- Christogenea Saturdays
The Protocols of Satan, Part 13: The Jewish "News" Agencies
We are slowly progressing through our presentation of the so-called Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, which we prefer to call the Protocols of Satan, taking what we believe are rather necessary digressions in order to attempt to establish both the context of the Protocols, and the facts of their execution. I wouldn’t say fulfillment, but execution, as the Protocols are not a work of intuition or a prophecy of any sort. Rather, they represent the outline of a definite plan by the rabbis and money-changers of Judaism for the subversion of White Christian civilization.
In our last digression, which has run over the course of the last two of these presentations, we hope to have demonstrated that by the time of the First World War and the Bolshevik Revolution, Jews were already in control of nearly all of the major newspapers in Germany, England, and the United States. Many of the newspapers were under their control for several decades by that time, and they not only had ownership and administrative control, but they also filled many of the important editorial and reporting positions. Where we do not find Jews in those positions, we find men who nevertheless had close relationships with Jews.
We also hope to have established that in their control of the newspapers – in an age of presumed democracy where the public opinion is supposedly to prevail – the Jews were not reporting public opinion, and they were not measuring public opinion. Rather, they were and they still are using their control of the media to create public opinion. Consider the consequences. When Jews agitated for war against Germany, Jews were creating public opinion through their control of everything which was published in nearly every major newspaper, and through everything which was distributed to other news agencies through their control of major news networks.
When Jews, in the middle of the World War, invaded Russia and usurped control of the government, other Jews in the West chose what to report and how to report it, so from most of the media outlets, the people of Europe and America were given mostly positive reports about the new and progressive developments in the blossoming workers’ paradise. There were a few media sources that presented more reliable accounts, but their voices were drowned out by the weight of the outlets which were under Jewish control.
In the years following the Bolshevik revolution, many Americans had a positive view of the Soviet Union and therefore, developed a positive view of Marxism and Communism. When the Bolsheviks purposely created famine conditions in the Ukraine, the Jewish newspapers in America were only telling part of the story, and even men such as Herbert Hoover were leading the cause to send food aid to the Bolsheviks in Russia, while the Christian Ukrainians were being left to starve to death by the millions. We discussed The Terror Famines in Ukraine here 15 months ago, and presented some of the alternative reporting of the situation along with the official response which was a result of the media-formulated mainstream opinion. Because of the Jewish treachery in obfuscating the truth behind what happened in Ukraine, it was not widely understood in the West for perhaps 60 years after it happened.
The purposeful Jewish obfuscation of the truth concerning the nature of the Soviet Union and the murder of millions of Christian Russians, Ukrainians and others at the hands of the criminal Jewish Bolshevik regime then set the stage for another Jewish media propaganda campaign, which was the presentation of the common criminal called Joseph Stalin to the West as a saint whereby the United States and Britain were pleasantly confederated with the devil in the destruction of Christian Europe in the Second World War. This also facilitated the destruction of Christian Germany at the hands of their own racial and religious kindred, for the benefit of the Jew. A continued examination of media reporting, its effects on public opinion, and the course of events in history will find that this is not an exception, but a pattern. History proves beyond doubt that the Jewish-controlled newspapers and other more modern media outlets have been moving the people of the so-called Western democracies towards a world dominated by Judaism for the past several centuries.
From his own personal papers, it does not appear that United Press International founder and early newspaper magnate E.W. Scripps was Jewish, although he was friendly to Jews and even once courted a Jewess. For now, we will leave the early Jewish influences at UPI uninvestigated. It was founded in 1907, and was for the most part only a domestic service for its first several decades. The United Press agency did not become United Press International until 1958. The Associated Press was first founded in 1846, primarily by New York newspapers for the sake of sharing the costs of obtaining news from the war with Mexico. It too was primarily a domestic news service until the mid-20th century. The New York Times has for a long time had its own news agency for the many other newspapers that it owns, operates and is in contract with, and it has been in Jewish hands since the 1890’s. But its foreign operations were not developed until the 1940’s. Until then, all of these major news agencies, which distributed news to practically every other newspaper in the United States, relied on a small handful of news agencies in Europe for all of their foreign news, the French Press Agency, Wolff and Reuters, and in the English language there was only Reuters.
