Rabbinical Control of the Jews

 It was only recently that I realised how profoundly the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD increased the control that rabbis had over their congregations.

What does the source (E. Michael Jones' "The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit") say about the Jewish revolt of 70 AD?

The Jewish revolt that culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 AD was initially sparked in 66 AD when the Roman ruler Florus used a small riot as a pretext to loot the Temple. According to the historian Josephus, this suicidal war was chiefly driven by the Jews' ardent belief in the imminent arrival of a messianic king who would deliver them from Roman oppression and grant Israel dominion over the earth.

The Outbreak of the Revolt The Jewish population was divided between the Zealots and a peace party. After the peace party's attempts to urge compliance with Rome failed, the revolutionaries gained the upper hand, and the Jewish people refused to pay taxes to Rome. The Zealot leader Menahem captured the fortress of Masada, while Eleazar persuaded Jewish priests to stop offering the daily sacrifice for the emperor Nero, officially committing the Temple to the insurrection. After terrorist factions like the Sicarii slaughtered Roman garrisons and the Jewish forces defeated the Roman general Cestius, Jerusalem was temporarily liberated.

The Roman Siege and the Fall of Jerusalem Recognizing the threat, the Emperor Nero dispatched his able general Vespasian, who cautiously starved out the rebels one fortress at a time rather than engaging them in open battle. In February 70 AD, Vespasian's son Titus appeared before Jerusalem and initially offered leniency. When the Jews refused, Titus resorted to extreme cruelty, crucifying 500 prisoners in a single day and sending others back with their hands cut off. The Jewish forces, led by John of Gischala, retreated to the Temple and set fire to their own buildings to hold off the Romans. In August 70 AD, a Roman soldier threw a flaming torch into the sanctuary, setting the Temple ablaze. Titus ordered the instant execution of the surviving priests, and the second Temple fell on the very anniversary of the destruction of the first Temple.

Aftermath and the Birth of Rabbinic Judaism The human toll of the siege was staggering, with more than a million lives lost. Within two months, Titus leveled the city's walls, and the surviving Jews were sold into slavery at prices so low that the market collapsed. The Jewish warrior Simon bar Giora was dragged through Rome and thrown from the Tarpeian rock.

The destruction of the Temple created a profound religious crisis, as the Jews were left with no Temple, no priesthood, and no sacrifices to fulfill their covenant. However, Jochanan ben Zakkai, a leader of the peace party who had himself smuggled out of besieged Jerusalem wrapped in a shroud as a corpse, was granted permission by the Romans to start a rabbinical school. Through this school, Judaism was reconstituted as a "religion of the book" based on the Pentateuch and the Talmudic commentary of rabbis, fundamentally transforming Jewish life and identity.

How did Jochanan ben Zakkai transform Judaism after 70 AD?

During the catastrophic Roman siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD, Jochanan ben Zakkai, a rabbi and deputy head of the Sanhedrin, recognized that the violent revolutionary path of the Zealots was leading to disaster. Prioritizing the survival of his people over militant rebellion, he had himself smuggled out of the besieged city wrapped in a shroud, pretending to be a corpse. Because he was known to Roman authorities as a friend of Rome, he was granted a single request by the Roman general Titus: permission to establish a rabbinical school at Jabneh.

This school served as the incubator for a profound transformation of the Jewish faith. Following the destruction of Jerusalem, the Jewish people were left with no Temple, no priesthood, no Sanhedrin, and no means of offering burnt sacrifices to fulfill their covenant. In response to this existential crisis, Jochanan ben Zakkai reconstituted Judaism as a "religion of the book" based entirely around the Pentateuch and the rabbis' interpretations of it.

Because the Temple was gone, modern Judaism was essentially reborn as a debating society. The primary role of the rabbi shifted away from the lost temple rituals and toward offering commentary on the scriptures. The results of these continuous rabbinical debates and interpretations were written down over the next six centuries, ultimately becoming the Talmud, which served as the central foundation and superstructure for this newly transformed Jewish religion. Through Jochanan ben Zakkai's intervention, a religion once centered on physical sacrifice was radically redefined around textual commentary and the supreme goal of ethnic survival.

How did the Talmud become the foundation of modern Judaism?

