Excerpt
from the Phoenix-Journal 130: TRACKING DOWN THE KILLER – “AND OTHER FORMS
OF MURDER”
…
Along this
pathway of example I have been graciously given an excerpt from a book
called THE TALMUD UNMASKED–written in 1892,
by Rev. I.B. Pranaitis.
In 1985
James K. Warner offered the volume with additions. I only want to use one
portion of the additions, APPENDIX II. I am NOT going to go
back and explain anything from the texts so when citations are given–YOU WILL
HAVE TO GET THE BOOK AND CHECK IT FOR SELF. However, the only reference I have
for obtaining same is The Imperial Academy of Sciences of St. Petersburg. I
understand that the Christian Defense League was able to get a portion of a
library of one Col. Sanctuary which held several files translated from this
named text.
Since the
added material deals with your own circumstances as you will see it unfold, I
think you start here and work backwards. I believe you will see that the latter
is not NECESSARY.
[H:
CONTACT editors: The stars (***) which will appear are as shown in the
document. Since they are “there” we will copy as best we can,
realizing that the same series of stars is usually indicative of my input to
you personally, for instructions. If I need to interrupt with instructions we
will have a series of ### so that you can recognize same.]
[QUOTING:]
THE TALMUD
UNMASKED, Part 1
by Rev. I.B. Pranaitis
APPENDIX II
Ps.
101,7: “He
that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall
not tally in my sight”. We make no apology for selecting this portion of a
Psalm of David in preparing this appendix. In the Contemporary Jewish
Record for July-August, 1939, Ben Zion Bokser has an article,
entitled: “Talmudic Forgeries, a Case Study in Anti-Jewish
Propaganda”. From that we take the following: “Czarist Russia
made its contribution to this gallery of literary swindlers in the person of
the notorious Justin Pranaitis, a Catholic clergyman.*** It was in 1912 during
the trial of Beilis on the ritual murder libel that Pranaitis drew world
notoriety upon himself by offering his services as an expert to the
prosecution. *** Beilis was, of course, acquitted, but the prosecution
remunerated the star ‘expert’ with 500 rubles”.
The American
Jewish Year Books, in the Jewish Section of the New York Public Library,
for the years 1913-1914, and 1914-1915, contain a number of references to this
famous trial in which Beilis was the defendant. These will be condensed as much
as possible for lack of space. “At the request of Mackevitch, Committee
appointed to examine all books in library of St. Petersburg Ecclesiastical
Academy for reference to the use of Christian blood by Jewish sects. ***
Ministry of Justice orders bringing a new indictment against Beilis at
approaching session of court. Public prosecutor assures Beilis that trial will
take place in May. Professor Troitsky, Christian authority on Jewish law and
customs, declares it an unfounded myth. *** Mackevitch completes report on
Yuchinsky case, comprising 8 volumes of 500 pages. Minister of Justice orders
further inquiry. *** Second indictment against Beilis confirmed by Kieff
Judicial Chamber. Indictment mentions ritual character of crime. The Retch
fined 500 rubles for criticizing indictment of Beilis. *** Prompted by Beilis
trial, the Holy Synod requests Missionary Council to study life of religious
Jews and of those who no longer adhere to principles of the Talmud. *** A.
Stolypin, brother of the late Premier, appeals to Jews to buy peace by
confessing the existence of a sect practicing ritual murder. *** At Irkutsk,
preacher at the cathedral in special sermon, eulogizes prosecution of Beilis
and attacks defense. *** Minister of Justice concurs in desirability of tracing
real accusers of Yuchinsky but opposed steps against Cheberick as this would be
interpreted as ‘abandonment of the ‘ritual’ theory of the murder’, which he
regarded as proven. *** At St. Petersburg, anti-Jewish press charge that Jews
bribed officials to destroy all documents against Beilis, and are about to burn
secret books concerning code of ritual murders. *** The Russkoe
Znonya states that Jews have destroyed the Zohar which
contained blood libel code. The Novoe Vremya continues to
publish threats that acquittal of Beilis will not be accepted as Jews are
masters of the court and Christian witnesses are all terrorized. [H:
Please keep the circumstances and murders involved within the O.J. Simpson
case–IN MIND, PLEASE, as we go through this “ritual murder”
discussion. Are you not finding that the WITNESSES who would come forth with
TRUTH–to be terrorized? You will also come to see that the murders themselves,
from the people involved (murdered) to the very number of slash-wounds and
methodology are ritualistic reality.] *** The Novoe Vremya,
in article on Yuchinsky case, in reply to British protest, states that Jews
ought to welcome arrest of Beilis as an opportunity of arriving at the truth.
*** The Novoe Vremya hints that experts in the Beilis case
were bribed by the Jews, adding that ‘after the part played by the banking
House of Rothschild, nobody will be surprised at the Kieff mobilization of all
savants and judicial authorities’. The Zemstchina charges that Papal Secretary
of State, Cardinal Merry del Val, was also bribed into authenticating Papal
bulls against blood accusation. *** In a letter to Lord Rothschild, Cardinal
Merry del Val, Secretary of State of the Vatican, certifies to the authenticity
of Bulls of Popes Innocent IV, Paul III, Gregory X, and Clement XIV [H:
Please understand that these names are NOT the true names of the persons
involved but are actually alias labels given by the Church to fully hide and
secret the true identities which are then eventually lost to history.] which
declare ritual murder a baseless accusation and wicked invention”.
From the
last page, 376, of Albert Monniot’s “Le Crime Ritual chez les
Juifs”, 1914 edition, which book is in the Jewish section of the New
York Public Library, we obtain a brief resume of this famous Beilis case:
“By virtue of all that precedes, Menachile Mendel Teview Beylis, bourgeois
of Kiev, 29 years of age, is accused of having killed, in company with other
persons unknown to the law, Andre Ioutchinski, age 12 years, with fanatical
religious intent. The foregoing boy was seized March 12, 1911, while he was
playing in the brickyard at Zaitzew and dragged into the yard, where by the
consent of Beylis, tied the hands of the boy, closed his mouth and killed him;
the head, neck and trunk showing 48 wounds *** causing the
body to become bloodless”.
In this
Beilis case there were two points to be considered by the jury: first, was a
ritual murder committed? second, was Beilis guilty of the crime? On the first
charge, the jury voted unanimously that Yuchinsky had been the victim of a
ritual murder, but on the second, the jury voted six to six, which was a
verdict for Beilis. Returning to the American Jewish Year Book, we
find an interesting item: “Appeals on behalf of Professor Troitzky to
permit him to return to his post at the Theological Academy, St. Petersburg,
unavailing”. Mr. Bokser did not tell his readers that Father Pranaitis
after the trial continued to occupy his chair at said Academy. Again, Mr.
Bokser, for obvious reasons, failed to mention that the government, in the
Beilis case, put into the record the celebrated Saratov case.
1853.
Saratov. Two ritual murders are involved this time: one, a 10-year-old boy in
Dec., 1852; the other an 11-year-old, in January, 1853. After a flood, both
bodies were found on the bank of the Volga, pierced with many wounds. Eight
years afterwards, two Jews, Schiffermann and Zourloff, were duly tried for
these murders and convicted. They were sentenced to 28 years labour in the
mines and they died during their imprisonment. This being a juridically decided
case, the sentence which passed for “killing two Christian boys and having
them endure martyrdom” by the Senate and submitted to the Russian Empire
Council, is, of course, not mentioned in Strack’s book. Authority:
Monniot’s Le Crime Rituel chez les Juifs, 1914, p. 157 (From
Mr. Leese’s book: Jewish Ritual Murder, p. 28)
Arnold S.
Leese, London, England, has written a booklet of 57 pages on the subject
of Ritual Murder. [H: It is still in circulation.] In
the effort which Mr. Bokser makes to ridicule Father Pranaitis, also that he
quotes two Popes, Innocent IV and Clement XIV, we quote from Mr. Leese, who in
turn quotes from the Catholic Bulletin which shows that the Bull is in two
parts, the first sums up the case as presented by the Jews themselves. *** The
second part, which alone expresses the Pope’s mind, is as follows: “***
not wishing, therefore, that the said Jews be unjustly harassed, whose
conversion God Expects in his mercy *** we wish that you would show yourselves
benign and favorable towards them. Restore to their proper state those of the
mentioned matters that you find to have been rashly attempted by the said
Nobles against the Jews, and do not permit that in the future they should be
for those or similar pretexts unjustly molested by anyone”! Says Leese:
“Jews must consider Christians to be very critical and gullible if they
think they can be induced to accept this document as a papal declaration that
ritual crime does not exist. It is obvious that the Sovereign Pontiff merely
gives instructions according to general principles, ordering that the Jews
should not be unjustly oppressed or molested. He makes no pronouncement
whatever regarding the truth or falsehood of the specific charges. *** None
could know better than he that it was not the teaching of the Scriptures, but
the infamous teachings of the Talmud that caused people to
look upon Jews as a grave danger to society. Only three years before the
appearance of his letter, namely in 1244, he showed plainly what he thought of
the Talmud by pressing Louis IX to collect from his subjects
all the copies he could obtain and consign them to the flames”. Continuing
with Leese: “Before leaving Innocent IV, I ask the reader to realize the
typical Jewish cunning exhibited by Rothschild in exploiting the answer of
Cardinal Merry del Val regarding the authenticity of the letter as confirming
an interpretation of that letter’s contents by Rothschild–How Jewish. Gregory
X in a Bull of 7th October, 1272, is a little more explicit than Innocent IV;
the same exhortation is made for legal trial of all cases, but he says that
they should ‘not be arrested again on such groundless charge unless (which we
think impossible) they are captured in flagrant crime’. Gregory thus does not
deny that the crime exists; he says he THINKS it is impossible. *** Then we
come to Clement XIV (named by Mr. Bokser–E.N.S.). Before he became Pope, he
was Cardinal Ganganelli. He was dispatched by the Inquisition in 1759 to
investigate Ritual Murder charges in Poland against the Jews, and he wrote a
long report about it. *** From the beginning to the end of Ganganelli’s report,
there is nothing that a scientific investigator would require as evidence that
Ritual Murder was NOT practiced by the Jews. *** Definitely, and far from being
able to refute the charge of Ritual Murder against Jews, Ganganelli admits the
Ritual Murders of St. Simon of Trent and St. Andreas of Rinn in these words: ‘I
admit, then, as true, the fact of the Blessed Simon, a boy three years old,
killed by the Jews in Trent in the year 1475 in hatred of the faith of Jesus
Christ’; and ‘I also admit the truth of another fact, which happened in the
year 1462 in the village of Rinn, in the Diocese of Brixen, in the person of
the Blessed Andreas, a boy barbarously murdered by the Jews in hatred of the
faith of Jesus Christ’ “.
[END OF
QUOTING]
CHAPTER 3
REC #2
HATONN
MON., MAR.
6, 1995 12:17 P.M. YEAR 8, DAY 202
MON., MAR.
6, 1995
In Part 1
of Appendix II of THE TALMUD UNMASKED; The Secret
Rabbinical Teachings Concerning Christians, by Rev. I.B. Pranaitis,
St. Petersburg, April 13, 1892, we had last copied the reference to a
three-year-old boy “killed by the Jews in Trent in the year 1475
in hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ…” and, “Andreas, a boy
barbariously murdered by the Jews in hatred…”
The above
is only for the purpose of reference to move into Part 2 for the interruption
in typing came in the middle of a subject causing possible difficulty in
continuity. Since this is an “Addendum” to a text it does not contain
headings as such or Chapter designations. In the interest of time and space we
will simply take up directly where we left off, please.
THE TALMUD
UNMASKED, PART 2
APPENDIX II
[QUOTING:]
Subject:
RITUAL MURDERS (Sacrifices)
Says Leese,
page 46: “And what of the Popes who have supported the Ritual Murder
accusation by their acts? There are many. Sixtus IX approved in his Bull XII,
Kal., July, 1478, of the conduct of the Bishop who dealt with the
Jews in the St. Simon case at Trent. The Jews endeavored to enlist Sixtus IV on
their side by pointing out that he had suspended the cult of St. Simon of
Trent; this was done by Sixtus IV solely as a disciplinary measure, for Simon
had not yet been beatified by papal authority, but was being made the center of
a local cult.
(In the
Book Review of the New York Times–Rare Books–Dec. 19, 1937:
“There is an amazing collection of works on the inquisition beginning with
a long manuscript of 614 pages written about 1478, ‘Prozess gegen die
Juden von Trent, 1476-1478.’ This account of the ‘Ritual Murder’ of
Simon of Trent in 1475 is one of three contemporary records of which the other
two, in Latin, are in the Vatican and the National Library of Vienna. This is
the only example known in German and it was made for Eberhardt I, the Bearded,
first Duke of Wuerttemberg. The codex is a record of one of the cruelest
examples of the persecution of the Jews in the Middle Ages, and it is almost
the only detailed authority of a great medieval criminal case. * * * The
notorious case had its origin when a 2 1/2- year-old child, Simon, the son of a
cobbler, was found dead in the river near the house of Samuel, a Jew of Trent.
Immediately all the members of the Jewish community, including women and
children, were arrested and accused of having murdered the child in order to
use his blood for the Passover ritual. Persuaded via the torture chamber into a
‘confession’, the Jews were executed and all the women and children were
forcibly baptized or otherwise punished. Various people interceded for the
accused, but after hearings before a Papal court of juriconsults the case was
finally declared, in a Bull of Sixtus IV of June 20, 1478, to be ‘rite
et recte factum’ “.)
“Gregory
XIII recognized Simon as a martyr and himself visited the shrine. Sixtus V
ratified the cult of St. Simon in 1588, allowing the celebration of mass in his
name. This is confirmed as a fact by Benedict XIV, who in a Bull Beatus Andreas
(1788, Venice, IV, p. 101 seq.) beatified both Simon and Andreas, two boys
murdered by the Jews ‘in hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ’; ‘the Jews’, he
said, ‘used every means to escape the just punishment that they had merited and
to escape the just anger of the Christians’. How significant of the methods of
the advocate for the Jew, to note that in Strack’s book, no mention whatever is
made of Benedict XIV’s Bull, although the actions of Sixtus IV are willfully
misinterpreted. [H: Surely doesn’t sound to me as if one is one whit or
iota better than the other and this, readers, IS NOT OF GOD IN EITHER
INSTANCE.]
“Pius
VII, 24th November, 1805, confirmed a decree of the Congregation of Rites of
31st of August according to the Church at Saragossa the right to honor
Dominiculus, killed by the Jews in hatred of the faith of Jesus Christ. He also
authorized for the Church at Toledo the same privileges in respect to St.
Christopher, the boy crucified by the
Jews near that place in 1490. [H: Nice picture don’t you think?]
“In
1867, the Congregation of Rites authorized the cult of Lorenzino, at Vicenza,
Padua, ritually murdered by the Jews.
“Gregory
XVI, also, gave his support to the anti-Jewish accusers when he honored
Gougenot des Mousseaux by making him a Chevalier of the Order of St. Gregory
the Great in reward for writing his book, Le Juif, le Judaisme et la
Judaisation des Peuples Chretiens, in which Gougenot des Mousseaux
devoted a chapter charging the Jews with Ritual Murder of Christians for the
sake of their blood.
“Pius
IX refused to see the Jew Montefiore when the latter was returning from his
visits to Egypt and Constantinople, where he had bribed the Khedive and the
Sultan so that the Jews at Damascus could escape the consequences of their
guilt of the Ritual Murder of Father Tomasi and his servant; this in spite of
the shameless Jewish persistence which has been fully described in Sir Moses
Montefiore’s biography. That showed what Pius IX thought about it, and he
himself was of Jewish blood.
“POPE
LEO XIII BESTOWED DISTINCTIONS ON EDOUARD DRUMONT, AUTHOR OF LA FRANCE
JUIVE, WHO ACCUSED THE JEWS OF RITUAL MURDER THEREIN. AUTHORITY: JEWISH
ENCYCLOPEDIA, 1905, VOL. X., p. 127.
“To
sum up: The Popes who have appeared to disbelieve the existence of the Ritual
Murder crime have, with the exception of Clement XIII, been those who lived in
the least enlightened times; many later Popes have given very clear evidence
that they hold the opposite opinion. * * * Remember that although other
murdered boys, victims of Jewish Ritual Murder, have been regarded in many
places as saints without papal authority, there is no record of papal
disapproval of these cults except in the case of Sixtus IV, already mentioned,
whose action was purely disciplinary, and who himself specifically approved of
the conduct of the Ritual Murder Case to which the matter referred. Such
locally beatified ‘saints’ or martyrs were St. William of Norwich (1144), St.
Werner of Oberwessel (1286), St. Rudolph of Berne (1287), St. Richard of
Pontoise (1179) and St. Hugh of Lincoln. In every such case it is quite obvious
that the cult had the full approval at least of the episcopal authorities over
the places mentioned”.
(With
reference to these ritual murders at Norwich and Lincoln, we have corroborative
evidence from John Foxe in his Acts and Monuments of the Church
(1563), quoting from Mr. Leese, page 49, where Foxe says: “For
every year commonly their (the Jews’) custom was to set some Christian man’s
child from his parents and on Good Friday to crucify him indespite of our
religion”. He described the ritual crucifixion of British children by Jews
at Norwich and Lincoln, before the expulsion).
“Those
who condemn the Blood Accusation as a wicked invention for the purpose of
persecuting Jews and robbing them, must at the same time condemn wholesale some
of the highest dignitaries of the Catholic Church, men against whom nothing is
known beyond that they had excellent characters, like William Turbe, Bishop of
Norwich, to give an English example. [H: Let us not get “carried
away” with the excellence of these “characters”. I am NOT HERE
TO BASH JEWS ANY MORE THAN ANY OTHER SECT OR CULT, READERS. KHAZARIAN ZIONISM
ANTICHRIST COMES IN ALL DENOMINATIONS, ALL COLORS, ALL RACES, OR ANY OF SAME.
THE “JEWISH” persons simply got caught up in the entrapment because
it was JUDAISM THAT WAS CHOSEN BY THE SERPENT PEOPLE FROM THE KHAZARIAN TRIBES.
THIS IS ALL PART OF THE ONGOING (FROM THE BEGINNING) PLAN TO TAKE THE WORLD
INTO FULL CONTROL OF LUCIFERIAN SATANISTS.]
“Many
of the earliest records we have of these Ritual Murders come from the pens of
Catholic historians, such as the Bollandists, a body of Belgian Jesuits; a list
of the principal works, Acte Sanctorum … historical record
between 1643 and 1883. The volumes in which they recorded various ritual
murders by Jews are mainly those writ-ten in the seventeenth century.
“Father
Creagh, Redemptorist, publicly accused Jews of the practice of Ritual Murder,
on 11th January, 1904, in a speech at Limerick. Authority: Jewish
Encyclopedia (1904), Vol. VIII, p. 89″.
Perhaps I
may best wind up this chapter by giving the names of the twelve members of
juries who investigated, considered and condemned the Jews in the Ritual Murder
case of la Guardia in Toledo, together with their qualifications; (1) Maestre
Fray Juan de Santaspiratus, Professor of Hebrew, Salamanca University; (2)
Maestre Fray Diego de Bretonia, Professor of Scripture; (3) Fray Antonio de la
Pena, Prior; (4) Dr. Anton Rodriguez Carnejo, Professor of Canon Law; (5) Dr.
Diego de Burgos, Professor of Civil Law; (6) Dr. Juan de Covillas, Professor of
Canon Law; (7) Fray Sebastian de Huerta; (8) Licentiate Alvaro de Sant Estevan,
Queen Isabel’s corregidor for Avila; (9) Ruy Garcia Mansio, Bishop Talevera’s
provisor; (10) Fray Rodrigo Vela, head of the Franciscan Monastery, Avila; (11)
Dr. Tristan, Cabnon of Avila; (12) Juna de Saint Estevan. On the findings of
such men of standing we surely have every right to reply.
IT WAS
NOTED THAT POPE LEO XIII BESTOWED DISTINCTIONS ON EDOUARD DRUMONT, AUTHOR
OF LA FRANCE JUIVE, WHO ACCUSED THE JEWS OF RITUAL MURDER
THEREIN. DRUMONT WROTE THE PREFACE TO A MINNIOT’S LE CRIME RITUAL CHEZ
LES JUIFS, 1914. Minniot reproduces long extracts written from a book
written in the Moldaian language by a converted ex-Rabbi in 1803 which was
published in the Greek in 1834 by Giovanni de Georgio under the title Ruin
of the Hebraic Religion. This converted Rabbi called himself by the
name of Neophyte. Extracts from his book were quoted in Achille Laurent’s Relation
Historique des Affairs de Syric Depuis 1840-1842. “This extract
gives very full information, confirms the murder, crucifixion and bleeding of
Christians by Jews for Ritual purposes, and the use of the blood for mixing
with Passover bread; and says that the practice is handed down by oral
tradition and that nothing appears about it in writing in the Jewish religious
books”.
Returning
now to Minniot’s book, especially to the Beilis trial: “Professor
Troitzky, the expert for the defence, was asked how then are to be understood
the two following texts: ‘Every Goim (anyone who is not a Jew)
studying the law must die’ and ‘even though he be the best of Goim”. Mr.
Troitzky declared that he admitted uncondi-tionally the existence of these two
texts in the writings of the Jews, but was at a loss to determine their
influence in the life of the Jews or on their relations with Gentiles. Although
always denying the use of the blood of Christians by the Jews for ritualistic
purposes, Professor Troitzky declared that he never considered this question
other than a point of view held by Jews-Talmudists. When it came to expressing
himself unequivocally on this question, as envisaged by the Jewish mystics, the
professor declared himself to be incapable to do so, having but a very vague
idea of the subject. (Cf, 191, 231, Vol. VI).
“IV.
The expert Pranaitis differed emphatically with Professors Glagoleff and
Troitzky. Having studied the religion of the Jews in every form, he discovered
the existence of the so-called ‘blood tenet’ among the Jews. The Catholic
priest Pranaitis based this conclusion on the following facts: All the
rabbinical schools, in spite of their divergence in many questions, meet on
common ground in their hatred of non-Jews, who, according to the Talmud,
are to be regarded as ‘beasts in human form’. This feeling of hatred and malice
which the Jews harbor towards all men belonging to other nationalities and
religions reaches its apex where Christians are concerned. This feel-ing
prompts the command to kill the non-Jews given in Talmud. The
celebrated rule ‘thou shalt not kill’ pertains to Jews ALONE.
[H: As
you read the following keep O.J. Simpson, et al., in mind, please.]
“However
the feeling of hatred is not the sole motive that conditions the relations of
the Jews with the Gentiles in the indicated sense. The extermination of
non-Jews is identified with religious heroism, prescribed by the law. According
to the mystic law especially, every death of a non-Jew hastens the advent of
Messiah, to which every Jew should aspire. The death of a non-Jew also has the
value of a sacrificial rite, a rite which was the most important one in the
cult of the Jew. The blood sacrifices could not be performed after the
destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem and the altar. To replace these
sacrifices the extermination of the non-Jews and Christians, these latter in
particular, was inaugurated. In killing all non-Jews a certain method indicated
in the KABALAH was recommended. THEY WERE TO BE KILLED ‘WITH
THEIR LIPS COMPRESSED, AS BEASTS THAT DIE VOICELESS AND WITHOUT A CRY’, AND
‘TWELVE KNIFE WOUNDS AND A FINAL BLOW WHICH MAKES THIRTEEN, ARE TO BE
INFLICTED’. Now in citing this text from the “ZOHAR” [H:
Listen to the similarities, Ranos.], the mystic book in which this method
of death is given, expert Pranaitis repeatedly brought the attention of the
presiding judge to the fact that the mouth of Youtchinsky was compressed and
that there were thirteen wounds on his right temple. [H: Care to check
the number of cuts on Mr. Goldman? You only THINK Mr. Goldman was a
“Jew”. I remind you that being a “Jew” has NOTHING TO DO
WITH BEING JEWISH OR HEBREW JUDAIST. There are so many clues as to the ritual murder
of Nicole and Ron Goldman as to boggle the mind. She was, in fact, sacrificed
as would be a Kosherized animal by the severing of her throat through all
vessels to the spinal cord–WHILE ALIVE. Sorry that this is “grossly
gory”–TRUTH AND FACT ARE OFTEN QUITE DISTASTEFUL. Do not expect to find
the same in every “crime” for there were other things involved here
in the “Simpson” case that give loud messages to different receivers.
If you haven’t yet read Gary Wean’s writings on THESE MURDERS, I suggest you
get them–NOW. You are being set up for massive riots in the aftermath, if it
waits that long, of this trial in slow progress. Mr. Simpson COULD NOT HAVE
KILLED THESE TWO PEOPLE.] * * * Pranaitis, after considering the
ritual murders known throughout the history of mankind, arrived at the
following conclusion: Murders of Christians by Jews for religious purposes do
take place as a perverted cumulative effect of the entire Jewish religion. As
for the murder of Youtchinsky, the circumstances under which it took place, the
method by which the wounds were inflicted, their disposition, the draining of
the blood from the body, the time of committing the crime, all these give to it
the characteristic traits of a typical ritualistic murder (Cf. 243, Vol. VI.).
[END
QUOTING OF PART 2]
I need to
leave this now so we will pick up Part 3 right here when we return. Thank you
for your attention, truth is not easy to witness from the “dark side”
but KNOW IT you must. You cannot “change” that which you do not KNOW exists.
THE
TALMUD UNMASKED,
Part 3
APPENDIX II
Picking up
directly where we left Part 2:
[QUOTING:]
Referring
to the converted Rabbi who called himself by the name of Neophyte: A copy of
his book was found in the Library of the Theological Academy of St. Petersburg.
Leese then tells us: “This work was translated from the Greek at a Court
Session by one of the experts, Professor Troitzky, who held a professorship in
the same Academy. The Neophyte affirms in his work that Judaism holds an
awesome mystery which is not revealed in its books and which consists in the
fact that Jews murder Christians to obtain their blood for different purposes.
If a Jew is in need of blood, he must not cut, but ‘prick and
pinch’. The opinion that the use of blood as food is forbidden to the
Jews is quite erroneous, since there are in the Talmut indications
to the contrary. * * * Excessive hatred which they feel toward Christians and
which makes them believe that in committing such crimes they offer a sacrifice
to God; the second reason is the superstition which they harbor about the
blood, attributing to it magic potentialities; finally, the rabbis who hesitate
to affirm that Jesus Christ was not the real Messiah think that they will be
saved if they spill the blood of christians. Having obtained the blood of
Christians, they use it for different purposes. The rabbis consider it to be an
excellent medication for eye and skin diseases which afflict the Jews so often.
Blood is also used in the ceremonies of marriage, circumcision, and burial, but
first of all in making of unleavened bread. For this last purpose they kidnap
children before the Passover, lock them up and then kill them to obtain their
blood. The murder is always preceded by tortures. The Jews prick the children,
believing that they are torturing Jesus Christ.
(Leese
tells the readers, p. 53 of his book: “Colonel Lindbergh’s son was
missed on 1st March, 1932. The Jewish feast of PURIM was on 22nd March. A
child’s body was found on 12th May, dead at least two months, according to the
experts, with the skull fractured in two places. I cannot see that it has ever
been proved that the body found was that of Colonel Lindbergh’s
son”. We divert here to mention that in Emile Gauvreau’s
book, What So Proudly We Hailed, the last picture in the book
is supposed to be that of the Lindbergh’s boy lying on a slab. Any observer
will note that the body is very badly decomposed, that one leg is missing from
the knee and that the height of the body, we are told, was four inches longer
than that of the missing boy.- E.N.S.)
Resuming
the translation of Minnoit’s book: “The supreme mystery known only to
rabbis, savants and Pharisees, and carefully concealed from the people, is this
use of the blood of Christians. A father on his death-bed transmits this
mystery under an extreme oath of secrecy to one of his sons. Neophyte says that
this mystery was transmitted to him by his father, who exacted from him an oath
never to reveal it, not even to his brothers. But having been baptized,
Neophyte held it impossible to remain silent on this point”.
Quoting
from p. 48 of Leese’s book: “Martin Luther seems to have had an inkling of
the true nature of the Jew when he said: ‘How the Jews love the Book of
Esther, which is so suitable to their bloodthirsty, revengeful, murderous
appetite and hopes. The Sun has never shown on such a bloodthirsty and
revengeful people, who fancy themselves to be the chosen people so that they
can murder and strangle the heathen’. (From the Erlangen edition
of Luther’s Table Talks, Vol. XXXII, p. 120.). This seems
plain speaking enough; but we find the Jew, C. Roth (Ritual Murder
Libe1 and the Jew) citing Martin Luther as having condemned the
‘libel’ of Ritual Murder ‘in unqualified terms’. However, the Jewish
Encyclopedia, (1904), Vol. VIII, p. 213, definitely states that Luther
charged the Jews with Ritual Murders”.
“At
Madgeburg, in 1562, a Protestant history of the Christian Church was compiled,
called the Madgeburg Centuries; it was compiled by a number of
Lutheran theologians headed by M. Flacius, and was first published as the Historia
Ecclesiae Christi. This book records the ritual murders of Blois,
Pontoise (Paris), Braisne, Fulda, Berne and Oberwesel”.
(The
McMillan Company, New York, 1906, published in four volumes, A History
of the Inquisition of Spain, by Henry Charles Lea. In Vol. II, p. 42,
we read: “In 1490, Davilla went to Rome in his eightieth year. Since 1461
he had been Bishop of Segovia and, in spite of Jewish descent, his family was
one of the most influential in Castile, intermarried with its noblest blood. He
had given ample proof of pitiless orthodoxy, in 1468, when, at Sepulveda, the
rabbi, Solomon Picco, and the leader of the synagogue were accused of
crucifying a Christian boy during Holy Week. Bishop Davilla promptly arrested
sixteen of those most deeply implicated, of whom seven were burnt and the rest
hanged, except a boy who begged to be baptized–although this did not satisfy
the pious Sepulvedans, who slew some of the remaining Jews and drove the rest
away).
(END
QUOTING OF PART 3)
Let us just
take up here next time.
REC #1
HATONN
WED., MAR.
8, 1995 7:26 A.M. YEAR 8, DAY 204
WED., MAR.
8, 1995
THE
TALMUD UNMASKED Part
4
APPENDIX II (continued)
RITUAL
MURDER
SIR RICHARD
BURTON
[QUOTING:]
Page 28 of
Leese’s book, supra: “Sir Richard Burton, the great explorer and
orientalist, who was English Consul at Damascus 30 years after the Ritual
Murder (of Padre Tomasi,–E.N.S.) studied the whole question of the Blood
Accusation, and eventually wrote The Jew, the Gipsy and El Islam,
of which this author has the edition edited by W.H. Wilkins and published by
Hutchinson in 1898. (I have a copy of this book which was bought in London in
1937.– E.N.S.) This work contains a damning indictment of the Talmud,
and a list of Jewish Ritual Murders, but Wilkins, in his preface (p.X) says:
‘In the exercise of the discretion given to me, I have thought it better to
hold over for the present the Appendix on the alleged rite of Human Sacrifice
among the Sephardim and the murder of Father Thomas; the only
alternative was to publish it in mutilated form'”.
Continuing,
Leese writes: “Let us therefore follow (1) the Book, (2) the appendix on
Ritual Murder.
(1) The
Book. This is easy; it is well nigh impossible to obtain.
(2) The
Appendix on Ritual Murder. What happened to it? This is what happened to it:
“‘See
D.L. Alexander versus Manners Sutton, King’s Bench Division, 27th March, 1911,
reported in the TIMES the following day. Herein, D.L.
Alexander, a Jew and President of the Jewish Board of Deputies, was able to
show that they had obtained an assignment of the manuscript from the surviving
executors of Sir Richard Burton. The executors had sold them to a bookseller,
who, in turn, sold them to Mammers Sutton; and he (Sutton), not knowing of any
assignment, made arrangements for the publication of the Appendix. D.L.
Alexander brought the action to stop this publication from taking place,
claiming copyright and delivery to him of the manuscript. The Jew won his
case.'” [H: I repeat for all you who think you can simply
copyright TRUTH and have it buried. If the information be truth in the
beginning–there ACTUALLY can be NO VALID COPYRIGHTS. However, the point I wish
to make is that unauthorized parties will get information and then copyright it
and it then becomes the most effective way to CENSOR information. This is the
main reason a book needs an ISBN number for registration purposes, but journals
and papers should never be copyrighted if you EVER want real truth TO BE KNOWN.
If the “original” work be truth, in science most especially, or a new
religious or historical work, it is only fair to have the information made
public and someone, hopefully, will come along at some point in future days, to
take the works and make them available somehow-somewhere. I take this
opportunity to readdress this very topic as concerns the Phoenix journals. The
first of the journals, prior to severing relationships with George Green of
America West Publishers-Distributors, bear his America West copyright. These
journals were not and are not his. Never were they his and they were to NEVER
BEAR COPYRIGHTS for we have no need of same since these are simply journals for
the gathering of information. The facts are that the imprint is equally as
phoney as is Mr. Green. The journals are not copyrighted and are free for any
and all to use in any way they might find worthy.
In the
instance of this book called THE TALMUD UNMASKED, the copy before
me is simply a reproduction of the Appendix. The entire volume is around
somewhere, I understand, but we at this desk have no copy. Do I fail to offer
this work because it may have copyright? I don’t know; it is a book written and
produced in April, 1892 (over a century ago), from St. Petersburg (Russia??).
Further, it is written in by a Master of Theology and Professor of the Hebrew
Language in old St. Petersburg. Who, if not God, has rights? It simply is a
point to ponder as we effort to bring understanding and historical review to
the attention of mankind. Therefore, just let us move on.]
“From
the Preface which is before us, we copy the following: ‘The Jew, Burton,
collected most of the materials for writing it from 1869 to 1871, when he was
Consul at Damascus. * * * Disguised as a native, and unknown to any living soul
but his wife, the British Counsul mingled freely with the motley populations of
Damascus, and inspected every quarter of the city–Moslem, Christian and
Jewish. His inquiries bore fruit in material, not only for this general essay
on the Jew, but for an Appendix dealing with the alleged rite of Human
Sacrifice among the Sephardim or Eastern Jews, and more
especially the mysterious murder of Padre Tomasi at Damascus in 1840. There is
little doubt that his inquiry into these subjects was one of the reasons which
aroused the hostility of the Damascus Jews against him; and that hostility was
a powerful factor, though by no means the only one, in his recall by Lord
Granville in 1871′”.
(On page 5
of the New York Times Book Review, April 11, 1937, there was a cut
of Sir Richard Burton, and an article titled: “That Homeric Character,
Burton of Arabia”. That review stated, in part: “Burton was very much
a man of earth, reveling in subjects not discussed in Victorian drawing-rooms.
* * * He was broken on the wheel of official intrigue in India at the beginning
of his career, lost the consulate of Damascus almost at the end for somewhat
the same reasons. * * * He was both impetuous and honest, the two blackest
vices in the consular service”. The following week, April 18, 1937, in
the Herald Tribune, reviewing the same book, Clare G. Stillman
wrote: “Burton was a man of invincible moral courage and integrity, of
wide enlightenment, the outspoken enemy of stupidity and hypocrisy, too
outspoken for his own good. * * * His encyclopedic Oriental erudition included
an unsurpassed knowledge of erotic philosophies and practices which he loved to
discuss in detail.”)
[H: I am
considered to be comparable to such men who are too outspoken for their own
good (or that of their press). I wonder, however, who might it really,
then, be good for? If I be too outspoken for my (our) “own good”, is
it not for the very reason of “good from mankind”? As you read about
ritual murders and life instances from the pain and total agony of a Cathy
O’Brien, do you find it erotic or painful in its truth? Ah, “both”,
you will respond. What is that feeling within that pronounces itself valid but
you think it perhaps to be “erotic”? IT IS FEAR! “There
but for the Grace of God, GO I.”]
“With
this introduction, we now cite some parts of Burton’s chapter dealing
with The Jew and the Talmud” (p.77). According to the Talmud (Chap.
IV., SANHEDRIN, of the fourth Mischnis section, or order Seder
Nezikin), the Gentile sanctifying the Sabbath must be put to death
without asking questions, [H: Golly-gee, it sounds like truthbringers and
patriots of your year 1995, and on….] even as the Lord said to him,
“Thou shalt not rest day or night. The Oral Law is superior to all
others”.
P.81. In
the books of Moses [H: HISTORICALLY, you will find NOT ONE SHRED OF
EVIDENCE OR TRUTH IN THAT THERE EVER EVEN WAS A “MOSES”.] we
find that blood is used as a purifier. * * * Human blood is not used by
us in its pure state: nor can we (Sic Burton. The Hebrew
scribe is supposed to be speaking) call it human for the Gentiles are
mere vermin, and of their daughters it is said, “Cursed be he that lieth
with any beast”. [H: Would this not give you full input and knowledge
about just WHO THE BASTARDS WERE WHO PRO-NOUNCED THE NATIVE AMERICANS TO BE
NON-HUMAN? WHITES, AS SUCH, WERE NOT THE ENEMY OF ANY PEOPLE–FOR ALL PEOPLE
NOT BEING “JEWS” ARE GOYIM (not human). This is NOT
“revisionism”, readers, this is original historic FACT–by the very
words and pronouncements of generations of the NOW SO-CALLED “JEWS”.
“Jew” is actually defined as Khazarian Serpent People falsely calling
themselves everything from Christians to (J)ews. Those wishing rights to
“everything” refer to “Jew” as a religion when convenient, a
“race” when convenient and on and on. They take from ALL to utilize
for selves.] It [blood of the Goyim] must also mostly
undergo through manipulation a change in essence. Nor is it administered
indiscriminately, but only to the most zealous. On the eve of the Passover the
chief Scribe attends the oven, and mixes what he pleases with the cakes, which
are then sent around to the congregation.
P.98 of
Burton’s Jew, See the MISCHNAH [H: Mishpucka??],
fifth part, tract Edonyoth, i. art. 5 et seq. This is a
fair answer to the host of contradictions and the general charge of
inconsistency leveled by anti-Talmud writers against the Oral Law,
and it enables the modern rabbi to make almost any assertion that he pleases
con-cerning disputed points. Thus, one will find in the Talmud that
Christians should be put to death, the other that they should be treated like
brothers. This is certainly very convenient.
P. 104. The
large space given * * * to the unhallowed practices of magic and necromancy,
the summoning and conversion with devils and spirits, the advocacy of
astrology, charms, and philters served as a pretext for Pope and Inquisition to
attack it. In A.D. 553, Justinian proscribed it (Talmud) by Novella 146
as a “tissue of puerilities, of fables, of iniquities, of insults, of
imprecations, or heresies, and of blasphemies”. It was destroyed by
Gregory IX, in A.D. 1230; it was burnt in Paris by Innocent IV, 1244; and it
was proscribed by Clement N, by Honorius IV, and by John XXII.
(This Pope
[Honorius IV] in 1286 wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury, directing him to
have a care lest any one read a book from which all evils flow. Pope Pius IV,
when authorizing a new edition, expressly stipulated that it should not be
published without the title of Talmud, which appears to have been a
kind of Shibboleth, Si tamen prodierit sine nomine Talmud, talerari
deberet. Such was the terror which it inspired in the ecclesiastical
mind.
A. is
the father of B. B. told this author that A. started his education in Europe
with the idea of becoming a rabbi but that when he had started his studies of
the unexpurgated edition of the Talmud and found what it
taught concerning Christ and Christians, he not only discontinued his studies
but later was a convert to Christianity and out of this experience told B.
never to read an unexpurgated copy of the Talmud).
P.115.
Obviously such cruel and vindictive teaching as that recounted in the previous
chapter must bear fruit in crime and atrocities. * * * From earliest ages to
these modern days, and not in one place, but all the world over, the hatred of
the Jew against the non-Jew has been the fiercest. Those who are so ready to
admit and deplore the mighty provocations which aroused a spirit of retaliation
in the Rabbinical mind should equally make allowance for the natural feelings
of the unfortunate Gentiles and heathens when the “People of the
Synagogue” had their wicked will. * * * In A.D. 614, the Hebrews of
Galilee, according to Eutychius, joining the Persian army under Chosroes II,
caused a great slaughter of the Nazarenes. When the Holy City was captured,
they bought at a cheap rate those taken by the Persians, especially from the
Monastery of Mar Saba, for the sole purpose of butchering them. Burton then
continues, giving thirty-eight other cases of ritual murder, ending with page
127. On page 122, he says: “According to the Cronica
Serafica (della vita di S. Francesco d’Assisi, Opera del Padre Damiano
Cornejo, 1721, lib. i., chap. 1) the Jews superstitiously used the blood of
Christians in childbirth, and sent it in a dried state to China and other
places, where they had synagogues, but where worshippers of Christ are not to
be found. Hence the Jews were eventually expelled from Spain and
Portugal”.
“TALMUDIC
FORGERIES”
In closing
our reply to the accusations of Ben Zion Bokser, the reader is directed to that
Christian classic: The History of the Christian Church, by Dr.
Philip Schaff. In Vol. I, p. 59, he writes: “The Talmud (i.e.,
Doctrine) [H: There, again, readers you have your clue as to WHO are
these people you can’t call Jews or a “race” or a
“religion”–they are a “doctrined people” following basic
Satanism–“TALMUDISTS”. That is the truth of it and that is
the definition of the people participating.] represents the
traditional, post exilian, and anti-Christian Judaism”, and then says on
page 156 of the same book: “Such was the Jewish religion at the time of
Christ. He was the only teacher in Israel who saw through the hypocritical mask
to the rotten heart. [H: Why don’t YOU just try to get a full UNEDITED
copy of the TALMUD! Also, while in the searching try to get copies
of the rituals of the temples of the MORMON church. (In Asia the very
word “mormon” MEANS: SATAN!, then by all
means go find the doctrine instructions for the church of satan.] None
of the great Rabbis, no Hillel, no Shammai, no Gamaliel,
attempted or even conceived of a reformation; on the contrary, they heaped
tradition upon tradition and accumulated the Talmud rubbish of
twelve large folios and 2947 leaves, which represents the anti-Christian
petrification of Judaism; while the four Gospels have regenerated humanity and
are the life and light of the civilized world to this day”. [H:
Well, forget the latter in its exuberant overstatement.]
In Vol. I,
p. 110, of George Foote Moore’s Judaism, Harvard University Press,
1932 he says: “Down to the rise of Karaites in the eighth century and
their revolt against the Talmud, there was nothing that deserved
the name of schism”. Again on p. 91 of the same volume, quoting Justin
Martyr, who was a native of Palestine (Schechem) and a contemporary, he says:
“Bar Cocheba took dire vengeance upon them (Nazarenes, or followers of
Jesus Christ) if they refused to deny Jesus their Messiah”.
About a
thousand years later, 1759, Leese tells us, p. 40 of the book we have cited:
“A converted Jew, J. J. Frank, formed a sect called the Frankists, at
Lemberg. These people were all Jews who had become Christians in revolt against
the evils taught in the Talmud. They said it was the Talmud which
was the root of all troubles between the Jews and Gentiles. Prince Etienne de
Mikoulissky, administrator of the archdiocese of Lemberg, instituted public
debates between the Frankists and the Talmudic Jews. A debate held
in July took place in which various matters were dealt with point by point
until six points had been settled: the seventh one was the Frankists’
declaration that ‘the Talmud teaches the employment of
Christian blood and he who believes in the Talmud ought to
make use of this blood’. The Frankists said they had learned this in
their youth as Jews. Under the heading Baruch Yavan, the Jewish
Encyclopedia , 1903, Vol. II, p.563, admits that the Frankists brought
the blood accusation against the Talmudists; also in Vol. VII p. 579, under
Judah Lob ben Nathan Krysa. There is a large bibliography with reference to the
Frankist community, of which the following two works may receive mention
here: La Malfaisance juive, by Pikulski, Lvov, 1760; and Materiaux
sur la question relative aux accusations portées contre les Juifs a propos des
crimes rituels , by J. 0. Kouzmine, St. Petersburg, 1914″.
Psalms
106, 36-38:
“And they served their idols: which were a snare unto them. Yea, they
sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils, and shed innocent blood,
even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto
the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood”.
With
reference to the death of Father Pranaitis, Mr. Leese, replying to this
author’s question on this, wrote me as follows: “The statement that
Pranaitis was shot by the Cheka comes from the same eye-witness (who
was a witness in the Beilis case). Eye-witness seen by me (Leese) personally;
cannot give his name”.
* * *
With the
concerted persecution of this editor, especially by those whom he expected
would be his friends on the record of his life and service, we now dare affirm
in our effort to present the truth that we are not apprehensive of the final
result and base our statement on Romans 8, 36-37: “For thy sake we
are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay,
in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved
us”.
E.N.S.,
Nov. 20, 1939
[END OF
QUOTING]
