Makow: Rosa Parks a Jewish Pawn, MLK a Lecherous Fraud

by **anotherdrew** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:09 am

FourthBase - Now you think you know. Maybe those points are even all true, but maybe they don't mean what makow wishes you to believe. I trust that you are able to tell the difference though and I sure don't advocate censorship so read on, I agree with you, finding good bits in the rough is an important skill. But still, why should she have had to move? What she did was the right thing to do. I don't doubt that soviet agents did all they could to spur the civil rights movement on. Our treatment of blacks was a major stick they swung against the US in their rhetoric. They were probably hoping to cause trouble too. We surprised them by ending segregation and trying to right the wrongs of the past with some assistance. It was the right thing to do at the time, but as is typical of America, once we get started doing something... rather than improve it and/or correct the course as needed, we fight about ending it completely or keeping it as nearly unchanged as possible. There was a need for reform, because there IS some merit to the argument about growing a culture of dependence as having started to happen, but fixing something means more than just cutting benefits and calls for some investigation of just what "jobs" people are supposed to go get... there are many times when there are simply more people than their are jobs, what to do then? Just let them starve? Why do we charge so much for people to learn a skill?

by **anotherdrew** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:14 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>hmm - from my point of view it would seem more logical that the PTB would prefer we viewed Rosa Parks as a lone idealist because this fits in with "the american dream"<hr></blockquote> the PTB want people as compartmentalised as possible, sharp point seeming high-controversy things like this are a great way to seperate people. Does anyone really think that she shouldn't have done what she did? What does makow wish? that that the cross-dressing blackmailed fool J. Edgar Hoover had has his utah boys sweep in and round up the NAACP?

by **hmm** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:29 am

its like blaming the cia if someone gets inspired by democratic ideals. that some of the ideas of communism would be attractive to people in the civil rights movement seems natural. the basic ideal of communism is equal collective rights? <blockquote>Quote:<hr>there are many times when there are simply more people than their are jobs<hr></blockquote> this "fact" is questioned by communism too. this and most other current problems would be solved if we "shared fairly" on a global scale? and so we come to my theory as to why the RW have this NWO boogeyman,the powers that be are scared to death of a real one-world government based on equality for all.

by **hmm** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:33 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Does anyone really think that she shouldn't have done what she did?<hr></blockquote> precisely!

by **anotherdrew** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:45 am

"equating communism with soviet agents is a mistake its like blaming the cia if someone gets inspired by democratic ideals." True, but I just meant it may be, in this one case, a possibility, that would be funny if true... maybe we have the soviet union to thank for desegragation. In a way that's already fairly mainstream, in as much as Johnson was sick of getting hammered by the soviets about it. Even if true, that doesn't make it bad or a mistake or too fast or anything, it would just be an amusing irony I think. So there is a seed of worthiness grown out of a pile of makow.

by **slimmouse** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 7:59 am

Im just wondering Proldic, where exactly in this link does Makow say what you claim he said ? And isnt it time you answered the questions that 4th base asked ? Perhaps you might answer mine too. Especially YOUR Claim that Makow said something he didnt. If you want to play that twisty wordy game that you are so incredibly adept at, then tell me; Do YOU think he meant ALL jews used Rosa Parks ? I mean, to the uneducated in the way this works, that would immediately tend to Leap out at you from this link now, wouldnt it ? Do YOU think he meant JUDAISM in its entirety USED Rosa Parks ? Or WHAT EXACTLY was your point ???

by **Dreams End** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 12:34 pm

You know, this does belong in the firepit, even though someone opposing this article posted it. But it's too bad, in some ways, because it is textbook. The whole thing is bullshit, of course, but I thought I would teach you folks how to read. First off, you notice that he clearly has an agenda. To me, unless his article were meticulously sourced, which it clearly is not, I wouldn't even bother with it. The only way you can find those "nuggets of truth" is if the sources are listed and you can check them directly. There is no way to find said "nuggets" if they aren't sourced, as then they are just a bunch of assertions. Evidently, that doesn't bother a lot of people around here. But it should. I thought I'd take one of his claims and dissect it a bit for you. It took me 17.6 seconds on google. The quote in question is this: <blockquote>Quote:<hr> "We must realize that our party's most powerful weapon is racial tensions. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by whites, we can mold them to the program of the Communist Party. In America we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the Negro minority against the whites, we will endeavor to instill in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negros. We will aid the Negroes to rise in prominence in every walk of life, in the professions and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the Negro will be able to intermarry with the whites and begin a process which will deliver America to our cause."<hr></blockquote> I know many of you would like to believe this sort of thing. Makow claims this is from one "Israel Cohen" in a document entitled "A Racial Program for the 20th Century" (1912) quoted by Congressman Abernathy, and entered into the Congressional Record (1957), p. 8559. Now I knew you Larouchians on here think empiricism is evil, so examining evidence isn't really your bag. But if you DID bother, you'd find that this quote was indeed in the congressional record. IT was indeed read into that record by a Congressman from Mississippi in 1957. Since I have a vague idea of the history of the South, it occurs to ME that a Congressman from Mississippi reading something into the record that suggests the civil rights movement is all a communist conspiracy MIGHT BE A LIE. So then you ask, where did Abernathy get that item? The answer: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Abernathy had found the quotation in a March letter to the editor of the Washington Star; he claimed it as proof that the civil rights movement was a foreign Communist plot. However, the Washington Star soon apologized for having printed the quotation without verifying its authenticity and, on February 18, 1958, published an article entitled "Story of a Phony Quotation--A Futile Effort to Pin It Down--'A Racial Program for the 20th Century' Seems to Exist Only in Somebody's Imagination", which traced the quotation to Mullins, who claimed to have found it in a Zionist publication in the Library of Congress. On August 30 of that year, Rep. Abraham Multer of New York read the Star article into the Congressional Record and raised several other points challenging the quotation's authenticity. These included the nonexistence of a British Communist party in 1912, the nonexistence of a British Communist author named Israel Cohen, and the failure of a book entitled A Racial Program for the Twentieth Century to appear either in the Library of Congress or in the British Museum Catalogue of Printed Books. The quotation has retained some popularity among racists and anti-Semites to this day, appearing on the websites of organizations such as Stormfront.org [1] and Jew Watch [2].<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Racial_Program_for_the_Twentieth_Century">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_R...th_Century</a> I admit it can be tough to do this kind of research because there are a handful of very famous such "quotes" that when you go to research their authenticity you simply find them repeated over and over on stormfront type sites. And, evidently, there are hundreds and hundreds of such sites. If you run that entire quote above through google you'll see what I mean. Stormfront, Christian Separatist, Zundelsite, national vanguard...just a few of the hits on the first two pages of this search. That alone should tell you something. For if the "case" for whatever the hell you fascists think you are making a case for, is so dependent on a few quotes that EVERY freaking nazi site on the planet is running them, then this "case" is not very deep at all.

by **slimmouse** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:12 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>The whole thing is bullshit, of course, but I thought I would teach you folks how to read.<hr></blockquote> So, YOU know how to read huh ? YOU know all about how people make up fabricated quotes and half quotes, and "National inquirer" type headlines and smears ? Well of course I knew that too DE. So, now that your back and functioning perfectly well again, I do believe we have some unfinished business. Its only ONE mouseclick away my freind; <a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm35.showMessageRange?topicID=1.topic&start=81&stop=100">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...1&stop=100</a> It comes in the form of a couple of questions put to you, prior to your "rebirth" phase. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=slimmouse@rigorousintuition>slimmouse</A> at: 11/9/05 12:15 pm

by **Dreams End** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 10:35 pm

Could you be just a LITTLE more specific. There are no questions from you on that page, or else I'm just missing them. Just repost them here...plus context if needed. Your link went to page 5, and you have this: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>why do you comedians keep misquoting me both out of context, or putting words into my mouth, or otherwise insulting me based upon such "intelligent" manipulation of my words ?"<hr></blockquote> I don't even remember. Your aren't one of the idiots who said it doesn't matter if the protocols are forgeries or not, you still believe them, are you? Because I know you wouldn't be asking the question if you were one of those guys. That would be stupid.

by **slimmouse** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 1:34 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I don't even remember.<hr></blockquote> Ill bet you dont, which is why no doubt you dissapeared as I made this prediction; No doubt you'll be asking for a list of examples next, cos youve conveniently forgot ? I hope youll Give me credit for that one at least lol. However just to back reference to the 'forgotten' You said ; <blockquote>Quote:<hr>"That’s successful Zionist gatekeeping, inflicted on a Jew, hiding behind the blood libel on the Jews. And Dreams End, self-appointed board policeman, excels at it." -slimmouse (God, I could KICK myself for bringing up that whole blood libel thing. That was so STUPID. Honey, could you pass me some of that gentile blood? This Matzoh is REALLY dry.)<hr></blockquote> Perhaps, you might find the post where I said the above ? I wont hold my breath. Id actually barely gotten it back at the time. I was busy trying to catch it having responded to one of your posts by actually agreeing with you regarding the "codename" for international bankers being Jews, only for you to then conveniently "forget" that exchange, and in some kind of not wholly untypical attempt at ridicule, come out with the following ; <blockquote>Quote:<hr>"And hey, wanna know something ? I dont give a shit who these "Bankers" are. Black, white, Green, Christian, muslim, Jewish, Martian, or whatever. If the cap fits wear it is what I say. Its a pity that here is a proffession traditionally associated and dominated by one particular ethnic group though, because anyone who dares so much as mention the word, let alone rightfully mention the heinous activities they indulge in is suddenly cast down with the dirty anti semites. " -slimmouse (I think that the absurd contradictions within this statement are designed to induce some sort of altered state. I think this may be some kind of Zen master. We are checking into it.)<hr></blockquote> This was of course my direct response to your earlier post that said ; <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Notice the terms "banker" and "Zionist." So, what we see is that the country, since it's inception, has been basically completely under the control of the bankers. And who are these bankers...they are Zionists. Now, I guess I'm a little weak on history, because I didn't realize there could have been such a thing as Zionists at the beginnings of American history. See, the Zionist movement started much later. Unless, of course, he's using "Zionist" to mean simply "Jews". But no one does that, now do they?<hr></blockquote> The only thing funny about this is the usual lack of context. Trouble is I stopped laughing at this kind of stuff a while back, with "intellectuals" such as yourself. This was your second out of context, half a story insult, just prior to your "reincarnation" as veritas. Veritas indeed. I did brave the slings and arrows of outrageous anti semitic labelling to ask you your thoughts on the influence of the International Banking cartels on your own life, or if you were happy that they had siezed control of the fed, But for reasons best known and left to you I found that the silence was of the typically deafening nature. The other half quote, which having spent 40 minutes searching for, but cant find now, involves QUTB quoting me completely out of context, followed by yourself repeating that same quote. I will if neccesary, and upon request, comb the boards to find it. But, I can remember distinctly what I found amusing about it at the time . Namely that it followed a lengthy diatribe by yourself about checking your sources quotes and all the rest of it. I even replied by suggesting that I thought it was a good post, and that I dont mind such rules of stricture if we all abide by them. Alas, what do I get not 2 days later ? I get YOU quoting QUTB quoting me completely out of context, when the discussion was all on the same fucking page ! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/roll.gif ALT=":rollin"> And finally DE, in the hope that we might clear this up from my perspective for the final time. You ask, in your usual courteous manner; <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Your aren't one of the idiots who said it doesn't matter if the protocols are forgeries or not, you still believe them, are you?<hr></blockquote> To which again I say, Im not interested in whether theyre forged or not. Im not interested in who wrote them or not. Im not interested in the messenger. Id be far more interested in looking at the message. And if you want proof of that statement, let me say this; I'll have you know that I even read most of what you write, and have to say that for all your hypocrisy, half quotes, misquotes, question dodging, and general such mischief, (or is that 'literary license?'), I even find myself agreeing with you from time to time. Now, I know that by your own rigorous standards, that might place me in the realms of where I shouldnt really be as regards to reliable sources who speak from the heart rather than out of any sense of what might easily be confused as malevolant innate prejudice or skewed perspective, but hell, even you dont drown in your own hypocracy all the time. Even you get it right quite often, to my mind And, after all said and done, I guess were all only human <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=slimmouse@rigorousintuition>slimmouse</A> at: 11/9/05 10:41 pm

by **Dreams End** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 4:16 am

Looks like I owe you an apology on the first quote. That was antiaristo. <a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm35.showMessage?topicID=1.topic&index=63">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...c&index=63</a> So I do apologize. A quote I meant to include from you was actually four posts down: <blockquote>Quote:<hr> Before that is, I came to realise that the state of Israel, and true judaism, as a benevolent tolerant practise, has been very cynically hijacked and manipulated by the above elite so called "Jews", who hate their own ordinary fellows, in exactly the same way as Bush, Her nibs and other elitist religious leaders hate the avge christian, or the Vatican elites have nothing but contempt for the avge catholic, or the Elite leaders of SA, and a gaggle of Middle Eastern dictators have contempt for the average muslim. <a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm35.showMessageRange?topicID=1.topic&start=61&stop=80">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...mp;stop=80</a><hr></blockquote> Look, we don't really have any way to communicate. Someone who says this about the Protocols: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>To which again I say, Im not interested in whether theyre forged or not. Im not interested in who wrote them or not. Im not interested in the messenger. Id be far more interested in looking at the message.<hr></blockquote> is simply not operating in a way I can even begin to understand. Why would you care about the message of a forgery? It was INTENTIONALLY DESIGNED TO MISLEAD. And the point of the deception was to turn people against Jews. And you can say it doesn't matter who wrote it, but it should matter that the message itself is that Jews run the world. I don't care if you later replace Jews with lizards. And to claim that you are NOT anti-Semitic while championing this document, with whatever caveats is simply naive beyond understanding. And maybe it is naive, but if you go to stormfront and all those type of sites that are much more up front about their views, you'll find a lot of the same parsing of words and differentiation between "real Jews" and "Jewish elites". If you honestly cannot understand how that language is used, or why, then I simply have to assume you don't care. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>. . . To what extent the whole existence of this people is based on a continuous lie is shown incomparably by the Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion, so infinitely hated by the Jews. They are based on a forgery, the Frankfurter Zeitung moans and screams once every week: the best proof that they are authentic. What many Jews may do unconsciously is here consciously exposed. And that is what matters. It is completely indifferent from what Jewish brain these disclosures originate; the important thing is that with positively terrifying certainty they reveal the nature and activity of the Jewish people and expose their inner contexts as well as their ultimate final aims. The best criticism applied to them, however, is reality. Anyone who examines the historical development of the last hundred years from the standpoint of this book will at once understand the screaming of the Jewish press. For once this book has become the common property of a people, the Jewish menace may be considered as broken (307-30<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/glasses.gif ALT="8)"> . -Adolph fucking Hitler<hr></blockquote>

by **slimmouse** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:30 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>And to claim that you are NOT anti-Semitic while championing this document, with whatever caveats is simply naive beyond understanding. And maybe it is naive, but if you go to stormfront and all those type of sites that are much more up front about their views, you'll find a lot of the same parsing of words and differentiation between "real Jews" and "Jewish elites". If you honestly cannot understand how that language is used, or why, then I simply have to assume you don't care.<hr></blockquote> I can fully appreciate the need for the utmost care when dealing with any of this. Im on the record as having said that when this topic was broached in the earliest days of the RI forum. But here to me, is the real art of the PTB. Those of Jewish birthright often find themselves bearing the hub of all of the actions of the elites - who I consider to be much more Anglo American in nature. And my how well it works. A typical example is the "Bankers" thing. The plain fact is that banking and usury is indeed one of the key factors along with Oil in surpressing and controlling the people via the economic grindstone, and the maintainance of the masses of humanity on the cusp of death through abject poverty, disease and starvation. Now any kind of intelligent dude, would automatically ask themselves , does this bankers thing mean "The jews", as in the entire race ? to which the commonsense answer is of course fucking not. But its a hell of a way to stifle debate on the topic isnt it ? I mean, the above statement is an unquestionable fact, whether you care to admit that or not, and yet you seem reluctant to discuss the matter. Can I enquire why that might be ? I ask the question, since I know that many feel obliged to simply avoid the whole disgraceful fucking area of Banking rip offs, due to the intricately placed theme of " Bankers are Jews, therefore speaking of the ills of banking is antisemitic, so I'll keep my trap shut" And Now for the double whammy. What model do the PTB use to reinforce such stifling of any sincere debate on all of this ? Well of course they use Hitler dont they. The man who would have much more fittingly been nothing more than some crazed racist boogie on the snot rag of history, had he not been nurtered, sponsored, supported and financed by very same fucking international elites, who now use his name and legacy to continue their murderous theft control and oppression of every last one of us. And this to me, is the very same modus operandi that revolves around the whole issue of the CONTENT of the Protocols. I mean for fucks sake, I HAVENT EVEN READ the fuckers, and looks how Ive been verbally flailed, badmouthed, misquoted, half quoted and all the rest of it. Talk about Ironic. And finally, If calling the Rothschilds a scheming bunch of Satanic emotionless ruthless cunning murdering motherfuckers is anti semitic then so be it. Ditto ANY so called "Jewish" elite. I hope youll forgive my failure to observe politically correct practise here. For They sit with all the other PTB - The vatican, Royalty, Strong, Moon, Rockerfeller, Pat Robertson, Billy Graham and a multitude of other such vermin along with all their associated political puppets - Bush, Blair, Cheney, Berlusoni and all the rest of these soulless fucks, defacating on us all from a great height. As such these people need to be pointed out for what they are.

by **Dreams End** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:15 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I HAVENT EVEN READ the fuckers<hr></blockquote> You haven't read them and you defend them? Then take whatever I've said about you... and double it. Anyway, your last post makes your position clear. And we'll never agree. You wanna spread the blame and then go back to picking out Jews again. It's the same pattern. You are what you are and this thread does nothing to really protect your reputation. In fact, your last post made it worse. It shows that what I'm saying is true, even if you include others, but it also shows that you are willing to go to the mat for the single most destructive forgery ever produced and you haven't even read it. Unbelievable.

by **slimmouse** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:40 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>You haven't read them and you defend them? Then take whatever I've said about you and double it. Anyway, your last post makes your position clear. And we'll never agree. You wanna spread the blame and then go back to picking out Jews again. It's the same pattern. You are what you are and this thread does nothing to really protect your reputation. In fact, your last post made it worse. It shows that what I'm saying is true, even if you include others, but it also shows that you are willing to go to the mat for the single most destructive forgery ever produced and you haven't even read it. Unbelievable.<hr></blockquote> You are one very sad individual. You know that ? However,For your further education as to how my "sick" mind works, might I reccomend Tarpleys unofficial Biography of GHW Bush. I might warn you in advance, it does contain a few home truths about Bnai Brith, and others, and about how the Anglo American Eugenics society very kindly invited leading Nazi scientists over to their conferences in the 1930s. It goes into further detail about the "trading with the enemy act" , and the various inquiries conducted into that ,a la Kean commission. No surprises there huh ? And of course, whilst I can fully appreciate that we're no doubt just 2 mouseclicks away from some anti semitic smear or other, I nonetheless remain convinced by Tarpleys findings. I actually did a "Dreams end" , and cross referenced a reasonable amount of his sources and footnotes. Never found a "Double standard dreams end" anywhere. And DE - Is this stoic defence against the evils of nazi racism really your moral high horse here ? I actually very strongly suspect, that Antiaristo had you nailed early on. I find youre position the complete antithesis of its cover. For lets make no mistake about this. The 4th reich IS here. Not quite in all its overt forms just yet. But courtesy of people like yourself, who either dont have the courage to call a spade a spade or even worse, theyre doing very nicely TYVM. One more time. What do you think about the evils of international banking, and its effect on humanity as a whole ? By the way, You still owe Anti an explanation too. And finally; BANKERS BANKERS BANKERS, INTERNATIONAL ELITES, INTERNATIONAL ELITES, INTERNATIONAL ELITES. THEY INCLUDE JEWISH PEOPLE, JEWISH PEOPLE, JEWISH PEOPLE. There. Id hate to dissapoint you.

by **Dreams End** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:52 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I actually very strongly suspect, that Antiaristo had you nailed early on.<hr></blockquote> I can't argue that, since I never have any idea what he's talking about. Enjoy your EIR and Protocols.

Makow: Rosa Parks a Jewish Pawn, MLK a Lecherous Fraud

Re: this is pointless

Re: this is pointless

Re: equating communism with soviet agents is a mistake

Re: Does anyone really think

yes

Re: Makow: Im glad this topic came here.

Re: Makow: Im glad this topic came here.

Re: Makow: Im glad this topic came here.

Re: Makow: Im glad this topic came here.

Re: Makow: Im glad this topic came here.

Re: Makow: Im glad this topic came here.

Re: Makow: Im glad this topic came here.

Re: Makow: Im glad this topic came here.

Re: Makow: Im glad this topic came here.

Re: Makow: Im glad this topic came here.

Who is online