About johnpfmcguire

Has not yet been declassified, unfortunately.

Einstein the dreamer (and schemer?)

YES,
ALBERT EINSTEIN WAS A GENIUS AND AN ASHKENAZI JEW,
BUT IT’S NOT LIKE YOU THINK

Untitled

All it takes to impress Americans at a gathering is something like Leonardo da Vinci was ahead of his time. But when it comes to Albert Einstein, it sometimes looks as if he was smack-dab in the middle of his time.

  • EXHIBIT A
    Quit calling me a scientist!
    The German-Jew-American Albert Einstein felt that he was intellectually inferior to the Serbian-American Nikola Tesla. What follows is what was said and possible reasons why, reasons that will overturn everything (yes, literally everything) you’ve been conditioned to think about the world. When asked how it felt to be the smartest man alive, Einstein set the softball ‘reporter’ straight: ‘I don’t know. You’ll have to ask Tesla’. In a letter sent on the occasion of the latter’s seventy-fifth birthday, Einstein wrote: ‘As an eminent pioneer in the realm of high frequency currents’ ‘I congratulate you on the great successes of your life’s work’. But if observable fact favored Tesla, today’s tyranny over the mind of man favors Enstein, and I’ll leave it to your darkest imaginings to piece together the reasons for this state of affairs.

    • So what did Tesla think of Einstein?
      Nikola Tesla agreed with ‘the Dopey Doctor’s assessment of which man had the better mind, not only because of their differences of ideology but because of their differences of methodology!

      • Difference of opinions. Tesla followed the great Giovanni Cassini (Newton’s rival, who unlike the Masonic knight got a space probe named after him) and persevered in holding aether over relativity, stationary geocentrism over modern astronomy [0], and electromagnetism over spacetime; he categorically rejected such Einsteinian notions as ‘curved space’! [1]
        .
      • Difference of method. Not only did Tesla agree that Einstein wasn’t the smartest man alive: he highlighted reasons why his fellow-immigrant wasn’t a scientist, full stop. Without saying it outright, Tesla warned that Einstein had started a cult with a wanton wackiness and a suspectness that mirrored the man’s personal appearance (and let’s just say it: his sexual conduct, which–paging Doctor Freud–would seem to explain his predilection for ‘relativity’. ‘Einstein’s relativity [2] work is a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king. Its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists’ (Nikola Tesla [underlines added]. I know what you’re thinking: when it comes to punctuation, the jury’s still out on which man was worse)! To reword his last remark, relativity theorists are just that: theorists, speculative and not empirical-evidence-based. This helps explain why Einsteinians rely almost entirely on mathematics and speak endlessly of the ‘beauty’ of the theory as a Muslim might peddle the Qur’an or a Seventh-day Adventist might advocate for the King James Version of the Hebreo-Christian Bible. When metaphysics masquerades as physics, circular reasoning is right around the corner. (See also the ‘science’ of sociology.)

        (Please note here that philosophies, religions, superstitions and intuitive enterprises, while it’s disingenuous to confuse them with science, can on the other hand be credited with having incubated much inspiration and indeed birthed many inventions. I believe it was C.S. Lewis who pointed out that technology is to science what magic is to religion.)
        .
  • So what had Einstein to say for himself?
    To this blogger’s shock, it turns out that Albert Einstein himself made no claims that could warrant Tesla’s diatribe. What happened with him, as with many edgy personalities (Jesus?), is that the cult wasn’t really Einstein’s idea. Early in his life, Einstein essentially disclaimed that he was nor aspired to be a scientist: ‘I want to know how God created this world. I’m not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His [God’s] thoughts, the rest are details’ (AE).
Light

We all know from science that nothing can exceed the speed of light, but relatively it’s happening constantly! The only real question is why we call Einstein a ‘scientist’, unless this is some kind of Yiddish Special Olympics and I wasn’t informed.

 

  • Blogger’s fun physics notes.
    Relativity has been disproved. And it’s little wonder, quite frankly. The problems this blogger sees in spacetime relativity are literally endless, such that when he envisions Einstein’s mind he conjures the image of a burrowing mole. So here for your consideration are what this blogger considers to be super-obvious reasons why Einstein should never be taken seriously as a physical scientist:

    • Were space and time relative and continual–if time was a ‘fourth dimension’–then it would be possible to move back in time which would create paradoxes that would negate the motive for having traveled back in time to begin with, thus creating an endless loop of nothingness, à la Donny Darko. But more importantly,
      .
    • the speed of light would be relative to the source of light and would therefore be limitless, which no one has even attempted to claim, and therefore the conversion of matter into energy at said speed (E=mc²) would of necessity rely on a collision of some kind. (Spoiler alert: the collision is with aether!) And finally,
      .
    • were spatial relativity realistic (never mind observable), there could be no orbits (as of satellites, moons and ‘planet-stars’), since neither rotations nor revolutions can be said to happen in relative space!
Untitled2

And this coming from a man who lucked out by being in the U.S. when Adolf Hitler won the chancellerian election!

