1917: A Great Year for Jewish Communists & Zionists

Released in December 2019, the film titled 1917was widely acclaimed and decorated with awards — including the recent Golden Globes awards for Best Motion Picture Drama and Best Director. Not having seen the film, we will refrain from reviewing the story which is set against the ghastly battlefield of  World War I. It’s interesting to note that out of the five individual years  which encompassed “The Great War” (1914-1918)the filmmakers chose the holy year (for many Jews)of 1917 for its title — instead of 1914, 1915, 1916 or 1918. Maybe it’s  just a coincidence — or maybe it’s a message among “their crowd.” Who knows?

But the number does offer us a good “teachable moment”  for explaining the history-altering significance of 1917 — a year that was very good for “the usual suspects” (so good that (((they))) made a museum exhibit in its memory) — yet utterly disastrous for so many millions of “goyim.” We now republish a popularAnti-NY Times piece which originally appeared in one of our 2017 issues.

A FLASHBACK CLASSIC

Picture

Herbert Johnson’s anti-immigration cartoon (with “anti-Semitic” overtones) from the era, titled “Make This Flood Control Permanent.”New York Times: Revisiting 1917, a Year That Reverberates for Jews Around the World

REBUTTAL BY

Picture

A museum exhibit set to open this weekend at the National Museum of American Jewish History in Philadelphia and later this year at the American Jewish Historical Society in New York will focus on three historic events and their impact on Jews (evidently, no one else really matters). The exhibit titled, “1917: How One Year Changed the World,”will feature America’s entry into World War I, the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the Balfour Declaration.

Though much of what this particular Slimes article tells of these three events is indeed accurate, the deception lies in what is omitted about this sad centennial. Let’s dive in and see what we mean.

Picture
Picture

Two major Jewish museums are teaming up to school their flocks on 1917 — but their exhibit leaves out a few details.

Slimes: The war and the revolution resulted in strict limits on immigration to the United States, reflecting a fear among Americans that unrest in Europe would spread to their country. The restrictions were not overtly aimed at Jews, but because the quotas from countries with high Jewish populations were tightened, fewer Jews were able to settle in the United States.

The Omission: The restrictions were aimed, in large part, at stopping the influx of Anarchists and Communists who had been causing problems in America since the 1880’s. And it just so happened (surprise, surprise) that many of these subversive characters were of a certain ethnic group (cough cough).

Picture
Picture
Picture

1 & 2 – 1901: President McKinley was murdered by Leon Czolgosz, an anarchist son of Polish immigrants // 3. The lovely and gracious Anarchist guru Emma Goldman (cough cough) from Lithuania (Russian Empire) defended Czolgosz’s dirty deed. 

Slimes: After the revolution, when the Bolsheviks came to power, and the xenophobia coalesced together and had the power to influence, that fear accelerated.

The Omission: The Bolshevik Revolution was a Jewish affair. With the exception of front man Lenin (1/4 jew who spoke Yiddish), a review of the roster of Russia’s leading Bolshevik killers reads like the guest list for a Russian-Jewish Bar Mitzvah — Trotsky(Bronstein)SverdlovDzerzhinskyLitvinov(Wallach)Radek(Sobelsohn)Kamenev(Rosenfeld)Uritsky and many, many more. 

Picture
Picture

The Bolshevik Revolution and subsequent bloodbath were Jewish — no “ifs,” no “ands,” and no “buts” about it!

Slimes: As the United States was entering the war, there were concerns among Jews over the persecution of those still in Russia and Eastern Europe.

Omission: Apart from the fact that the “persecution”  of the chosenites was greatly exaggerated, it is important to note that the Communist movements of the other nations of Eastern Europe were also led by the usual suspects — Bela Kun in Hungary; Max Goldstein in Romania: Rosa Luxemburg in Germany et al. It is understandable that the good Christian people of these nations might come to justifiably resent the Jewish-led drive for a Bolshevik Europe.

Slimes: Not all Jewish immigrants viewed the United States as a safe haven. A handful of documents highlight the little-known story of Boris Reinstein, who came from Russia and made a career as a druggist in Buffalo. His 1917 application for a passport is on display, as is his 1923 renunciation of his United States citizenship. Mr. Reinstein was a true believer in the Bolshevik Revolution and the Soviet ideology and left his wife, Anna, to return to Russia, where he worked in the Library of the Marx, Lenin and Engels Institute.

Comment: An interesting and useful little truth gem which validates our points of argument. Thanks Slimes!

Picture
Picture
Picture

Blah-blah-blah…Always soapbox rabble-rousing on behalf of “the people.” Trotsky (Russia), Kun (Hungary) Luxemburg (Germany)Slimes: The Balfour Declaration, meanwhile, expressed Britain’s support for a Jewish home in Palestine. For Dr. Perelman and Rachel Lithgow, executive director of the American Jewish Historical Society, one gratifying coup was the loan of two draft versions of the Balfour Declaration from the financier Martin Franklin…This was the text that was forwarded to Lord Balfour and was used as the basis of the Balfour Declaration. Arthur James Balfour, for whom the declaration is named, was Britain’s foreign secretary. The final declaration, in the form of a letter dated Nov. 2, 1917, was sent to one of Britain’s most distinguished Jewish citizens, Baron Lionel Walter Rothschild.

Ultimately, it said, in part: “His Majesty’s government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object.” The document also added that “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.”

Omission: Solid history, but the direct linkage between the Balfour Declaration and America’s entry into World War I is oh-so-conveniently “forgotten” about.

Picture
Picture
Picture

125,000 American “doughboys” died a horrible death for Zionism and Globalism/Bolshevism. 

Picture

Chaim Weizmann and Arthur Balfour — immortalized on 1967 Israeli postage stamps to mark the 50th anniversary of that dirty deal which dragged the USA in World War 1. 

A wealthy New Yorker named Benjamin Freedman, a former aide to Bernard Baruch, later split with his fellow Jewish millionaires and “blew the whistle” on The Balfour Declaration and Zionist treachery in general. Freedman at his finest, from a 1961 speech at the Willard Hotel in Washington:

*****
“Let me show what happened while we were all asleep. …..

World War I broke out in the summer of 1914. … There are few people here my age who remember that. Now that war was waged on one side by Great Britain, France, and Russia; and on the other side by Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey. What happened?

Within two years, Germany had won that war: not alone won it nominally, but won it actually. The German submarines, which were a surprise to the world, had swept all the convoys from the Atlantic Ocean, and Great Britain stood there without ammunition for her soldiers, stood there with one week’s food supply facing her — and after that, starvation. 

At that time, the French army had mutinied. They lost 600,000 of the flower of French youth in the defense of Verdun on the Somme. The Russian army was defecting. They were picking up their toys and going home, they didn’t want to play war anymore, they didn’t like the Czar. And the Italian army had collapsed.

Now Germany — not a shot had been fired on the German soil. Not an enemy soldier had crossed the border into Germany. And yet, here was Germany offering England peace terms. They offered England a negotiated peace on what the lawyers call a status quo ante basis. That means: “Let’s call the war off, and let everything be as it was before the war started.” 

Well, England, in the summer of 1916 was considering that. Seriously! They had no choice. It was either accepting this negotiated peace that Germany was magnanimously offering them, or going on with the war and being totally defeated.

While that was going on, the Zionists in Germany, who represented the Zionists from Eastern Europe, went to the British War Cabinet and — I am going to be brief because this is a long story, but I have all the documents to prove any statement that I make if anyone here is curious, or doesn’t believe what I’m saying is at all possible — the Zionists in London went to the British war cabinet and they said: “Look here. You can yet win this war. You don’t have to give up. You don’t have to accept the negotiated peace offered to you now by Germany. You can win this war if the United States will come in as your ally.”

The United States was not in the war at that time. We were fresh; we were young; we were rich; we were powerful. They [Zionists] told England: “We will guarantee to bring the United States into the war as your ally, to fight with you on your side, if you will promise us Palestine after you win the war.”

In other words, they made this deal: “We will get the United States into this war as your ally. The price you must pay us is Palestine after you have won the war and defeated Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey.”

Now England had as much right to promise Palestine to anybody, as the United States would have to promise Japan to Ireland for any reason whatsoever. It’s absolutely absurd that Great Britain — that never had any connection or any interest or any right in what is known as Palestine — should offer it as coin of the realm to pay the Zionists for bringing the United States into the war.

However, they made that promise, in October of 1916. And shortly after that — I don’t know how many here remember it — the United States, which was almost totally pro-German — totally pro-German — because the newspapers here were controlled by Jews, the bankers were Jews, all the media of mass communications in this country were controlled by Jews, and they were pro-German because their people, in the majority of cases came from Germany, and they wanted to see Germany lick the Czar.

The Jews didn’t like the Czar, and they didn’t want Russia to win this war. So the German bankers — the German-Jews — Kuhn Loeb and the other big banking firms in the United States refused to finance France or England to the extent of one dollar. They stood aside and they said: “As long as France and England are tied up with Russia, not one cent!” But they poured money into Germany, they fought with Germany against Russia, trying to lick the Czarist regime.

Now those same Jews, when they saw the possibility of getting Palestine, they went to England and they made this deal. At that time, everything changed, like the traffic light that changes from red to green. Where the newspapers had been all pro-German, where they’d been telling the people of the difficulties that Germany was having fighting Great Britain commercially and in other respects, all of a sudden the Germans were no good. They were villains. They were Huns. They were shooting Red Cross nurses. They were cutting off babies’ hands. And they were no good.

Well, shortly after that, Mr. Wilson declared war on Germany.

The Zionists in London sent these cables to the United States, to Justice Brandeis: “Go to work on President Wilson. We’re getting from England what we want. Now you go to work, and you go to work on President Wilson and get the United States into the war.” And that did happen. That’s how the United States got into the war. We had no more interest in it; we had no more right to be in it than we have to be on the moon tonight instead of in this room.

Now the war — World War One — in which the United States participated had absolutely no reason to be our war. We went in there — we were railroaded into it — if I can be vulgar, we were suckered into — that war merely so that the Zionists of the world could obtain Palestine. Now, that is something that the people in the United States have never been told. They never knew why we went into World War One. Now, what happened?

After we got into the war, the Zionists went to Great Britain and they said: “Well, we performed our part of the agreement. Let’s have something in writing that shows that you are going to keep your bargain and give us Palestine after you win the war.” Because they didn’t know whether the war would last another year or another ten years. So they started to work out a receipt. The receipt took the form of a letter, and it was worded in very cryptic language so that the world at large wouldn’t know what it was all about. And that was called the Balfour Declaration.

The Balfour Declaration was merely Great Britain’s promise to pay the Zionists what they had agreed upon as a consideration for getting the United States into the war. So this great Balfour Declaration, that you hear so much about, is just as phony as a three dollar bill. And I don’t think I could make it more emphatic than that.”

**** End quote ***

Yes indeed. That fateful history-altering year of 1917 was very bad for humanity. But it was very “good for the Jews” — as the popular inside-the-Tribe saying goes — which is why the Jewish museums are commemorating its 100th anniversary. And that, dear reader, is some serious REAL history. 

Picture
Picture

Later labelled (and libeled) by the Anti-Defamation League asa “self-hating jew,” defector Benjamin Freedman spent a fortune, gave many speeches, and published several books trying to warn America about the Jewish Mafia.

https://www.realhistorychan.com/1917-a-very-bad-year.html

Biden to use force to crush opposition to masks and vaccines at city council and school board meetings.

For those who have not yet gone to school boards and city Council meetings, it is time to start. Once they stop people from speaking out at school boards and city Council meetings, they have effectively ended the First Amendment. After the First Amendment, is the Second Amendment, so that when a tyrannical government takes away your right to speak, you have guns to make sure you still have the right to speak.

To further complicate things, we are running out of food. This is not an accident. This was completely planned, and this has happened before. The bankers deliberately take control of the food supply, and make sure there are issues, so that the people do not have food, and the people will rise up, then the bankers step in with their new rules and pretend like they care for people and will save them.

And, as if Biden attacking our First Amendment rights, they are trying to force vaccine and mask mandates down our throat’s, and a food shortage is not enough, the bankers have another strategy. They are pushing race tensions.

Have you ever heard the name Jesse Dirkhising? What about Channon Christian and Chris Newsom? Who are they and why have you not heard their names likely? Jesse Dirkhising was a 13-year-old boy who was brutally abused and murdered by two men. Channon Christian and Chris Newsom were a young couple who were brutally raped, abused, and murdered by five assailants. The media did not widely report on this because Jesse Dirkhising was murdered by two homosexual men (details here, and here, and Channon Christian and Chriss Newsom were murdered by five black people (details here). The media only cares if one of its victim groups are injured or killed. Other than that, they completely do not care.

I thought my whole entire family was aware of this habit of the media of lying and trying to divide by race, but apparently not. When a friend of the family was recently killed, who happened to be black, in an altercation in a bar over a girl, and was shot by the girls boyfriend, it seems there is a lot to be determined before a judgment is reached. However, the irresponsible media, and Democrat politicians are out screaming that Oregon is racist, and unfortunately, grieving family members of the deceased Barry Washington, and even some of my own family members are badly deceived by this.

It is time for Americans of all genders and races to unite against the real enemy, the Talmudic Jewish Bankers who control all of the worlds money and all of the worlds information.

 

Urgent! YouTube Bans ALL Anti-Vax Videos

YouTube will ban all “harmful vaccine content” from its platform, including claims that vaccines are ineffective at reducing disease transmission. The ban comes after a year of escalating censorship by the Google-owned company.

urgent! youtube bans all anti vax videos

© Reuters / Stephane Mahe

“We’ve steadily seen false claims about the coronavirus vaccines spill over into misinformation about vaccines in general, and we’re now at a point where it’s more important than ever to expand the work we started with Covid-19 to other vaccines,” YouTube said in a blog post on Wednesday.

The new rules prohibit content alleging that vaccines “cause chronic side effects,” that they “do not reduce transmission or contraction of disease,” and that they contain unlisted ingredients like fetal cells. The rules apply to all currently approved and administered vaccines, and not just Covid-19 shots.

At first glance, the rules are open to interpretation. YouTube’s moderators will have to decide, for instance, whether content discussing side effects strays beyond the “rare side effects that are recognised by health authorities.”Likewise, multiple studies and real-world data have suggested that Covid-19 vaccines are less effective at preventing transmission and infection than previously thought, and some suggest that this efficacy wanes with time.

And, while YouTube explicitly bans claims that vaccines contain fetal tissue or fetal cell lines, shots for various diseases – including Hepatitis A, Rubella and Chickenpox – are actually manufactured using cell lines started in aborted fetal tissue, but individual doses do not contain any of this tissue.

Content violating these new rules will receive a series of “strikes” from YouTube, with three strikes resulting in the termination of the offending channel.

The new policy adds to YouTube’s existing ‘Covid-19 medical misinformation policy,’ which sets out a wide range of forbidden topics regarding the coronavirus. These include videos “encouraging home remedies,” content claiming “that masks do not play a role in preventing the contraction or transmission of Covid-19,” and content “that recommends use of Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine for the prevention of Covid-19.”

The latter two topics are controversial, as there is no scientific consensus that masks prevent transmission of the virus, and Ivermectin has shown some promise in studies as a treatment for Covid-19.

Nevertheless, YouTube stated on Wednesday that over 130,000 videos have been removed since last year for violating this policy.

Earlier this week, RT’s German-language channels (RT DE and Der Fehlende Part) were permanently deleted by YouTube. The company took down the channels after handing out a strike to RT DE over alleged “medical misinformation” in four videos.

Among these cases of supposed “misinformation” was an interview with German epidemiologist Friedrich Puerner, who was critical of his government’s methods of battling the pandemic. He, however, was in favor of vaccination and never doubted the Covid-19 pandemic.

Starting September 21, RT DE was no longer allowed to upload any videos or conduct live streams on its YouTube channel. RT DE content, albeit not the flagged videos, was shared through another channel, the DFP (also owned by RT in Germany).

This, YouTube claimed, was a violation of the strike issued to RT DE and the Google-owned platform took down both channels.

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, told journalists on Wednesday that the banning amounted to “a case of censorship, and of obstructing the dissemination of information by the media,” and would be investigated by Russian media regulators, adding “there must be zero tolerance for such violations of the law.”

Urgent! YouTube Bans ALL Anti-Vax Videos

Wikipedia Co-Founder Says Online Encyclopedia Is Now Largely Just ‘Leftist Propaganda’

Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger has blasted the site for its slide into “leftist propaganda,” accusing it of long since abandoning impartiality and simply becoming an amplifier for mainstream news narratives.

Sanger co-founded Wikipedia with with Jimmy Wales in 2001.

wikipedia co founder says online encyclopedia is now largely just 'leftist propaganda'

SOPA Images via Getty Images

During an interview with the Epoch Times, Sanger noted that the online encyclopedia began with noble intentions but is now just another tool to demonize people who challenge the consensus.

“Wikipedia made a real effort at neutrality for, I would say, its first five years or so,” said Sanger, adding, “And then … it began a long, slow slide into what I would call leftist propaganda.”

Wikipedia is run by around 125,000 volunteer editors, the vast majority of whom are leftists, with a further 1,000 administrators who enjoy special privileges to block others who go against the grain.

Sanger explained how Wikipedia now serves not just to skew information, but to viciously demonize anyone on the right or anyone deemed to be a “contrarian.”

Wikipedia “casts them as conspiracy theorists, are far right or whatever, when they and their friends and people who know them well would never describe them in that way,” Sanger said.

After banning sources such as Fox News or the Daily Mail, Wikipedia now relies almost entirely on far-left outlets and legacy media sources to determine truth.

“More recently, they’ve gotten rid of almost all conservative news sources as sources for their articles,” he said

“And so as the news media has shifted, and as the establishment, frankly, has shifted more to the left or to the left, the content of Wikipedia has followed suit.”

As we previously highlighted, a perfect example of Wikipedia’s extreme political bias was evident when the website’s editors deliberately sought to bury links between convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and Bill Clinton.

The fact that Clinton flew on Epstein’s ‘Lolita Express’ private jet at least 26 times, which was reported by the media multiple times back in 2016, disappeared from Wikipedia before it was added back in after an outcry.

Editors also sought to scrub any of Epstein’s links to Clinton while amplifying his links to Donald Trump, which were less direct and less damaging.

Wikipedia Co-Founder Says Online Encyclopedia is Now Largely Just ‘Leftist Propaganda’

WHEN HUSBANDS AND WIVES ROLES ARE REVERSED

Written By Michael Pearl at No Greater Joy

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Pearl,

First of all, praise God for Created to Be His Help Meet! A woman at my church recommended this book to me. I started reading it and it has changed my life and my marriage! I told a few other women about it and they are reading as well, and their marriages are much better. Thank You. Thank God.

Recently, I have gone back to work full-time and my husband is at home with the kids and homeschooling them. My question is how can I still be a help meet in this situation? My husband is having health issues and thought it best for us to switch. He loves to cook and has been cooking. What are your thoughts on this situation?

Thank you,

A Reader

Michael Pearl Answers:

Dear Reader, understand that I use your question as a springboard to address this issue in a broader way. Some of the things I say may not fit your situation at all. I am not attributing attitudes or actions to either you or your husband. Use my comments to gather principles that might apply to your situation.

It is never ideal for the woman to be the breadwinner and the man to be the home-keeper for the simple reason that the role reversal (a role dictated by our created natures) places each in a position contrary to their nature. A single woman may fit into the workplace as well as a man. A single man with children may function as the housekeeper, cook, homeschool teacher, etc., and do a fair job of it—all consistent with human nature. But the marriage relationship is unique. The man by nature is the savior, provider, and protector who braves the cruel world and carries the responsibility to protect and nourish his wife and family. It is in a man’s genes to take the command-and-control position. To become a dependent rather than the provider wreaks havoc on a man’s self-esteem. In our modern world, the one whose name is on the paycheck is the head of all finances, the one to be thanked and appreciated. That person is the fountain of the family, possessing the right of veto over all spending, and controlling the direction of the family where it involves finances.

The one who comes home tired from a day’s work is entitled to the recliner until dinner is served. It is the one who says, “Why aren’t my socks in the drawer?” and “This house is a mess; what have you been doing all day?” The breadwinner decides what kind of bread to eat and whether or not spending is foolish or necessary.

A bread-winning woman is not vulnerable and finds it difficult to come home and be a submissive, servant wife. To be forced to do so breeds resentment and a feeling of being used. I need not go on; you know these things and more to be true to nature and experience.

But sometimes life throws unnatural curves and turns our world upside-down. We have to make do like a one-legged man. We get around and get along in the best way we can. When a man is disabled and cannot enter the labor force, the wife may be thrown into an unnatural role of breadwinner. Sometimes the children are forced to work to provide for the family. It is not natural but it is necessary. A dependent man will have to accept a different worldview and a different role. He will have to accept not being fulfilled in the normal manner. And the bread-winning wife will need to learn humility and to try to maintain a feminine demeanor at home, giving deference to the man, allowing him to be a handicapped king in his limited domain. The dependent man will also need to learn humility and to accept his dependency with thanksgiving and grace. Like any unnatural handicap, it will not be easy, but it is entirely manageable, and each can find fulfilment in their role reversals.

However, when a couple reverses roles because the wife is able to make more money, or when the man is lazy and incompetent, or when she just likes to work and he just likes to hang out at home, you can be certain that neither is going to find fulfilment in their relationship, and their marriage is likely to end in the woman divorcing the man.

When both the man and woman are reconciled to the reality that the man is handicapped out of the work force through no choice of his own, and not having to do with incompetence, it takes the edge off of blame and the discomfort of role reversal; but when they both know it is a choice, expect the man to shrink in his self-respect and the woman to grow masculine in her demeanor—leaving the marriage to suffer.

God said to Adam, not Eve, “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground” (Genesis 3:19).

Paul declared, “But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel” (1 Timothy 5:8).

“That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed” (Titus 2:4–5).

When Husbands and Wives Roles are Reversed