The agency generally credited with being the first modern news agency is the Agence France Presse founded in 1835 by Charles-Louis Havas. While Havas himself is said to have been French, we have not yet found any reference to his religion. He was born into a banking family which was said to have been employed as estate managers for the Norman nobility, however they themselves were not nobles, nor were they apparently Norman. On the French-language Wikipedia page for Havas, he is said to have been a “former international banker and merchant”. As life in France was rather tumultuous at that time, Havas being caught up in the politics of the Napoleonic era, by 1825 he became an independent journalist and translator of news from overseas, which led to the founding of his agency. At the same time, he had developed his own advertising agency monopoly within France. Havas’ agency is still in business today. The circumstances of his life as well as his politics indicate to us that Havas was a Jew, but we have no direct references to support that indication. One of Havas’ early employees was the so-called Paul Reuters, and another was Bernhard Wolff.
Reuters had even more numerous and sudden changes in his life then Havas. He was born as the son of a rabbi in Kassel, Germany, and his given name was Israel Josaphat. As a young man, he learned about telegraphy from the Christian and German scientist, Carl Friedrich Gauss. In 1845 he moved to Britain, and within three weeks he underwent a presumed conversion to Christianity, and changed his name to Paul Julius Reuter. Only a week after that event, he married the daughter of a Lutheran pastor. All of this happened a St. George’s German Lutheran Chapel in London. Evidently St. George didn’t slay the dragon as well as he should have.
Soon after his supposed conversion and his marriage, Reuter went to Berlin and began publishing books with another man whom I suspect was a Jew although the evidence is insufficient, named Joseph Abraham Stargardt. He used his new endeavor to help agitate the revolutions of 1848 by distributing and publishing radical literature, for which he was run out of Germany. The German Wikipedia page indicates that, although he was supposedly converted in London in 1845, he was still identified as a Jew in Germany in 1847. There we read that “In August 1847, he [Reuters] had signed in Berlin for the acquisition of citizenship and was summoned on December 8 to take an oath. He refused, however, to take the oath in the form prescribed for Jews. His citizenship certificate he received so until May 1852.” The same source also describes his publishing endeavors during the 1848 Revolution in a rather restrained manner: “During the revolution of 1848-49 they published a series of political writings, which can be broadly described as democratic. While Stargardt pointedly then carefully behaved, Reuter was the driving force of utterances democratic consciousness, had to soon answer for spread of democratic literature and flee abroad.”
Reuter went to Paris, where he went to work for Havas’ press agency, but started his own agency transmitting news between Brussels and Aachen. A short time later Dover was linked to Calais with a new telegraph cable, so Reuter returned to London and set up his office in the financial district. By 1857 he was a British citizen. In 1858 the Reuters news agency had its first newspaper client, the London Morning Advertiser. In 1871 Reuter was conferred a barony by Ernest II, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. Ernest was the older brother of Prince Albert, the husband of Queen Victoria. By 1874 Reuters’ news network stretched from Asia to South America, and it was transmitting news internationally using radio in 1923, almost as soon as the technology was developed. The first commercial radio broadcast occurred in the United States on November 2, 1920, in Pittsburgh, and was sponsored by Westinghouse. The first broadcast with paid advertising is generally believed to have been in New York on August 28, 1922. So Reuters was on the cutting edge, assuring that it would retain control of news between Europe and America through some of the most important decades in modern history.
From the Encyclopedia Britannica article on Reuters we read:
The spread of undersea cables helped Reuter extend his service to other continents. After several years of competition, Reuter and two rival services, Havas of France and Wolff of Germany, agreed on a geographic division of territory, leaving Havas and Wolff their respective countries, parts of Europe, and South America. The three agencies held a virtual monopoly on world press services for many years.
This leads us to discuss this third European news service, Wolff of Germany.
According to the sources which treat the subject, another German Jew, Bernhard Wolff, a physician who was the son of a Jewish banker in Berlin, was also an early employee of Charles Havas’ French news agency. We are informed that Bernhard Wolff was “The second son of a Jewish banker,” and, according to Wikipedia, “Wolff lived and died in Berlin. His grave is preserved in the Jewish cemetery on Schönhauser Allee in Berlin's Prenzlauer Berg neighbourhood.” Wolff went on to found the third significant European news agency, the Wolff Telegraphic Bureau. Because it informs us of aspects of the operation of all three European news agencies, here we will offer part of the Encyclopaedia Britannica article on the Wolff Telegraphic Bureau:
Wolff Telegraphic Bureau (WTB)... [is a] German news agency founded in 1849 by physician Bernhard Wolff. Formed shortly after the Havas and Reuters news agencies, WTB served as the primary German news agency and was one of only a handful of international news services for about 75 years.