The real reason media-led ‘pop culture’ hails Einstein as a ‘scientist’ is because he champions not science but scientism. What I mean is that his sloppy plagiarized formula is the last thing standing between us and the truth of a geocentric universe (see last video).

SCIENTIST NO, PROPHET YES

  • EXHIBIT B
    .

    • The man who would be philosopher-king of the Jews
      Critiquing one’s own family, tribe or nationality can be delicate (by which I really mean ‘indelicate’). Albert Einstein was quick to praise what good he found in his Judaism-based upbringing and in his fellow-Jews but he kept no secrets (hint, hint) about what he found to be deeply disturbing, manifestly maladjusted, unequivocally unjust and spiritually stunting in Jewish nationalism [3], namely their attitudes and policies of secrecy, superiority and supremacy. Nor did he make any secret of his opinion that, when it came to transcendence, there were far better paths available! (For Einstein’s intellectual successor, see also Jewish genocide survivor Hajo Meyer.)
      .
    • B-1
      We Jews really need to get our sh*t together!
      Albert Einstein (like almost any other genius you can name) profoundly sympathized with and sought to candidly address ‘antisemitism’.
      ‘Anti-Semitism [sic] is nothing but the antagonistic attitude produced in non-Jews by the Jewish group [or demographic]. This is a normal social reaction’ (AE).
      Specifically, Einstein thought the Talmud was awesome but had to be made public (and by the way this blogger agrees on both points [5]): ‘The scientific organization and comprehensive exposition in accessible form of the Talmud has a twofold importance for us Jews. It is important in the first place that the high cultural values of the Talmud should not be lost to modern minds among the Jewish people nor to science, but should operate further as a living force. In the second place, the Talmud must be made an open book to the world, in order to cut the ground from under certain malevolent attacks, of anti-Semitic [sic] origin, which borrow countenance from the obscurity and inaccessibility of certain passages in the Talmud’ (AE [underlines added], who as we’ll see doesn’t believe in a personal or separate God, as well as having had a fascinating family life).
      .
    • B-2
      Israel’s (systemic) racism is shockingly hypocritical and regressive!
      Albert Einstein refused to accept presidency of Israel, warning that Zionists were becoming Nazis vis-à-vis the Palestinians (and quite possibly asking himself why on Earth the powers that be had scrapped earlier cool-headed plans and opted to settle Jews in Arab Central rather than in sparsely populated Argentina, Uganda, Madagascar or at the very least in the Jewish Autonomous Oblast).
      ‘The most important aspect of [Israeli] policy must be our ever-present, manifest desire to institute complete equality for the Arab citizens living in our midst.’ ‘The attitude we adopt toward the Arab minority will provide the real test of our moral standards as a people’ (AE). And ominously, ‘It would be my greatest sadness to see Zionists do to Palestinian Arabs much of what Nazis did to Jews’ (AE). Sure enough, the Jewish Democratic State of Israel today (29-Nov-2017) has sixty Arab-hating laws on the books, affecting virtually all areas of public life within its ever-expanding borders, like a gangrene of the Middle East. (Contrast with Palestine which has zero systemic racism and has a Christian diplomat.) In the area of civil rights, Tel Aviv basically makes Johannesburg look like London.
      .
    • B-3
      Personal gods are for kids; national gods are for savages!
      Albert Einstein rejected a personal or separate deity as the true God: ‘The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. If there is any religion that would cope with modern scientific needs, it would be Buddhism’ (AE?). Einstein used terms like naïve and childlike in reference to the whole notion of a personal or separate deity, preferring ‘religious unbelief’ and instead a Baruch-Spinoza-styled ‘pantheism’, which today would be simply termed panentheism. Einstein was a total Buju.
      In short, the only path Einstein saw for world Jewry was to allow their culture to become truly enlightened, rather than act as the Western world’s eclipse by coasting on the advances made in the Enlightenment for thuggish ends. (For counterpoint, see Star Trek.) But here let’s be fair and point out that the Judeo-Masonic Bavarian Illuminati, who too colluded with the Rothschild bankers (as well as Jacob Frank!) and whose saga reads like The Lord of the Rings. The Illuminati (d.b.a. ‘Free and Accepted Masons’) have had a clear corrupting influence on the Enlightenment and on the Zionist movement. Long before Jews gained equality anywhere on the European continent, the Illuminati similarly refused to publish their ideology and methodology even where persecution by church authorities was nil, opting for élitism, much to Thomas Jefferson’s consternation.