The transformation of the Talmud into the foundation of modern Judaism was a direct consequence of the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 AD. With the Temple destroyed, the Jewish people were left with no priesthood, no Sanhedrin, and no means of offering the burnt sacrifices required to fulfill their covenant.

In response to this existential crisis, Rabbi Jochanan ben Zakkai, who had smuggled himself out of the besieged city, was granted permission by the Romans to establish a rabbinical school at Jabneh. Because physical sacrifices were no longer possible, Judaism was reconstituted as a "religion of the book". The primary role of the rabbi shifted away from Temple rituals and toward offering commentary on the scriptures, effectively turning modern Judaism into a debating society.

The interminable debates generated by these rabbinical schools were written down over the next six centuries and became known as the Talmud. As this commentary expanded, it became the absolute basis of the new Jewish religion. By the fifth century, the Babylonian Talmud had been codified and soon became "the fundamental possession of the Jewish race, its life's breath, its very soul".

For more than a thousand years, the Talmud represented the "only true reality" for the dispersed Jewish nation. It essentially took the sacred scriptures out of the hands of ordinary Jews, making the interpretation of the law the exclusive purview of the rabbis as codified in Talmudic lore. Consequently, Jewish religious and moral life was preserved and promoted entirely through the lens of Talmudic dialectic and commentary, establishing it as the core foundation of modern Judaism.

How did the Talmud take the law out of the hands of ordinary Jews?

The Talmud took the law out of the hands of ordinary Jews by establishing a system of "control through hermeneutics," making the interpretation of sacred scripture the exclusive domain of the rabbis. Following the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD, the Jewish people were left without a priesthood, a Sanhedrin, or a means of physical sacrifice. In response, they reconstituted their faith around the Pentateuch, building a vast "superstructure of commentary" upon it that eventually became codified as the Talmud.

Over time, this extensive body of rabbinical commentary essentially absorbed the Torah and nullified the direct, accessible word of God for the common person. The interpretations within the Talmud were incredibly complex, deduced from the Pentateuch and strung together through endless rabbinical debates. Because there was no scientific framework to adjudicate between differing authorities, the commentary sometimes even contradicted the original texts it was meant to explain.

This shift created a rigid hierarchy of knowledge. An ordinary Jew could no longer independently appeal to or interpret the sacred writ; they required the explicit permission and guidance of the rabbis who controlled the Talmudic lore.

Furthermore, the primacy of rabbinic interpretation led to a radical shift in how the law was applied. The new rendering of the law "certainly did violence to the words of Scripture," to the point where a common saying emerged that the Talmud permitted whatever the Torah explicitly forbade. By monopolizing the interpretation of the law and substituting complex dialectic for straightforward scripture, the rabbis effectively kept the Jewish masses in "blind obedience to rabbinic control," ensuring that their own authority over the community remained absolute.

What are the differences between the Jerusalem Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud.

The provided sources offer very limited information regarding the specific differences between the Jerusalem Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud. The primary distinction mentioned in the text concerns their lasting historical impact and prominence:

• Historical Prominence: It was the Babylonian Talmud, rather than the Jerusalem Talmud, that ultimately became "the fundamental possession of the Jewish race, its life's breath, its very soul". For over a thousand years, it defined Jewish life and served as the absolute basis of reality for the dispersed Jewish nation.
  
  
• Codification of the Babylonian Talmud: The Babylonian Talmud was codified during the fifth century by the Amora'im, a process that began with Rabbi Ashi (who died in 427) and culminated in the work of Rabbi Abina (who died in 499).
  
  
• Content: The Babylonian Talmud is specifically noted for containing narratives that mock claims of Jesus's virgin birth and challenge his status as the Messiah. Scholars assert that these passages betray a "remarkably high level of familiarity with the Gospels" and represent a deliberate, sophisticated anti-Christian polemic.

The provided sources do not contain further details comparing the structure, origin, or theological differences between the two texts.

Please note that information outside of your sources indicates that the Jerusalem Talmud was compiled earlier (around the 4th century) in the Land of Israel and is generally shorter, whereas the Babylonian Talmud was compiled in the academies of Babylon, is much more extensive, and became the universally authoritative text for Jewish law. You may want to independently verify this outside information if you require a more comprehensive comparison. 

Can you elaborate on how the rabbinical control of the Jews that arose following the destruction of the temple in 70AD continued over the centuries and what eroded this control in the modern era (from say the 18th century onwards).