Wolff became interested in news agencies after serving as a translator of medical and financial news for Agence Havas in Paris in 1847 and 1848. He returned in 1849 to Berlin, where he worked as an editor of a newspaper and formed his own financial news cooperative, the Berlin Telegraphische Anstalt. That cooperative made early use of the spreading network of electric telegraph lines, though most of Wolff’s initial clients were banks and other businesses, not newspapers. Taking over several smaller competitors, Wolff broadened his operation to cover general news in 1855 and took on newspaper clients [which was three years before Reuters had a newspaper client]. By 1859 Wolff was exchanging news with Havas and Reuters. The operation underwent several name changes, finally becoming the Wolffsche Telegraphenbüro (WTB).
The Prussian government began contributing some financial support (and exerting indirect control) by 1865. A secret 1869 agreement between the government and WTB gave the latter priority use of the expanding network of German telegraph cables, in return for which Prussia gained some degree of control over the political news transmitted and even the hiring of staff. With that the news agency became effectively an instrument of Prussian official policy, though it also achieved primacy in issuing official news. Wolff retired as managing director in 1871.
In 1856 WTB signed an exchange agreement with Havas in France and Reuters in Britain to share financial news from their respective countries. Their cooperation soon expanded to more general news, and in 1874 they agreed to create joint offices in Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay.
By 1870 the three agencies had established a cooperative news cartel, soon dubbed “The Ring.” With each agency being responsible for a specific part of the world (WTB covered Austria-Hungary, Russia, and Scandinavia), the cartel thus eliminated overlapping reporting and its related costs. For many years, WTB controlled the national news bureaus in Sweden and Norway. Being the smallest of the three, WTB was subject to its partners’ agreement to any expansion of its services—for which it paid a premium. All three made effective use of the growing web of undersea cables and land telegraphy and were accordingly often called “wire” services. With some changes, the cartel agreement was renewed in 1890 and again in 1914.
It is evident that with this agreement, the English-speaking countries would be almost entirely reliant on Reuters for English-language news from Europe and the rest of the world. But all of the news which was reported from Russia and Germany was first filtered through the Jewish-owned Wolff Telegraphic Bureau.
That is the important aspect of our having presented this account. From the 1860’s through the 1930’s, all of the news about Europe and most of the rest of the world which made it to America in sufficient time to steer American public opinion concerning world events came through one of these agencies, and the most important news during the decades in question was from Russia and Germany. Reuters news agency was founded by the son of a rabbi who was engaged in radical political activities serving the interests of the Jews from the very start of his career as a publisher. The Wolff Telegraphic Bureau was founded by the son of a Jewish banker from Berlin. Finally, the Havas agency was founded by the son of another banker, who was a banker and international merchant himself, and who turned to journalism as a second career. Practically everything the American people thought they knew about the Kaiser’s Germany, the Bolsheviks in Russia, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler and National Socialism, and all of the contemporary events of the period, came from the newspapers, and was spoon-fed to them through one of these Jewish-controlled news agencies.
So even where Jews did not own and edit the newspapers, they nevertheless controlled the news from Europe which reached those newspapers. They decided what to send, what not to send, and how what they did send was written. By that alone they could control American public opinion of events in Europe. The newspapers passed this “news” on to their readers, and based on what they read, those readers formulated their political decisions. Who to vote for, whether or not to support the wars overseas, what Europeans thought about various economic, political and social issues, all of the opinions Americans had in these areas and others came from these few agencies and their local newspapers. And Jews always promote Jews and Jewish interests first and foremost.
When Jews cannot control the news or the newspapers directly, they do so through commercial pressure. We are going to let Henry Ford, or whoever wrote this article for The Dearborn Independent, give us that account. The following is from page 99 of The International Jew, The World’s Foremost Problem:
How far does Jewish influence control the Newspapers of the United States?
In so far as the use of the word "Jew" is concerned, the Press is almost completely dominated. The editor who uses it is certain to hear from it. He will be visited and told – contrary to everything the Jew is told – that the word "Jew" denotes a member of a religious denomination and not a member of a race, and that its use with reference to any person spoken of in the public prints is as reprehensible as if "Baptist," "Catholic," or "Episcopalian" were used.
The Jew is always told by his leaders that regardless of religion or country of birth, he is a Jew, the member of a race by virtue of blood. Pages of this paper could be filled with the most authoritative Jewish statements on this point. But what the Jew is told by his leaders, and what the Gentile editor is told by the Jewish committee are two different and antagonistic things. A Jewish paper may shriek to the skies that Professor So-and-So, or Judge So-and-So, or Senator So-and-So is a Jew, but the secular newspaper that should do that would be visited by an indignant committee bearing threats.
A certain newspaper, as a mere matter of news, published an excerpt from one of The Dearborn Independent articles. Next day a number of advertising accounts dropped for lack of copy. Inquiry developed the fact that the reticent advertisers were all Jewish firms and the cause of their action was the really unimportant excerpt which the paper published. It developed also that the advertising agent who handled all the advertising for those Jewish firms was himself a Jew who also held an office in a Jewish secret society, which office was concerned exclusively with the control of newspapers in the matter of Jewish publicity. It was this man who dealt with the editor. A lame editorial retraction followed which faintly praised the Jews. The advertising was returned to the paper, and it is just a question whether that editor was rightly handled or not. Certainly he has been made to feel the power. But the diplomacy of it was bad. The editor, along with hundreds of others, has only been given the proper background for estimating the Jewish power in its wider reaches.
This is not to say that every editor should enter upon a campaign to expose the secret power. That is a matter for personal decision. Every editor, however, is so situated that he can see certain things, and he ought to see them, note them, and inwardly digest them.
Jewish publicity in response to these articles is very easy to get in almost any newspaper. Some have fallen most lamentably for lying statements. Others have opened their columns to propaganda sent out from Jewish sources. That is all very well. But the Gentile interest in the question has been largely ignored, even in cases where the editors are awake to the whole Question. This too affords a vantage from which the average editor can view what is transpiring in this country.
If a list of the Jewish owners, bondholders and other interests in our newspapers should be published the list would be impressive. But it would not account for the widespread control of the Press as observed in this country. Indeed, it would be unfair in such a connection as this to list some of the Jewish-owned newspapers of the United States, because their owners are fair and public-spirited servants of the people.
Actual ownership does not often account for much in a newspaper. Ownership in the newspaper business in not always synonymous with control. If you wish to know the control of the newspaper, look to its attorney and the interests he serves; look to the social connections of its chief editors; look to the advertising agents who handle the bulk of Jewish advertising; and then look to the matter of the paper's partisanship or independence in politics.
Newspaper control of the Press by the Jews is not a matter of money. It is a matter of keeping certain things out of the public mind and putting certain things into it.
One absolute condition insisted upon with the daily Press is that it shall not identify the Jew, mention him, or in any but the most favorable way call the public's attention to his existence.
The first plea for this is based on "fairness," on the false statement that a Jew is not a Jew but a church member. This is the same statement which Jewish agents in the United States Government have used for years to prevent the United States Government from listing the Jews in any racial statistics. It is in direct contradiction to what the Jews themselves are told. A flabby "fairness," a sloppy "broad-mindedness," a cry of "religious prejudice," is the first plea. The second is a sudden cessation of Jewish patronage. The third is withdrawal of patronage by every Gentile concern that is under the grip of Jewish financiers. It is a mere matter of brutal bludgeoning. And the fourth act, in a community thoroughly blinded to the Jewish Question, is the collapse of the offending publication.
Read the Jewish Encyclopedia for a list of some of the papers which dared open up the Question, and ceased!
When old Baron Moses Montefiore said at Krakau:
"What are you prating about? As long as we do not have the press of the whole world in our hands, everything you may do is vain. We must control or influence the papers of the whole world in order to blind and deceive the people."
