ON BRASS AND BANDWAGONS

When arguments are presented as caricatured images, should they be treated with a sober embrace? Should they be seriously entertained? Should “tall tales” and “fraud in fiction” be honored by serious minds? If the “king has no clothes,” should he be so advised? Should his subjects pretend that he has on a respectable, royal robe?

A positive response by academic and working stiff types may well be expected in a few instances. In such cases naysayers are the “fools-rushing-in” where wiser heads stand immobile and mute.

Exaggeration is employed by all of us at certain times. However, there are people who have such remarkable ability to grotesquely enlarge that, rather than be chided, they are listened to with rapt attention rarely encountered outside a religious ceremony. I would like to focus on them.

An assertion was made during and after World War II that Nazis were making soap, fertilizer and the like from the bodies of murdered, or otherwise deceased, Jews. This claim was presented as anecdotal evidence from sources in and about Nazi-controlled territory, or freshly escaped therefrom, by well-funded Jewish organizations. Associate Professor Arthur R. Butz cited such instances in his THE HOAX OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY, which is a best-seller of which most people have never heard. Others have also cited such allegations, and the whole fraudulent claim has now been admitted by most authorities.

Nevertheless, I possess an article appearing in a tabloid describing a gathering of Jews, including a presiding rabbi(s), in or about Atlanta, Georgia who were “burying” a bar of soap said to be the last remnant of a Jewish victim of the Nazis. This “burial” occurred, as best I can remember, in the mid-1990s. That’s long after the whole business had been dismissed as a myth by all respectable authorities.

Merchants of fraud can get away with such matters because of the abysmal ignorance of the general population on the true history of World War II – and almost any other significant historical event. Of course, the media helps spread darkness.

Frankly, Jewish storytellers have told some “whoppers.”

In regard to the “Diaspora Revolt” that occurred around the death of Trajan and the assumption of power by Hadrian, the Talmud recorded that the number of Jews killed at Alexandria, Egypt was “sixty myriads on sixty myriads, twice as many as went forth from Egypt.” Assuming that addition would be called for, that indicated a figure of about 1.2 million. Although Alexandria had a large and prominent Jewish population so that they had their own quarter, the entire city was not likely to be larger than Rome itself, which it would have to be to suffer such a loss of Jews.

However, Jewish imagination can really soar, when the “spirit” seizes them.

During the Palestinian Revolt of 132-135, a man of extraordinary abilities arose. He was Bar-Kokhba. He was said to be so tough that he could catch catapulted stones with his knees and cast them back at the unexpectant Romans. He also claimed to be – or was proclaimed to be – the messiah.

Bar-Kokhba commanded a fortress at Bethar. The Romans laid siege and eventually overran it. According to the Talmudic account, the total Jewish losses killed by the Romans was 4 billion “or as some say” 40 million. The Midrash Rabbah reported that Jewish martyrs numbered 800 million.

Now, some readers might assume a “typo” with those figures. Not!

Further, to emphasize the immense loss, it was recorded that the Jewish blood reached the nostrils of the Roman horses and, like a flash flood, carried all before it, including boulders, either one mile or four miles to the sea. The Jewish blood stained the sea for a distance from the shore of four miles.

The diabolical Romans were a match for the Nazis. Bodies of slain Jews were used to build a fence around Hadrian’s grape fields. Since it was estimated that Hadrian’s vineyard was 18 miles square, the number of slain Jews must have been immense – right? Furthermore, the Jewish blood which the Romans were able to save from the remnant of the tidal wave was used to make fertilizer for the grapes. Although we assume they were a red grape variety, a miracle cannot be discounted; white grapes may have turned under the power of Jewish blood. Be that as it may, the Talmud apparently alleged that the fertilizer was made for seven years from this remnant of Jewish blood. That might be another miracle. Too, it does indicate a practical – even efficient – Roman aptitude. “Waste not, want not.”

This material was gleaned from Arthur R. Butz’s book (pp245-46-47), cited above. In it his indicated his source.

One last thought on the numbers claimed in the Talmud. I believe that it was an attempt to indicate that Jews were once as plentiful as the stars in the sky or grains of sand on the beach. Hence, I believe it was a way to be at one with the Abrahamic Covenant, which otherwise Jews have never met even remotely. Hence, there seems to be a belief that “all is possible with chutzpah.”