Following the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, the Jewish people reconstituted their faith around the compilation of rabbinical commentary known as the Talmud. For more than a thousand years, the Talmud represented the "only true reality" for the dispersed Jewish nation. This text preserved their religious and moral life but did so by imposing strict separation and complete rabbinic control over the Jewish masses, nullifying their direct access to the scriptures. Institutionally, this control was exercised through the Kahal, an autonomous Jewish legal system that allowed Jewish elites and rabbis to adjudicate disputes internally and maintain tight, often tyrannical, control over their communities without recourse to Christian legal systems.

This rigid rabbinical hegemony remained largely intact until the 18th century, when it was eroded by the advent of the Jewish Enlightenment, or Haskalah, and the subsequent political emancipation of the Jews.

The Impact of the Jewish Enlightenment (Haskalah) The primary catalyst for the dissolution of rabbinic control was the German-Jewish philosopher Moses Mendelssohn. In 18th-century Germany, Mendelssohn initiated an Enlightenment movement that "shattered the protective shell of orthodoxy and opened the way to acquaintance with Western culture". Through his influence, "the reign of the Talmud and the rabbis was broken".

As the Enlightenment spread, young Jews began reading secular philosophers like Voltaire and Kant, attempting to adjust Judaism to the modern world. Intellectuals like Salomon Maimon fled the shtetls of the East for Berlin, deliberately abandoning what they saw as "Talmudic darkness". Maimon and others vehemently rejected the rabbis' "mind-killing business" of endless hair-splitting and quibbling, which they felt built "castles in the air" with no grounding in reality. The traditional authority of the rabbis came to be viewed by enlightened Jews as "rabbinical mumbo jumbo" and a parasitic anomaly.

Political Emancipation and State Intervention The breakdown of rabbinic control was accelerated by the intervention of the modern state. During the French Revolution and the conquests of Napoleon, Jews were offered civil emancipation and citizenship. Napoleon's convocation of the "Sanhedrin" in Paris in 1806 was a deliberate effort to usurp the rabbis' authority; he demanded that Jews recognize France as their new "Israel" and transfer their primary allegiance from their religious leaders to the French state.

Similarly, in the Russian Empire, government reformers sought to integrate Jews by intentionally breaking the power of the Kahal. Russian officials recognized that the "Jewish priests, known as Rabbis, hold their people in an unbelievable dependence and forbid them in the name of their faith to read any book other than the Talmud". In 1844, the Russian government officially abolished the Kahal, dividing its functions among local secular governments in a bid to end Jewish isolation. Furthermore, the Russian government established state-run schools for Jewish youth designed specifically to eradicate the "harmful prejudices instilled by the study of Torah".

The Aftermath: From Orthodoxy to Nihilism and Revolution The erosion of rabbinical control had profound and unintended consequences. The Mendelssohnian Enlightenment successfully destroyed Talmudic orthodoxy for many young Jews, but it failed to replace it with a stable religious alternative. Deprived of the all-encompassing worldview of the Talmud, a rising generation of secularized Jews experienced a severe identity crisis.

Having broken the "iron yoke" of the rabbis, these young Jews found themselves alienated from traditional Judaism but largely unassimilated into the Christian cultures around them. The spiritual vacuum left by the eradication of Talmudic law was quickly filled by nihilism and secular messianic politics. Obsessed with universal ideals of brotherhood and equality, this newly emancipated and secularized Jewish intelligentsia took the messianic fervor previously directed by the rabbis and transferred it to radical political movements. Ultimately, the collapse of rabbinic control transformed the marginalized Talmudic student into the vanguard of modern revolutionary socialism and Communism. 

WHALE

I came across an interesting site called WHALE with a large number of links to various topics. The best way to approach a site like this is to simply follow a link that you find interesting. I chose Anne Franks' Diary because these sorts of holocaust-affirming books annoy me because they've been pushed into the curricula of nearly every country's secondary education system.

