aug 4, 2005 5:50:11 PM"
Is it correct that you, Allen Esterson, wrote the above comments? If so, why do you not follow your own advice and why have you repeatedly libeled me in your widespread smear campaign against me?
Now I will address some of Esterson's sophistry. Esterson stated,
"Unfortunately there are two possible readings of the word 'racist' in this context, one that is purely descriptive, an attempt to classify different groups of human beings, the other that describes the advocating of discrimination against a particular 'racial' group. Bjerknes fails to distinguish between. [sic]"
Esterson ridiculously parses words to avoid the issue and the numerous quotations of Einstein's racist remarks found in my book, which statements by Einstein are clearly "racist" remarks in both senses of the term Esterson elects to adopt as definitions of the term "racist". Does Esterson ask me to define each word in the English language I use, and is he incapable of understanding terms without express definitions attached to each term?
My charges against Einstein are factually based and thoroughly proven, and Esterson only demonstrated his ignorance when he sought to mock them. As for Stachel's comment, my statement in reference to it was absolutely correct and Esterson simply sophistically attempts to change the subject, as he so often does, by inappropriately parsing words. Einstein was notorious for his inconsistencies, and the fact that his statements were inconsistent on the subject of his racial views, a fact I note in my book, does not change the fact that Einstein made virulently racist remarks, promoted anti-Semitism, and promoted a racist, segregationist Zionism, for which he was the most famous spokesman of the day. I have also proven that Einstein was repulsed by assimilatory Jewry. Esterson, instead of ceding the point, elects to prevaricate with sophistry and unnecessarily extend arguments which were already settled based on the facts.
Esterson loves to condemn me for standing up for the fundamental human right of freedom of speech and freedom of thought. He does not contest my arguments, but instead repeatedly smears me with innuendo. I am not ashamed of the fact that I am an advocate of the human right of free speech and I will cry out for freedom from every rooftop.
Esterson has the chutzpah to deny that he was attempting to shoot the messenger when he defamed me to Geraldine Hilton, and whoever else read his hateful remarks. Esterson writes, and note that Esterson misrepresents the context of my remark,
"Bjerknes writes: 'It appears that Allen Esterson opts to shoot the messenger with unproven defamations in order to avoid the truthful message I am telling.' In fact the point I was actually making in the passage in question was that Geraldine Hilton (writer/producer of 'Einstein's Wife') indiscriminately copies whole passages in a most unscholarly fashion from any source that accords with the message she is propagating (e.g., sections from Wikipedia and the writer Andrea Gabor). I pointed out that in the instance in question she was quoting a passage by Bjerknes, and that she would no doubt be horrified to find the source of the quotation was someone who posts on the 'Holocaust Revisionism' website CODOH, founded by the Holocaust denier Bradley R. Smith, who attended the notorious 2006 Tehran Holocaust Conference at which he endorsed the following: 'The alleged slaughter of millions of Jews by the Germans during World War II did not happen. The extermination allegation is properly termed a hoax, that is to say, a deliberately contrived falsehood.'"
In contradiction to Esterson's false claim that I was referring to his defamations against me on another website, I was referring to Esterson's vicious smears posted on Cosmic Log. He has so often defamed me with lies, that it must be difficult for him to keep track of his defamations. He attempts to weasel his way out of the fact that he sleazily introduced his smear tactics into what ought to be an academic debate, and attempts to deny that he was shooting the messenger, when it was obvious that he was doing just that. In addition, his vicious and hateful remarks stand as an open threat that any who knowingly quote me will be smeared. He is attempting to render my work taboo.
In point of fact, this is what the disingenuous smear monger Allen Esterson said, and note that Esterson again failed to mention my refutations of John Stachel's "review", though he hypocritically and incorrectly accuses me of being tendentious,
"The link on the Tesla Society webpage indicates that the passage in turn comes from a webpage on the website of Christopher John Bjerknes. Bjerknes is an eccentric anti-semite who posts on a Holocaust denier website. Bjerknes's antipathy to Einstein is indicated by his describing him as the 'chief racist' among the political Zionists of his time, and his writing that 'Einstein hated non-racist Jews'. His book on Einstein received a scathing review from John Stachel. I'm sure that Hilton would be horrified to know that, in regard to the second paragraph she has copied above (which purports to explain away the fact that Joffe clearly cited Einstein as the sole author of the three most celebrated of his 1905 papers), she is citing the arguments of a rabid anti-semite with an intense antipathy to Einstein. That does not, in itself, mean that Bjerknes's contentions in that paragraph are false. Like any assertions, they must be examined on their merits."