– he knew what he was saying. By "blinding" the people he only meant that they should not see the Jew, and by "deceiving" them he only meant that the people should think certain world movements meant one thing when they really meant another. The people may be told what happens: they may not be told what was behind it. The people do not yet know why certain occurrences which have affected their whole lives, should have occurred at all. But the "why" of it is very definitely known in certain circles whose news service never sees print, and sometimes not even writing.
Statistics as to the space given the Jews by newspapers concerning things they want to get into print would also be an eye-opener. A minority nation, they get more publicity than any ten of the important minor nations of Europe – of the kind of publicity they want!
The number of Jewish contributors to the Press of the United States makes another interesting statistical bit. It would be sheer prejudice to make objectionable mention of many Jewish journalists and writers, and they come within the scope of this study only as they have shown themselves to be the watchful agents and active servants of the System. This is what many of them are. Not the ambitious young Jewish reporter who runs around the streets gathering news, perhaps, but the journalist at the seat of the news and at the necks of those two or three important international runways through which the news of the world flows.
The whole matter, as far as extent of control is concerned, could be visualized on a map of the United States, by means of colored pins showing the number of Jewish-owned, provably Jewish-controlled papers, and the number of Jewish writers who are directing the majority thought of the various sections of the country.
The Jewish journalist who panders to unrest, whose literary ambition is to maintain a ferment in his readers, whose humor is sordid and whose philosophy is one of negation; as well as the Jewish novelist who extols his or her own people even while the story sows subtle seeds of disruption in Gentile social or economic life must be listed as the agents of that World Program which would break down society through the agency of "ideas." And it is very striking how many there are, and how skillfully they conceal their propaganda in their work.
Here and there in the United States it is now becoming possible to print the word "Jew" in the headlines of an article, and tell the Jewish committee which calls the next day that this is yet a free country. Quietly a number of newspapers have tested the strength of this assumed control in their communities, and have discounted it.
There is no reason for fear on the part of the editor who has his facts. But the editor who backs down will more and more feel the pressure upon him. The man who courageously and fairly holds his ground will soon learn another thing that is not so generally known, namely, that with all the brilliance there is a lot of bluff, and that the chain of control once broken is felt throughout the whole system as a blow.
There is nothing that the International Jew fears so much as the truth, or any hint of the truth about himself or his plans. And, after all, the rock of refuge and defense, the foundation of endurance for Jew or Gentile must be the Truth.
[The Dearborn Independent, issue of 11 September 1920]
Henry Ford is right, that there were still some independently-minded newspapers in the 1920’s. Looking for some information on the quote here from the English Jew, Moses Montefiore, we found the Thursday, October 5th, 1922 edition of an Oklahoma paper called the Mangum Star. Here is a short article found on an unnumbered back page, where the classified ads were located:
“Coming Events Cast Their Shadows Before”
The propagation department, Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, sent out the following newsletter from Atlanta, headquarters, under date of September 21st:
Nowaday, a patriot has a tough road to travel! A new society called “Invisible Jungle, Knights of the Tiger’s Eye” has made its bow. Its announced purpose is to fight the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. Their black robe and mask is similar to that worn by the K of C’s in lodge room. [A reference to the Catholic Knights of Columbus.]
A public proclamation, signed by Edward Young Clarke, Imperial Wizard, Pro Tem, is to be released to the press today. It makes the startling charge that there is a “nation-wide conspiracy to destroy American institutions and obliterate Christian ideals,” and promises that the Klan will produce evidence to the American public which will be the greatest exposure ever witnessed.
Klan endorsed candidates in California were elected in the recent primaries with but few exceptions. Klan recruiting in this state is progressing rapidly.
What a pleasant little sentiment is contained in this quotation from Baron Montefiore – a German Jew. “What are you praying about? As long as we do not have the press of the whole world in our hands, everything you may do is in vain. We must control or influence the papers of the whole world in order to blind and deceive the people.” And yet we hear some Americans say, “There is no Jewish conspiracy.”
When the City of Springfield, Massachusetts, refused to permit Dr. William J. Mahoney to speak on the principles of the Klan in the high school auditorium, the local Shriners came forward like true Americans and offered the use of the Shrine Temple. The exchange club of Worcester, Massachusetts hearing of the incident extended a cordial invitation to Dr. Mahoney to speak to them.
Klan victories in Georgia primaries were as numerous as the wives of Solomon.
When William Coote, member of Ulster and British parliament spoke last week in the Western Avenue M. E. [Methodist Episcopal] Church, Chicago, in support of North Ireland Protestants, his remarks were punctured by bricks hurled through the church windows by Irish Sinn Feiners. No doubt the rioters will gloat over the fact that their missiles struck several women in the audience.
“Issues of Today,”a flannel-mouthed, pro-German, anti-Anglo Saxon weekly, misedited by one Frederick Schrader, assisted by A. Van C. P. Heuzinga, thunders against a book entitled, “I Am An American” used by the Jersey City Schools. They admonish their readers to “Get after the school authorities and the book dealers that handle the book; stop speaking to anyone that defends it. Get hold of copies and burn them in the public square.” (Issue of September 9th, 1922, Page 359.)
We could not imagine today a newspaper publishing anything positive about the Ku Klux Klan and still being in business tomorrow, but certainly not the reproduction of an entire newsletter. So Ford is correct in his assessment that not every newspaper was held in fear of the Jews in 1920, or 1922. But while we could not resist but to cite this article for our example, Mangum is a small town in Southwest Oklahoma with a population of less than 4,000 people.
But we see that this particular newspaper also must have sympathized with the Klan in its vitriol towards Germans. Then it labels Moses Montefiore as a German, when he is no more a German than he was an Englishman. Montefiore was born in Italy to a Sephardic family that had been in London since the 1740’s. He was the sheriff of London, President of the Board of British Deputies, and knighted by Queen Victoria in 1837. He lived until the age of 100 and died in 1885. I have not yet found the source or context of the quote from him concerning the Jewish objective of control of the press, but by the time he died the Jews certainly did control the entire European press.
In any event, the Klan’s hatred of Germans reflects the divisions sown among Whites by Jews which continue to make the world safe for Jews. Montefiore and his family found life much more rewarding among the Anglo-Saxons. On the other hand, this article seemed to reflect the Klan’s acceptance of groups such as the Shriners, a Masonic group which is rooted and Jewry and openly identifies with Arabic culture and Jewish humanist ideals.
We will revisit the Jewish control of the press as soon as our presentation of the second of the Protocols. For now, we shall finally continue our presentation of the first of the so-called Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, as they are found in the book The Protocols and World Revolution attributed to Boris Brasol, and published in Boston in 1920 by Maynard, Small & Co. This is a continuation of Protocol No. 1, entitled The Basic Doctrine, from where we had left off in Part 11 of this series:
PROTOCOL NO. I, continued:
From temporary evil to which we are now obliged to have recourse will emerge the good of an unshakable government, which will reinstate the orderly functioning of the mechanism of popular existence now interrupted by liberalism.
The wording is sometimes difficult. The Marsden translation has it to say that “Out of the temporary evil we are now compelled to commit will emerge the good of an unshakable rule, which will restore the regular course of the machinery of the national life, brought to naught by liberalism.”
This document already existed in the 1890’s, but we cannot really tell how much older than that it may be. Perhaps this “temporary evil” was the planned revolution in Russia, or the wars that the Jews had instigated between the various nations of Europe. The Europe of the 19th century was an evil time, and the Europe of the 20th century was even more evil. Through all of the mayhem and confusion, murder and war instigated by the Jews since the French Revolution, and even since the protestant Reformation, the Jews hoped recreate the world in their own image. That would result in a so-called Pax Judaica where the Talmud would rule, and Christianity would be slowly extinguished. That is the world in which we currently live, and that is why White Christians cannot get any justice from that world.
This explains why the so-called western democracies are laden with bureaucracy today. The Jews are now in control, and they are adverse to the idea of true political or economic liberty, so we are burdened with bureaucracy and the taxes which support them, as the Jews “reinstate the orderly functioning of the mechanism of popular existence” to their own liking. Perhaps that is how the reference to “red tape” really developed.
However White Christians cannot see the real problem, because their opinions as well as the acceptable bounds of discussion are all formulated for them by the Jewish media. We cannot adequately state this in a few short paragraphs, but to describe it has been the objective of this entire series of presentations of the Jews in Europe and the Protocols of Satan, and even back to our presentation on Martin Luther in Life and Death, which we one day hope to continue.
