Anti-Imperialism & Anti-Humanist Rhetoric of Gilad Atzmon

[compared2what?]

"I object to being characterized as a detractor of Alice's, honey. I love Alice. It's Atzmon I have the problem with."

I didn't call your name. You rang your own bell.

It wasn't an unreasonable inference, though. The field of possibilities is very small.

But that's okay. I already clarified.

prescient

be careful with the definition. it has nothing to do with jews. jews have nothing to do with this. don't make me take you task with cite city but i will. i don't won't to, and i probably wont. but don't push it. i'll let you go as is.....this thread ain't my bag, but i can cite to the moon if need be. nobody wants me to do that, including me.

I do, though.

Citation of prescience from the Protocols, please.

[eyeno]

Quote:
prescient

be careful with the definition. it has nothing to do with jews. jews have nothing to do with this. don't make me take you task with cite city but i will. i don't won't to, and i probably wont. but don't push it. i'll let you go as is.....this thread ain't my bag, but i can cite to the moon if need be. nobody wants me to do that, including me.

I deleted that because i'm not up for a cite war but obviously you are. I'm not tonight, and probably won't be ever. I hope you won't push me to cite, year by year, how this has all evolved. Surely you have learned by now that I NEVER SAY THINGS WITHOUT MY CITES IN MY POCKET.

Disclaimer: I did write it, compared2what cited me correctly before I could delete it. She was quick.

[compared2what?]

this has nothing to do with jews. nothing at all. and i mean nothing. real jews wouldn't touch this stink.

Hey! Since that part wasn't there when I first replied, may I add:

As I've already said, my problem with it also has nothing to do with Jews, per se.

That was my explicitly stated point, as a matter of fact.

notice. i keep editing this, like ten times, but it took that many........

Sorry for the inadvertent "gotcha." If you don't want to do the citation thing, that's fine. My original request was actually to Ben D, anyway. And it was really as much a way of saying "The Protocols describes a grand conspiracy in general terms that (being invisible) could later be regarded as prescient under any circumstances that could plausibly be construed as beneficial to Jewish/banking/Bolshie interests" as it was anything else.

So no worries.

[eyeno]

My point is that the Protocols are without question a "forgery" of some plan. We could, but should not, go through hundreds of cites as to how this plan has come to fruition. It would take us several months to get through the cites. Let us not go there. I'll say it again, "if the average run of the mill common jewish folk ever get tired of the absolute bullshit that gets run under their name decide to do something different then the game is over."

How plane is that? (plane) Some day it will happen or Judaism will disappear forever. Real Judaism that is, which is a dying art and has been for two thousand years.

Now i'm done with thread. I'm over it. Gilad, in my opinion, is desperately attempting to save old time Judaism which was a BEAUTIFUL THING.


Where in the fuck did Jesus come from? Hello people? Damn it........Ignorance is rampant..........

[American Dream]

My (unofficial) name for this thread is:

"With Friends like these, who needs enemies?"...

[barracuda]

So no worries.

Really? I have a few myself. Not so much that this thread has effortlessly segued into a discussion of the usefulness and prescience of the Protocols, though - that was probably the inevitable, even natural course for it to take, imo.

Forgery definition: Copy of an original.

No, that's incorrect. A forgery is an object made specifically to deceive. It can be an adaptation, a pastiche, or an imitation, but its imitative quality is not the essence of what makes it a forgery, rather it is the quality of deception that lies at the impetus of its construction. The Hitler Diaries associated with David Irving were forgeries, but without an original. The same can be said of van Meegeren's religious Vermeer paintings. The Protocols are obviously of this ilk, scabbed together from a variety of sources - some of them noted by compared2what? above - and passed off as genuine without having any identifiable original.

As you say, be careful of the definitions.

Whose plan is it? If that is not obvious to most around here then all can say is...duhhhhh

I have to mention how much I dislike postulations such as this, as I can only imagine a few reasons why anyone would create a cryptic statement like that, avoiding at all costs the plain-speaking honesty that might allow for real discussion. Either:

- You have no real idea what you're talking about but want to sound like you have the goods, or
- You know what you want to say but are for some reason afraid to do so.

