use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~2 users here now
David Icke Making Sense for Once in His Life
submitted 1 month ago by hennaojisan from youtube.com
view the rest of the comments →
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 1 month ago (0 children)
Frankists are a particularly easy target as Judaism does not support them. Indeed, Frankists were expelled from Judaism. Some so called conspiracy theoreticians make the connection between Frankists and Freemasons. Helen Nesta Webster noticed the connection as the first one. Today she is called by the always reliable Wikipedia, /s., a far-right conspiracy theoretician, despite the fact that she was very cautious in her conclusions.
I find her conclusions quite well supported, considering the time they were written. Another author who has made the connection of Freemason with Frankists is Rabbi Marvin Antelman. He appears to be a disinformation agent directing attention to Frankists. As many people here on saidit and reddit do.
Frankists disappeared long ago an their legacy is the pro-Israel attitude in Masonry. It is not realistic to think there are any Frankists left, and the only Sabbateans are the followers of Turkish Dönmeh, not a major threat to a modern society. Of course it is not so, there are no Frankists, their contribution was to give Mizraim and Mephis Freemasonry a clearer kabbalistic and messianic program.
So, there was a conspiracy. There were actually three conspiracies, which derived from the same origins.
Freemasons had a conspiracy trying to change the old regime to the new world.
This was the dual nature of Freemasonry: there were like two types of Masons, one type were the leftist revolutionaries.
Masons more or less stopped their revolutionary activities, however, after the Paris Commune fell, but the conspiracy continued in secret societies associated with Rosicrucians and Theosophists.
Many people find it contradictory that Freemasons and international bankers would have had connections to leftist revolutionaries, but it is historically true. It is not so strange, at least for bankers. It is possible for investors to make good profits on any catastrophes, especially if they can foresee the catastrophe, which is the case if investors finance wars and revolutions.
Catastrophes cause shortages and in open market shortages increase prices. In the time of war there often are shortages of many things. If the country does not impose rations, prices increase to the point where high prices suppress demand or enable compensating production.
If a country imposes rations it leads to a black market. In international markets it usually is not possible to enforce rations and therefore shortages increase prices to the level where demand decreases or new production comes economically viable. This price level is much higher than the economic price level for existing production, which means that old producers can make huge profits.
An international investor is in the best position to benefit from these shortages in the long run, as different products will have shortages in different catastrophes. An investor, if he knows when the catastrophe starts and ends, is able to buy shares of industry, which will experience a boom. There are other ways bankers can benefit from wars and catastrophes, like giving loans. Catastrophes are real business if they are correctly used.
Doyle does not write in Sherlock Holmes stories what happened later to this New World Order conspiracy. It is quite well known from other sources:
You may naturally wonder what international bankers might have done:
There was a counteraction against communism (like Nazis), also fomenting catastrophes. Could bankers possibly benefit from them?
The fact is that investors can benefit from any change, provided that they take correct actions. It seems that a small group of international bankers did finance early Communistic revolutionaries. As one ethnic group was over-represented among these early Communists, and the group of bankers also had a certain composition, an ethnic adjective was added to the New World Order conspiracy, though it was not a conspiracy by any ethnic group. An ethnic association is to some extent justified of the Communistic stage (not of the Masonic stage) by member statistics.
What is the stage after Communism fell can be deduced and I do not need to deduce it. In any case, these are no myths. The great conspiracy was true and though suppressed, the facts can be found even today with some own work.
Communism was a conspiracy, though not by an occult secret society. They used secret parties. Zionism tried to restore the Jews and create Israel, and there is Israel.
One cannot really seriously question whether there was a plan and whether the plan was advanced by secret plots. I have noticed efforts against the Catholic Church and for promoting multi-culture, gender equality, immigration, liberalization, humanism, futurism, holocaust cult, Israel interests, race denial and all these things the rightists so like to mention. I do not think these efforts are spontaneous and I link them to the original conspiracy. There is clearly something happening in the Catholic church quite at odds with the traditionalist Catholic doctrine.
[Thus, I must conclude that the Catholic church has been infiltrated. The first Jesuits, conversos, many of whom were crypto-Jews, were kicked out of the order in the 17th century. The Jesuits slowly died out, and did not have much power until the 19th century. They were particularly, anti-semitic and were against the memorialists or the Jews who were disallowed into the order based on the blood rule. What is clear, presently, is a subversion of the counter Jesuit revolution, or traditional Jesuits. Thus, I must conclude that the memorialists or memorialistas have in the 20th century, infiltrated the Jesuit movement and have effectively communized, liberalized and hijacked traditional Catholicism. After, WW2, the blood rule, disallowing Jewish blood into the order was disbarred.]
When did Zionism start? One could answer that it started from pre-Zionism around 1840 and that is a reasonable answer, but one could also claim that it started in Napoleon’s time when Napoleon almost promised Jews a home country. [Napoleon was a Freemason., hence his utter distaste
for the traditional Jesuit order. There are numerous picture of Napoleon displaying the masonic hidden hand gesture.]
But I think it started much earlier. I suggest the 17th century when Judah Leon Templo presented his plans for the Temple of Solomon. It so well fits to the beginning of the secret society of the builders of the temple of Solomon. The time fits to Shabbatai Zevi, the translation of Kabbalah to Latin and Christian Zionism in England. If this is the correct starting time and all these things are linked, then it was always a conspiracy and it still continues today.
The central question in the Jewish Problem was that in the old world order, monarchy and aristocracy, Jews had a special position as king’s people. There is no doubt about this. They had privileges and restrictions. If the Kings of Edom were destroyed, this position had to change. If Jews were to assimilate, they would lose their identity and their leaders would lose the people, but assimilation was not so easy because Jews become to be in direct competition with Christians.
Jews had better education than Christians, more money and they had their social networks because of their former special position, not from a higher genetic intelligence as some try to claim.
This situation could only create new Anti-Semitism even where it did not earlier exist. Therefore Zionists wanted a home country, and finally it had to be in Palestine. The plan was made and executed by using all connections, but the result is seen now and it is not good. In modern time you should not do what Israel is currently doing. There is always a solution, here there is no wish to find a solution.
Assimilation also failed. Two million Jews stayed in the Soviet Union, but they finally did not assimilate and most of them immigrated to Israel after Communism fell.
The reality, of course, is that Jews were reliable supporters and partisans for Communism during World War II, a period that witnessed the peak of propaganda against Judeo-Bolshevism. Rather than being a controversial opinion, this is one of the findings of Jewish historian Dov Levin in his Baltic Jews Under the Soviets, 1940–1946 (1994) and The Lesser of Two Evils: Eastern European Jewry Under Soviet Rule, 1939–1941 (1995), as well as a host of histories by other academics. And after World War II, Jews dominated communist governments throughout Eastern Europe.
There was a western understanding of Judeo-Bolshevism to the Western trope of “Judeo-Christian” civilization. It was a modern sociological construct designed to place (primarily) American Jews within a “universalist rubric” [p.224] and, later, to promote the pro-Zionist image of a:
“transatlantic community of values” united against Islam [p.281].
“transatlantic community of values” united against Islam [p.281].
This is itself part of the broader twentieth-century development in which the Jewish Question disappeared from mainstream Western discourse, only to be replaced with the ‘Whiteness’ Question and, most recently, the Islamic Question.
It cannot be said that assimilation succeeded in the USA, as there is the pro-Israel lobby and many powerful dual citizens and neocons. It is not strange that assimilation fails. Nobody has managed to assimilate Basques. Russians did not manage to assimilate Finns, Poles or Jews. But there is a difference, since none of these other people ever tried to use their position as a group to take over an entire country.