Salvation is from the Jews…and maybe damnation too…

To: Roy Schoeman
Author of Salvation Is from the Jews

My dear Mr. Schoeman,

I am veraciously enjoying your book Salvation Is from the Jews. As happens so often with my Jewish brothers, I find myself so on the same wavelength with your edgy wordsmithing and even sometimes your risqué investigative style that I have to call the experience “spiritually immersive”! Not least owing to our common affinity for sound mysticism and according skepticism of so-called “Churchianity,” Augustino-Calvinist Puritanism and scholasto-Jesuitical sophism, just some of the anacondas strangling Western Christianity in too many quarters. Your Old-New Testament insight about the eldest sons and analogously Israel missing the blessing I find particularly insightful and cannot restrain myself from asking, Is it not at the very least postulable that this principle can apply today to the Roman “See of Peter”? (Some would argue that the Fourth Ecumenical Council at Chalcedon thinks the answer is positively yes.)

On the flip-side, my relish of what you say understandably served to augment my distaste for crucial truths you omit and thereby falsehoods you imply. I am willing to overlook the almost total eclipse of post-biblical Middle Eastern history—your Ashkenazim, your Antiochian Orthodox Christians, your Khazaria, and then in the West your Sephardim and your Rothschilds with their fractional reserve banking cartel with its death-grip on the so-called Renaissance plus “modern times”! I am no Anti-Semite/racist, no Holocaust denier/revisionist and I am fully satisfied that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is a forgery and that Council of Jamnia never necessarily went down as theorists describe it, and you basically do justice to the wrongness of Mesoretic and other such renderings as well, the contemporary prevalence of depraved esotericism among the astral/noetic rulers (“ascended masters”) of this present darkness and the patent inner workings of occult brotherhoods that masquerade as “charitable fraternities.” (Yet why you abstain from fingering “Catholic” occult equestrian orders and the Jesuits I can’t explain to my satisfaction.) Nay indeed, more than just not being a racist, I consider racial theory a sad and quintessentially unmanly cop-out in the case of Hitler (part-Jewish and one-time art aspirant in a [then as now] Jew-dominated arts community) and all his ilk! No truly spiritual or godly undertaking orders, countenances or even contemplates violence, malice or certainly any evil. But I am a “truther” first and last, all unanswered questions remain for me on the table, and there are questions that loom especially large for serious historical researchers that you leave conspicuously unmentioned.

I am here going to assume that you at any rate regard the “gentile” or ”goy” as at least nominally human, so I won’t even go into the fact that Communism killed between 85 and 100 million and counting to Nazism’s 11 million. Except to ask: At a conservative (but not neoconservative) estimate, how many Jews do you think Communism killed? (I am morally certain that Communism has killed more Jews—leave alone many times more humans!—than Nazism.) And even the suckling babe knows with the crispest clarity that Communism, which is more conspiracy than revolution, was a Jewish aristocrat’s brainchild (or rather Rothschild). We also certainly won’t mention Saul Alinsky, the modern Karl Marx, who holds as his ideological (noetic?) marionettes all our nation’s top leaders. Your otherwise wondrous exposé fails to edify inasmuch as it does not excavate the modern underpinnings of Communism and global banking.

No, we’d best leave that golden calf alone, but what I do want to address, for example, is your failure to name “Nazim,” Zionists and other nationalist types (be they sluggish in the head or thuggish in the heart) who have sharply influenced contemporary U.S. American culture and policy like Werner von Braun, Walt Disney, Ayn Rand and yea G. K. Chesterton.

Most disturbingly of all, while you do mention Hitler’s willingness to spare Jews for export, you fail to mention that, as even Wikipedia admits, “Palestine was the only location to which any Nazi relocation plan succeeded in producing significant results, by means of an agreement begun in 1933 between the Zionist Federation of Germany (die Zionistische Vereinigung für Deutschland) and the Nazi government, the Haavara Agreement” (ostensibly quoted from Dr. Anwar El-Shahawy’s book Allah and Space). In other words, the élite in all quarters do not adhere to the same ideological lines of division they feed the masses. I contend that Nazism, in its inner circles, is not about race and is about the same thinking that set Madame Blavatsky apart, who (until exposed as a charlatan) was more accepted by spiritualists than bloodline-obsessed Masons. It would be hard to overstate her direct influence on Hitler. And in conclusion, it is nearly impossible to exaggerate the extent to which we have been lied to concerning the relationship among socialisms, and particularly between Nazism and Zionsim.