As the Protocols had said just a little earlier in Protocol No. 1, “political freedom is an idea but not a fact.” The Jew only believed in freedom when the Christian nobility had control of the governments of the world. In order to break that control, the Jew offered the false hope of liberty to the people, so that the power of money could supplant the Christian nobility as ruler over the people. The Christian people should have known better, as Paul of Tarsus had told the Romans, “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.” Therefore if the Christian overthrew his rulers, and if he would not be ruled by his God, then it was inevitable that something else would come to rule over him, for which the Jew was in waiting.
In some ways, the Jew understood this much better than the Christian, that political liberty is simply not possible. The Jew only wanted to supplant the kings, and the power of money was naturally in the hands of the Jew. But the Jew needed a vehicle, and that vehicle was Liberalism. If the Jews let the people know the truth, then the people never would have agreed. Liberalism is the lie created by Satan to deceive the people into believing that they could rule themselves. Once the rule of the people prevailed, the devils knew that they could become the true rulers, because they had the means to manipulate the people in their hands: the banks and the media. The serpent said to Eve, “5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.” When the people thought that they could be as gods, the devil won the day.
The preamble to the Declaration of Independence says “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
Now, we know that those words were written by well-meaning Christian men. But they were words based on the concept of Liberalism, that men had the liberty to rule themselves. That idea is contrary to the Divine Will of God. Some of those men understood that God must be in the equation, but when the words were written, God was left out of the equation, and therefore room was made for the devil. This was also the permissive will of God, and for our imagined liberty we have been enslaved by Satan. But this is not the Divine will of God, where men only have liberty in Christ, if they realize that He alone can be their King, and that they must submit to Him. So the noble words of the American founders made the mistake of leaving their specific God, Yahshua, or Jesus Christ, out of the equation, and Satan crept right into the equation.
PROTOCOL NO. I, continued:
The end justifies the means. In laying our plans we must turn our attention not so much to the good and moral as to the necessary and useful. Before us lies a plan in which a strategic line is shown, from which we must not deviate on pain of risking the collapse of many centuries of work.
Likewise, the Marsden translation has this last sentence to say “Before us is a plan in which is laid down strategically the line from which we cannot deviate without running the risk of seeing the labor of many centuries brought to naught.”
Presenting our series on The Jews in Medieval Europe, where in 11 parts we feel that we have only scratched the surface, we discussed in two parts the Converso problem and the Spanish Inquisition. While Jews were restricted from many areas of life in the relatively Christian society, they claimed to convert in large numbers, so that they could hold office or engage in certain activities. But the conversions were always feigned, and they continued to live all of the routine aspects of their lives as Jews, while only engaging superficially as supposed Christians. The following is from part 1 of that series, where we were in turn citing E. Michael Jones, and we will leave our original comments in place:
The conversos continued to earn the odium of the Christian majority because many lent money at interest and tax-farmed. The efficacy of baptism, and therefore, the sacramental system of the Church, was called into question, something that led inexorably to racism. [But the sacramental system was never Christian in the first place.] Or fear was suppressed and then transformed into hatred of the Jews, who were seen as trifling mendaciously with the most sacred commitments, and therefore incapable of being trusted. The suspicions fell most heavily on the cultured conversos of the upper class who benefited most from conversion by gaining access to offices previously off-limits to Jews. The average Christian believed he was ruled by a class of philosophical intellectuals who were nihilists and opportunists with no religious beliefs. [No different than today’s atheistic Jews, who insist upon being conferred with all the benefits of being the so-called “chosen” while denying God Himself.] Baer cites the saying, "to be born and die; all the rest is a snare and a delusion," as epitomizing the beliefs of this class of convert. [The attitude which gave rise to humanism within the Church.] 28 Because of the large number of converted Jews prominent in Spain, it was reputedly more secular than renaissance Italy. [Secular society is the natural result of a Jewish-dominated society, because the Jews truly have no God.] "Lyric poetry from the period reveals, as it did in the 12th and 13th centuries, a type of Jewish courtier who had become either a converso or an open apostate." The Italians felt the Jews ruled Spain, "while secretly perverting the faith by their covert adherence to Judaism.'' 29 [It was not long before devout Catholics such as Prince Carpi were fighting with Italian humanists within the Church in Italy.]
As we had seen in those presentations, this situation began in the 13th century, and continued through the 15th. In the end, the Jews nevertheless had eventually prevailed as they had throughout all of Europe. These events, those in Spain and those which were about to occur as the Protocols were published, are certainly just as connected as the Protocols boast here, where they state that “Before us lies a plan in which a strategic line is shown, from which we must not deviate on pain of risking the collapse of many centuries of work.” The Jews had been infiltrating and subverting Christian society in Europe for many centuries, sowing seeds of discord and dividing Christians with false doctrines and false historical ideas.
Even Martin Luther, as we had seen, was friendly to the Jews. One theme which we have not yet had the chance to fully develop in our presentations on the life of Luther, we will summarize briefly now. Early on in his struggle, Luther was successful because he had attracted the backing of the humanists who had formerly rallied behind Johann Reuchlin. It was the humanists who were Luther’s first major publicists and attracted for him the backing of men who were much more consequential to his ultimate success. But these humanists who had first rallied behind Reuchlin had allied themselves with the cause of the Jews, as Reuchlin was defending the license of the Jews to keep their writings, the Talmud and the Kabbalah and the other Jewish books which the traditional Christian functionaries in Germany wanted to destroy. Ostensibly, many of the humanists may have been Jews, but practically all of them sympathized with the Jews, and after the Reuchlin Controversy had lost its lustre, they chose Luther as their next vehicle by which to weaken and attack and break the authority of the Church of Rome, which was their real objective. This was also the objective of the Jews, and therefore the Jews also supported both the humanists and Luther.
At first, Luther was friendly to the Jews, and he actually believed that he could convert them to Christ. Luther rather naively saw the evils of the papacy and the false doctrines of Roman Catholicism as the impediments to converting the Jews to Christ. Luther evidently did not consider the first 300 years of Christian history, long before there was a papacy or a Roman Catholic Church, and the Jews would not convert, persecuting Christianity instead. [Then again, they would not convert for Christ Himself, and killed Him instead.] But after the Reformation succeeded in Germany, Luther became disillusioned that the Jews would still not listen to him. That is when he awoke to their true nature, and that is when he wrote On the Jews and Their Lies. He was duped, and with Protestantism the Jews also attained greater religious freedom of their own, as their old enemy – the Roman Catholic Church, was severely weakened. So there are two sides to the story of the Reformation, and while we see it as good and necessary to our own Christian religious freedom, and the liberty obtained from the oppression of the popes, there is also an aspect that benefitted the devil.
The Kabbalah was produced by the Jews around the same time that Jews in diverse places began converting to Christianity and writing commentaries on the Scripture. As we had seen in our presentation of Martin Luther’s On the Jew and Their Lies, even Luther, in his diatribe against the Jews, could not help from quoting Jewish sources, and revealing for us the unsound Jewish thinking which had severely affected his own theology. This is what the Protocols profess that the Jews purpose to do, to create confusion and break down the existing order so that they can “reinstate the orderly functioning of the mechanism” as they see fit. In the case of Medieval Christian theology, the confusion they created and their own reinstatement of order resulted in modern Christian Zionism, which is actually the religion of the Anti-Christ.
All of this is not a coincidence. While the Jews of Europe evidently did not have a timetable, their collective actions were consistently geared towards undermining Christian society and ruling it for themselves. As we also witnessed in our presentations of the Converso problem in Spain, as soon as the Jews were put out of the offices of state that they were able to acquire with their feigned conversions, they openly threatened and even proceeded to move to Turkey and agitate the Ottomans to invade Spain. For all of those centuries, they endeavored to conquer Christendom one way or another. This is exactly what the Talmud teaches the rabbis to do.
So the Jews who wrote the Protocols are correct, that it had taken “many centuries of work” for them to subvert Christianity to the degree in which they had at the end of the 19th century, and they had to be careful politically so as not to risk losing what they had gained. There were many pogroms of the Jews in Europe over the centuries, whenever their treachery was uncovered. They only started to gain control of the media in that very century, and the brave new world was as new to them as it was to the unsuspecting Christians. They almost lost it with Hitler, and today they seem to believe that their struggle is over, so we see the natural result in the development of worldwide Sodom and Gomorrah.