Neither of these reasons are big confidence builders, btw. You're sitting in front of a keyboard typing - why can't you simply say what you mean? I assure you it's not at all obvious.

Surely you have learned by now that I NEVER SAY THINGS WITHOUT MY CITES IN MY POCKET.

Please.

My (unofficial) name for this thread is:

"With Friends like these, who needs enemies?"...

The writhing contortions that have been gone through here to justify support for Mr. Atzmon's more incendiary statements would make a snake proud.

[Ben D]

Just a quick comment concerning,.."eg. The Protocols".

Regardless of who wrote the Protocols, the amazing thing to me is the apparent prescience shown therein as to the actual developments of the 20th century. So for that reason alone, the subject deserves serious consideration as to how this could be?

Iow, was the apparent prescience not prescience at all, but based on a real down to earth hegemonic plan that was being implemented, and for which the real perps were setting up the Zionists as the fall guys?

It's the prescience of the work that marks it as something that can't be dismissed by talk of forgery, and so I'm left wondering. If anyone has any leads to help me understand this better, it would be appreciated.

If you don't believe that zionism is and/or was part of a secret international Jewish plot to control the world, the Protocols wasn't prescient.

If you do, it is (of course) a testament to the Protocols. But not to its prescience.

Because: Where the fuck in the Protocols does it say anything will happen that subsequently came to happen? In any prescient detail that's not manifestly more applicable to:

(a) social and political unrest in the 19th-century Russian Empire?; or

(b) an eschatologically oriented Russian Orthodox 19th-century world view?

Citation, please.

I read a hard copy of the Protocols loaned to me through a Theosophical connection I had at the Brisbane lodge back in the early 90s. Just now, I did a search online for a copy to refresh my memory and the so called Protocols that came up don't appear to be the same as my memory recalls. I could be mistaken, but I suspect these are not the genuine article, they seem so transparent as to the agenda of creating a hate campaign against Jews, and thus find it hard to imagine this is what I had read. I will however, when opportunity and time permits, attempt to borrow the hard copy I had read previously to confirm one way or the other.

The prescience to which I was primarily thinking of based on my memory was a plan to weaken the targeted gentile nations by first destroying the cohesion of the family unit whose strength existed due to their general sincere belief in and compliance with Christian moral standards. They would do this by first acquiring control over the media, and then promote sexual self indulgence as being natural, and thus in time bring about the lowering the traditional Christian/cultural moral standards. Hence, the resulting large scale promiscuity, children being born out of wedlock, sexual deviation, easy divorce, etc., would eventually transform the existing coherent national culture made of strong family units based on a common Christian morality, to a mass of loose family arrangements comprising self indulgent individuals who thus could be manipulated by the media controllers much like animals.

Being an oldie, I have lived long enough to witness the transformation of my nation along the lines of the description above.

Please note that i'm not judging the changes as good or bad, just noting the unfolding transformation of this nation from the perspective of this soul.

[eyeno]

I don't give a damn what you think barracuda. The original Jewish thought, from a few thousand years ago, in the times of Jesus, did not include the philosophy of the Protocols. It did not include poisoning the well. Nuff said?

That would be scary close to Christianity would it not? Nuff said?

[compared2what?]

The original Jewish thought, from a few thousand years ago, in the times of Jesus, did not include the philosophy of the Protocols. It did not include poisoning the well. Nuff said?

The philosophy of the Protocols and well-poisoning aren't now and never have been at any point included in Jewish thought. They're both myths propagated by imperial forces in order to incite the populace.

That would be scary close to Christianity would it not? Nuff said?

Wait. A secret cabal of Jews is responsible for making Christianity into something scary? And that's somehow not about the secret evil influence of Jews? Is that the working hypothesis here?

[eyeno]

Wait. A secret cabal of Jews is responsible for making Christianity into something scary? And that's somehow not about the secret evil influence of Jews? Is that the working hypothesis here?

Your internal alarm woke you up again. Go back to sleep. I didn't say that. But interesting that you 'think' I did....Go back to sleep. That is not what I said nor what I meant. If you would stop raising your head many things would stay under the carpet.

Words to the not so wise...

[compared2what?]

Citation, please.

I read a hard copy of the Protocols loaned to me through a Theosophical connection I had at the Brisbane lodge back in the early 90s. Just now, I did a search online for a copy to refresh my memory and the so called Protocols that came up don't appear to be the same as my memory recalls. I could be mistaken, but I suspect these are not the genuine article, they seem so transparent as to the agenda of creating a hate campaign against Jews, and thus find it hard to imagine this is what I had read. I will however, when opportunity and time permits, attempt to borrow the hard copy I had read previously to confirm one way or the other.

The prescience to which I was primarily thinking of based on my memory was a plan to weaken the targeted gentile nations by first destroying the cohesion of the family unit whose strength existed due to their general sincere belief in and compliance with Christian moral standards. They would do this by first acquiring control over the media, and then promote sexual self indulgence as being natural, and thus in time bring about the lowering the traditional Christian/cultural moral standards. Hence, the resulting large scale promiscuity, children being born out of wedlock, sexual deviation, easy divorce, etc., would eventually transform the existing coherent national culture made of strong family units based on a common Christian morality, to a mass of loose family arrangements comprising self indulgent individuals who thus could be manipulated by the media controllers much like animals.

Being an oldie, I have lived long enough to witness the transformation of my nation along the lines of the description above.

Please note that i'm not judging the changes as good or bad, just noting the unfolding transformation of this nation from the perspective of this soul.

Fair enough. As I said, there are a lot of versions of it. And even the standard edition does kind of suggest something like it. But may I humbly submit that by the late 19th-/early 20th-century in France and Russia, you wouldn't have really had to be prescient to know that a general statement of intentions along those lines would speak to then-prevalent fears of social decay, arising from then-recent and/or contemporary events?

I mean, the entire thing continually returns to gloating over what a destructive influence modern, liberal social policies are having on the masses who are too stupid to know that aristocratic despots such as the tsar were the only thing saving them from the kind of chaos created by the French Revolution. (IOW -- The text isn't prescient in anticipating, let's say, the rise of the United States as an international power on a par with what were then the great powers of Europe, or anything like that. Its predictions (such as they are) are all about things that already would have been more or less within the scope of the average person's imagination at the time.)

[compared2what?]

Wait. A secret cabal of Jews is responsible for making Christianity into something scary? And that's somehow not about the secret evil influence of Jews? Is that the working hypothesis here?

Your internal alarm woke you up again. Go back to sleep.

I was just reading, really.

I didn't say that. But interesting that you 'think' I did....

I couldn't tell what you were saying. That's why I asked.

Go back to sleep.

Reading.

That is not what I said nor what I meant.

Okay.

If you would stop raising your head many things would stay under the carpet.

I can't help it. And anyway, I don't want things to stay under the carpet unless they're things like "the floor" or maybe "those sticky pads people put under carpets." Because who would?

Words to the not so wise...

Hey!

[compared2what?]

So no worries.

Really? I have a few myself. Not so much that this thread has effortlessly segued into a discussion of the usefulness and prescience of the Protocols, though - that was probably the inevitable, even natural course for it to take, imo.

Let's be fair. That one's entirely on me. I've been thinking about (and researching) stuff in connection with it on-and-off all week. So it was on my mind. And I brought it up.

[compared2what?]

Where in the fuck did Jesus come from? Hello people? Damn it........Ignorance is rampant..........

Atzmon is fond of asserting that he was killed by Jews in a typical fit of violent Jew vengeance.

[eyeno]

Where in the fuck did Jesus come from? Hello people? Damn it........Ignorance is rampant..........

Atzmon is fond of asserting that he was killed by Jews in a typical fit of violent Jew vengeance.

Sometimes I wonder why the mods don't reign you in. We don't need Talmud quotes up in here. Or do we? We could, but it would shut this place down. You need to learn when enough is enough. Ya know? You undo and reverse everything you seek to do. All a person has do do is reverse this thought stream. Have you ever thought about that? Sometimes far enough is far enough.

I have handed the olive branch many times. When will you be smart enough to take it?