So it was interesting to read the following:

For decades those who questioned the authenticity of Anne Frank’s diary have been castigated as vile holocaust deniers and anti-Semitic bigots. Jewish organisations have taken pains to defy any attempt to interfere with the Anne Frank legacy. Surprise, it is now the holders of the copyright to Anne Frank’s diary who insist that Anne wasn’t the only author of her own diary. Apparently, as some history revisionists, including Robert Faurisson, have been claiming for years; “The Diary of Anne Frank” was not what it claimed to be.  What caused the sudden change in attitude to Anne’s masterpiece?  Shekels. The Diary Of Anne Frank’s copyright is due to expire in Jan, 70 years after the author’s death in Bergen-Belsen. Adding Otto Frank as a co-author would allow the copyright royalties to continue until 2050 (Otto Frank died in 1980). We are dealing here with a substantial amount of mammon. After all, the diary is the best selling Jewish book, it is way more popular than the Talmud, the Torah or even Herzl’s The Jewish State .  This shameless shift in narrative provides another opportunity to delve into the elastic nature of Jewish history and its minimal regard for truth or authenticity. Once enough money is involved, we change the past to fit with our emerging narrative.   

Of mainstream media sources give a different slant on things. To quote from this article in The Guardian from January of 2016:

On 1 January, University of Nantes lecturer Olivier Ertzscheid and French MP Isabelle Attard separately published online the Dutch text of Frank’s account of her family’s time in hiding during the second world war. They argue that because 70 years have elapsed since Anne Frank died in Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, and because across much of Europe copyright expires 70 years after an author’s death, the work has now entered the public domain.

But the Anne Frank Fonds, the foundation established by Anne’s father Otto Frank, has vigorously denied this. It claims that while Anne was the sole author of the original diaries, “Otto Frank and children’s author and translator, Mirjam Pressler, were inter alia responsible for the various edited versions of fragments of the diary”, published in 1947 and 1991, respectively, and “the copyrights to these adaptations have been vested in Otto Frank and Mirjam Pressler, who in effect created readable books from Anne Frank’s original writings”. Otto Frank died in 1980, while Pressler is still alive. So the foundation, which gives all its income to charitable causes, argues that the diary is still protected by European copyright laws.

 The article concludes by saying:

Outside Europe, the circumstances of Frank’s diary are much clearer: in the US, works first published between the 1920s and 1970s are protected for 95 years from the date of their first publication, meaning Frank’s diary, first published in the US in the 1950s, will remain protected there until the 2040s.

According to the Fonds, Anne Frank’s Diary of a Young Girl has been translated into 67 different languages, and has sold upwards of 30m copies.

The foundation supposedly gives all its income to charitable causes but it would seem that it also keeps a good many people in gainful employment. The diary is also an important cog in the machinery of the Holocaust Industry. Anyway, the point is that, until I followed the Anne Frank link on Whale, I wasn't aware of the copyright controversy. The site was last updated in 2017 with the comment that next update promised when donations add-up to a good laptop.

The site is similar in its presentation of information to a 730 page book that I downloaded titled THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF MONEY & NEO-FEUDAL WORLD ORDER USURY SECRETS by James Alexander. Here is summary:

History of how the current enslaving monetary system, in which Banklords get a credit monopoly (which gives them the power to create unlimited money from nothing at no liability to themselves because it is redeemable for goods or services produced by anyone forced to accept the private Federal Reserve dollar currency notes and cheques) and use our tax system to collect the fraudulent interest was brought about by the forces of banking family dynasties working to establish a tyrannical New World Order through a series of wars, depressions, deficits, propaganda and crimes in which good politicians are murdered or removed by the New World Order (NWO) mafias (CIA, Mossad, MI5/6, Vatican, Jesuits, CFR, Bilderbergers, Trilateral C., Knights, etc). How ancient pagan cults are elitist-made inventions designed to allow their priesthood (Pharisees) to con value out of the public and how they are leading everyone back towards feudal fascist enslavement.

The contents of the book were compiled in 2010. Like the WHALE site, there are hundreds of links and its difficult to decide where to start. Once again however, it's best just to click on a link that you find interesting. One link caught my eye: Judaism Corrupted into Babylonian Talmudism circa 586 BCE on page 297. Here is what is written:

True-Torah Judaism was originally based on Moses' vision of God as a universal moral force. The Sadducees upheld this view but the Pharisees overthrew them in a civil war in 79 BC. The remnants of the Sadducees, "Torah Jews", still cling to Moses and the Old Testament but they are a minority (5%). Phariseeism is based on the Babylonian Talmud, which consists of the interpretations of "sages" during the Babylonian exile 586 BC to 1040 AC. Generally speaking, the Babylonian Talmudists contradict the spirit of Moses and take precedence over the Torah. They have been using the name of Judaism as a shield against their banking/money monopoly since ancient times. And as you will see later, the majority of Jews today are not Israelites, i.e. 90% are from Southern Russia/Northern Turkey and known as Ashkenazi/Khazar whose elite symbolically converted to Babylonian Talmudism in the 8th Century AC. More on this later.

This of course is fascinating stuff and immediately shed light on today's Torah Jews that I'm been aware of for some time now. It would be good to have a daily dose of either a dip into this book or to follow a link on the WHALE website.

King Louis IX

An article that has been getting some traction in the news lately, amid the general madness having taken over the United States, concerns the city of St. Louis that was named after King Louis IX of France. Here is an excerpt from an article in The Jerusalem Post:

Muslims, Jews petition to remove statue of St. Louis’ crusader namesake

St. Louis is named after King Louis IX, the only French King to be canonized by the Catholic Church, who is considered by the church to be a model Christian monarch. 

King Louis IX was also a notorious antisemite. He oversaw one of the infamous medieval disputations, in which rabbis were forced to debate with Christians the merits of Judaism, and the subsequent burning of 12,000 copies of the Talmud in 1243. He required Jews to wear badges so they can be easily identified, and he outlawed banking, which led to the expulsion of many Jews from France and the confiscation of their property. 

The funds that Louis IX confiscated went towards his two crusades, in 1248 and 1270, to fight Islamic kingdoms for control over the Land of Israel. 

Louis IX is honored with the entire city of St. Louis being named after him, as well as a statue in Forest Park, the city's major park, atop Art Hill overlooking the city. Umar Lee and Moji Sidiqi, of Muslims for a Greater St. Louis, together with Israeli-American restauranteur Ben Poremba want to change that and have launched a petition. 

"For those unfamiliar with King Louis IX,” the petition calling to change St. Louis’ name reads, “he was a rabid antisemite who spearheaded many persecutions against the Jewish people. Centuries later, Nazi Germany gained inspiration and ideas from Louis IX as they embarked on a campaign of murderous genocide against the Jewish people. Louis IX was also vehemently Islamophobic and led a murderous crusade against Muslims which ultimately cost him his life.” 

The petition calls the city’s name “outright disrespect” to its Jewish and Muslim communities.

Having read E. Michael Jones "The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit", an historical overview of Jewish involvement in revolutionary movements, I thought I'd look back at what he had to say about this notorious and rabid antisemite. Before I do, I'd like to say that in this post, I'm only addressing the Jewish and not the Muslim complaints. It's made clear in the article that the Muslim involvement came as a consequence of Jewish activism. To quote:

Lee told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday that he became aware of the statue’s history when Rabbi Hershey Novack of the Chabad on Campus at St. Louis' Washington University held a Tisha B'Av gathering by the Louis IX statue to remember the atrocities he wrought on Jews of France. 

As mentioned earlier, Lee is a member of Muslims for a Greater St. Louis. It's not surprising to see that Chabad-Lubavitch is busy stirring up trouble. So what did King Louis IX get up to concerning the Jews of France? Here is an excerpt from E. Michael Jones' book:

It took a while for the Church to digest what it had learned about the Talmud, but Pope Gregory's letter to the bishop of Paris indicated "the attack on the Talmud heralded a change in the Church's basic attitude toward Judaism." Three years later, Bishop Eudes's legantine commission reported that the Talmud was "full of innumerable errors, abuses, blasphemies and wickedness such as arouse shame in those that speak of them and horrify the hearer." 

The books were so horrifying that they "cannot be tolerated in the name of God without injury to the Christian Faith."'74 In a letter to St. Louis IX, King of France, in May 1244, Innocent IV, Gregory's successor, drew certain conclusions. "The wicked perfidy of the Jews," he said, "does not properly heed the fact that Christian piety received them and patiently allows them to live in Christendom through pity only. Instead, it commits such grave sins that are stupefying to those who hear of them and horrible to those who tell of them.'' The Talmud's blasphemies and its injunctions about defrauding the unsuspecting goyim threatened the conditions under which Jews were tolerated. They called for rethinking the whole social compact. 

Upset by the harm that it was doing, St. Louis called a conference on the Talmud. In June 1240, Nicholas Donin had an extended debate with Rabbi Yehiel ben Joseph of Paris under royal auspices and presided over by the queen mother, Blanche of Castile. One Jewish commentator claims "the entire event epitomized the declining status of Jews in that century and their transformation in Christian minds into little more than embodiments of blasphemous doctrine.'' 

The rabbi was dumbfounded that he had to defend Jewish esoteric writings in a hostile environment. Nothing like this had ever happened before. Rabbi Yehiel, lacking any precedent for conducting a disputation of this sort, didn't know how to respond. When asked whether it were true that the Talmud claimed "Jesus was condemned to an eternity in hell, immersed in 'boiling excrement'" and Mary, his mother, was a whore, the Rabbi could only respond, yes, those passages were in the Talmud, but they did not refer to "that" Jesus or "that" Mary. " 

Not every Louis born in France is the king of France," Yehiel maintained, giving new meaning to the term "chutzpah." "Has it not happened," he continued, "that two men were born in the same city, had the same name, and died in the same manner? There are many such cases.'' One Jewish historian referred to Rabbi Yehiel's denial as the birth of Jewish humor. 

A Christian account of the debate, however, failed to see the humor in his statement. "Concerning this Jesus, he confessed that he was born out of adultery and that he is punished in hell in boiling excrement and that he lived at the time of Titus." But Rabbi Yehiel said, "this Jesus is different from our Jesus. However, he is unable to say who he was, whence it is clear that he lied."

It was only in the 13th century, when Jewish rabbis who had converted to Christianity spread the word, that the Catholic Church came to know about the hateful contents of the Talmud. Naturally, the Catholic hierarchy was upset and so the burning of the Talmud has to be seen in that light. Of course, there's no mention of this historical context nor of the Talmudic content that caused such offence to the Catholic Church.

Chabad-Lubavitch, the organisation to which Rabbi Hershey Novack belongs, is unapologetic in its belief that Jews are superior to the rest of humanity (referred to as goyim) and that the highest purpose in life that a goy can aspire to is to serve the Jews.  A belief in Jewish Supremicism is central. It's ironic that a member of Chabad-Lubavitch should be criticising Louis IX when this organisation wholeheartedly embraces the spirit of the Talmud and its utter disdain for the goyim. Then again its members have no shame. Their self-professed goal is to rule the world by any means possible and fomenting social unrest is a key tactic. 

Theodor Herzl: Victim of Talmudic Magic?

As I continue my reading of Douglas Reed's The Controversy of Zion, I'm grateful for the insights he provides into Zionism and its running mate, Communism. There is material in this book for many, many posts once I've completed it and, at which point, I'll probably start reading it again.

What caught my attention was this part of his comments on Herzl:

When he returned to address the Sixth Congress of his World Zionist Organization his fate rose to meet him in the form of a compact mass of Russian Jews no longer merely "humiliating" to him, but menacing. At this moment of his fiasco he thought he had the ace of trumps in his pocket and he produced it. As a result of those interviews in London and of the "irresistible pressure" which supported him, the British Government had offered Dr. Herzl of the Vienna Neue Freie Presse a territory in Africa, Uganda! 

Yet the trump card proved to be a deuce. 295 delegates voted to accept the offer, but 175 rejected it; clearly Dr. Herzl did not speak for "all Jews". The great majority of the 175 Noes came from the Jews of Russia. The huddled Jewish throngs there had hailed Herzl as the Messiah; these 175 emissaries of the Eastern rabbinate imprecated him, for Uganda meant the ruin of their plan. They cast themselves on the floor in the traditional attitude of mourning for the dead or for the destruction of the temple. One of them, a woman, called the world-famous Dr. Herzl "a traitor" and when he was gone tore down the map of Uganda from behind the speakers' dais. 

If what he said and wrote was fully candid, Dr. Herzl never understood why the Jewish emissaries from Russia refused to consider any other place than Palestine, and if that is so he must have been most guileless. He had built up his entire movement on the claim that "a place of refuge" was directly needed for "persecuted Jews", and these were the Jews of Russia; Jews were fully emancipated elsewhere. If that was true, then any good place would do, and he had now procured one for them; moreover, if any of them preferred to stay in Russia, and his negotiations with the Russian Government succeeded, they could have all they wanted in Russia too! 

From the point of view of the Talmudic rabbinate in Russia the matter was entirely different. They, too, had built up the legend of "persecution in Russia", while they worked against emancipation there, but this was for the purpose of fulfilling the ancient Law, which meant possession of Palestine and all subsequent things that the Law ordained. Acceptance of Uganda would have meant Doomsday for Talmudic Judaism. 

Dr. Weizmann describes Dr. Herzl's final humiliation. After the vote Herzl went to see the Jews from Russia, who had turned their backs on him and walked out, in their committee room. "He came in, looking haggard and exhausted. He was received in dead silence. Nobody rose from his seat to greet him, nobody applauded him when he ended. . . It was probably the first time that Herzl was thus received at any Zionist gathering: he, the idol of all Zionists". 

It was also the last time. Within the year Dr. Herzl was dead, at the age of forty-four. No conclusion can be offered about his death. Judaist writers refer to it in cryptic terms. The Jewish Encyclopaedia says it was the result of what he endured and other authorities make similarly obscure, though significant, allusions. Those who during the centuries have been the object of anathema or excommunication by the ruling sect often have died soon and wretchedly. The student comes to feel that in this matter he approaches mysterious things, closed to all ordinary research." 

 The closing part of this quote is most interesting and I'll reprint it below:

Those who during the centuries have been the object of anathema or excommunication by the ruling sect often have died soon and wretchedly. The student comes to feel that in this matter he approaches mysterious things, closed to all ordinary research.

What Reed doesn't mention here but which that "bastion of truth" (as James Corbett refers to Wikipedia) does is:

He married Julie Nachauer in 1889 and they had three children. However, all three had unhappy lives. His first daughter, Paulina, died in 1930 of a heroin overdone. His son, Hans, committed suicide at age 39 on the day of his sister's funeral. The youngest, Margaritha (Trude), died in a concentration camp in 1943. Theodor's only grandson, Stephan Theodor Neumann committed suicide in 1946 at age 28. He had been an active Zionist. 

Figure 1

Clearly we are in the realm of Talmudic and Babylonian magic which is why I've included the photograph shown in Figure 1 with its Assyrian symbols and Sepiroth. I don't know the provenance of the photo but here is the link to the February 2017 article in which it appeared, titled Judaism: Satanism, Sorcery and Black Magic on the website VETERAN TODAY Journal for the Clandestine Community. 

In the article, reference is made to a book by E. Michael Jones titled The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and its Impact on World History that looks like it may be interesting as Douglas Reed's book is proving to be. I've downloaded it from The Internet Archive, where it's available for free, and here is the link. Returning to the article, the following excerpt is of interest:

The Kabbalah (“reception”), is a series of books of magic and mysticism. The canon has not been strictly defined although the rabbinic consensus names the Zohar as the most important volume. Another book, Sefer Yetzirah is a guide to black magic in Judaism. Zoharic studies in English have been advanced exponentially by the recent publication of Daniel Matt’s uncensored translation* of all of the volumes traditionally associated with the Zohar. The descriptive term “Satanic” is overworked in this age of the Internet and “desktop” publishing. We do not propose to employ it casually or imprecisely. The Kabbalah is fundamentally Satanic in its theological orientation … The Kabbalah is attributed to the Rabbi Shimon ben Yoahi who wrote, “Even the best of the gentiles should all be killed.” Like the Talmud of Babylon, it is reputed to be derived form an Oral Law which God gave to Moses on Sinai in addition to the Written Law. 

* available for loan from https://archive.org/details/zohar00dani 

So black magic is certainly, though not exclusively, a part of Judaism and it would seem that the elders of the Ostjuden were particularly proficient in its execution (or maybe Herzl and his offspring were just plain unlucky). By the way, the term Ostjuden means "Eastern Jews", in German, and was the generic term for Yiddish speaking Jews from Eastern European countries that immigrated to Germany and Austria. Vienna as the capital of the Austrian-Hungarian Monarchy attracted immigrants from all parts of the Empire. Jews from Eastern Europe moved to Vienna during two immigration waves. Source.

See my earlier post on the Khazars where I write:

So it would seem that the Khazar hypothesis has been accepted even by the Israelis. The references at the beginning of my post to the Talmud and Babylon reminded me of two videos (Meet the Rothschilds' Bosses 1 and 2) that I watched recently that were posted by an Israeli woman named Doreen Dotan. This is the link to her YouTube channel. She claims that it was the Jews who stayed behind in Babylon, after their exile to that region, who are responsible for the Talmud and the worship of Babylonian deities. She claims this group and their descendants have perverted Judaism.

The Khazars

The following comment to a video I watched caught my attention:

Satanism is based on Rabbinical Talmudism, a Babylonian Magick of biblical Pharisees, worship of Baal, Baphomet etc., the basis for Judaism, doctrine Jesus Christ railed against. Jews are not the biblical Hebrews they claim to be. They are impostors who inverted reality and inserted themselves into biblical stories. They are Khazars.

The comment came with a link attached to a blog post in The Times of Israel, dated March 18th 2014. The post has this header:

Leaked report: Israel acknowledges Jews in fact Khazars; Secret plan for reverse migration to Ukraine 

It then goes to say that:

It is well known that, sometime in the eighth to ninth centuries, the Khazars, a warlike Turkic people, converted to Judaism and ruled over a vast domain in what became southern Russia and Ukraine. What happened to them after the Russians destroyed that empire around the eleventh century has been a mystery. Many have speculated that the Khazars became the ancestors of Ashkenazi Jews. 

Arabs have long cited the Khazar hypothesis in attempts to deny a Jewish historical claim to the land of Israel. During the UN debate over Palestine Partition, Chaim Weizmann responded, sarcastically: “lt is very strange. All my life I have been a Jew, felt like a Jew, and I now learn that I am a Khazar.” In a more folksy vein, Prime Minister Golda Meir famously said:  “Khazar, Schmazar. There is no Khazar people. I knew no Khazars In Kiev. Or Milwaukee. Show me these Khazars of whom you speak.” 

Contrarian Hungarian ex-communist and scientist Arthur Koestler brought the Khazar hypothesis to a wider audience with The Thirteenth Tribe (1976), in the hope that disproving a common Jewish “racial” identity would end antisemitism. Clearly, that hope has not been fulfilled. Most recently, left-wing Israeli historian Shlomo Sand’s The Invention of the Jewish People took Koestler’s thesis in a direction he had not intended, arguing that because Jews were a religious community descended from converts they do not constitute a nation or need a state of their own. 

Scientists, however, dismissed the Khazar hypothesis because the genetic evidence did not add up. Until now. In 2012, Israeli researcher Eran Elhaik published a study claiming to prove that Khazar ancestry is the single largest element in the Ashkenazi gene pool. Sand declared himself vindicated, and progressive organs such as Haaretz and The Forward trumpeted the results. 

Israel seems finally to have thrown in the towel. A blue-ribbon team of scholars from leading research institutions and museums has just issued a secret report to the government, acknowledging that European Jews are in fact Khazars.

So it would seem that the Khazar hypothesis has been accepted even by the Israelis. The references at the beginning of my post to the Talmud and Babylon reminded me of two videos (Meet the Rothschilds' Bosses 1 and 2) that I watched recently that were posted by an Israeli woman named Doreen Dotan. This is the link to her YouTube channel. She claims that it was the Jews who stayed behind in Babylon, after their exile to that region, who are responsible for the Talmud and the worship of Babylonian deities. She claims this group and their descendants have perverted Judaism.

All this is confusing of course to someone with little knowledge of the history of Judaism. There is an article in Wikipedia about the Babylonian Talmud. Here is an excerpt:

The Babylonian Talmud (Talmud Bavli) consists of documents compiled over the period of Late Antiquity (3rd to 5th centuries). During this time the most important of the Jewish centres in Mesopotamia, a region called "Babylonia" in Jewish sources and later known as Iraq, were Nehardea, Nisibis (modern Nusaybin), Mahoza (al-Mada'in, just to the south of what is now Baghdad), Pumbedita (near present-day al Anbar Governorate), and the Sura Academy, probably located about 60 km south of Baghdad.  

Of course there is the Jerusalem Talmud and lots more to make sense of. It's best that I read the following book that I have on my Kindle:

After doing that, I should have a better overview of Jews and Judaism. I'm sure that there won't be much mention of Satanism and its connection to Radical Talmudism but at least I'll have a foundation from which to explore further. The takeaway from all this is that terms like Jew and Judaism are not straightforward. When combined with Zionism and Israel, things become more complex still. I realise I know very little.