In conclusion, Einstein really wasn’t who we were told, but he was still a total rock star of profundity! Oh, and please understand that I’m not being patronizing when I call him a true genius and cultural luminary as well as icon. As a 90s Catholic kid, I was treated to this and that Italo-American Catholic evangelist (nationalist?) plagiarizing Einstein’s sayings right and left with nary a scruple. One of the late great Mother Angelica [4]’s most iconic ‘sayings’ concerned ‘what God thinks’, and the ex-priest John Anthony Corapi could rouse a crowd with his standard ‘God has placed clear limits on Man’s intelligence, but none on his stupidity’–to whose veracity their own popularity is maybe a case in point!

________
[0] You’ll find that aether does necessitate geocentrism: see the Michelson-Morley Experiment.
[1] Concerning space, Tesla said: ‘I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view’ (underline added). Note: neither Tesla nor Einstein has a middle name.
[2] This blogger found it fascinating to learn that Einstein’s theory was translated into English by none other than Satyendra Nath Bose of India (no relation to the Bose Wave Radio man, though both hail from Bengal, specifically Calcutta). Especially since the boson in Higgs boson (the new name for ‘aether‘?) actually derives from this very Bose.
[3] Jewish nationalism includes both classical Judaism and Europe-based Zionism.
[4] My favorite words from the Talmud express the Golden Rule or Law of Reciprocity which, like all the key points of Judaism, actually comes from Egypt:

דעלך סני לחברך לא תעביד. זו היא כל התורה כולה, ואידך פירושה הוא: זיל גמור
That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor.
That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation. Go and study it’
(Babylonian Talmud, tractate Shabbat 31a).

[5] Full name: Mother Mary Angelica of the Annunciation, PCPA (born Rita Antoinette Rizzo).

Untitled2

And then there’s super-science?

 

W

Advertisements

Westboro and Western civilization

FRED PHELPS: MINISTER, HUSBAND, FATHER, LAWYER. AND ANTI-RACIST

I am going to make you love and hate the Westboro Baptist Church and its late pastor Fred Phelps, or your money back. Why? Because that’s what caring bloggers do!

westboro_baptist_church

Fred Waldron Phelps Sr., a White man, has been a friend and ally of Blacks, women and other system-undermined demographics, and this fact was even acknowledged by the NAACP. But the US media just can’t seem to find it in their heart to forgive him for stepping on their toes, so it’ll be a cold day in hell when you’ll hear the whole story from them!

Setting the stage with some ‘I statements’, this blogger basically doesn’t ‘hate’ or ‘fear’ anything or anyone, but he does ‘Prove [or test] all things’ (1 Thessalonians 5:21) before embracing it, as any sane person should. Then again, this blogger is not the minion of some super-villain who’s invested in social collapse whereupon he plans to give all his minions the ‘mafia retirement package’. The establishment media, on the other hand, act like they’re in this perpetual breathless rush to assume that any personal taste or principle that clashes with their Khazarian producers’ paradigm/narrative/agenda must necessarily be coming from a negative place either of ‘hate’ (‘miso-gyny’) or ‘fear’ (‘homo-phobia’) and definitely not from a cool-headed understanding of human nature or a balanced reading of human history. Of course, behind this breathless rush, what the shills on TV clearly hate and fear most of all is the thought of a strong, self-sustaining society that has no use for their Babylonian-Talmudic, insatiably corrupting and enslaving system of self-destructing ‘values’ (‘values’ which you may rest assured these same élite reject and mock when they’re among their robustly traditional families and fraternities). If you’re in media, do me a favour and give your boss this message for me: Expect us.

Fred ‘God Hates Fags’ Phelps, aside from having been an ordained Baptist minister, was once a practicing lawyer, and he even founded the firm in which three of his kids still practice, Phelps Chartered out of Topeka, Kansas. The firm played a key role in the eventual abolition of all Jim Crow laws on every level of government with jurisdiction over Topeka, and they even championed two women professors with discrimination cases! In fact, about one-third of Kansas’s federal docket of civil rights cases was the doing of Pastor Fred and Phelps Chartered. And then with his minister hat, Fred condemned the Dutch Reformed Church for promoting apartheid. [1]

Fred_Phelps_on_his_pulpit

‘God’s lawyer’

In the 1980s, the self-described Primitive Baptist [2] patriarch-minister received awards from the Greater Kansas City Chapter of Blacks in Government and the Bonner Springs branch of the NAACP, for his work on behalf of Black clients. Let’s take a moment to let it sink in that neither of these awards have been publicly revoked in spite of the man’s spoon-fed reputation for so-called ‘hate’.