I think your use of the “yeast in the dough” imagery is the reverse of Jesus’ and hence is theologically the most questionable thing in the book thus far, and I stop just short of calling it impious and a total sell-out of the Faith. Jesus was patently not describing the Jewish Race or Religion as the “yeast in the dough” (or salt of the earth or light of the world) but rather his followers as the yeast in the dough that is each nation, Jewish or “Goyish.” The Church is the New Israel. That is the focal point of all Christians. The Jews are become a footnote, albeit a fascinating footnote, and a mysterious tool in prophetic literature in which nothing is clear much less nationalistically applicable. But let’s stop beating around the bush: the Judaizer heresy is just that, a filthy, base and demonic heresy. If emphasizing the Jewish Law is a slap in the face to Christ, how much more emphasizing the Jewish bloodlines!

I take exception, however, to any condemnation of the preservation of Jewish culture within Christian communities. I want to retain my (majority) Irish heritage and saints in how I worship because it makes me the more fully part of the whole Church. I’m told that some “Russian” Orthodox Christians, being of Jewish descent, were let back into Israel and, subsequently, there are Jerusalem parishes that celebrate the Divine Liturgy in Hebrew. I rejoice for them. And yes, they have a special perspective on Jesus being of His same household, and I rejoice with them. I love every chance I get chewing the fat with Jews, however secular, Orthodox or even Hasidic. I love hanging out with Catholics and Protestants. I even sometimes can stand Hindus and even (maybe) Buddhists. Wiccans? Druids? Why not. Mormons? JWs? Seventh Day Adventists? Sure, though obviously we’re bordering on the contrived and probably artificially preserved. Scientology obviously is downright dark, but their members are equally people. And I believe I am a missionary to everyone and everyone is a missionary to me.

Though I am the staunchest localist you’re ever likely to meet, I can never. Ever. Ever condone nationalism, because it is mass-insanity. I’ve heard a lot of people go on and on about a lot of things. I know an insecure, vacuous rant from a true scholarly thesis (however well calculated the former’s buzzwords to play on the contrived sympathies of my nation’s telehypnotized positivist sanctimonious funk). Every culture that’s old (read decadent) enough never shuts the heck up about some haplessly worldly claim (again, better suited to theater than academia) to being “the most special” or to having bestowed upon the undeserving unwashed and unappreciative “leftovers of genésis” their most vital (sometimes even implying spiritual) flair—and the ones who brag the most tend to offer the least substantive value—so by and large my Jewish (and, God Almighty help us all, “Christian”) Zionist-leaning brethren should get real and get in line because the sun doesn’t rise and set on their hex* deity, certainly no less evil than any swastika or moon, which like the “Nazim,” they flamboyantly procure to cast, and are indeed casting, upon the whole earth.

I say, A hex on our accursed ignorance.

A final question: What if anything did the honest, common “Goys” and Jews (Christian and otherwise) of the earth—especially of the United States—ever do to deserve the endless shower of pseudogodliness that is modern Hebrew Nationalism?

I get that you’re a bit shy—a neurosis you’ve perhaps mistaken for contemplation, toward which your personality, once informed by the truth, could yet lend itself—as well as unconvinced—your at times mumbled reading of your own writing betrays it—but try to hear this: even despite your occasionally poor dynamics a lot of people hang on your words. My father does. Even as I embrace you as a brother, I, with my whole being, request a clarification, at your leisure, of the loose ends I’ve listed above. I ask you to consider writing a sequel if not errata.

Most sincerely,
John

________
* Even Wikipedia admits the hexagram has not been in circulation among the Israelites for a day over 2,400 years if that. Not even Solomon in his wildest apostasy used it, much less Great King David. Another disgrace, another lie to the Babel-high pile. As for me, I want no part in Israel’s self-inflicted curses.

Ron Paul Scares the GOP and 4 Reasons He Might Still Get the 2012 Republican Nomination

Why the GOP Is Scared of Ron Paul and 4 Reasons He Might Still Get the 2012 Republican Nomination

Posted: 08/21/2012 3:55 pm
Wait, isn’t Dr. Ron Paul out of the presidential race? Isn’t it all tied up nicely in a bow with the Romney/Ryan ticket?

No.

Why would the GOP be scared of Ron Paul but end up nominating him?

I’ll explain.

Romney and the GOP have demonstrated both poor judgment and poor sportsmanship that might cost them by damaging Romney’s electability among the Ron Paul supporters thus leading to a splitting of votes, which in turn, could cost the GOP the entire election.

Dr. Ron Paul is still in the race for president and is a strong contender for the 2012 GOP nomination.

To be on the GOP ballot Aug. 27, 2012 in Tampa and get a 15-minute speaking slot, a candidate must have won the plurality (majority) of delegates in at least 5 states.

Well, Ron Paul did win the plurality of delegates in 5 states, enough to be eligible for the nomination and a 15-minute speaking slot at the GOP convention. The states he won are Louisiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Maine and Nevada. Then Ron Paul went on to win the plurality in Massachusetts, Romney’s home state and half the delegates in Oregon. Dr. Ron Paul also has around 500 delegateswho support him. The exact number of delegates that Romney and Paul have is still a mystery but should be clarified at the convention.

So… Ron Paul won his 5-plus states, he’s on the ballot and writing his speech, right? Not exactly.

What happened next is what may cost the Republicans and Romney the entire election. Instead of accepting that Ron Paul, the GOP underdog, had won enough delegates in enough states to be allowed his rightful place on the ballot and his 15-minute speaking slot, the GOP and Romney’s people decided to try and take these legitimate wins away from Ron Paul and his supporters. Ron Paul supporters fought hard, played fair and won. Romney supporters didn’t play fair and still lost those 5-plus states. These Ron Paul pluralities were won in spite of shenanigans and tricks tried by Romney supporters and the GOP to prevent or undermine Ron Paul wins. The Ron Paul supporters were well prepared and won the needed amount of states anyway.

So, how did Romney and his supporters handle their losses of five measly states to Ron Paul? Honorably? Graciously? With dignity? Maturely?

No. Quite the opposite.

Romney’s people ran to Big Daddy GOP to rescue them from their defeats by trying to disqualify the valid Ron Paul delegates and to take away Ron Paul’s right to speak and be on the ballot by reducing his states won to fewer than the five needed.

So far, Romney and the GOP have contested the Ron Paul wins in LouisianaMaineMassachusettsand Oregon. They threw out the Massachusetts Ron Paul delegates after the GOP tried to force the delegates to sign a long legal document that required them to vote for Romney. This was not something that had ever been done before. The GOP allowed Romney, big lawyers and big bullying to invalidate Ron Paul’s solid win in Massachusetts.

As in the other states, the Ron Paul delegates in Maine played by the rules and won. Even Governor LePage of Maine, a Republican, is appalled with GOP efforts to throw out the duly-elected Ron Paul delegates.

The entire plot to reduce Ron Paul wins to under five states to take his name off the ballot and take away his 15-minute speaking slot is well under way. If Romney/Ryan are so great, why can’t they handle a little competition without whining and crying like sore losers?

Are they afraid of losing the 2012 nomination to Ron Paul if he speaks and is on the ballot?

Why not play fair and let the best man win?

Who cheats? The lazy, bratty, insecure and less-qualified people who can’t win honestly and fairly. Is that really presidential material?

I wonder if Romney and the GOP are worried that if Ron Paul speaks and gets the nomination, that Ron Paul will fire all of them. Is the GOP that terrified of change, even if it is for the betterment of the country?

Here is why I think that Ron Paul might still walk away with the nomination.

4. Lots of regular “little people”, like me, want Ron Paul to be the 2012 GOP presidential candidate. We, the little people, do not like being trod upon and when we join together, we are stronger than big money. Remember, “We the People”? Ron Paul’s donors areregular working people, many military men and women, not banks.

3. Ron Paul is the David to Romney’s Goliath Machine but the spirit, character and faith of we “little people” count more in America than just money. Romney has raised$152 million to Paul’s $39 million. Ron Paul has more passionate support from his supporters due to Ron Paul’s character and dedication to serving America and Americans based on our founding principles embodied in our Constitution. Money, media manipulation and bullying can’t buy this type of support. But, Romney and his lawyers couldn’t let Ron Paul keep 5-plus wins?

2. Ron Paul wants to serve his country, and has served in the military, and would end the wars. Ron Paul’s supporters and Americans want someone they can trust and believe in. Dr. Paul is that man.

1. Mitt Romney is much less qualified to be president than Ron Paul, who understands the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Watch this link where Romney is asked a basic Constitutional question and replies, “I’ll have to ask my lawyers”. Ron Paul tells Mitt Romney, “Read the Constitution.” Ron Paul is the only Republican Presidential candidate who is qualified, experienced and credible.

We, little people, similar to Ron Paul and his supporters, work hard, play fair and expect the same from others.

If Romney and his supporters had been gracious losers about Ron Paul’s 5-plus state wins and Ron Paul’s 15-minute speech, Romney had a chance to garner both the GOP 2012 nomination plus the support and votes of Ron Paul and his supporters. (I say “a chance” because many Ron Paul supporters do not see Romney as a fiscal conservative.)

Not anymore. It is hard to vote for someone who has acted so dishonorably, even for the sake of party loyalty.

The misguided Machiavellian advice Romney got and took to “win at all costs,” may cost him dearly in November due to the bad will generated with Ron Paul supporters. Too many people have lost too much respect for Romney to vote for him. To the contrary, even though Ron Paul’s campaign was repeatedly slighted and undermined by Romney and his supporters, Ron Paul stayed gracious and denounced mistreatment of Romney. He has told his delegates to “Make yourself heard but be respectful.”

By playing dirty and being greedy, Romney supporters may have lost Romney both the nomination and the election.

Romney and the national GOP are showing their ugly colors by attempting to take away Ron Paul state delegate wins that were earned fair and square.

In speaking with some Ron Paul supporters, here is their current plan. If Ron Paul doesn’t win the 2012 GOP nomination, many Ron Paul supporters will elect to vote for Gary Johnson, the Libertarian presidential candidate. Why wouldn’t Ron Paul supporters write in Ron Paul on ballots around the country? For those write-in votes to count, a write-in candidate must be listed in every state and some Ron Paul supporters do not know if their Ron Paul votes would count.

And, due to the shabby treatment Ron Paul and his supporters have received from the GOP and Romney’s people, many Ron Paul supporters may refuse to vote for Romney in 2012, even if it means Obama being re-elected for four more years. One supporter told me, “I want the GOP to see how many votes they lost by playing dirty. They will only be able to count all the lost votes if I vote for Gary Johnson.”

If you want to learn more about Gary Johnson click here. He stands for small government, government staying out of your business, liberty and fiscal responsibility. He is like Ron Paul without the Roe v Wade concern. Gary Johnson has had virtually no media coverage so you may not have heard of him.

As I heard in grammar school and it remains true: “Cheat, Cheat Never Beat”.

Ron Paul is the only qualified person for the 2012 Republican Nomination who can unify conservative Republicans, Independents, Libertarians and stabilize the economy. If the GOP is smart and humble enough to do a mea culpa and nominate Ron Paul, Republicans stand a better chance of winning in November. If Ron Paul doesn’t get the nomination, many Ron Paul supporters will likely be voting for Gary Johnson. All Romney and the GOP had to do was play fair and win honorably, but I guess that was too much to ask.

But here is the GOP’s conflict: If the GOP nominates Ron Paul and he wins, many of the GOP cronies will be shown the door. There will be a big house cleaning of corrupt politicians, like turning on the lights and the cockroaches scatter. On the other hand, if they don’t nominate Ron Paul, they risk losing all the Ron Paul supporters, which would likely split the vote and lose the 2012 election entirely.

It is hard to make those type of decisions when choosing what is best for the country doesn’t figure in at all, but choosing what is best for their own selfish principles of self-preservation, greed and thirst for power rule the day.

Romney and the GOP need to leave Ron Paul’s five-plus states alone, place him on the ballot and allow Ron Paul to speak.

Follow Laura Trice on Twitter: www.twitter.com/LaurasWJF

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