Esterson wastes many words confirming that what I said in my article "Was Einstein an Incestuous Rapist?" was perfectly correct, while pretending that he, Esterson, has somehow refuted what I had said. Esterson pretends that by his repeating the correctness of my assertions he has somehow discredited me, while avoiding all of the points made in my book and in my article. Esterson does not mention Einstein's perverse desire to fornicate with his cousin's daughters, or the fact that Einstein was conducting an incestuous and adulterous relationship with his same cousin, while seeking to bed her daughters. Esterson seems to miss the salient and incontestible points that Einstein was a licentious man, who had employed violence against his family on repeated occasions. Just as Esterson has failed to condemn Einstein for Einstein's racism, Esterson fails to condemn Einstein for Einstein's violence, or Einstein's sexual degeneracy, and completely avoids the issues raised in my book and in my article.
Christopher Jon Bjerknes
Christopher Jon Bjerknes Interviews Jim Condit, Jr.
May 23, 2007
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Christopher Jon Bjerknes
I have submitted the following response, and note that one of my previous submissions has not appeared, though it is quoted in one of my previous blogs:
Note that Allen Esterson, in his desperation to shoot the messenger and avoid the message, has not once attempted to address my factually based arguments regarding Mileva Maric. Instead, he hopes and prays that the statements I have made on other issues, and supported with thousands of pages of documentation, will shock the uninformed reader. Esterson only cursorily addresses that evidence in some instances, while completely ignoring it in others. He opts to mine for points he believes he can show to be weak, but even there fails to refute my arguments, but instead offers up his groundless opinion that the facts just are not good enough for him, though they represent precisely what I have contended they represent, and Esterson has nowhere shown otherwise.
Why are the issues of Zionism, Jews, Judaists and Jewish and Zionist racism so fascinating for our Allen Esterson, and why does he race (no pun intended) to Einstein's defense instead of condemning Einstein for Einstein's virulent racism and segregationism? Why does Esterson ignore the many racist things Albert Einstein stated, for example Einstein's assertion, which is a commonly expressed racist Zionist myth, that anti-Semitism is good for the Jews, in that it keeps Jews segregated?
In search of answers to these questions, I found that Allen Esterson wrote the following Herzlian Zionist nonsense:
"Posted by: Allen Esterson at Aug 4, 2005 5:02:25 PM [***] Whether you prefer to think of anti-Semitism as a virus or a cancer, the reality is that almost two thousand years of bloody and bitter history has shown that it is utterly incurable, and thus, the only really effective method of combating anti-Semitism is not the JDL or the courts but aliya."
Esterson also stated:
"Posted by: Allen Esterson at Aug 4, 2005 5:50:11 PM [***] And I don't believe it's incorrect to describe Islamist theocratic aspirations as at least akin to fascism."
These quotations are found here:
In reference to his first point, I note that Esterson posts from London. America has never been a hotbed of anti-Semitism, in part because Zionist Jews have never made a concerted effort to sponsor anti-Semitism in America, as they did in Germany when they funded Adolf Hitler and praised his segregationist policies. One way to combat anti-Semitism is to abandon such Zionist myths as the lie that anti-Semitism is inevitable and necessitates Jewish segregation in a "world ghetto"--to use Herzl's phrase, which lie is a defamation against all of humanity. There is nothing inherent in the DNA of Jews which would make Jews the natural and inevitable targets of hatred, nor is segregation any kind of a solution to anti-Semitism.
Esterson fails to acknowledge the fact that Judaist theocratic aspirations inspired Islam, and call for the enslavement of non-Jews, and a world-wide government ruled by a Jewish King from Jerusalem, as proven below. Is Esterson ignorant of Jewish messianic beliefs?
Esterson quotes a passage from one of my works, The Jewish Genocide of Armenian Christians, which states at pages 65-66:
"The Jewish genocide of Armenian Christians makes for a good case study of classical and cultural Jewish racism and Jewish deception. It demonstrates the highly developed Jewish arts of genocide, war and control of public opinion to do evil while appearing to be the victim, scapegoating others for Jewish crimes, etc."
Esterson omits to mention that I prove these facts in my books. I quote directly from Jewish texts which define the Jewish People as if a "chosen people" above all others (Deuteronomy 7:6), who must not intermarry or interbreed with allegedly inferior races (Exodus 34:16. Deuteronomy 7:2-3. Ezra 9. Nehemiah 9:2; 13:3, 23-30), which Jews are destined to rule the world (Exodus 19:5-6. Numbers 24:17-20; 33:50-56. Deuteronomy 7:6; 28:10. Psalm 2:1-12 (see also: Sukkah 52). Psalm 18:40-50; 72:8-11; 110:1-7. Isaiah 2:1-4; 9:6-7; 11:4, 9-10; 40:23; 42:1; 49:7, 23; 60:12; 61:6, 9; 65; 66. Jeremiah 3:17; 10:10. Ezekiel 39:17-18. Micah 4:2-3;17:16-17. Zechariah 8:20-23;14:9), and which Jews must exterminate the "Amalekites" (read Armenians) in an absolute murderous genocide (Exodus 17:14-16. Numbers 24:17-20. Deuteronomy 25:17-19. I Samuel 15:1-35. Malachi 1:1-14. Sanhedrin 20b), ultimately leaving only the "righteous" left alive, meaning obedient Jews and Goyim who slavishly submit to Jewish world rule and the Noahide Laws which forbid Christianity (Sanhedrin 56-60, 99. Zechariah 8:20-23. Shabbath 32b). I cite many examples of Jewish deception, including that of the crypto-Jew Esther, who committed genocide, and other crypto-Jews who committed genocide, most especially the "Young Turk" old Jews who perpetrated the Jewish genocide of Armenian Christians. I document Theodor Herzl's accounts that he would employ a corrupt "Jewish press" to control the fate of the Sultan of Turkey.
Esterson does not dispute the facts I present, nor does he question the logic of my conclusions. Does not Esterson find the Armenian Genocide an act of evil? Does he dispute the fact that it was perpetrated by crypto-Jews deceptively calling themselves "Young Turks"? Does he dispute the fact that today influential Jews and Jewish organizations are attempting to quiet talk of the Armenian Genocide, and have exercised undue influence in governments and media to do so? Why is Allen Esterson, who avers that Aliya is the only option for Jews to combat anti-Semitism, attempting to render my work taboo, when it has been so valuable to so many, including Alberto Martinez, upon whom Esterson relies?
Now onto Einstein's overt racism and his evil belief that anti-Semitism is good for Jews. I will pull a few of the many quotations by Einstein, and those who knew Einstein, found in my book The Manufacture and Sale of Saint Einstein, many of which passages appear in concentrated form here:
and note that Esterson nowhere acknowledges the fact that I fully support my contentions regarding Einstein's virulent Zionist racism with verifiable facts:
"Anti-Semitism will be a psychological phenomenon as long as Jews come in contact with non-Jews—what harm can there be in that? Perhaps it is due to anti-Semitism that we survive as a race: at least that is what I believe."--A. Einstein, English translation by A. Engel, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume 7, Document 37, Princeton University Press, (2002), p. 159.
"Antisemitism must be seen as a real thing, based on true hereditary qualities, even if for us Jews it is often unpleasant. I could well imagine that I myself would choose a Jew as my companion, given the choice. On the other hand I would consider it reasonable for the Jews themselves to collect the money to support Jewish research workers outside the universities and to provide them with teaching opportunities."--A. Einstein as quoted in M. Born, The Born-Einstein Letters, Walker and Company, New York, (1971), p. 16.
"[The Allied Powers] whose victory during the war I had felt would be by far the lesser evil are now proving to be only slightly the lesser evil. [***] I get most joy from the emergence of the Jewish state in Palestine. It does seem to me that our kinfolk really are more sympathetic (at least less brutal) than these horrid Europeans. Perhaps things can only improve if only the Chinese are left, who refer to all Europeans with the collective noun 'bandits.'"-- Letter from A. Einstein to Paul Ehrenfest of 22 March 1919, English translation by A. Hentschel, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume 9, Document 10, Princeton Univsersity Press, (2004), pp. 9-10, at 10.