And it’s really hard to tell if it was their love of Jesus or their hatred of slavery, but they also make it clear that God is against observers of Judaism, together with all who reject Jesus (or for that matter Moses)! Now like it or not, Blacks are overwhelmingly more anti-gay [3] than Whites. In other words, Fred Phelps not only helps oppressed minority groups legislatively but also he identifies with the Black population far more profoundly than libertine ‘liberals’ ever could [4], and Phelps promotes causes that will obviously help their cultures to survive the social engineering apocalypse–an apocalypse by the way that is being precipitated, by and large, by a certain oppressive minority group that shall remain nameless!

quote-racism-springs-from-the-lie-that-certain-human-beings-are-less-than-fully-human-it-s-alveda-king-15-85-95

And the jury’s still out on who changed heir undertanding of civil rights, Westboro or Western society? After all, to many (including prolife activist Dr. Alveda King) it looks as if what started out as a true civil rights movement–promoting simple fairness–has been infected by some kind of virus that has installed into the programming of society a step-by-step transition into some kind of Babylonian death cult, not to mention the death of culture. Now contrast that to this: the Westboro Baptist Church, whose website is libelously categorized and often blocked by US government servers as ‘violent’, has never promoted and has always resoundingly opposed violence of any kind on the part of us mere human beings. [5] What Westboro congregants do as far as I can tell is:
– 1. to leave all the chastening and vengeance to God as their Bible (eventually) commands,
– 2. to do all they can to warn sinners and enemies of God that they may survive the coming wrath (or I might say the natural and spiritual consequences), and
– 3. to piously take joy in all the works of the Lord, whether pleasant or unpleasant.
The question then becomes, Why would such a blasé M.O. on the part of Westboro Baptist Church prompt both the US government and the US media to discredit and legally jeopardize themselves by libeling the Church? This only makes sense in light of the US élite’s all-encompassing assault on common-sense lifestyles. (Please comment if you disagree!) If Westboro Baptist Church be stripped of the freedom to express their religious perspective as they do, then the first amendment really is ‘just a goddamned piece of paper’ as pseudo-conservative George W. Bush called it. At the very least, we’ve established that the US media and the US government are miles from ‘impartial’ or ‘compassionate’, and they are fully prepared to sell ‘their’ people and society down the river to further the goals of their handlers’ bosses.

quote-thank-god-for-9-11-thank-god-that-five-years-ago-the-wrath-of-god-was-poured-out-upon-fred-phelps-72-69-05

So yeah, the hypocrisy of the US élite is naked and perfect. But I think it’s clear that the ‘media Black-out’ about Phelps’s role in the Civil Rights movement is not only motivated by the red-hot hatred they bear the Westboro Baptist Church and what they stand for. The élite also fear that a critical mass of citizens might glimpse the bigger story: how the Neo-Bolsheviks are pushing this Babylon culture of death on us, which is really a slow-motion takeover by the same cats who sodomized the nation-states of Eastern Europe and the Far East, and now as then it works hand in glove with the undeniably Judeo-Fascist State of Israel. There is no doubt in this blogger’s mind as to whether or not the Civil Rights movement has been hijacked since its glory days and is now controlled by a Red army of criminally insane ‘social entrepreneurs’.

1200px-Westboro-church1

And no, it’s not insane but rather barely savvy to sort of ‘reverse-J’accuse’ and cite Jewish power and the ‘gay lobby’ as the number-one contributing factor here, for as ever,

‘To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize’
(Kevin Alfred Strom).

~

‘The American Jews are the real Nazis–that is, mis-users and ab-users of governmental power–who hate God and the rule of Law’
(Fred Phelps).

One last question before we move on: Is it really as strange as we love to pretend it is that the same people who oppose White hegemony would also criticize Jewish hegemony?

EINSTEIN-ANTI-SEMITISM-QUOTE

(Prior to what follows, you may want to read the Gospel According to John, Chapter 3.)

ON THE OTHER HAND, ‘Satan’ does mean accuser. And I think that, underneath the harrowing emotions, we’re all a bit confused as to whether Phelps’s kin-disciples are promoting the Gospel, the Torah or some theologically biased (not to say rabidly Calvinistic) reading of both? In this sense, the overall dynamic looks to be one of Neo-Pharisee vs Paleo-Pharisee!

7300124-3x2-940x627

It always cracks me up when ‘Christians’ lean on the Hebrew Law of the Flesh (i.e. the Old Testament) pretending its observance has some bearing on the afterlife, with the effect of scaring people out of their wits which they can then commandeer and sort of remote-control. Incidentally, this is the same mind-buggering that the media and the deep state do with different tools, so no wonder they run the risk of beating them at their own game–but at what cost? So again, this looks a lot like fighting fire with fire, which is conventionally predicted to have a negative net-impact.

fred-phelps-dead-westboro-baptist-003

Source: time.com

In fact the Torah says nothing about eternity, let alone any eternal ramifications for infractions but only a curse of some number of generations. [6] But no wonder, since it’s given in the name of a race- and land-specific deity, and explicitly not by the Godhead/Divinity, much less by Pure and Holy Spirit. (See also John 3:16.)

fred-phelps-dead-westboro-baptist-005

See, contrary to theology’s more politically driven (as opposed to spiritual) tangents, spirit and flesh though related aren’t on equal footing such that flesh could somehow ‘derail’ spirit. They only even interact through the mediation of mind or soul, and flesh eventually goes to powder (from whence it came!) as do all of the consequences of its frailty.