AMERICA'S A-CHANGING

The supreme Court (as provided in the U.S. Constitution) seems to me to be a kind of bell weather sounding a warning about the near future. Others have likened it to a bell cow, leading the other cows back to the safety of the evening containment. Surely, its human constitution will augur something meaningful about America’s “Ship of State.”

Some observers believe that the fact that at least one-third of the nine members of the supreme Court are Jews is the most significant anomaly. Jews are thought by some to adhere to “their law” rather than the organic law of the land in which they dwell, Jewish protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.

I have read on good authority that Justice Ginsburg reads the Talmud daily. No doubt, she finds it edifying. I am certain that she doesn’t spend the same amount of time reading about the U.S. Constitution, exegeses written over the last two hundred years on it, or the beliefs of those who wrote the organic law of America. Certainly, the beliefs of the people who ratified it are not likely to interest Justice Ginsburg. On the other hand, insights derived from Rabbi Akiva, Rabbi Hillel, the Sage of Vilna and Rambam might well influence her interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

In the past Justice Breyer has sought the wisdom of the leadership of Zimbabwe and other countries to find “new precedence” for constitutional interpretations. People who commonly form international organizations with global ambitions must feel compelled to tap into the font of wisdom typically found in third world countries, and, surely, this has been the case with Justice Breyer. Too, nations are just too constricting to people who have outgrown them.

Justice Kagan is from Chicago. Her fellow Chicagoan, President Barack Obama, passed over the likes of Eric Holder to choose her. In the “City of Fixes” political animals know how to schmooze.

The present supreme Court may be viewed from other perspectives. Consider the fact that a majority of the Court are minorities. Besides the three justices listed above, there are Justices Thomas and Sotomayor. What might this mean?

Years ago in the 1950s, the cry went up about the “tyranny of the majority.” At that time approximately 88-90% of the American population was classified as “white.” One can infer that this was a highly accurate census count, and that the “white” category was filled with Anglo-Saxons and other clearly white types of people. No one dared at that point in America’s history to describe an Egyptian as “white,” as may commonly happen today.

Hence, the term “tyranny of the majority” was aimed directly at them. The view that our Republic, reflecting democratic properties, would normally pass laws that were approved by that majority was given little note. Some group, or groups, with ulterior motives convinced “educated Americans” over time that such commonplace expectations as majority rule in point of fact was based on “tyranny.” Newspapers pointed the finger of guilt at the “majority,” and they were all-to-ready to wallow in guilt [“It hurts so good!”]. This set the stage for the “tyranny of the minorities.” Soon, white society seemed to be on the road to decline.

A minority supreme Court naturally follows.

Still another way to look at the present constitution of the supreme Court is from the point of view of religion. One can observe the three Jews. Whether an observant Jew or a “secular” Jew, Jews still consider themselves to be “Jews.” This status is held on to tenaciously. One should respect that desire. However, deranged ideas embraced by and emanating from this category need not be respected.

I have read somewhere that five or six of the justices were Roman Catholic. Usually, this means that they plan to make a “perfect act of contrition” just before dying, allowing them to schlep into Purgatory. If this obtains with the justices falling into this category, then an ordinary citizen might feel some cause for wariness.

Lastly, one of the two minority “ruling circles” (to use that oddly apropos terminology of former Soviet Union rulers) in America are the Freemasons. I don’t know if any members of the present Court are Masons, but in the past they have numbered upward of six.

The really stark change in the modern supreme Court is that there are no Anglo-Saxon Protestants.

Not counting Freemasons, the Anglo-Saxon, Scott, Welsh, German, Scandinavian and kindred people have been marginalized. No politician or pundit wastes much ink trying to “win their vote.” Since they have ceased to be an effective majority, the “tool of tyranny” is wielded by dominant minorities.

By effectively using immigration policy the “ruling circles” have assured a continuing downward trend in the power status of the once dominant white population. This protects the status quo of the two ruling minorities, while giving them additional sets of human blocks to manipulate.

Both dominant minorities are globalist and constantly market its benefits and inevitability. Hence, it is hardly unexpected that nations such as the United States fare worse and suffer decline.