"With adults it is quite similar as with children. Due to race and temperament as well as traditions (which are only to a small extent of religious origin) they form a community more or less separate from non-Jews. [***] It is this basic community of race and tradition that I have in mind when I speak of 'Jewish nationality.' In my opinion, aversion to Jews is simply based upon the fact that Jews and non-Jews are different. [***] Where feelings are sufficiently vivid there is no shortage of reasons; and the feeling of aversion toward people of a foreign race with whom one has, more or less, to share daily life will emerge by necessity."--A. Einstein, English translation by A. Engel, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume 7, Document 34, Princeton University Press, (2002), pp. 153-155, at 153-154.
"I am neither a German citizen, nor is there in me anything that can be described as 'Jewish faith.' But I am happy to belong to the Jewish people, even though I don't regard them as the Chosen People. Why don't we just let the Goy keep his anti-Semitism, while we preserve our love for the likes of us?"--A. Einstein quoted in A. Foelsing, English translation by E. Osers, Albert Einstein, a Biography, Viking, New York, (1997), p. 494.
"JUST WHAT IS A JEW? The formation of groups has an invigorating effect in all spheres of human striving, perhaps mostly due to the struggle between the convictions and aims represented by the different groups. The Jews, too, form such a group with a definite character of its own, and anti-Semitism is nothing but the antagonistic attitude produced in the non-Jews by the Jewish group. This is a normal social reaction. But for the political abuse resulting from it, it might never have been designated by a special name. What are the characteristics of the Jewish group? What, in the first place, is a Jew? There are no quick answers to this question. The most obvious answer would be the following: A Jew is a person professing the Jewish faith. The superficial character of this answer is easily recognized by means of a simple parallel. Let us ask the question: What is a snail? An answer similar in kind to the one given above might be: A snail is an animal inhabiting a snail shell. This answer is not altogether incorrect; nor, to be sure, is it exhaustive; for the snail shell happens to be but one of the material products of the snail. Similarly, the Jewish faith is but one of the characteristic products of the Jewish community. It is, furthermore, known that a snail can shed its shell without thereby ceasing to be a snail. The Jew who abandons his faith (in the formal sense of the word) is in a similar position. He remains a Jew. [***] WHERE OPPRESSION IS A STIMULUS [***] Perhaps even more than on its own tradition, the Jewish group has thrived on oppression and on the antagonism it has forever met in the world. Here undoubtedly lies one of the main reasons for its continued existence through so many thousands of years."--A. Einstein, "Why do They Hate the Jews?", Collier's, Volume 102, (26 November 1938); reprinted in Ideas and Opinions, Crown, New York, (1954), pp. 191-198, at 194, 196.
"To deny the Jew's nationality in the Diaspora is, indeed, deplorable. If one adopts the point of view of confining Jewish ethnical nationalism to Palestine, then one, to all intents and purposes, denies the existence of a Jewish people. In that case one should have the courage to carry through, in the quickest and most complete manner, entire assimilation. We live in a time of intense and perhaps exaggerated nationalism. But my Zionism does not exclude in me cosmopolitan views. I believe in the actuality of Jewish nationality, and I believe that every Jew has duties towards his coreligionists. [***] [T]he principal point is that Zionism must tend to strengthen the dignity and self-respect of the Jews in the Diaspora. I have always been annoyed by the undignified assimilationist cravings and strivings which I have observed in so many of my friends."--A. Einstein, "Jewish Nationalism and Anti-Semitism", The Jewish Chronicle, (17 June 1921), p. 16.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Christopher Jon Bjerknes
In violation of the most fundamental principles of civilized behavior, the barbaric, racist and genocidal Israelis promise to murder the leaders of the Palestinians. Instead of lifting their inhuman embargoes on the Palestinians, instead of ending their seige of the Palestinians, instead of ceasing to fund and foment civil war, instead of living in peace and brotherhood with their neighbors; the poisonous Israelis are openly threatening to murder the political leaders of the Palestinian People. The Israelis are doing everything in their power to make the life of the average Palestinian hell, so as to provoke them to violence so that the racist and homocidal Israelis can blame the Palestinians for the Israeli genocide of the Palestinians.