‘[T]he spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak’
(Matthew 26:41).

Jesus explains to Nicodemus that ‘That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit’ (John 3:6), which is in fact his stated rationale for requiring that a man be born again–or rather born from above! In other words, when looking at the nature of our world (within and without both!), we see two separate realms or kingdoms. Martin Luther got this, so it’s little wonder that he’s such a central figure in the Protestant Reformation.

Don’t get me wrong: be a slave again to fear (cf. Romans 8:15) [7] if you so choose, but just know that I know that you know that such a Bible scholar as Luther was far from madness, as many lazily suppose, when he said ‘sin boldly’ [8]. It’s called having priorities, perspective and purpose. In man’s journey, the true replacement for outer hierarchy is inner hierarchy, and similarly outer observances eventually leave off for inner wholeness. Or in other words, the spirit and not the body can save the soul.

fred-phelps-dead-westboro-baptist-007

But yeah, the spiritual afterlife trumps Jewish national moralism in the Christian movement, and it is ultimately of an Egyptian, monastic, esoteric and Gnostic nature, as is the foundation of every spirituality, movement and religion. An afterlife is not essential to Judaism any more than universal monotheism is. Those who invoke or adore national deities are generally termed henotheists as distinct from monotheists, and I’ve never heard any reason to exempt the observers of Judaism since now as then they identify as a race rather than as an assembly. Most Torah, not surprisingly, isn’t even moral in character but cultural imperialist and even racial supremacist. (Duh, ‘Chosen People‘!)

fred-phelps-dead-westboro-baptist-001

But what match are the facts against a horde of seventy-two self-righteous Bible trolls armed with law degrees–not to mention the well-funded cultural wrecking crew they’re up against! You root for whoever strikes your fancy; I’m going to do the responsible thing and plant my head firmly in the sand.∎

‘The wise should surrender speech in mind, mind in the knowing self, the knowing self in the Spirit of the universe, and the Spirit of the universe in the Spirit of peace’
(Maitri Upanishad).

‘May life go to immortal life, and the body go to ashes. OM’
(Isha Upanishad).

________
[1] In 1982 the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa was kicked out of WARC, which maintains that apartheid is a sin.
[2] Despite presenting as Southern Baptist, Phelps was ordained by the Southern Baptist Conference (ironic since this church is known for regarding its Black churches as ‘missions’ [of the White churches]).
[3] Blacks (and ‘minorities’, most notably Hispanics) are also more robust in their ‘antisemitism’ and nationalism, which is no coincidence, and which is all underreported or unreported. I will suggest this has something to do with the outlawing of marijuana which, as I once heard Jewish Atheist and Libertarian Adam Kokesh say, only has one side-effect: making the user allergic to bullshit!
[4] Illiberal ‘progressives’ are infamous élitists: while pretending to champion Black issues, ‘progressives’ assure themselves that Black’s time-tested morality is archaic if not outright barbaric.
[5] This is eerily reminiscent of what the same media and government do to Palestinians, TBH, completely ignoring the fact that, speaking of racism, sixty racist laws govern most of life in Israel, which goes a long way to explain why, whereas Israel has zero Christian (also zero non-Jewish-blooded) public officials, Palestine has a Christian diplomat!
[6] The omnigenerational original sin doctrine was invented by the partner-and-child-neglecting ‘Saint’ Augustine of Hippo.
[7] I hear fear pairs nicely with institutional double-standards.
[8] By ‘sin boldly’ Luther advocates not sin but bold repentance and transparency, to be clear, lest he be mistaken for a Sabbatai Zevi, a Gregor Rasputin or an Aleister Crowley.

Secularism is religulous

Most who claim to advocate ‘truth’ and ‘science’ actually promote establishment-biased closed-mindedness. The illiberal, aggressive élite are the monotheistic, monolithic clergy of our age: perception-reality dualists, contemptuous of that which is directly evident or readily inferred therefrom, transparently careerists in stagnant, ossified secret societies, loving their social connections and official positions far more than truth. It is–can any doubt it?–against this secular rabbinical priestcraft that Thomas Jefferson swore ‘eternal hostility’ since, in the employ of the rich, they constitute an incomparable ‘tyranny over the mind of man’.

The ‘Whole-ocaust’

NOBODY IN ACADEMIA GIVES A SH*T ABOUT YOU: THEY ALL SERVE THE BANKERS

Deborah Lipstadt, who some say succeeded where the Queen of England had failed against Ernst Zündel (1992), won a victory for professional Holocaust mourners everywhere when she took on avid social climber, Nazi and self-proclaimed ‘historian’ David Irving (2000) who had sued her publisher’s London house on the charge of libel.

Deborah Lipstadt went to London to expose a phony,
stuck that feather in her cap and spewed her own baloney!
Deborah Lipstadt, NPR, cram our brains with candy,
Just don’t say ‘Ha’Avara’ and with young minds be handy!
– or –
David Irving went to London to be ruled a phony,
called the judge all sorts of names and prob’ly got a Tony
David Irving keep it up: hit-and-miss as always.
Mix fresh facts with nutter acts and shouts at girls in hallways!

Though Irving routinely takes liberties with the facts and his interpretation thereof (and was promptly called out in court), and Lipstadt is clearly too emotionally involved and plagued by cowardice to defend herself or indeed debate anyone whom she deems a ‘denier’, the question of who won in the court of public opinion remains as open as the special relationship between the Third Reich and the Jewish Agency (1933-?), about which you can rest assured nothing was ever said publicly by Doctress Lipstadt. So apparently

ZIONISTS AND NAZIS HAVE A LONG HISTORY OF COMMON CAUSE AND COLLUSION

From the diary of the very first Zionist luminary Theodor Herzl to the HaAvara Agreement between Nazi and Zionist partisans to Jewish Neonazi Frank Collin, organizer of the Skokie uprising, it becomes clear that Jewish natio-socialists (i.e. Nazis) and other natio-socialists are highly interactive and even interchangeable!

Now what this doesn’t, doesn’t, doesn’t mean is that Zionists don’t get along with those other socialists whom we call Communists. Indeed, the Balfour Declaration was signed five days before the Bolshevik Revolution, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was the first power to recognize the State of Israel. It’s a big world, and academia keeps you in a cozy corner, totally alienated from what’s really going on in the world.

A tale of two Simons

REHABILITATING THE MAGICIAN

‘And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations’ (Luke 16:9).

Simony is a term that refers to the sale of things that are deemed sacred. It is one of the most sacrosanct Church traditions, indeed a founding principle, that a priest or other minister must not require money for a sacrament(al), an amulet or any product or service thought to possess mystical power, and the breach of said tradition is one of the best-known catalysts of the Protestant Reformation. So an act of simony is associated with a considerable degree of evil (even more than its sound-alike sodomy unless you’re a Baptist), namely that of the money changers outside Solomon’s temple who alone incurred the violent wrath of Jesus (if the Canonical Gospels are taken as truthful and comprehensive). If you picture someone setting up a tollbooth on the road to heaven, you’ll have some idea of what simony is. It inhibits people from entering heaven, and the person doing it doesn’t enter heaven anyway but has chosen a worldly position instead. These are all themes of Jesus’s rants in the Canonical Gospels of the Christian Scriptures. (Muhammad is said to have been possessed of a similar rage in Mecca, whence Islam [and toothbrushes]!)

As for Simon Magus, as he’s called, he stands apart from the Jerusalem temple establishment in that he is simply never known to have committed simony by that definition. What he did, even by Christendom’s accounts, was the reverse, and it was something Jesus (in his least popular parable) enjoins all to do.

In chapter 8 of Acts Simon Magus is portrayed as someone particularly interested in manifestations (signs), which really fits the common idea of the magus or magician. (He is perhaps the historical model for the Wizard of Oz, much as Babylon is the model for Atlantis.) It seems that the Gift of the Holy Spirit gives people the ability to command the spirit-world but that the ability to bestow said gift was a secret kept among Jesus’s closest apostles, Simon Peter and John. Simon Magus, adept and man of means that he was, apparently thought it couldn’t hurt to offer to buy the trade secret off of Simon Peter and John. But Simon Magus, in his aristocratic ways, probably came on a little strong, Simon Peter and John really thought highly of themselves, and Simon Magus apologized and managed to diffuse the drama manifesting pomp, which more than likely was not the kind of manifestation Simon the Mage had been hoping for.

Now had Simon Peter and John offered to sell their recipe to Simon Magus, the pair would have been guilty of what (by now I think you know) we mistakenly call ‘simony’. As for Simon Magus, he had merely attempted to make to himself friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when he should fail, they might receive him into everlasting habitations, exactly as Jesus had counseled his Apostles, Simon Peter and John included. Can it be that Simon Peter and John perceived that power had gone to their heads and they were beginning to stray from the pure wisdom of Jesus with all their admittedly characteristic Hebrew preoccupation with signs and with being viewed as the only ones worthy to wield them?

Either way, the real tragedy is that Simon Magus is seen even not as a symbol of simony so much as gnosticism. But I’m going to just say that simony is the real evil, simony and the sin against the spirit that is the gravest blasphemy and modernism. Like its co-founders, the Church has taken its eye off the ball by preferring system to spirit and allowed modernism to worm its way in.

We need to get back to Simon’s self-effacing way. Perhaps that at least is Francis’s gift (whether sincere or not).

‘Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee’ (Matthew 17:27).

eaf7fbfa4db135dab66ce1d470f5ee6c--simon-magus-levitate

Will the real Lucifer please stand up

Lucy

Apologies for the humorous depictions, intended as comic relief to precede my correction of a serious error that has ensnared virtually the whole Body of Believers.

“And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book” (Revelation 22:19).

The Latin Vulgate’s LVCIFER (English: ‘LIGHT-BEARER’) was apparently taken to be a translation of the Greek Septuagint’s ΕΩΣΦΌΡΟΣ (HEOSPHÓROS, English: ‘DAWN-BEARER’*), in turn apparently a translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew הֵילֵ֣ל (HELÉL, English: ‘MORNING STAR’).

Thus is the Italian saying tradurre è tradire (‘translation is betrayal’) proved horrifyingly true, for we can clearly see how the original meaning was hacked away little by little through a succession of mistranslations by men who to my knowledge no one considers ‘prophetic’ or in any sense ‘inspired’. It’s every Bible student’s worst nightmare come true: an elaborate ‘modern folk-theology’, based on apparently source-blind translations, that started haunting the Christian West around 1830.

The equating of Lucifer to Devil and Satan (the latter two only being linked in the highly abstract Book of Revelation) seems to have begun not with Jesus, his disciples, any Church Father or anywhere in Eurasia, but rather in the nineteenth-century United States of America with Seventh-day Adventists (sic) and other King James enthusiasts (e.g., KJVO). It was then solidified by such pro-Lucifer esotericists as Albert Pike and Helen Blavatsky. (This was around the same time the Star of David [that wasn’t] emerged from esoteric circles in Prague into nationalist circles in Germany among Ashkenazi Jews).

It seems that the Hebrew scrolls contain the term that was originally used in Isaiah 14:12 (the only Biblical use of the term) as A KINGLY TITLE OF NEBUCHADNEZZAR II OF BABYLON (and no euphemism for any incorporeal being such as an angel), as all scholars (religious affiliation notwithstanding) agree.**

To be clear, then, nowhere does the Bible, in any manuscript or translation that I know of, say or imply that Lucifer refers to an ‘angel’ (fallen or otherwise), but rather a formerly successful king ‘who once laid low the nations’. Lucifer is nowhere mentioned by Jesus or by anyone in the New Testament (though there is the Apocalyptic Morning Star, which is the original thing Lucifer is a double-mistranslation of*). Even the Church Fathers (i.e. ‘Patristics’) nowhere mention Lucifer. Essentially, everything you know about Lucifer is pseudo-Christian folklore obsessing on a horrendously mistranslated nickname for Babylon’s King Nebuchadnezzar II.

Now having said all this, let’s just point out that Biblically Babylon has a lot of serious evil attached to it, culminating in the Apocalyptic Whore of Babylon***. And in medieval/modern Judaism, just look at all the brazen abominations contained in the Babylonian Talmud, the standard reference of most Ashkenazi Jews, even the underlying inspiration for such modern philosophies as Marxism and Zionism, which have jointly caused more senseless human death—not to mention irreligion (or rather statism as religion) and slave-class immorality—than anything before or since.

But going back to Scriptural trends, it is worth noting that the Latin Lvcifer is also imported (i.e. not translated into Ebut apparently treated like a proper name) into King James English, which helps explain why the English-speaking world is actually the most emphatic that Lucifer be thought of as a purely and spiritually evil term, apparently clueless as to the precise nature of its original and Biblical use.

All told, it may be that there is some wisdom to the Christian oral tradition on this matter, and cultural Christianity may have unveiled a covert meaning that is crucial for our times. I would say that perhaps this notion of Lucifer as a twisted and evil angel, that has hijacked our biblical comprehension these couple millennia, may now retain some place in the savvy Biblical commentary of the future.∎

Jerome

________
* ΕΩΣΦΌΡΟΣ (HEOSPHÓROS, English: ‘DAWN-BEARER’) is just one Greek letter off from ΦΩΣΦΌΡΟΣ (PHOSPHÓROS, English: ‘LIGHT-BEARER’), a simple likeness of letters from which one typo by an overly abstract-minded scribe could be responsible for a massive degree of Biblical confusion! In conclusion, it should have be rendered AURÓRAFER or rather STÉLLA MATUTÍNA (which is a reference in Revelation 2:28, commonly thought to refer to Jesus [the ultimate Bible twist?] and a title of Mary in the Litany of Loreto; for other references see Order of the Golden Dawnand not LUCIFER at all!
** As to the likely origin and context of the kingly title that the Hebrew renders הֵילֵ֣ל (HELEL), you had is the Babylonian cult for the Planet Venus (but only when this appears in the morning), whom the ancient Babylonians associated with the Babylonian Cuneiform B153ellst (ISHTAR [whence ‘EASTER’, English: ‘TO IRRIGATE’], a Mesopotamian goddess of love, beauty, sex, desire, fertility, war, combat, and political power, similar to ἈΦΡΟΔΊΤΗ [APHRODÍTE]).
*** Early Reformation Christians assumed Whore of Babylon referred to the Vatican City ‘of seven hills’, another instance of this persistent pattern of totally ignoring what the Bible is saying about Mystery Babylon generally and King Nebuchadnezzar II in particular! although I would add that Babylon and Italy are both historically notorious for their usury [or as we’re taught to call it ‘interest rates’], hence the popular Babylon-Rome parallel seems justified in terms of cultural morals.

The Legion of Muhammad?

Image may contain: 2 people, hat and text

INTRODUCTION. In vain do these (of course highly paid) ‘Legion shills’ pretend to compartmentalize LC devotions to God, LC devotion to Maciel, LC hierarchy, LC secrecy, and LC abuse—defending one while condemning the other. The issue really is that any ‘meekness and humility’ that is selectively directed toward the rich and powerful is obviously worldly, carnal, egoistical and diabolical—not Christological. With good reason is she given the archdiabolical title of ‘Legion’: she offers nothing of reform to the Holy Mother Church of Rome. At best, she claims to oppose ‘Communism’ and ‘Freemasonry’ but refuses to oppose their quadruplet evils Zionism and Modernism.* On this point the Legion identifies herself as the true daughter and heiress of the Nazi Party. She admittedly offers no new ‘Spirituality’ (i.e. ‘Subpath within Roman Catholicism’), ‘Charism’ (‘Spiritual Gift’) nor ‘Apostolate’ (‘Ministry’).

CASE IN POINT 1. LEGIONARY ‘SPIRITUALITY’. She claims her ‘Spirituality’ is ‘strictly Christocentric’ (her attempt at slighting all foregoing Orders, Congregations and Charisms, which she also blatantly misrepresents to boot, though her technique [like her apologetics, Q.E.D.] is fanatically ‘Macielian’ [an intentional play on ‘Machiavellian’] and light-years away from anything remotely Christlike. [We could start off with the ‘sensus legionis’ os such Christian building blocks as ‘Love’ and ‘Charity’, but I’ve already done a video on that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMVFvxuFcIg ])

N.B.: For comparison on this last point (i.e. lofty rhetoric belying base methodological [heck, even ideological] exemplars), see not only Nazism (Google ‘Transfer Agreement’) but also Islam. Moreover, the Guadalupe narrative also borrows some of its most emotionally moving plot points from Islamic teachings, specifically the apparition to Juan when he attempts to avoid apparition, which also happens to Muhammad in the Islamic tradition. And to top it all off, you have the heady Islamic influences on the chief figures of the original Counter-Reformation movement, upon which we know the Legion bases much of her appeal.

CASE IN POINT 2. LEGIONARY ‘APOSTOLATE’. Also tellingly, the Legion claims her ‘Apostolate’ is ‘nonspecific’ (in the sense of ‘unlimited’), but what they do in practice is to ‘lawyer up’ to prey on budding apostolates like FAMILIA (in much the same way they like to prey on ‘budding apostolics’, Q.E.D.!). Her only sincere concern, God forbid, is amassing money and power.

CONCLUSION. FAITHFUL (‘ORTHODOX’) CATHOLICS ARE SITTING DUCKS because Legionspeak™ and Legionkultur™ are fine-tuned with the goal of snowing them with void impressions and shameless flattery. The Legion DEMONSTRATES EVERY INTENTION NOT OF REFORMING JACK SQUAT (whether within herself nor much less within the Church) BUT RATHER OF BEING PART OF THE PROBLEM by creating networks for the ‘leaders’ (i.e. the élite inhumanitarian and criminal class) by slapping a Christian crucifix on the most sordid of enterprises, with her own institute being a mere sampling of these.

________
* On November 2, 1917, the Balfour Declaration was signed, granting swaths of the British Mandate of Palestine to the Zionist Kibbutzim. Five days later the Bolshevik Revolution broke out. In 1948, the USSR was the first power to ‘de jure’ recognize the State of Israel on May 17, 1948. They say blood is thicker than water. Can it be that atheistical socialist Jews work together regardless of whether they advertise themselves as ‘nationalist’ or ‘globalist’? DRAW YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS.