In 1921, the London Times presented conclusive proof that the Protocols was a "clumsy plagiarism." The Times confirmed that the Protocols had been copied in large part from a French political satire that never mentioned Jews -- Maurice Joly's Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu (1864). Other investigations revealed that one chapter of a Prussian novel, Hermann Goedsche's Biarritz (1868), also "inspired" the Protocols.

Take all the issue you want. That is your freedom to do so.

But the dissemination of "propaganda" is what you see every day on the national news in my opinion.

What you think is "known fact" and what I think is "known fact" can be debated.

If you don't believe what is being said, and if you don't agree with 9-11 theories that is certainly your right to do so. I have look closely at the official spin and I don't buy it. I've made up my mind that it is not the truth.

But I have a reason for what I say and I have sources that I respect so I take issue with you telling me that I am spreading "propaganda."

I find it very interesting that when hate threads about Muslims get started nobody seems to take issue with that.

I do not support extreme Islamist any more than I support extreme Zionists. I just feel that both sides of the story need to be told.

I usually always have references or links to consider. I don't pull this stuff out of my hat.

I don't mind intelligent debate. But I do mind people who continually try to silence me just because they don't believe or agree with what I am saying.

If you don't believe it, and if you don't want to hear it, just don't read the thread.

Propaganda is everywhere. I see it on both sides of the issue all the time. It is up to the individual to try to ascertain what it true and what is not.

I have yet to hear a valid argument in favor of Zionism or a valid reason why anyone should support it.

Have you got any?

I posted what I found about the the Protocols and find my post to be reasonable and true.

I don't consider wiki to be completely unbiased where Zionism is concerned.

I have great respect for Henry Ford and agree with what he said here:

"Of course there are black sheep in every flock, as there are among men of all races, creeds and nationalities who are at times evildoers. It is wrong, however, to judge a people by a few individual, and I therefore join in condemning unreservedly all wholesale denunciations and attacks."


The black sheep in Israel's flock are the people behind the creation and operation of political Zionism, which is the creation and expansion of the State of Israel by means of war and conquest.

Zionism is the real enemy of the Jewish people.
Zionism is a political movement.
Zionism does not mean "Jewish."

I have repeated this over and over.
The problem is when people (mostly Zionists) try to blur the meaning of Zionism and claim that it represents all Jews.

It does not.
Millions of Jews refuse to claim Israel and Zionism as their owand are in fact anti-Zionist.

Therefore, all the Jewish people will never return to the State of Israel and the mythical religious prophecies that people cling to will never happen.

All I could add to the above would be the fact that most of what I post comes from Jewish People and yet I am labeled a Jew hater.

I reserve my right to Freedom of speech.

All I could add to the above would be the fact that most of what I post comes from Jewish People and yet I am labeled a Jew hater.

I reserve my right to Freedom of speech.

I am not a British Subject

Good for you..

My contempt rate has decreased by a few percentage points..

This isn't as simple as saying you either support zionism or you don't

Call me crazy, but I look at it as whether you support tolerance or intolerance.

Agreements were made agreements were broken on both sides. It didn't help that the gutless cowards that created the whole mess decided to wash their hands of it when the situation on the ground was toxic and explosive.

There is no debating the fact that at the end of world war 1 there was a mandate created for palestine and it was agreed to by both sides..

It clearly states in the preamble that the mandate includes a national homeland for Jews in palestine..


There is no debating that..

What happened after that is a clusterf**k and there are many people and nations to blame.

Putting all this on the Jews is disingenuous and factually false..

My personal belief is that the One State solution offered in the Mandate was the way to go is the way to go and will be the only way to stop them from killing eachother.

Putting all this on the Jews is disingenuous and factually false.

The Balfour Declaration of 1917 (dated 2 November 1917) was a letter from the British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Baron Rothschild (Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild), a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland.

His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

The statement was issued through the efforts of Chaim Weizmann and Nahum Sokolow, the principal Zionist leaders based in London; as they had asked for the reconstitution of Palestine as "the" Jewish national home, the declaration fell short of Zionist expectations.

The "Balfour Declaration" was later incorporated into the Sèvres peace treaty with Turkey and the Mandate for Palestine. The original document is kept at the British Library.

All I could add to the above would be the fact that most of what I post comes from Jewish People and yet I am labeled a Jew hater.

I reserve my right to Freedom of speech.

You agree that the Protocols are fraudulent but even so you cling
to the notion that they are somehow true. Why?

Which means that the Protocols, a plagiarized work, is no more fraudulent than the Bible.

How about we just make it an even trade and label them both a complete fraud and banish them both from the world and from everyone's memory.

That would probably end all wars.

You can't possibly believe that. I have to assume you are trolling, because even a moron could look at the world and see that there have been plenty of wars (WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam) that can't possibly be linked to the Protocols or the Bible. It seems to me that you just love being able to cling to your Protocols as justification for hating Jews, so you are spewing nonsense like a squid spews ink.

Yes I totally believe that to be the truth.

Every major war I, II and III have, at its foundation, religious and Zionist roots.

Absolutely.

The Bible is fraudulent.

Abraham, Issac, Jacob, Joshua, King David, Moses, etc. are all fictional characters.

The new testament is complete plagiarized fiction.

Yes I absolutely believe that.

Albert Pike received a vision, which he described in a letter that he wrote to Mazzini, dated August 15, 1871. This letter graphically outlined plans for three world wars that were seen as necessary to bring about the One World Order, and we can marvel at how accurately it has predicted events that have already taken place

All wars are planned and executed for a single purpose. There are those who strongly believe that ultimately the world must fall under the same governance.

There are plans being made and implicated to eventually dissolve the boarders in North and South America and Canada. In the future, any separation will be nothing more than the way our United States are separated. They will all fall under the same world governance.