The depraved Israelis degrade and murder Palestinian women and children. The bloodthirsty Israelis only recently carried out a deliberate premeditated aggressive assault on defenseless Lebanon, whose government they had first subverted with treacherous puppets, and whose land the Israeli Jews wish to steal. The kleptomaniacal Israelis have countless Mossad agents provocatuer operating in Lebanon and Palestine to provoke civil wars and to carry out and foment insignificant attacks on Israel, which the Israelis then use as a pretext to commit genocidal attacks on Palestine and Lebanon. It is difficult to imagine a more reprehensible people than the Jews of Israel.
In the News:
The Deadly Doenmeh, Who Genocided Christian Armenians, and Who Have Subverted Governments and Media Around the Globe
Christopher Jon Bjerknes
The Doenmeh are alive and well in Turkey. These two-faced crypto-Jews are secretly behind the current machinations taking place in Turkey, and throughout the World, to subvert democracy and religious freedom in Turkey. They laud the crypto-Jew Ataturk and deride Islam, while pretending to be Moslem. They hire Moslem protesters to carry the signs and flags they provide, in order to subvert Islam.
Secrecy and contempt work in their favor and serve as an excuse and a shield for the crypto-Jews' hidden agendas and secretly subversive activities. Though supposedly hated by most Jews, they are the current motive force behind World Jewry's ancient pursuit of World conquest and the theft of "Greater Israel" from the indigenous populations of Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Egypt, etc., and the many genocides this 2,500 year old Jewish plan requires.
Jews were never a native population in "Israel". They were always a temporary genocidal invading force for evil. In the ancient World, as today, they were an intrusive source of violence and instability in the region.
Most human beings revile genocidal hypocrites like the Doenmeh, who pretend to be what they are not, so that they can ride inside a Trojan horse and corrosively destroy their Goy neighbors. The Doenmeh exploit and manufacture the illusion of contempt, which provides them with cover behind which to hide and shield their Jewish agenda from scrutiny and exposure. They blame their cowardly and viciously hateful subversive and genocidal practices on their victims.
Like the crypto-Jewish Bolsheviks, who changed their names to Russian sounding names, then committed genocide against the Russians and other Slavs, so that they could blame their victims for their crimes; the crypto-Jewish Doenmeh commit genocide and destroy Goy religions as a Jewish religious duty, but these wretched vampires hide their true Jewish identity and scapegoat Christians and Moslems for their Jewish crimes.
The Doenmeh follow the vile heritage of the myth of the crypto-Jewess Esther and the Jewish genocide of Gentiles, which the Jews celebrate each year in their favorite holiday, Purim. Like the Doenmeh, today's Hassidic Jews are among the descendants of the Shabbataians and Frankists. "True Torah Jews" revere the Talmud as a part of the Torah. It is a myth that "True Torah Jews" supposedly reject the poets, prophets and histories of the Hebrew Bible. It is also a myth that they reject the Talmud, which is their most revered set of holy books. Like their false Jewish messiahs Shabbatai Zevi, Baruchyah Russo and Jacob Frank, "True Torah Jews" embrace Cabalah. They also consider the Talmud to be a part of the Torah, because they hold to the myth that the "oral tradition" was given to Moses on Sinai, and passed through him to his brother Aaron and down through the priests of Aaron to eventually be recorded, with commentaries, in the Talmud.
It would be interesting to scratch Nicolas Sarkozy's ancestry and sniff for the rotten stink of descent from the false Jewish messiahs Shabbatai Zevi, Baruchyah Russo and Jacob Frank, or one their most ardent followers. Sarkozy is descended from Salonikan Jews. Sarkozy's grandfather, like Jacob Frank, converted to Catholicism, and Nicolas was very close to him. Perhaps, Sarkozy has no line of descent from the followers of the false Jewish messiahs.
The Frankist plan to subvert the leading governments of Europe with ultra-Zionists has been fulfilled. France, Italy, the United Kingdom and Germany have each recently been ruled by Zionists more ardently Zionistic than most Israelis. The Judaists' plan has always been to rule the World. It appears that they have succeeded. But what has their rule brought to mankind, other than wars, genocide and the destruction of the living environment of the Earth?
Alas, that is also part of the Jewish grand plan called "Judaism". We are meant to perish at their hands.
In the News: