This file is www.big-lies.org/jews/teaching-about-jews.html

Teaching Real Jewish Studies:

What Everyone Should Know About Jews - Suggestions for Awareness Courses

[ Practical, Applied, Theory-Free Jew Teaching for Everyone | Race |

Written by 'Rerevisionist' 29 November 2013 - 22 June 2014 This version v. 15 November 2023

Introduction: Be Prepared
There are obvious reasons for warning young people about murderers, rapists, fraudsters, kidnappers, thieves and so on. And warning them of risky locations and situations. Most people, reasonably enough, aren't much interested in politics and wars and religions, and prefer to have something to do that they like, and somewhere nice to live with people they like. So why burden them with yet more warnings, and information about a ridiculous bunch of obsolescent fanatics?

The answer of course is that people calling themselves 'Jews' seem to have had disastrous effects. Jewish influence is a hypothesis, to be tested. Look for systematic suppression of fact about Jews:–for example, the history of economic theories, where Adam Smith's work omits Jewish economic activities.

Just as The discovery of oxygen explained fire, rust, corrosion, breathing, calories in food, paper turning brown, how fish live under water. And the discovery of oxygen led to inventions (typically within 200 years) such as oxygen for use in hospitals, oxygen-free food packaging, firefighting methods, stainless steel, rocket fuels, oxy-acetylene welding, and underwater diving.

Better understanding of Jews helps awareness of words inserted in the past. Propaganda is a Latin word for methods of propagating Roman Catholicism. But there is no word for Jewish deceptions. Vandalism probably was used by Jews to express contempt for non-Jews and non-Moslems in Spain; the word shows misunderstanding. Nazi of course is ceaselessly used by Jews as a derogatory expression. Jews use their own slang—goi, yok (yokel?), shiksa (white girl, whore).

The discovery of Jewish behaviour patterns explained international spread of 'Jews'; clannish secrecy; control of money by the 'Federal Reserve', and secret funding of both sides in wars to kill non-Jews; money control of companies, rents, media, churches, bureaucracies, law, and education; solid Jew insistence on nonwhite immigration, except into Israel; and the use of violent thugs. And the discovery of Jewish behavior patterns may (within 200 years) lead to reforms such as non-Jewish control of money; understanding that money is not a 'store of value' so much as an active part of power; actions against Jewish warmongering; exposure in detail and then action against persistent Jew corruption; controls against population replacement; and legal action against fake demonstrators and criminals.

From our viewpoint, part-way into the 21st century, by far the most important Jewish actions have been in the First and Second World Wars, and the subsequent Jew-controlled world, including the Jewish-American Empire and other smaller Jewish-controlled regions. Jews now have a linked set of cities and headquarters, with fast secret communications, and with large numbers of anonymous 'Jews' acting together mostly unnoticed. What 'Jews' see as their own interest takes precedence over any other human groups. The Second World War needs to be understood as a unified group of Jews, who collaborated with national traitors and puppets. Few people as yet have any clue about all this. Most people still think only of their own local conflicts, often inflamed by Jews. They don't think of the linked chain of Jews, able to act as full-time specialist parasites.

Jews can be studied, and must be, to understand the world as it is now. Nobody can hope to understand the world without knowledge of self-styled 'Jews'. Study of Jews is rather time-consuming, and at present is mainly self-taught, or home-schooled, or a priceless gift of Internet and online publishing. But when mastered Jew-awareness gives a much more accurate worldview than without it. It goes to the root of things.
At present, many people, unthinkingly, imagine that discussing Jewish influence is not important. I hope that, in time, the opposite view will take over: that it's essential to understand the Jewish problem, and that anyone who doesn't is rather simple-minded, like a believer in witchcraft or astrology.

The entire process is like recovery from anaesthesia: it's not painful, but it is surprising, as reality comes into focus and the mind un-deforms, in this case after a lifetime of Jewish binding by lies.

'Jews' are a sub-race produced by the written word. Without the effects of reading and writing, 'Jews' and their inbred literalist fanaticism could probably never have existed. Possibly they evolved away from normal people by becoming more psychopathic—by selecting or even losing genes, in the way fish in dark caves may lose their sight, or cats in the orient often have kinked tails, or colour blindness may be a workable group strategy, or some hazels lose their geotropism but can exist in a coiled-up version. In my view, the possibility of human groups parasitising other human groups is a genuinely new biological discovery. I hope research effort will be directed to understand the roots of instinctive reactions, and such phenomena as 'passive aggression', group secrecy, covert group violence, and mal-education by deception and repetition of lies.

Without the Mediterranean Sea and its surroundings, civilisations themselves may not have started. Its staggering importance is often ignored:

The map (right) was drawn from descriptions by Herodotus (500 BC or so). The globe (far right) is from Google; I couldn't remove the clouds (or appearance of clouds).

The Mediterranean and connected seas (and the Red Sea and Persian Gulf) are protected from the oceans and relatively storm-free. Ships with sails and/or oars allowed transport of large loads, including men—something far more difficult by road at the time. Raw materials, intermediate materials, finished goods, food, people with skills, could be moved.

The area is by far the largest set of inland waterways on earth.

As outlined above, areas with defensive barriers (most of Europe, though not in the east) could genetically have high-specialisation societies.
Areas with open areas (grassland, steppes, possibly deserts) without defensive barriers (eastern territories, but not to the west) could genetically have tribal, inward-looking, aggressive groups unable to spend time on arts, theories, techniques, beauty, speculation.

The spread of Christianity in my view was land ownership and control over largish areas. It involved groups who were neighbours being induced to believe in some new idea(s). Trade routes would be an effective way to spread ideas. Reading, writing, oratory, and some fluency in languages would be necessary. Probably money would be an essential part of such a package, to offer careers to some of the target populations. It could spread slowly.
Very likely some absurdity would be needed as a badge of credulity, to show willingness, and submission. Very likely it would need exemplary violence, or perhaps just threats. It would have to be not easily disprovable: adherents could claim to speak in tongues, but not to fly; they could claim people can live after death, but not let the undead pay visits; they could claim healing powers, but not for serious diseases.

I'd suggest something like this is what happened. And perhaps was predicted.

jew shock discover jews learn about jews

« Here (left) is my 'Jew Shock' video (about 50 minutes), on the topic of discovering Jews. Just as Australia, oxygen, bacteria, the beliefs of Andaman Islanders, buckyballs and NASA's frauds were discoveries made in the past.

John Baker's 1974 book Race is reviewed here. Terrifyingly, this is the last overview book on race published in the English-speaking world, since the establishment of Jew media control.

Evolution of parasitism in Jews suggests a mechanism for sub-evolution of parasitism in Jews.

Similar possibility described here is Gipsies - another mysterious group.

Introduction: Jewish Evil
I must stress the fact that Jews have an unparalleled record of evil.
• This example relates to financial fraud in the USA.
• Jewish policy is to exterminate opposition, to make it seem it never existed. For example, it seems likely that Jewish-funded explorations/invasions in south America had a policy of destroying south American achievements and history. One reason why little is known about the early history of the Americas.
• Mass murder, and starvation, are typical Jewish activities. The killing of Armenian Christians was started by Jews in Turkey. At the present time, Jewish policy seems to be to exterminate whites in South Africa. Most whites are puzzled, seeing Jew-controlled blacks destroy white farms. They think of farmers growing food, using the seasons and land and water, supplying the food industry. To them, it's contra-indicated to deliberately cause harm. But it's second nature to Jews.
• Most whites habitually economise and save money. But Jews in control of countries can make money from famine, and make money from money itself—if governments overrun their costs, Jews benefit by charging interest on government borrowings, and from repayments.
• Jews habitually plan in a long-term way, which others find shocking and incomprehensible. Consider my long article on both world wars and how Jews, the 'master race', not only planned and mutually staged it but won,
Jews are often skilled actors, essential when lying convincingly. Controlled opposition example exist everywhere. Hitler is a perfect example. Trump is a current example. Backroom Jews run most of the long-term lies of the world. Unfortunately legal systems often fall into the hands of Jews, and they often run the most absurd schemes. The 'racism' and 'LGBTQ' schemes are ridiculous; the Jewish schemes of the Soros type—large-scale population movement policies, which typically make money for Jews by paying for cheap housing then collecting rent and interest from the non-Jew population, with paid thugs collaborating with the 'police'.
• Prostitution and slavery are examples of Jewish activities. Americans are discovering more-or-less slowly the actions of Jews.
• Disguised harm is one of the most habitual Jewish foul plays. Miseducation, misinformation, medical lies, propagation of bad health—examples are endless.

Jewish Influences on White Beliefs and Academic Subjects (in the file 'Guide For the Perplexed'; click the back-arrow to return here) has genuine examples of Jewish influence, the words and phrases of 'political correctness', official vocabularies, censorship, Jewish racism and so on. If you're puzzled over the odd meanings given to 'individualism' or 'liberalism' or 'religion' or 'socialism' or 'freedom' or 'eugenics' or 'markets' or 'minorities' by the Jewish media, read it through, or just pick and choose phrases. I think I've got most of it right.
Here, (see below), I'm more concerned with subjects, the way they appear in schools, exams, universities, and the way the world is partitioned by the media, and by people who take what is given to them.
Jewish studies may as well be taken one topic at a time. What follows are suggestions of mine, to be taken along with the rest of this page, and of course other sites, which I hope may help shape teaching and discussion groups around the world. My material is largely British and often shaped by my own reading and research; by all means use examples which appeal to you, the more the better. In no special order, since the world is in no special order:–

[ Practical, Applied, Theory-Free Jew Teaching for Everyone | Race | Religion | Philosophy | Sophistry | History of Ideas | ... History of Silly Ideas | Sociology | Organisations: Unions, Political Groups, Govt Departments, New Organisations |

There is a desperate need for courses that focus on organized jewry and their supremely negative impact on White society.
Some suggested courses:

Jew Subversion Studies Program Jewish Infiltration of White Societies.
Jew Subversion Studies Program Jewish Aims in Destroying White Societies.
Jew Subversion Studies Program Jewish Tactics in Destroying White Societies.
Jew Subversion Studies Program Jewish Consequences of Destroying White Societies.

We need to develop a whole range of organised accessible educational material, at all levels, to wake up our fellow humans to the danger that Organised Jewry and its goy helpers represent.
[From 'katana', in The Occidental Observer, June 13, 2015]

Race
Race is universal in the living world: everything—bacteria, butterflies, grass, dogs, mankind—is divided into races; these are not usually clearly defined. They can be generated by normal evolutionary processes, such as a species living in separate areas. They can be man-made, as in breeds of dogs and cats, both of which are races of one species.
Note for people worried about evolution: it's not necessary to believe the full theory of evolution; species date back so far that their beginnings are in the far, far remote past. All that's needed is understanding inheritance of multiple characteristics. For example, generations of people with diabetes aren't counted as a 'race'; people who can't digest cow's milk aren't a race; but people who've interbred for many generations in special circumstances are a race. In particular, 'Jews' are a sub-race produced by the written word. Without the effects of reading and writing, 'Jews' could probably never have existed.
DNAs (with reservations) are related to race. There are other technical possibilities, for the future: here's an interesting comment: It will be interesting when face-recognition software ... makes it possible to identify ... members of cryptic in-groups [and races].'
Jewish control of media has suppressed popular discussion of all this; 'politically correct' writers such as Richard Dawkins go to great lengths to avoid any mention of important human racial differences. The Jewish motive, where it acts, typically in the media and the academic world, seems partly to skirt around the absurdity of their claiming to be chosen by 'G-d', partly because non-Jews are regarded as worthless, partly to ascribe the tale of Ham, Shem, and Japheth to 'G-d', and partly to pretend that non-white immigration is valuable rather than damaging. A detailed examination of this issue was made by Kevin MacDonald, in The Culture of Critique, on a Jewish pseudo-scientist called Boas.
Some otherwise serious investigators omit the entire issue of Jewish deliberate promotion of dysgenics (or 'malgenics'). Roger Pearson's Heredity and Humanity (1996) discusses the entire heredity question without mentioning Jews once; they are not even in the index, although anyone serious can identify them, for example 'Ashley Montagu'.
On specifically 'Jewish' inbreeding: researchers might note that the high rate of inbreeding and 'consanguinity' among for example the 'cousinhood' must have caused an increased level of genetic defects; the British royal family could not completely conceal a severely abnormal girl (who was buried in a pauper's grave) but it must be likely that there are many equivalent examples in the closely secret world of so-called Jews.
Serious speculation about race had to wait until whites had learned to travel round the globe, and observe raw data. Suggestive ideas include: the security of territories—Europe is divided by mountains and seas into territories still resembling Spain, France, Italy, Britain, Scandinavia. The Western Carpathian and Sudeten Mountains affect central Europe. Whereas North America and Asia and much of Africa are very open to invasion and looting. Climate is another likely racial influence, as it affects food supplies, and also rival animals, moulds, etc which are likely to deplete food. So is transport: consider Egypt and the Nile. And it's no surprise that Eskimoes and black Africans differ in lung capacity and fatness, or that people where cattle are common can digest cow's milk. I noticed Shockley considered blacks very superior in 'visual acuity'.
The best-known book on the topic of human races and their differences is (probably) J Philippe Rushton's. Here's a review of the shortened free edition of Race, Evolution and Behavior. There are analogous figures in other nations and language groups, for example Helmuth Nyborg of Denmark, and Kenya Kura of Japan.
Students might like to think about:
(1) The 'white race' (or subraces) as a category. Many whites don't even think about their race; in past centuries, of people they knew, everyone was white. Christendom was more or less coterminous with whiteness. It's essential to understand the Jewish cult's awareness of, and hatred of, whites. Much of 20th century politics and war can only be understood with this anti-white racism in mind. All over Internet, Youtube, the media, are people who think they are Jews, saying whites should be exterminated. (A more recent repetitive meme is to suggests whites should commit suicide; or white males, for 'Jews' who want white females. Note that orthanc.pdf by Miles Mathis includes a piece about Silvia Canetto, old female Jewish writer on male suicides in USA). If you don't understand this hatred of Jews for whites, you cannot understand modern history.
(2) The distribution of population characteristics over whole populations (rather than individuals). For example, where infanticide or kidnapping are rare, there are usually about equal numbers of males and females. Some groups may need e.g. people able to tolerate long periods of work, or of intermittent work (such as agriculture); or people able to tame animals, or hunt; or people who are inventive in the face of problems.
(3) The number of generations needed to produce a fairly clearly-defined race. Experts in this subject include animal and plant breeders. I'm not aware of any general survey; dramatic effects may be obtainable in surprisingly few generations.
(4) Pressures leading to co-operation or competition. It's worth thinking about evolution considered in an one-ended way: for example, if 'intelligence' is desirable for survival, what if anything prevents it increasing indefinitely?
(5) The game theory and/or probabilistic approach to 'aggression' might give valuable results. For example, it's clear that any species with long infancy time must on balance have a low probability of in-group violence, however this mechanism might develop. If (say) a species had a 1 in 50 chance per year of killing its offspring, two parents would give a below-survival death rate. It should be possible to see how Talmudic deceit developed: any group which overtly wished to damage other groups must presumably develop mechanism(s) to keep this secret. The difficulty of keeping up permanent deception must lead to cohesiveness. And so on. Grasping selfishness, and hostility to others, are not as easy as might be thought. Jewish books could be treated as manuals of a race's behaviour, and the advice teased out. This may be unpleasant, but at least would serve as a warning. To take just a few analogies, no doubt the US Army has advice on how to rape, Jews have advice on brothels, the USSR army had procedures on torture and killing. Best be prepared. Taking a long view, it's likely there may be long-term cycles, as with predator-prey population fluctuations: an obvious example is the expulsion of Jews: the memories subside, and they are let back, and the same cycle repeats. Certainly there must be important details on strategies for carrying out divide-and-rule in Jewish sources.
(6) Specifically, Jews are believed at the simplest to be two types: Biblical, i.e. ancient, and Khazar converts, with not much more than 1,000 years' history. There is plenty of scope for discussion of their inherited characteristics, such as tribal cohesiveness, the effects of written texts, rage against rivals, how outgroups are recognised and how that recognition is transferred into action, geographical situations, murderous hatred for any groups likely to be competitors, notably whites. As far as I know, authors like Rushton and Lynn haven't produced a theory convincingly explaining how the Khazar roots led them (if they did) to such exceptionally fanatical extremities of behaviour.

Caution when interpreting Jews' own claims
I mentioned 'expulsions', the common expression for what happened to groups of 'Jews' in the past. BUT this is likely to be a misleading word. Probably in most cases Jews stole or embezzled, then ran off to safety—a common pattern. What would they say at their destination? Probably not that they got away with their loot! Probably not that they screwed the goyim over! Most likely, they'd give a sob or horror story, and claim to have been thrown out violently.
Another illustration is the idea that Jews do not defraud each other, and religiously avoid such a thing. Which of course sounds relatively ethical, and shows some concern for their fellows. BUT again I'd suggest this is misleading. Jews may have dozens of frauds at various levels of operation—at present, the 'Holocaust' fraud, AIDS, drugs, NASA, nuclear frauds, educational frauds, frauds in individual African countries, prostitution rings, people shipping frauds, voting frauds, housing and rent frauds, religious frauds, media frauds, medical frauds, policies of intentional damage, and so on. But each of these frauds has its own needs for secrecy, its own concealing vocabulary, its own list of people in the know, its own contacts; probably therefore Jews keep their groups separate, to avoid the risk of wrecking projects being run by other Jews.

Race: Whites
I share the view that whites have led in achievements of most kinds, including several thousand years ago and before. And this must be explicable by genetics. Not that all whites are pathbreaking innovators, which is any case seems logically impossible. The traditional simple 'bell curve' or normal distribution of measured 'intelligence', which is based on large numbers of rather similar small changes, is not enough to explain this: India, China, and Africa now each have populations 10-20 times Europe's in the 19th century. But there is no sign of dozens of great thinkers, historians, or scientists—and the fact that they share in White/Jew frauds and errors is proof of lack of independence of thought.
Many white writers at present underrate the downside of white behaviour, under the influence of the Jewish media: Jews are unlikely to admit to the money they make from wars and money fraud, and are just as unlikely to admit that some of the most callous war crimes are committed by Americans. Many Americans simply have no idea of the harm that has been done by them in other countries. As a few further examples of white deficiencies:
• There's usually been a lack of large-scale cohesion. I like Joseph McCabe's opinions on chaos and wars throughout Europe. (The link is to an entire reference book by McCabe; THIS LINK is to my choice of parts of his work). It seems likely to follow that bribery, deathly skills sold to the highest bidders, indifference to suffering in other groups and offloading nuisances onto other groups were endemic. Judging by (e.g.) journalists hiding facts for decades, war criminals, dishonest officials, dishonest teachers these characteristics have been tapped into by Jews with remarkable parasite-like efficiency. Civil servants in the British Foreign Office were perfectly happy with 50 million deaths in Europe just to give Jews money power over Germany.
• It's possible that genetics of a large community of nomads, with herds which needed careful supervision and guarding against marauders, needed co-operation on a scale not fund in scattered village and small town communities. Over millennia, this must have had genetic effects.
• The ability to concentrate is essential to any sort of constructive work, and may genetically be part of white groups because of the need to deal with difficult times in small groups. The ability seems to attach itself to unimportant objects, in a similar way that 'pathological altruism' can be a free-floating emotion waiting to lock onto some objective or other.
• There's a lot of laziness among whites where long-term issues are concerned, even though whites probably had more forethought than other groups. As a simple modern example, there are few useful Amazon reviews of Jewish books, or TV. A concrete example is Jewish-promoted books, on (for example recently) the effects of Internet, the history of interest, and the psyche of Americans; they are obviously worthless—they wouldn't be promoted otherwise—but there are no good dismissive reviews online to be found. Another example is Foyle's War, a TV series with supposedly millions of viewers in English-speaking countries, presenting of course the Jewish viewpoint of the Second World War: out of all those millions, not one single person or group wrote a serious review. A more practical example is the damage to British aristocrats by immigrant Jews, which they proved unable to oppose. History has many examples of whites assisting Jews against other whites, and collaborating with Jews in flagrantly dishonest schemes. Discussion of Jews illustrates all this: often it's suppressed, or given a glossy simple-minded treatment. As a result we now have a huge number of conflicting views on Jews—as ancient tribes, as subdivisions of ancient tribes, as offshoots of tribes, where avoidance of the issue has allowed strange and unreal opinions to flourish. H G Wells (As a matter of fact the Pyramids were there a long time before the Jews) tried to be rational on the subject three-quarters of a century ago. We must expect a long period to remain of such inconsistencies, in which whites may on the whole stay shamefully idle.
• Another white characteristic, perhaps related to evolution in difficult terrain with difficult mobility, is the assumption that other people are 'nice': it saves trouble if people are polite, help each other out, work together, and so on, but where there is economic surplus grasping strategies may evolve, incompatible with scattered community 'niceness'. A good example is the Holocaust fraud by Jews; many whites simply can't understand the compulsion to lie which is in Jews, and a feedback system develops in which the more they make up stories, the more money they're fed, and so the more lies they tell...
• If the Jewish menace is overcome, there will probably be genetic effects on remaining whites, since gullible, lazy, complacent, good-natured, and uncomprehending whites are likely to be selectively disadvantaged. The world may survive as more aggressive white types come to the fore and spread. Lack of gentleness, thoughtfulness, and politeness; and vanishing of delicate, specialised and rare human types, may be the Jewish legacy for generations.

Race: 'Blacks'
[ Top of page ]
Here's an edited online item, by Jan Lamprecht, 25 August 2018. Which simultaneously shows several Jew/race issues, 'Jews' not a race, but as a group operating under their own rules (including lies), and the 'land seizure' issue in South Africa. In my view, Jews want to ruin farming to cause starvation: presumably for preference whites in Africa, who are correctly seen as more competent and in any case have been enemies of Jews since the Boer Wars. Non-Jews tens to think farms ought to be used for producing food, and simply don't even consider the Jewish attitude, just as non-Jews think wars are to be won by A or B, not just used for profit and deaths. But watch another part of the history of Africa.

Ramaphosa

Trump’s Land Seizure Tweet – Is Ramaphosa a Black Jew?

Business Day is our [South African] equivalent of The Wall Street Journal. This is run by (((white Liberals))). It came out attacking Trump fiercely for “his crazy tweet”. They later turned it into an editorial.

Even stranger was that the London Financial Times very quickly printed a full story, that seems to be written by Ramaphosa [I'd guess his Jew handlers - RW] wherein it says: “This is NOT a Land Grab”. It goes on to tell the normal lies of the blacks, but with a twist. It says that the blacks are stuck and “unable” to develop further because of this problem with Land ownership. This is pure HOGWASH at its FINEST. It goes on to give bogus reasons and bogus benefits for seizing the land without paying for it.

As usual the blacks lie by omission, by not mentioning that they’ve already taken many of the best farms in South Africa through the Land Claims Court since 1996. They have taken thousands of farms and even mines, using this on the “willing buyer, willing seller” principle. The vast majority of these superb farms turned into total failures. They do not mention any of this.

The London Financial Times piece is pure propaganda right out of the mouth of Ramaphosa. Business Day then rushed to print it.

In about 2010-2012, before I finally kicked my “best Jewish friend” [described many times by Jan Lamprecht] out of my life, he told me ... an “important black” had gone through the long and tedious conversion to Judaism. I asked him more than once: “So who is this black guy?” He refused to tell me. He just told me he was important. I was of the impression that this was very likely an ANC guy. I thought perhaps the Governor of the Central Bank ...

... I’m almost utterly convinced ... that the black who converted to Judaism is Cyril Ramaphosa. He is a firm communist [Jan thinks 'communism' is something other than mere Jew-controlled BS], and Jews love and support all black communists and all communists in fact. But the way he was blessed by the Jewish Rabbi when he became the President really has made me wonder if this is not the real reason. In my dealings with Jews, they are serious about their stupid religion of rubbish. I had many discussions with my Jewish friend and I began to realise that there are many things these Jews will NEVER DO. They do take their garbage religion very seriously.

... Look at [a photo of] Ramaphosa’s face, during the blessing and afterwards. During the blessing his eyes are closed. I think Ramaphosa was blessed BECAUSE HE IS A JEW. I don’t know of any black leader in Africa, that was EVER blessed by a Rabbi like this, including Mandela himself.

I am very seriously thinking, almost 100% certain in fact, that Ramaphosa may be the black who converted to Judaism.

The weird way in which the Business Day, did a 180 degree turn in supporting Ramaphosa on an issue as critically important as land seizure without it being paid for, is too weird, even for South African Liberals. The speed with which a Jewish British publication like The London Financial Times, rushes to tell lies in support of Ramaphosa, is unprecedented. NEVER BEFORE have the rich rushed so fast to protect a black South African President.

I think we are watching Jewry in action here. This is too slick. This is very bizarre. Even the Liberal white scum, being the dog shit that they are, would NEVER think of allowing land to be seized without it being paid for. The Rich White Liberals are too materialistic and extremely cowardly at the same time. They would NEVER be so CALM about something unless they are on the inside in some way. They are themselves the owners of masses of land. The only reason they would support such a line is if they know things and are in on secrets that we do not know about. For example, they might all know that Ramaphosa will NOT seize the land of any JEW in South Africa. As a Jew, he would NEVER be allowed to steal from another Jew. The Jews would know this and therefore since they don’t have a problem with STEALING FROM NON-JEWS, they would support him since they know that THEY ARE SAFE. That he is one of them.

'Judeocommunism' (or Judeo-Communism'), a coining on similar lines to Judeo-Christian, fits the bill here.

I hope race analysis will increase, because of its immense importance. The subject has been censored by Jews; but this may be expected to change. Maybe:
[1] Some whites have curiosity. But creativity is genetically difficult; how can there be impulses to search out fruitful newness? Some Whites tend to invent, but on a chance basis. Many waste their lives on silly activities and will not co-operate.
[2] Jews have evolved as parasites, specifically with secrecy, tribal networking, lies, deception, and violence. They seem unable to originate; they can be envious and aggressively imitative, but can't usually even identify new desires. They happily spend their entire lives in endless repetition of lies.
[3] Blacks would like to be parasites, but haven't evolved mental skills to parasitise. Evidence is new, since large-scale exploration has not existed for even 200 years. Evidence suggests they ruin things.
[4] Other large or once-large groups include: Central and South Americans, who probably were separated from other groups for the longest time. Unfortunately, evidence is lacking, as Spanish Catholics and/or Jews destroyed most evidence. India, with their long-established caste system, which in fact may have been used by Islam to inflate its numbers by taking 'untouchables'. China is (my best guess) finally awakening to the risk of Jews and other parasitic groups. Arabs are yet another group, possibly a product of deserts/ camels/ dates/ oases/ and Muslim parasitism.

Race: 'Half-Breeds'
It's remarkable that thorough material on mixed races seems non-existent, despite the Jewish moves to force widespread mass migrations. We have one-off opinions: a German General who said of the Second World War that half-Germans in eastern Europe were the most dangerous fighters against Germany; Coudenhove-Kalergi's view, based on himself; a view that mixed couples are more intelligent than average; and the exactly opposite view. It may be found that coloureds in southern Africa were mostly sired by Jews. There may or course be reliable material in medical circles, waiting for a renaissance. This is an important issue!

computer simulation of genetics and strategies

Abstract
... computer simulations suggest that ethnocentrism ... may have arisen through biological evolution. From a random start, ethnocentric strategies dominate other possible strategies (selfish, traitorous, and humanitarian) based on cooperation or non-cooperation with in-group and out-group agents. ... we show that ethnocentrism eventually overcomes its closest competitor, humanitarianism, by exploiting humanitarian cooperation across group boundaries as world population saturates. Selfish and traitorous strategies are self-limiting because such agents do not cooperate with agents sharing the same genes. Traitorous strategies fare even worse than selfish ones because traitors are exploited by ethnocentrics across group boundaries in the same manner as humanitarians are, via unreciprocated cooperation. ...

Quoted from The Occidental Observer Aug 10 2015 online, quoting The Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation (2013). The very simple shapes suggest an over-simple genetic model, at least to me, but this sort of thing may prove powerful.

Race: Natural Selection, Artificial Selection, Unnamed Selection
Darwin named the processes of adaptation 'natural selection', i.e. selection 'by nature'. 'Artificial selection' is his word for deliberate breeding of races or varieties—cart horses, fancy roses, sheep, wheat, or whatever. However, human races can change their environments, and this feedback effect may be important. Heavy clothing, effective housing, improved hunting methods, new food sources are obvious examples. Probably, detailed information on water, food, salt, fuel, security and shelter may suffice to model much of human behaviour. Speech, writing, and reading are less obvious because many people take them for granted. Legal agreements and tribal habits are in effect almost invisible but can influence all aspects of life. My best guess is the sudden importation of Talmudic material, probably simplified, into Khazar territory had huge genetic impact there.
Race: Computer Modelling Possibilities
Computers can process data in unprecedentedly large quantities. It seems possible that huge populations could be genetically modelled, and that new unexpected patterns may emerge. Low-probability combinations of genes will happen occasionally. Perhaps new laws of genetics will emerge. There may be long-term cycles. on human populations which are clannish vs populations which are more isolated into groups and more opportunistic might be testable. Perhaps population characteristics might be fitted fairly accurately into genetic variations needed to live in areas identified by defensibility, food sources both animal and vegetable, air and water, deficiencies, climate, diseases and other hostile forces, unpredictability, available materials.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Prejudice
The word 'prejudice' is derived from pre-judgment. This constructed word is supposed to imply coming to an opinion before any evidence has been looked for, or discovered. It's usually misused deliberately. Views for example about Jews, when evidence has been found—often with a lot of effort, against walls of secrecy—could be called 'post-judice' since they are not the usual uninformed and silly statements.

Religion
Religious discussion is bedevilled (not in my view literally!) by Jewish control. For example, the Scofield commented edition of the Bible is said to provide a Jewish-biased view; the King James version itself is modernised, not the original version; Jewish laws have imposed tax and other restrictions which make free discussion difficult; and in any case the money power of Jews directs money to groups of their own choosing, often very silly ones. Christian churches, it is painfully obvious, have all but given up intellectual discussion; Internet has livelier and better discussion than any churchmen. And the latest Archbishop of Canterbury (Welby) is of Jewish descent; his predecessor was about as ineffectual as it is possible to be.
Note that the phrase 'Judeo-Christian' is itself a Jewish introduction. The earlier expression was typically 'Judeo-Hellenic'. The 'Bible Belt' in the USA is a strange survivor; four hundred years ago the Bible, newly and officially translated into English, was forced top-down onto the populace, and its distorted narrow history, sex, anthropology, and ethics, may have seemed interesting at the time. I doubt if one person in ten thousand has any understanding of where the component books came from, or why they were included, or how reliable the translations are. Modern so-called 'Jews' have a huge vested interest in pretending they have a continuous history. All Christian denominations are liable to fall into this trap.
Many people think, or have been told, that 'all religions are the same'. In fact, they differ enormously: students might check up Hinduism, Islam, types of Buddhism (this is Indian), Daoism (or Taoism), Confucianism, Jainism, and ancient religions (Egyptian beliefs were largely based on coincidences in stars, beetles, and so on). And check out the Aztecs. An interesting and little-known religion is thuggee, after which 'thugs' are named. Groups of thugs walked (in India—distances are long) and joined other travellers; other thugs joined along the way, but with no sign of recognition; when numbers and conditions were right, the victims were strangled with a yellow scarf, the dead bodies broken in a way to make them quick to bury, and the loot split between the thugs. If a student feels this isn't a religion, he/she should check up the books traditionally believed to be Jewish. As far as I know, translations are online, although their accuracy is suspect.
Students might note the difference between religions with a literate basis, and those without. Africans developed no written language; it's hardly possible they could have complex religions. 'Celts' seem to have had writing, but little has survived; so the beliefs of Druids are not known in any detail. Nordic mythology as far as I know survived mainly as tales, sagas, poems, 'lays' and so on and may possibly revive, maybe as a fake of Gerald Gardner's 'wicca' type. Jewish productions of Wagner operas reveal considerable hostility and fear of his themes.
Off-the-wall Arguments For and Against Religions. Most criticism takes religious claims and beliefs as they are made by supporters of religions, rather than a more holistic examination. For example, it is possible that the Catholic Church on balance is beneficial, because it extracts and isolates people who are unusually fanatically obstinate. By keeping them out of the way, it may permit others to get on with their lives. Maybe religions could be compared by assessing their populations: if population A is judged better than population B, their religions, if they have them, are part of the complete set of forces acting. It's not necessary to debate which makes sense or which is truer: there are many people indifferent to truth and consistency.
'Catholicism' as Derived from Jews. Early Christianity came via Jews; the first Popes were Jews. Whether the views of early Christians were the same, or whether those people were a Jewish fake, is probably not known reliably.
Jewish and Catholic opinions have a lot in common. A modern Catholic pamphlet says All the goods on Earth were placed here by God FOR THE USE OF ALL which appears to show that wealth does not belong to people who made it. This has a lot in common with Jewish views, presented as 'Communism', though Jews hide the part about controlling wealth themselves.
Because of the symbiosis between Jews, Christians (and Muslims) I advise religious people to watch for unexpected agreements between these groups an 'lay people'.
'Communism' as a Religion

is a subject which has barely been investigated, despite its interest. The main reason in my view is, yet again, the Jewish component: Jewish money sources have to be kept hidden; Jewish anti-white and anti-competitor strategies have to be secret; lies are absolutely necessary to keep subject populations, and fellow-travellers in non-subject countries, in the dark. 'Communism' is (arguably) unique in being bogus, a fraud imposed on the gullible goyim; the gap between the preaching and reality is larger than any other religion. And there are genuine philosophical issues to complicate the picture. There are interpretational problems, especially about history, notably Jewish fixed ideas on their own supposed history. There are translation difficulties. There's the question of how far Jews manipulated China and Mao.
This site's hypothesis is, roughly, that Jews controlled the USSR/ Soviet Union (and made attempts to impose their system on Germany and Hungary and other places). They had a financial lifeline to US Jews in New York, and German Jews. Their personal religion was Jewish supremacism, and they thought lying was justified to support this. Their goal was to maximise power, in practice something like maximising the difference between Jewish and other power. This involved theft, mass murder with a huge thug hierarchy, full media and education control, and imported technology with slave labour. I take it that 'Communism' is the ideology taught to the underlings under their control, and to the 'trusties' who worked with them, and to foreigners, some of them Jews in on the secret, and others to be more onside than without 'Communism'. So for example trade unions manipulated by Jews could work for Jewish control of industries. Divide-and-rule could be used on any groups: class and traditional enemies and language being the most used in practice. For example Irish groups could be set against each other, if necessary helped along by false flag operations. Propaganda through news sources generated splits between e.g. Britain and Germany. 'Capitalists' were always shopkeepers, farmers ('kulaks'), factory owners: the topic of control of finance was avoided. Colonies were always treated as though there were no interests in common. Race differences and sex differences were used later.
From this point of view, Marx and Engels founded the modern version of this religion, though there were precursors, before and during the French Revolution for example. Lenin wrote vast amounts of material; so did Trotsky and Stalin; students of Jews might make an attempt to trace this material and tease out the multiple meanings given to 'class', 'imperialism', 'capitalism', 'socialism' and so on, to their various target audiences, and the changes as the world changed. Good luck with that, anyway. Here's the sort of material to wrestle with:–-

'.. the only determining criterion of revolutionary proletarian internationalism is: are you for or against the USSR, the Motherland of the world proletariat? An internationalist is not one who verbally recognises international solidarity or sympathises with it. A real internationalist is one who brings his sympathy and recognition up to the point of practical and maximum help to the USSR in support and defence of the USSR by every means and in every possible form. ... The defence of the USSR as the socialist Motherland of the world proletariat, is the holy duty of every honest man everywhere and not only of the citizens of the USSR.'
– P. Vishinsky, in 1948. At that time, the world situation was: the USSR was presenting the faked deaths of Jews at the Nuremberg trials; tens of millions of Russians had been killed; the whole of eastern Europe was being wrecked and shaped in Jewish ways; fake atom spies and vast frauds were being organised with Jews in the USSR.

A few failed leads include Acton The Illusion of the Epoch (see the end of Student Power of the 1960s); Cohn-Bendit's Obsolete Communism - The Left-Wing Alternative (French Jews deciding maybe Stalin wasn't a model to follow); and Isaiah Berlin's books which tread an impossible line between Jewish triumphalism and cultural pretence. Important warning note: Jews regard the Soviet Union as a wonderful example of socialism and it's a mistake to assume they don't want to continue with similar techniques. Here's an audio talk by Eric Hobsbawm on the so-called Russian Revolution showing the utterly callous indifference to sufferings of non-Jews. This callous cruelty was taken up by the USA, as Jews secured greater holds, notably after Kennedy's murder. As with Russians it's important to separate out the Jewish influence from the thugs just obeying orders.

Most religions are imposed top-down, as Christianity was imposed by Constantine. Judaism is believed, on strong evidence, to have been imposed on Asian nomads. Power is a source of creeds: 'Communism' and 'Holocaustianity' are attempts to impose Jewish attitudes. Contrary to general belief, Judaism, like many religions, is trying for world wide conversion, though they are extremely coy about describing it, for reasons which the student, if he doesn't know already, should soon discover.
Many people still don't understand the tribalism of Judaism; they say they are free agents, and if they want to believe and become Jews they will. In fact it's not easy to get in (or out). It's a characteristic similar to Islam: here's a review of a book on Islam, including comparisons with Judaism. Cox and Marks's book, typically, ignores all serious issues.
Some people might like to study evidence that Christ never existed and also note Jewish attitudes to Jesus; they don't seem to have had much talent for historical enquiry. They might also probe the extent to which pre-Khazar Jewish histories were invented myths. Internet discussions on skepticism, rationalism etc are worth checking for Jewish influence: they encourage skepticism of everything except Jewish beliefs and Jewish frauds. See the note, above, on Sayanim and Hasbarat (click the back-arrow to return here).
Students might like to look at the 'Reformation' as a practical historical example of the reduction of religious power. (Click the back button to return here). Watch for Jewish censorship: Luther felt sympathy for the Jews in his early years, but after nailing up his theses and translating the Bible into German under Prince Federich, a Jewish convert informed Luther about the Talmud and its cultish wickedness, after which Luther saw the truth, and wrote about the Jews. But most modern Lutherans have never heard this, because of censorship by US and other military occupiers of Germany. Study of the Reformation may form the basic strategy for removing Jewish power. (Here's a book review of a 1960s standard undergraduate history book, written by a Jew in Britain, on the Reformation, 1517-1559, which shows how history has been distorted). Catholic or Orthodox Christians might prefer to examine the origin of Christianity as the imposition of a system that may in the past have served them better than the present Jewish 'Holocaustianity' and 'Political Correctness'.
‘Moral Community’ note Kevin MacDonald thinks Christian religious groups are communities who believe in a strict code. MacDonald thinks they are unique to whites. In my view, he understates the part played by money. In practice, the nominal leaders have to be funded. If they don't control their funding, such groups may be corrupted, or fade away. Groups who control money can use it to feed 'moral communities'.
An extreme case is Jews themselves, who view themselves as a 'moral community' and exert huge pressures on young 'Jews' to force them into their 'community'. Another example is military groups, some of which are viciously violent, but are held together by money and some primitive belief system.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Philosophy
Jews are not important in philosophy: unbiased seeking for truth is very definitely not their thing. Let me just mention (1) Maimonides: an Arabic Jew, or Jew-influenced Arab, or something; students might compare the way this book is described, with its actual content. (2) Baruch or Benedict Spinoza, a Jew in the Netherlands, who tried to produce an objective theory of ethics, and impressed (for example) Bertrand Russell, mainly because he, Spinoza, said pleasant things. Jews have recently been attempting to claim Spinoza as a very significant philosophical figure. (3) Marx who I suppose is still read in some quarters, but contributed little to philosophy, apart from Germanic, overwritten by Jewish, things, typically based on Hegel, (who may have been Jewish, wanting to conceal his world predictions, and love of wars for others) such as dialectic materialism (in effect the idea that money can change the world in stages), and repeating that point is to change the world. His importance is more that of a screaming street preacher, hiding the crimes of his handlers. (4) Jews seem to have contributed 'pragmatism' to the world. I suspect Dewey was a Jew; in any case his idea that truth is what works is entirely Jewish. If the Holohoax makes money for Jews, then it's "true". (5) Some other Jews - Wittgenstein, Horkheimer, Derrida, Chomsky, for example - made their names through obscurity and obfuscation. In the peak of Christian times, there were Christian writers and philosophers of the same type.
Students ought to try to fairly identify the main points, or themes, or attitude, of such writers; don't get tangled in webs of detail. And students should try to see why Jews selectively flatter some writers, but not others, in proportion as they go along with Jewish myths. This often provides an easy key: I remember trying to discuss Russell, Arthur Koestler, science, and Vietnam, with a Jew, without realising she, as on robotic control, would think Russell was OK but not special (he mentioned Jews, but not just them), Koestler wasn't good (he commented on Khazars etc), science wasn't Jewish so no interest, and Vietnam involved non-Jewish deaths so it didn't matter except that Kissinger must not be criticised.
Anyone new to philosophy and its oddities (in particular, the avoidance of many important issues) might do well to read Russell's History of Western Philosophy (now more than fifty years old; there are online copies). It's arranged by names of philosophers, giving an overview of their beliefs and their times. But also relevant here is Russell's characteristic 19th-century dishonesty about Jews, common amongst Britons, and Russell's holocaustianity.
There are attempts to popularise philosophy, usually tired old themes: induction free will, whatever. For our purposes, there are four relevant possibilities:
1. Jewish Traditional Beliefs. These are hardly known to most non-Jews, for good reasons. A starting-point is online translations of the Talmud.
2. Scientific Method. Because of widespread science-based Jewish frauds (e.g. AIDS, nuclear matters, 9/11) it's worthwhile having a grasp of the deepest basics of each science. Some of this is philosophical. For example, 'instrumentalism' can be regarded as results of the use of scientific instruments—telescopes, microscopes, and so on.
3. Human Knowledge and the 'Psychosphere' or 'Mentosphere'. There is, or may be, a divide in ways of looking at knowledge. It can be regarded as non-human, or above humanity, existing in an abstract sense in books, libraries, organisations. Many scientists think, vaguely, in such a way, with each scientist sharing a communal bank of knowledge. A different view, which must be more attuned to Jews, is that each person has his own awareness and sphere: a housewife knows her house and local shops and people; a mechanic knows about a range of vehicles and what to do with them, plus his suppliers and associates; a lecturer knows his own notes and rooms and books and colleagues; an IT worker may get computers working, and repair connections etc—everyone you see, throughout the world, has some localised expertise, if it can be called that. However Jews have a more-or-less unconscious attitude, that there are networks of Jews, more or less available and on call, with their localised knowledge. This attitude is more personal and selfish than that of many scientists; 'knowledge' is the sum of what Jews believe, and what they can get away with, in secret, against goyim. This is worth discussing.
4. Possible Types of Societies. Plato's Republic started, perhaps, examinations of possible new types of society. Buoyed up by statistical population ideas, why not discuss the issue of peoples' ideal societies? Minimisation of violence, perhaps? Maximisation of 'opportunity', whatever that means? Maximising happiness? Maximising differences between people, to provide food for evolution? Maximising incomes? Providing as many alternative lifestyles as possible? Maximising security? Try to ensure some group grows as much as possible? Aiming for some population level? Minimising the chance of meetong psychopaths? Trying to offer happiness by matching the abilities of people with appropriate opportunities?
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Sophistry

This word, from the Greek of a few thousand years ago, supposedly referred to a school of philosophers, who specialised in distortions, lies, and unnecessary elaborations. Such methods don't really make up a school of philosophy, since they are techniques, not aims. Probably the meaning was taken from Jewish practices, which of course they accurately resemble. It's essential that whites (or 'Europeans') should be less unsophisticated than they have been, since otherwise they will continue to be deceived by Jewish-controlled media.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

History of Ideas
Jews are not important in the history of ideas. Most of their intellectual effort has been directed into documentary exegesis. Most of their practical effort has been tribal. In my opinion, which may be wrong, the well-known financiers are atypical, but as there seem to be no autobiographies or serious biographies, certainty seems out of place here. There are three ways in which Jews have been influential:–
(1) Not in original thought, but in censorship, 'hype', selection. This process in the white world seems related to the invention of printing, and the fairly coincident discovery of the western hemisphere. These influences first coincided in Holland. They were reinforced by Cromwell, and Napoleon, and the eventual victory of Jews over the USA.
(2) The Zionist movement and the more or less simultaneous Jewish 'Internationals' have had vast practical effect, but intellectually were, and are, just complicated special pleading.
(3) In science and technology there has been a huge promotional effort, notably in huge frauds: 'nuclear weapons', NASA's frauds, AIDS, the mythology of Einstein, and so on.
| https://big-lies.org/jews/teaching-about-jews.html#USSR-invention-claims Whether Jews will develop serious science and technology remains to be seen. My best guess is that if rented 'goyim' move away, and their patents etc disconnected from Jews, and there are moves to compensation for Jewish frauds and crime (click back-arrow to return here), Jews will be in serious trouble. Here's a review of Cecil Roth's Jewish Contribution (1938), which is not impressive. Jews fronted by Stalin had the greatest opportunities probably of any group in world history, but all their weapons, tanks, etc were non-Jewish.

Harry Hodgkinson's Doubletalk: The Language of Communism (1955, Allen and Unwin) has an immediately post-Stalin table of inventions claimed by the USSR, rather like the present-day absurd 'inventions by blacks' websites, as far as I recall all ridiculed, and the pretences that Americans invented many inventions of Germans:

Abbreviated list of claimed Russian/ USSR inventions taken from e.g. Soviet Encyclopaedia, Moscow Radio, Tass news agency etc:–
Aeronautics - looping the loop/ Airplane - Mazhaisky 1882/ Airship - Kostovich 1900/ Animal - 'dinoceratosaurus' / Antarctic - Bellingshausen & Lazarev 1819-21 / Antibiotics - penicillium glaucum 1870s / Artificial insemination of fish - Vrassky 1857 / Atomic fission - Flerov & Petrzhak / Calculating machine - Yakobson, 1750 / Physical chemistry - Lemonosov 1752 / Cinema projector - Odessa University 1893 / Crystallography E S Fedorov / Gobi Desert uniqueness - 1951 / Detergents - G S Petrov, 1913 / Dyestuffs - N N Genin, aniline 1842 / Electric arc - V V Petrov 1802 / Electric light - A H Lodigin, 1875 / electrical units - Yakoby / Electric motor boat - Yakoby / Flying boat - Yakov Gakkel, 1911 / Gas turbine et al, 1897 / Helicopter - Lomonosov, 1754 / Hydrogenation plant - 1908 / Internal combustion locomotives [?diesel] - 1947 / Interplanetary flight / Jet Aircraft - 1942 / Mine, first mechanised / Naval tactics / Naval mines / trawler / hydroplanes / Oil well 1846 / Parachute - Kotelnikov / Quartz crystal clock / Radio - Popov, 1895 / Radar - Popov 1897 / Railway - 1753 / Rockets - 1620 / Seismology - Golitsyn, 1926 / Synthetic rubber - S V Lebedev, 1926 / Steam engine - Polzunov, 1754 / Submarines - based on Crimean Sea fishermen / Telegraph - P L Shilling, 1832 / Telephony - Vlasev, 1893 / Television - B L Rosing, 1911 / Stereo cinema - Ivanov, 1941 / Trams, 1846 / Caterpillar Tractor - F A Blikov, 1879 / Turbine - Ignaty Sofronov 1837 / 'Underground mole' for tunnels / Vaccination - 1713 / Viruses - Gamalyeva 1886 & Ivanovsky (1892) / Vitamins - Lunin, 1881 / Wood Roads in Novgorod

The USSR's Jews were adept (with US assistance) at theft and plagiarism, including entire businesses and entire factories. Note that during the Second World War a Jew, Rothschild, was allowed to spy on British inventions, such as the cavity magnetron. Spying can have downsides - read about the USSR theft of rejected Anglo-French Concorde plans, the ill-fated Tupolev supersonic airplane. Serious students might try to check details of these huge subjects, and speculate on the future.

Breaks in Continuity of Ideas in my view are important as a catalyst in changing people's views. The point is that someone who returns, from a long break, to a previously-held system, may well find the system outdated, useless, or wrong. After 'Communism' failed in Poland, very many Poles found the return to Roman Catholicism impossible: Polish church leaders wanted Poles to believe that someone called 'Jesus Christ' died 'for their sins', two millennia in the past; and rose up into the sky after his death, which was the worst death anyone ever experienced. The interlude made all this (and of course there's more) seem not credible. Marxists, if there's an explicit comeback of Marxism, are asked to believe that all history is class struggle, including for example Mongols and Huns attacking western Asia; and that labour determines value; and that working-class people always existed, and were always exploited. There's plenty more; but people on whom this is being reimposed are immunised against it: they've heard it before. Jews who were assimilated would have difficulty believing that for example all goyim are worthless, or Jews are chosen (if so, why would they need to tell lies? Wouldn't Jehovah just help them?) and Jews are skilled in business (if so, why tell lies for money? Why the fraud and scheming? Why the desperation to control money? Why not just make money by working hard?) If the BBC is removed for a period of time, it seems likely the absurd staging, the PR material, the obvious acting, the canned laughter, the ludicrous plots, the historical frauds, would not work for many people a second time around.

Philosophy Students of philosophy ought to be aware of Jewish 'religious' books; the real thing, not edited and bowdlerised versions. A subgroup of this genre is the fairly serious attempt to show that Judaism is, after all, realistic and rational. I have a used-bookshop copy of Charles Napper's The Art of Political Deception (1972; just an example—I'm not recommending it) which doesn't live up to the title, but does make some attempt at debate from ancient times (i.e. Biblical) to modern times, discreetly promoting Jews, including Isaiah Berlin and Isaac Deutscher. A narrower present-day movement, documented by The Occidental Observer, is to promote Spinoza by Jewish mutual article-and-book-plugging. There are science analogues, notably in nuclear physics.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

... History of Silly Ideas
Jews are important in the history of silly, foolish, incomplete, and wrong ideas. Why this should be is a study in itself. The monomaniacal attack on their children must be one reason: the historical fact that just one or two books were forced on children for many years, at a time when lifespans were shorter and manuscripts and books fewer. The feedback effect of 'reward' for this activity must have had a reinforcing effect, as must the effect of mutual recommendation and feeble criticism. So must the internal 'memes' thoughtfully put in to deter any other exploration. Freud, Kafka, Boas, Marx, Jewish anarchists, Marcuse, Derrida are just a very few modern-ish names. Some mimic literature, some mimic art, some mimic religion, some mimic science (for example Einstein and whole groups of nuclear 'researchers'), some, such as 'political correctness', mimic ethics. I'm wording this bluntly, to try to get across the idea that Jewish writings and speeches have a quality which ought to put people on their guard. Any vague or imprecise region of thought is liable to be colonised by Jewish mal-thought. This is obvious in the case of economics, for example, and sociology. I recently noticed what I take to be a Jewish school on probability, apparently due to Nasem Taleb, taking advantage of many mistakes lurking in wait in statistical theory: ambiguities in sample spaces, unnoticed assumptions, subtle changes in meanings, and what have you. (He appears to have been plagiarised by Rolf Dobelli in a book popular in Europe, made up of short chapters). Taleb thinks books have been in print for thousands of years, and that old people are sure to die before young ones. and that simple integrals (with two variables) can model events with many variables.
The heart of all these things is parasitic behaviour: either waste the time of goyim, or try to plant confusions, or aim to fill paid positions, or direct attention away from Jews. Academic economics has an almost complete taboo on discussing the 'Fed', for example. 'Media Studies' and journalism courses avoid ownership issues. Science is now corrupted on a huge scale by Jewish paper and e-money. War and peace issues barely touch on the activities of Jews.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Sociology
I offer some Jew-specific hypotheses which students might like to test.
(1) Claiming Jewish originality for old ideas. Maslow's 'Hierarchy of Needs' always struck me as a joke; it's fairly obvious people need to eat and drink, but also that pondering elegant clothes, taking elaborate revenge for barely detectable slights, studying subjects taking many years to fruition, come later, if ever. Maslow obviously was not original. Something similar is true with the claim that Marx invented 'economic determinism'. In fact the idea is not at all new: the 'Domesday Book' had a clear economic function; Caesar listed four economic reasons for invading Britain—wheat, tin, lead, and slaves.
(2) Censorship and evasion of the idea that a large number of men in key positions can have decisive effects. Hence the Great Man idea; and hence, also, the masses idea. Both these ideas distract attention from the obvious possibility that a secret unified group, such as Jews, can have disproportionate effects. This distraction is a very long-lived strategy by Jews, and it's easy to miss. Herbert Spencer, for example, whose The Man Versus the State has a well-worded long passage on careerism and bureaucrats, and praises individualism, but says nothing much on serious collaboration. Earlier examples are Samuel Smiles (UK) and Horatio Alger (US), and the suggestions that Cromwell and Napoleon and Lenin operated as extraordinary individuals. The omission applies to groups of writers, groups of propagandists, groups of teachers: see if you can find the 'Frankfurt School' discussed by conventional sociologists. Very possibly the hysterical Jewish denunciation of 'fascists' is a method to counter unification of (for example) whites. It follows that fairly simple observation can amount to valuable research: for years Bilderberg researchers compiled data on trips abroad by people suspected of arranging secret meetings, and their work was fully vindicated. Civil servants, and organisations like the FBI and CIA, can operate in much the same way, but of course tend to be less distributed all around chokepoints.
Another example is intellectual history treated as a series of great books. In modern times, the effects of prolonged media campaigns of lies exceed the influence of any book: thus, in the late 19th century, many British people had absorbed the attitude that Russians and Germans were essentially rather evil, simply from passing comments in newspapers, which weren't even particularly common, in the same way that Jewish-controlled 'Hollywood' output influences vast numbers of consumers.
Here's a discussion on number of people in key positions needed to control a country.
The Freemasons illustrate exactly the same point. With large numbers of 'lodges', given a sufficiently large membership of each lodge, large numbers can act as a secret criminal group. Here's a 90 minute talk about Freemasons (recorded in 2000; speaker is Jasper Ridley, hired to write a book on the subject). Note that freemasons seem out of date, now. They may have been prominent local people, but as the economy shifted to huge blocs of public sector makework types, and private sector large organisations, Common Purpose seems to be superseding them.
(3) Naturally, understatement of the methods and role of high finance.
(4) Conspiracies are denied, despite the fact that Jews have operated conspiratorially for centuries, as their lies about sufferings, lies about killings and wars, and lies about money prove abundantly. And the fact that legally conspiracies to defraud, kidnap etc are penalised far more than individuals, when Jews are not involved—consider the Lindbergh household for example, and the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby. Considered more generally, it's difficult to see how there could not be conspiracies: there are too many people in the world for all be informed of new plans, designs, schemes, though these need not be malign.
Here's an example that appealed to me; a review by A M Ludovici of a 1923 book nominally on Fascism by Pietro Gorgolini:
‘Who, for instance, understands Bolshevism, how it works and what it really is? We can realise how the huge Muscovite population of Russia, which in 1914 had hardly emerged from barbarism, readily relapsed into that condition when once the unprecedented strain of a great war, combined with misrule and feeble leadership, led to the overthrow of the Government; but as a fact and as a term does it convey anything to our minds, apart from its obvious effects upon the country of its birth? Could it have any existence away from the soil on which it grew? Would it stand a chance among a people that had enjoyed many centuries of active political life? And when the barbarians of Russia threaten to spread their barbarism beyond the frontiers of their own land, may we not hope to see those radical differences of race and national tradition — intangible and elusive though they may be — springing up everywhere to resist the Mongolian scourge?’—Ludovico clearly has no idea about Jews and the First World War. [He enjoyed the knowledge of military life, the understanding of men, the experience of actual warfare, and insight into at least the gunner... but knew nothing of propaganda, finance, diplomacy, and Jewish and freemason rôles.]
(5) Science, technology, food, shelter... everything practical is excluded, and I'd suggest one reason is Jewish parasitism. Jews simply assume there are goodies supplied by goyim there for the taking. As a result, Jewish-backed groups such as the Bolsheviks, the 'European Union', possibly the Chinese Communists. Blacks are similar but arguably less evolved, since for huge stretches of time they had only nature to feed off, and never had to plan for winters. Hence the ANC in South Africa have no useful plans, but copy their Jew masters.
(6) No studies (or no published ones) on changes of loyalty. Of all the groups interwoven with Jews - UN, IMF, US political parties, the European Union, Common Purpose (which seems to have displaced Freemasons), lawyers enforcing anti-white legislation, branches of the US military and NATO ... will these groups remain loyal?
(7) Automatic, routine deception where truth is hard to find. For example, I was interested to check whether the 'baby boom' alleged to have happened after 1945 was in fact genuine. If Jews want to pretend whites are breeding fast, a 'baby boom' is what they'd claim. Other examples include deception over crimes by races, deception over war crimes by Jewish allies, and deception over actual reading, writing and arithmetic performance where Jews want to attack whites by promoting immigration.
(8) No studies of any unpleasant Jew-related hypotheses. For example, Britain declared war on Germany in 1914 and 1939; and before 1914, laws had been passed on taxes payable on death, nominally to reduce the unfairness of inheritance. Is it coincidence that the spacing of 25 years was ideal to remove two generations of white males, and their family money? Students might consider how to test such hypotheses. For example, it will no doubt be found that Jews were made a special case over death duties. Another example: after the Boer War, and the First World War, people started openly discussing Jewish influence (see for example Hilaire Belloc's The Jews); is it coincidence that the BBC, founded at that time, has never had any serious discussions on Jewish money power? And another: the hypothesis that many people are afraid to criticise Jews, through fear of retribution, as happened in the French Revolution, 1848, etc. Would any sociologist investigate this? And if so, how? Another example: the French so-called nuclear tests in the Sahara coincided with war against Algeria. Was this a scare device, as Bertrand Russell thought 'Hiroshima and Nagasaki' (now known to be Jewish fakes) were to scare the Vietminh?
(9) Possibly most important: no discussion of genocides by Jews: Armenia, Russia, Ukraine, Germany spring to mind, and south east Asia. And no discussion of violence by Jews: assassinations, support for thugs, murders in South Africa...
(10) Interesting things might be said about the Jewish practice of name changing. Here's Hilaire Belloc; here's a forum discussion on Jewish surnames and their detection.
(11) The sociology of mass expulsions, mass migrations, mass invasions ought to be studied in view of the Jewish policy of trying to eradicate whites. Jesuits, Huguenots, Irish, Jews moving west, Ugandan Asians into Britain, Mexicans into the USA, illustrate the sort of thing. Saudi Arabia has announced it intends to remove large numbers of immigrants. On mass immigration note the evidence for the Jewish push (in the US summarised by Kevin MacDonald). There are alternative theories, set up as smokescreens; or perhaps ink-screens, after octopi squirting black ink, are more appropriate as a metaphor. Such claims seem obviously bogus: there are no plans for realistically costing housing, health, crime, education etc or for even checking qualifications or competence, and this situation applies it seems in every white country now.
(12) Secrecy is another topic where Jews have a clear-cut, simple policy: secrecy for Jews, as little secrecy as possible for everyone else. This is a huge advantage over those people who want some sort of fair system. It's no doubt significant that minutes of public officials are published, if only years after the event. So far as I know, there is no corresponding principle to information about central banks.
(13) Population Growth. A fixed idea now is that low-intelligence populations breed very fast. When you muse over this, clearly it seems unlikely: how would they get water, food, shelter, protection, resolution of disputes, and so on? Probably it's a myth, and, as with many myths, it is likely to be part of the vast contamination of truth by Jews. Much of the truth must be the parasite/ economic migrant/ white medicine imposed on primitive populations idea. In other words, it's driven by higher intelligence groups. When Jews make claims about cheap labour and strength in diversity and asylum—but Israel does the opposite—this clearly shows they are lying. It looks as though huge population crashes are likely in future.

Jewish Sociological Schools by Nation The French have of course been plagued by 'Jews' of the Raymond Aron, Lévi-Strauss type. With practice, it's easy enough to separate out the Jewish influence: Aron for example edited Second World War material about 'Free France', later supporting Stalin apart from a few small noises, promoting the Holocaust myths, saying nothing useful about Algeria (where Jews had significant numbers, and must be assumed to have had an interest in French policies), indifferent to US war crimes and the French precursors. A similar worthless type is Furedi, a Jew from Hungary, professor in Britain (see e.g. review of New Ideology of Imperialism: Renewing the Moral Imperative (1994) where 'renewing' is presumably aimed at Jews, as though they ever had a 'moral imperative'.
To a first approximation, revisionists looking at sociology, so far as it appears in university courses, could simply re-examine names that have been slurred, such as Pareto, Chamberlain etc. (Only a first approximation: there are plenty of almost unreadable 'right wing' writers; and there are plenty of censored topics). Where sociology shades into politics, a leader in slurred names might be the 'Protocols of Zion' (click back-arrow to return here). However, this methodology isn't enough, since critics of many Jews simply get no publicity whatsoever. I don't know of any single critic of Gramsci, for example; who appears worth studying because of his Jewish Italian version of the Frankfurt School. It's also striking that critics of Marx are scattered and silenced. The same applies in science: It's clear Alfred Russel Wallace, as the originator of evolutionary theory, ought to be re-examined; but there are few traces of people such as Hillman (biology) and nuclear sceptics. I've done my best to cast light on these, but researchers relying on official university academics would probably find nothing.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Aristocracies
I offer some Jew-specific hypotheses which students might like to test.
(1) Covertly Promoting Jewish Aristocracies as 'Conservative'. Aristocracies have been families which parcelled out territories among themselves. One method of course is descent from conquest, though in practice most aristocrats had nothing to do with actual conquest. Another method is that of churches, where descent may not be by inheritance, but by training or experience or importation from some other territory. Jews of course have often covertly intermarried. Miles Mathis, armed with computer genealogies online, has worked on Polish aristocracies, the Medicis, Russians, and French, German, and English and Scottish aristocracies, to modern north America, and stretching back through the mists of time. He has rescued aristocracies as a theory from official neglect by the low-grade people infesting universities since about 1900.
An interesting example (but not interesting as a listener) is Alexander Jacob, featured in Alison Chabloz in March 2019. He suggests a revived 'Conservative' aristocracy, presumably a hybrid Anglo-Rothschild affair, excluding the mere bourgeoisie, excluding bourgeois Jews too. It's fascinating to listen to a 'thinker' erasing Jews in the French Revolution, erasing the US Civil War from history, erasing Englishmen who fought to keep Jews out, erasing the world wars' participants (except Jews), regarding Fascism and Communism as utopian, praising non-material spirituality—and never mentioning Rothschilds!

(2) Tension Between Individual Aristocrats and Numbers Needed in Practice. Generally there were far more aristocrats needed than show up in vague modern accounts. I suspect this happens because Jews profited from bigger territories, in place of larger numbers of smaller ones. In fact many of the movements for 'nationalism' may have been Jew-directed, for their own ends. Just look at this map of Italy from only about 200 years back. Considering Jews as a Europe-wide layer, the biggest adjustment schemes and wars may well have obviously benefitted Jews if the territories were larger. I haven't attempted serious analysis; it seems obvious, and of course it seems just as obvious that there may have been drawbacks both to the original aristocracies, and to the people living there.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Organisations: Government Departments, Unions, Political Groups, Education Organisations, Professions, Error Investigations, Management. And New Organisations
Organisation Theory has technical-seeming diagrams and flowcharts and a special vocabulary, but which manages itself in such a way as to avoid important parts of the real world. Who, for example, could honestly believe bureaucratic accounts of military actions? Here, we want to suggest tests for specifically Jewish influence, and comment on the probable effects.

Government Departments It's worth noting a very important difference between the 19th and 20th centuries: many people in the 19th century (Marx, J S Mill...) thought the state would decline and perhaps vanish. Many people at the time resigned from positions as a principled stand; Sidgwick, was a once-famous example. It's traditional to imagine Hegel's alleged worship of 'the state' made this change, which occurred at the First World War: one of C P Snow's 1930s novels has an indignant wife saying so-and-so ought to resign, while Snow's character reflects on the loss of income. During WW1 entire economies and prices levels were fixed; independence was hardly possible. We now have a situation of great rigidity, where whole organisations are corrupt (and correspondingly secret). To illustrate the rot from the top, consider Jack Straw (Jew, real name unknown): as Home Secretary, he presided over voting fraud, interference in trials to jail people he didn't like, handing out of British passports to as many foreigners as possible, suppressing information about child sex and rape gangs, allowing rapists and murderers free, allowing legal aid frauds, ensuring Britons were at the bottom of the pile for housing, leaving ex soldiers homeless, encouraging drug flows into Britain, and so on. And yet this piece of shit remained in place, something unthinkable with a more fluid system.
On secrecy, here's a link to Free to Obey by Luke O'Farrell, some notes on whom are One Man's Journey to 'Anti-Semitism' (click back-arrow to return here). The point made by him and others is that letter bombs were sent to members of the British Cabinet, including Bevin, in the late 1940s, but this was kept secret. For sixty years. ["Israel's Stern Gang Mailed Letter Bomb to White House, President Truman"—just one other example.] Was this wise? Students of Jews ought to ponder the points of secrecy, and try to separate legitimate secrecy from damaging secrecy. It must be certain that Irishmen in 'The Troubles' were lied to, since Sinn Fein is clearly now Jewish-controlled. There must be intelligence documents confirming that Irishmen on both sides were duped. They might not be pleased to be informed unambiguously. South Africans must be in something like that position. At an 'elite' level, Ivy League US Ambassadors might be around when the full force of US troops' instructions on rape are published in some way, or information on mercenaries and torture. Possibly even worse—some obviously useless token black woman might be in such a position.
Just a reminder: Jews in Clinton Administration 1998 (Click back-arrow to return here).
Students of Jewish influence will investigate, and face constant surprises, until there's more of a consensus. For some reason, the following surprised me even though I knew it:–

The former Labour prime minister Harold Wilson (1916-95) was funded by sleazy Jews, one of whom, "Lord" Kagan, was imprisoned for stealing from his own companies after Wilson left office. Before that his Jews, like Bliar's, got a very good return on their investment in a goy politician:
Harold Wilson was President of the Board of Trade from 1947-51. The few people who could get permission from the Board of Trade to import heavily rationed raw materials or finished goods were in a good position to become vastly rich. Among the lucky few who got licenses were [Jews] Montague Meyer, Joe Kagan and Rudy Sternberg. Kagan and Sternberg later became peers.

Trade Unions, Other Unions
Above is an introductory note on jews manipulating honest trade unionists; and here's a longer article on unions (click back-arrow to return here). The hypothesis is that jew led unions will favour jewish owners, jewish industries, and pro-jewish organisations. The IWW ('International Workers of the World') was presumably an attempt at jewish control of all the goyim workers. Even where industries are overseas, this can be expected. I've noted elsewhere (e.g.) the BBC's treatment of 'Red Robbo', who came from nowhere and helped destroy the shipbuilding industry. Many years ago the BBC ran a sitcom called The Rag Trade with a somewhat similar plotline. The miners' strike at the time of Thatcher may have had some such genesis; it's hard to know for sure. Certainly the news presentation never dealt with actual facts about coal and mining. Further back, a seamen's union in Britain refused to allow Lloyd George (I think) to travel overseas for some negotiation; it's unlikely they had much idea of the issues.
A similar analysis applies to the 'National Union of Students' in Britain; often led by jews, it (for example) had a pro-immigration stance, a dumbing-down approach to exams, no comment on fake teaching establishments as covert immigrant entry-points, and no platform (of course) for any rational debates on jews.
A pointer to who's in control is often to see who benefits. I was reliably told that video editors of BBC news were getting £200,000 a year at one time in the 1980s. Another pointer is to see the restrictions; there's a note somewhere here about the actors' union, Equity (no card - no job). Lady Rénouf said she'd been blacklisted.
Political Groups
At the time of writing, the supposed leaders of all three 'mainstream' parties in Britain are Jews. There are of course immense implications, not just in policy, but in selection of MPs, and appointees of all kinds.
Professions
Accountants, Architects, Doctors, Lawyers ... Offshore tax havens, tax avoidance schemes, junk housing paid by government debts, disguised loans, medical indifference to unskilled immigrants and imported diseases, aspects of the legal system including legal aid and rigged judgments and even separate legal systems are very obviously part of malign jewish influence. Researchers might examine organisation structures to identify points of weakness and leverage.
Short Note on Education
Histories of education are usually written by official practitioners, accustomed to traditional organisations and their practices. Probably the origins expanded from the teachings of parents, and people regarded as experts at the time. Language must presumably have been face-to-face, but expanded by contact with new people and groups. (How difficult it is to describe whole groups of people and their interactions!) In something like living memory, there were dancing masters and fencing masters, and tutors is what were deemed to be subjects. There were trades, professions, and mysteries. I'd guess that many 'elites' must have had internal modes of instruction; an obvious example is the Jewish system, with intensive training, which has had enormous influence, much of it harmful. The illustration below, taken from a flyer of Winter 2020 by the restaurant chain named 'Wetherspoon' in England, illustrates amusingly how such systems may persist for many lifetimes.

Oxford

Educational Systems, Schools, Universities, Teachers
The influence of jews in the USA on the content of courses, and educational standards, is depressingly obvious. Not many universities can stand against serious pressure being brought to bear, though the tenure system gives some protection, as for instance in the case of Arthur Butz.
What's of vital importance at the highest levels, of research and serious work, is the constant tendency towards fraud in technology, science and social science. It's not clear yet how much this is jewish-dependent. In technology, the cases of NASA and 9/11 as fraudulent are painfully clear, despite being so far free of official investigation. Nuclear issues are only starting to be investigated; these are international and, if their exit strategies succeed, may even escape completely. In social science, the Holohoax issue is too easy to understand for exit strategies to work, at least in my opinion; there is still a residual belief in fearless and evidence-based history. Science, theoretically, has a system of ethics: but evidence from wars shows that in practice it is now a dead letter. Most people don't understand that science research is now largely dishonest. I've done my best to publicise fraud in biology as shown by the work of Harold Hillman (a jew, ironically), Gilbert Ling, and others, probably with little effect.
Secret Groups: Freemasons, Common Purpose 'Graduates', Fanatics
Students of organisational structure have to take account of secret groups operating behind the scenes. My guess is that Freemasons (originally people who were locally influential under fairly small-scale capitalism) are rather outdated, being replaced by bureaucrats, town planners, building contractors, shopping mall planners, and so on. Fanatics may be influential simply by a self-perpetuating system: if they grab, attack, relentlessly oppose, propagandise, and take on small groups one at a time, unless there is opposition they may get further than seems possible.

Social Research, Detection of Common Themes in Events

In workplace health & safety and industrial relations, when you have an incident, you never focus on it in itself.
You look at history:
Did poor attitude contribute?
Did fatigue contribute?
Did non-qualification/training contribute?
Did communication/lack of instruction contribute?
The point is: the only reason to investigate something that shouldn't have happened is to find the root cause and effect. Without clearly and correctly identifying that, you are doomed to repeat it. ...Like history.
The powers that have been have removed vital truths to cloud our investigation. When something doesn't make sense it's normally bullsh!t. When you marry up all the information from before a job even starts, guidelines - procedures - training - communications, leading up to an event that has occurred numerous times, you soon find a re-occurring theme.
Jews exiled from over 80 countries 109 times. The longest lasting empire ever, the Byzantine Empire, removed all Jews from politics education finance. The same as Hitler wanted, but as we are aware, that escalated due to the pressure Jews around the west of the world put on other governments.

New Situations and New Organisations
It's obvious (in principle) that once-new organisations offer scope for identifying motives. In practice there may be secret details or confusing wording to muddy the water.
Treaties may mark the start of new structures: Versailles is an example, with the disputes following it a monument to the disasters, or triumphs if you take that view, which may follow. The post-Napoleonic Congress of Vienna was (I've read) studied by Kissinger and no doubt formed his methodology on Jewish activities. The Treaty of Westphalia is a well-known example of exhaustion leading to a peace, though I'd expect some issues to be glossed over by historians.
New Organisations include the League of Nations, and (later) the United Nations, the IMF etc. Then NATO and other organisations probably based around US military bases and arrangements with USSR Jews. The European Union strangely morphed from the Coal and Steel Community into something modelled on the USSR. OPEC (something like Organisation of Oil Producers and Exporters) may have been something new; or it may have been a puppet organisation, like the ANC (African National Congress). To put it mildly, it's not easy to identify what these organisations actually did, and what they were perceived to do, and what the participants hoped they would do, and what outside forces operated.
Radically New Legal Changes include such things as the entire system of company law in the 19th century, the National Health Service in the UK after 1945, abortion laws, and the late 20th century system of migration, passports, anchor babies, votes for immigrants, housing and other benefits for immigrants. The changes they initiate may take many years to work through and are often shaped cunningly for social engineering purposes.
Public Inquiries may have important effects. In practice they tend not to occur at all (First World War? Vietnam War?) or be obviously biased: I doubt if anyone who has studied the issues would believe the Warren Commission on Kennedy's murder, or the Pentagon Papers—not exactly an enquiry— or the Kissinger-chaired 9/11 report, or the BSE inquiry in Britain chaired by Krebs on BSE, or the inquiries into Blair and Iraq, unearthed truth. But for students with some immunity to bureaucratically dull language, these things may be worth studying to see how legitimate views are sidelines and excluded.

For a short sharp look at important organisations and buildings, C N Parkinson's chapter Plans and Plants, or the Administration Block is worth a look, though it doesn't include the last half century or so. He had a common-sense approach (deeply informed by knowledge) which is difficult to achieve, but can be very helpful and persuasive.
When trying to test hypotheses, one test is to look at unexpected decisions, unexpected by the standards of normal people of the time. For example, if a Jewish Attorney General changes his mind on a decision to make war on Iraq, is the Jewish aspect relevant? It's not easy to decide, and the most definitive approach seems to be to try to assess the case with other legal opinion or legal reading. If a legal ruling allows rapists or murderers to go free, what is it that has changed, to make such a judgment possible? Why is it that Jewish activity is censored—is it because it is not important? Or is the reason precisely that it IS important?
A Pioneering Organisation? Reading a biography of Ingvar Kamprad, I was struck by what might be attacks by Jews against him and IKEA: for example a venture into Russia, still with many Jewish 'oligarchs', resulted in large-scale thefts and losses, including of valuable machinery in forested areas. IKEA was bringing some stability and wealth into areas which the Jewish USSR had left to ruin. In the USA, the 'Anti-Defamation League' is reported to have attacked Kamprad. I believe to this day IKEA has problems in the USA market, including a complete plagiarism of their product range and style. IKEA, or one of its spin-off organisations, has some banking presence; moreover they do not accept the percentages taken by credit card companies. My hypothesis here is that IKEA may be a sample of what could be Jew-free business operations in future. I don't know if it is; it's just a suggestion.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Population Studies, Demography

The arithmetical basis for demography is simple-seeming tables: a spreadsheet of numbers of people of ages 0 - 100 for a population, at any one time, provides a handy summary. There are graphical presentations, e.g. by gender, comparative population pyramids, figures for children by age of women, figures for immigration, emigration, deaths.
Large mistakes may be avoided with approximations: if average age at death is 70, say, then every year approximately 1 in 70 will die; in 10 years, 1 in 7. Population change is not very intuitive, since it starts with new births which generally aren't very noticeable. The lag of 20 and more years is something many people can't project forward. For this reason population changes expressed as (say) an increase in 10% in thirty years can be misleading, and of course are deliberately used in a misleading sense by Jews who hate whites, among others.
Wars may have less effect than might be expected; often effects such as food and water-supply crashes, and illness, have more effect, again something with propagandist uses. There are other propaganda uses: Have Effects of Wars on Whites Been Understated by Jews? looks at manipulation of statistics by the Jewish media, with reference in particular to two world wars. (Click back button to return here).
On the propagandist front, Jews have pushed for immigration into white countries ever since they were allowed in. Naturally with media control come torrents of lies. Arthur Kemp's Immigration Invasion is a head-on reply to the secret policy. David Conway: A Nation of Immigrants?: A Brief Demographic History of Britain looks at the truth of claims about immigration in the past.
Eugenics (this comments on a feeble BBC TV thing; click back arrow to return here) is a topic deliberately misrepresented by Jews, whose instinctive attitude to healthy intelligent people is to weaken or kill them. It's curious how efficiently their media control has spread the idea.
Large-Scale Population Migrations (and see the section on race mixing - click back-arrow to return here) ought to be studies, because travel is easier now than in all human history; this of course means that returns of populations are easier. Examples include colonisation in the Greek and Roman sense: by today's standards these movements were tiny. They include something like diffusion, for example Khazars into eastern Europe. They include mass invasions across large territories: Mongols, Huns, Muslims into northern India, and Jewish-controlled groups into eastern Europe; all seem to be historically established. And they include transoceanic colonisations of the last few centuries, notably of the Americas by Europeans, and Africa and Australia. Some population movements were planned to provide labour; Chinese labour for example was imported to California and South Africa. Post-1900 migrations include so-called Jews moving westward, and post-1900 migrations secretly arranged by 'Jews' into white countries. Mass movements include forced movements of Vietnamese, allegedly the biggest in human history, though these of course are censored by the Jewish media. The post-WW2 movement of Jews to Israel, and to the USA, and out of eastern Europe has relevance to our topic. The effects so far on the Middle East, on New York and US politics and violence, and the slow re-emergence of Russia and eastern Europe from Jewish mass cruelty and lies, have been profound; it remains to be seen whether the flows of money will continue.
Where more or less voluntary, Reasons for Migrations ought to be examined. One interesting aspect is the use of deception: French people were induced to go to Louisiana by John Law's schemes (Compagnie de Indes; the South Sea Bubble was similar) where they found little or nothing. Deception seems to have been used to lure west coast Scots to Canadian shores in the 19th century. Legends of prosperous towns in Africa seem to have been used to attract Europeans. At the present day, some British and European organisations overseas have advertised benefits in Britain and Europe, though my personal belief is that such offers were met with scepticism, since the actual numbers are far smaller than might have been expected by the Jews originating the policy. The British end of the deception surfaced in a newspaper article by Andrew Neather, in the Evening Standard; it's worth studying the secret document it refers to, written I think entirely by Jews and other non-British people. Its exposure was at about the same time as publicity about the official secrets-covered Joint Tenancy Agreement 2001.

Students might care to do newspaper/ TV research into such things as world population explosions?, huge populations, baby booms, funding for families (and its withdrawal), and immigrant-related problems. And the jubilation of Jews when whites are either killed or swamped.

Is there a connection between population size and numbers of bosses?

Demographic Sociology, the normal processes of birth/ growth/ ageing applied to groups of people. As examples: after 1945, surviving war pilots tended to become commercial pilots. So by about 1985, there was an entire population of pilots about to retire. (So I'm told). About twenty or thirty years ago, the Jews controlling British education decided to cut back on medical training, using the entire force of media lies, paper money and the rest. There is now a shortage of British medical people, who were of course traditionally of very high quality. An entirely different example is schools of thought: in religions, psychology, etc where there are lifelong hierarchies, schools of thought may last 30 or 40 years, until the practitioners or theoreticians retire or die off. The Church of England in Victorian times had (from memory) about 30,000 'livings'. If we assume an average vicar spent 30 years in the Church, then roughly 1,000 new vicars were needed per year, which matches neatly with the number of Oxbridge graduates at the time. In publishing and the media, 25 or 30 years marks the point at which old books, films, TV programmes are looked at, to see if they can be updated and pushed to a new generation of consumers. Some of my reviews tell people not to bother with some books, for that reason: Richard Rhodes on the 'Atomic Bomb' (presumably not worth reading, as it seems to have nothing on firebombs and Hiroshima); Keegan on Wars, has no mention of US war crimes in Korea and Vietnam and Iraq and so probably not worth reading; Christopher Caldwell on Immigration, Islam and the West (no mention of Jews behind immigration; unlikely to be worth reading). There are marketing examples: cheap wine after the Second World War, hamburgers ditto, diamonds in Japan, etc.
One important aspect is promotion: career civil servants, for example, after the initial selection process, cling on for decades. There's some joky early-post-WW2 material by C N Parkinson on this issue, though perhaps fortunately the full horror isn't revealed. There are some, but not many, critiques of the British public school/ Oxbridge nexus. Students of Jewish influence should note examples of men being pushed out as a result of Jewish campaigns.

[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Geography and Geopolitics
Geography is an interesting mixture of empiricism (i.e. looking at countries, land, food, water, industry, towns, mines, transport, deserts, ice, populations, communications...) with theories and models and maps and simplifications, mostly suggestive rather than definite. People with geography degrees were the most employable, I've been told, in about 1990; whether they still are, I have no idea.
Few people have much of a clue about where Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Greece, Syria are ... and of course this is useful in demonisation and dehumanisation.
An interesting issue is the interpretation of 'Asia' and 'Asians'. John Steadman's The Myth of Asia (1969) years ago tried to draw attention to the variations within countries carelessly referred to as 'Asian' as though they were all similar.
Relevant here is the secrecy over Jews as a layer in many countries. Here's an example: the BBC reporting Syria used just one Reuters (Jewish) correspondent. Who naturally fed them the Jewish line.
Some typical interesting half-way empiricism is Jane Jacobs, though of course the Jewish component is suppressed. Here's a review of Cities and the Wealth of Nations (click back arrow to return here) which has observations and reflections on cities throughout history, and on wealth creation.
My review of a book by Tim Marshall Prisoners of Geography goes some way to look into geopolitics, and its suppression. I've tried to review Sun Tzu's Art of War.
The Talmud seems to have rules of thumb for making wars the Jewish way, treated more or less as official secrets.

There are possibly simple models for wars and disputes: for example, if we have three countries, or power blocks, A, B and C, with Power in some units or other of Pa, Pb, and Pc, then a war between A and B may reduce both Pa and Pb, leaving Pc relatively more powerful than it was. I've tried to enlarge on this in the section below on math models (Back arrow will return you here).

Revisionist Geopolitics Vast size of Africa. The maps of these countries are in 'equal area' projection. ...

... Is it coincidence that these huge areas are both victims of Jews?

Another human geography issue related to genetics could be defensible spaces: Europe is an exceptionally partitioned area—islands (Iceland, Sicily, Sardinia, Britain...), mountains (Alps, Pyrenees, Urals...), cold belts (Norway. Sweden, Finland..), rivers (Rhine, Seine..), peninsulas (Denmark, Italy, Spain, Scandinavia...) must have helped keeping down invasions. In the same way, consider the Caucasus Mountains, marking off Khazar territory from what was Persia. Such a barrier is the equivalent of an enormous armed force, ready 24 hours a day.
Seas offer a different type of defensible space, which may be more navigable. The Mediterranean Sea loosely links north Africa with southern Europe, with Italy a central division, and western and eastern boundaries with various characteristics. There's a somewhat similar arrangement between Japan on the east and China on the west, with Korea a central division. The Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico offers something similar.
Mountains, and islands, offer possibilities of defended attack: 'Haburim' were supposed to be mountain dwellers, attacking lowland town. Japan and Britain on a large scale, and Sicily and Anglesey on smaller scales, provide island examples.
Technical changes shift such boundaries around. They also allow strata to develop worldwide: so far, Jews' expansionism has followed technical growth almost in step with it: however there must obviously be a limit. Probably some such approach might explain genetic differences of the sort popularised by J Philippe Rushton, and economic and war effects induced by Jews. Jewish parasitism, to date, has caused many disasters, but has not been world-wide; for example the Jewish mass murders in eastern Europe were in effect supported by western countries' productivity. It seems unlikely they could become world-wide, since the productive and organisational base would erode away. The genetics of Jewish behaviour also appear to be parasite-linked: it's curious to see the bland self-confidence of (for example) Dick Cheney or David Cameron: parasites take it for granted at a deep unconscious level that substrates will exist in future. Their flabby blandness in the face of very difficult issues, and its fragility under challenge, shows they simply can't understand problems; instinctively, like children, they have to believe someone else will provide.
Revisionism may start with a survey of neglected or forgotten or suppressed work. Halford J. Mackinder, credited in the Anglo-speaking world with inventing geo-politics; German and Russian writers, if their works survived Jewish book-burnings and massacres; L. Dudley Stamp, for many years more or less synonymous with 'geographer', and Hendrik van Loon, of The Home of Mankind (not The Story of Mankind) suggest themselves as possibilities. Van Loon's 1930s book is rather childishly written and has painfully infantile drawings, and seems to have been prompted by news reports—whole chapters on countries as small as Bulgaria, but just one whole chapter on Africa. It has interesting material which might, by updating from the vast amount of empirical facts and measurements and techniques which have accumulated, and allowing for the influence of non-national groups on nations, might seed valuable work in disease, famine and food, populations and skill and so on, and perhaps demolish propaganda myths of the Hitler-wanted-world-empire type.
Improvements in mapping are a world away from the painful indian-ink mapping pens of days gone by. Three-d maps are easy enough. Faked maps showing e.g. claimed radioactivity, climate change etc are common enough: let's hope useful work may yet come from these techniques, including exposure of faked NASA images.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Finance: Supply of Money to Countries
This link to a piece above, Jewish Control of Money. And the Missing Economic Theory of Macrofinance (click back-arrow to return here) explains 'fiat' money, money that is called into existence legally, and needs general acceptance and a legal or military framework to keep it going. I've tried to explain how it works, why there's a lot to be said for it, and why it needs honesty in its application; and how Jews at present control it, and how they exploit this position.
The two-tier money system exists when certain groups exploit this power. At present, Jews get money easily, everyone else has to work for it; or be one of a favoured group: non-Christians, criminals, immigrants, fake think-tanks following Jewish agenda, liars. This accounts for the myth of Jewish business skill. It's like claiming the notoriously dim Queen of England is a master businesswoman. If Jews were so skilled, they wouldn't need fraud. And the easy money explains why businesses come under Jewish ownership. For example, the first James Bond film was almost not made; but Jewish money is easier than other money, where the 'angels' face genuine risk, after direct and indirect taxes and interest and so on; so James Bond films were Jewish-financed.
I've also summarised some generally-accepted economic laws, and pointed out the absence of such descriptions applied to high finance. A good theory would probably predict increasing debt, high interest, waste including wars, offloading costs onto non-bankers, complex relations with governments to prohibit their taking over or reappointing the money function, and channeling money to favoured groups.
M3 money supply figures not collected by Jews

M3 money supply figures not collected by Jews

None of this is uniquely new. Jews were accused of clipping gold coins; an obsolete form (except for adulterated gold) of theft. I'd suggest borrowing with nothing as backup, is a new form of coin-clipping, directing part of total output to Jews.
Students of this subject might try to develop theories of power maximisation for controllers of paper and plastic and electronic money, then test the theories against the real world. They may make new discoveries, and help reform the world.
A first-class example is the issue of currency exchange: exchange rates between currencies are fixed by a more-or-less secret process, the subject of intermittent controversy, but of course to no effect. It seems reasonable to believe that currencies vary in purpose, and that they may not be suitable over wide areas; the EU illustrates the sort of problems. There's a widespread belief that Germany under the Third Reich, and Italy and other countries at the time, bartered goods on a large scale, rather than bother with the intermediate processes of selling and buying. In their judgment, there was no point incurring extra expenditure; and indeed it seems obvious that money is best suited to intermediate transactions, not huge ones, and equally not tiny ones such as intra-family economics. Such facts as that Gaddafi, who of course was murdered by ZOG/USA puppets, wanted to be paid in gold for oil; and the refusal of IKEA to incur credit card payments; suggest the issue will not go away.

Missing jew paper money and missing debt to jews and missing jewish coup in Russia

Chicago Tribune cartoon, 1934. Casual errors:-
[1] Note the Federal Reserve is not mentioned: the money shown is mostly bags, possibly gold and silver
[2] Note that debt is loved by Jews, because they are paid interest by the government, at a huge real rate of interest.
[3] In Russia, there was a military coup by Jews; the country was NOT bankrupted by high spending.

Making a Country Bankrupt and Causing Depressions. Jewish policy has been to make weak rulers dependent on Jews; the pattern is the same probably in Elizabethan England and the failed Spanish Armada, post-Cromwell Britain, Napoleon and his thefts, Germanic city states and their borrowings, Russia after the coup (it must have been bankrupt by 1917 and dependent on US Jews). Britain in both World Wars was damaged. Note that the gold standard was abandoned by the early 1930s—and there must have been a link with the switch to paper money to 'pay' for the coming war for Jewish power. Britain was bankrupt by about 1941. Policy in the USA when Jews were in a position to take control, after Kennedy's murder, was to make the USA dependent on the Fed: the Vietnam War made money for Jews, bankrupted the USA, and increased the hold of Jewish central banks; no doubt there were other effects desired by Jews.
Benefiting from Depressions by manipulating paper and other non-valuable money.
Economic Parasitism. Israel has had vast sums from the USA and from Germany, partly under the Holohoax fraud. These payments of course help fund a huge propaganda machine of parasitic liars, the 'sayanim', whose desperation is likely to increase. Serious students should make some attempt to assess the value of this fraud, including allowances for inflation, opportunity costs lost, and all the rest.

Finance: Different Jews, Different Roles
Common sense suggests specialisation among Jews. Students ought to pay attention to specific incidents and events, and the Jews relevant to them, and the interconnections. Such names as Sieff, Kuhn, Loeb, Rothschild, Goldman, Sachs, Oppenheimer and numerous more appear in connection with (no special order) financing Napoleon, financing the Boer War, financing the Russo-Japanese War, financing the First World War, financing the Jewish putsch in Russia, financing the 'Communist' Party in Russia, financing science frauds, and so on. Goldman Sachs may specialise, for example, in the 'third world' - here's a review of a book by a token black woman, Dambisa Moyo, supposedly on the subject of Africa and, of course, money.

Note on secrecy. The secret funding by Jews in control of money is rarely referred to by ordinary Jews. The Frankfurt School says nothing about it, for example, despite the obvious fact they knew of it and were supported by it. Nor as far as I know does Gramsci. Nor do the Protocols of Zion. Nor does Marx, or Engels. Occasionally it seeps out: newspaper in Britain in the 1900s sometimes quote Jews saying things like "We rule you simple Britons with our money power" and "Your King, our country". Common Jews are perhaps their own worst enemy.

Note on Alternatives to Fed and Bank of England etc. In the real world, anomalous things can happen. Revisionists ought to study businesses that managed to flourish despite threats from Jewish ultracheap money. Henry Ford is an obvious example. I suspect Edison is another example; and, perhaps, Bill Gates, Ingvar Kamprad, and Richard Branson. Some states and countries may point out examples: a popular belief is that North Korea, Libya, Egypt, and a few other countries were free of the Rothschild yoke.

Note on US Popularist or Populist Movements. ('Populism' is intended to be a denigratory label). Andrew "I killed the bank" Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, and J F Kennedy are three USA Presidents who opposed Jewish financial power. William Jennings Bryan is still remembered. As far as I know, this record is unique: no European country had any such movement, apart from the Third Reich. Russia had an analogous record, notably after the Napoleonic Wars and Congress of Vienna, but this is less obvious to non-Russians. These movements left traces which need a revisionist reappraisal.

Henry George and 'Single Tax' on land value, Major Clifford Hugh Douglas and 'Social Credit', Kropotkin and 'anarchism', practical and academic types such as Silvio Gesell [in mileswmathis. anton.pdf] and Piero Sraffa and Joan Robinson, Campaign for Interest-Free Money, Keynes and traditional Christian ethics are typical theoretical attempts to improve peoples' lives in general, except those of parasitic types—and of course in the past there have been many Christian heretical groups trying their own local lifestyles. Most modern movements have not been Jew-aware. The Jewish attack has been merciless and monomaniacal, showing how very simple and effective pure self-obsession is. It seems likely to me that NSDAP German writers, who had first-hand experience trying to democratise their part of the world, might be the best line of research, assuming any of their books and papers escaped the book-burning of so-called US, British, and Russian troops.

Finance: Large Sums of Money (as Presented to the Dazzled Populace)
Millionaires, Billionaires Most people, of course, have little understanding of large sums of money. I suspect that, in relatively recent times, the main exposure to 'large' amounts of money was weekly pay packets: if there were (say) 400 employees, the total cash paid out must be about an entire years' income. Another exposure might be wills: Victorian novels about middle-class people often have scenes with wills being read out, to the pleasure or otherwise of those with expectations. Later newspaper accounts of (e.g.) a Swedish 'match king' or oil millionaire or arms dealer are of course light on details of what such people in fact do. Here are just a few notes on keeping money a puzzle.

Jews and Financial Frauds need to be understood to make sense of the previous few centuries. Here's Enron, Fastow, and the Looting of America transcribed from a radio broadcast by William Pierce in February, 2002. The detail of fraud is not Pierce's main expertise; if the social 'sciences' are ever to be scientific, explorations of the results of fraud, on both sides of the accounting, will be a subset of science of power. In my view, Pierce makes one error: he thinks all non-Jews involved in frauds end with empty wallets. In fact, this is not the case, partly because there's a lot of loot, and partly because it's necessary to buy, bribe and threaten fairly large numbers of accomplices. Because there are very many Jewish frauds, interested readers may as well try searching: "Jewish frauds" and "Jewish crimes", for example.

Wars of the sort that are currently carried out need money. How is that huge amounts are found, when nothing much is found for ordinary people? The answer of course is the paper money/ emoney process. It's just fabricated from nothing by Jews, at interest, to be repaid by future generations of taxpayers. Budget Reports for example by the BBC never ever mention the higher reaches of money-printing, the interest to be paid, and to whom—like foreign aid, but what could be called 'Home Aid'. How the arrangements for Common Purpose, which seems to be replacing Freemasons, and Charities which pay almost nothing out, and financial devices like 'Private Funding Initiatives', are as far as I know never summarised. There is instead endless discussion of 'duties' on things like beer and spirits and tobacco and petrol (=gasoline), and tinkering with income tax rates; maybe some new tax is made up, or some old one dropped. How money goes on 'Foreign Aid' is kept secret; there are no debates on funding war criminals overseas, and no discussion on whether it makes sense to give foreigners money tied to products or services; nothing on transfers of money internationally—and tax havens, foreign ownership, EU policies, bank frauds. The sort of thing fed to the public is gambling, which can only provide big winnings to a tiny number. These may not be what they seem; see this discussion. The scam of paying a large sum over (say) twenty years has a reducing effect. House prices have provided many people in Britain thrills for years: 'improvements in house prices' replacing reports on 'housing being good value', the main cause being changes of targets, as the issuers of paper money reassess opportunities for parasitism. And such things as value of footballers: as far as I know contracts are never published; it's impossible to know whether the figures quoted go to clubs or players. When people see announcements that some very ordinary software has been sold for a billion, beware: there are plenty of deceptive valuation methods.

Education is vastly expensive. At the present time, probably none deals with the serious questions related to so-called 'Jews'. Jews pay an extraordinary amount of time on media control, including of course books, newspapers, TV, films, things like the Economist where a lot of the output is not recognised as 'education'. From Jews' viewpoint; this makes sense. Consider for example Norway, which as a result of offshore oil has a stash of about $900 billion (in 2015) in various investments and holdings. A typical university in Britain has running costs of about $20 million a year. Norway, alone, could fund an entire revisionist university—history, wars, Talmudic studies, jewish policies, science and frauds, media studies, documentary history, psychology, creativity, appropriate world economics, propaganda, false flag activity, and so on, for 20/900,000 of its stash, providing 20,000 or so jobs. About .002% per year. For that matter, it could run an English-language truth TV station for about 6% of its stash (the BBC's revenue is supposedly £5Bn). The wasted opportunity worldwide is scandalous and shocking.

Finance of Social Engineering on A Global Scale: White Genocide
First, read White Genocide by Shaunantijihad. (Click left arrow to return here).

How can such a project be funded? Most non-Jews believe believe (there is no media presentation of the truth) that subsidies to immigrants, foreign aid, weapons, pensions and what-have-you all come from taxation. But there is not enough tax for these purposes—hard though this may be for taxpayers to believe. The key is Jew-controlled paper money, and loans: Jews love lending to governments, who waste money on a suitable scale, but also can usually be made to repay. This is why health trusts, housing groups for immigrants, are in debt, as the 'businessmen' running these frauds know perfectly well.

I'd guess Jews control about 20% of GNP. They have plenty for propaganda, fake think tanks, media control, control of important sectors: large-scale transport (shipping and air travel of both goods and people), large-scale food and water, large-scale housing.

The money side of things has been a long time in developing: I doubt if the full history, including princes, Venice, the Medici, the Fuggers, then probably imitation, including theft, by the Rothschilds, is known at all fully. However much of the mythology is known. The lachrymose pseudo-history: jews have in fact never been oppressed in their entire history; whereas jews are at the height of the criminality, and many whites are 'philosemitic'. Their written stories, allegories, and pseudo-history are better known than the other writings, because they were transmitted by the Bible, and a few have attracted attention. These include: killing off and destroying entire races; the Tower of Babel; plagues; poisoning wells; murdering kings; going to other towns to carry out fraud; abusing children; cruelty to animals; Kol Nidre and the annual repudiation of contracts with non-Jews; supporting both sides of conflicts; Jewish slave trading and use of slaves; Hanotayn Teshu-ah for strong central governments where these favoured Jews.

Many people simply can't believe there are long-term plans laid against whites; and in fact apparent plans could be genetic, caused by centuries of inbreeding of psychopathically-inclined types. That is, not specifically anti-white, but instinctively hostile to anything attractive, well-ordered, skilled, or intelligent. Most people believe it's planned, however. Here's a relatively well-known example: Jane Birdwood's Anti-Gentilism: The Longest Hatred.

Some Examples:

Immigration: see for example Andrew Joyce, who discovered that the 1948 Empire Windrush was Jewish-owned; all the push for immigration into white countries was and is Jewish-promoted. See this example Jewish website from Sept 2015. Immigration pressure groups are funded by Jews. Some 'businessmen' pretend that immigrant groups with 80% unemployment as valuable contributors; this is a typical Jewish technique, of simple lying. Legal systems (e.g. barristers such as Cherie Blair illustrate the same point.
Family Life and Children: there are multiple ways to attack families, though many people, for example in men's groups, have yet to understand how things have worked. Funding divorces; supporting abortion; selectively housing immigrants; spoiling education; supporting things like anal sex—think of the weird pseudo-politician Peter Tatchell, for example; making housing expensive; making creches etc expensive.
Attacks on entire populations: these are presumably synchronised; vast amounts of money enable long-term planning. Consider four events: war starting 1914, then war starting 1939, 25 years later, together making a huge whole in the population pyramid. Then Jewish pushes for immigration in Britain: under Blair, in about 2000; then, under Cameron and the EU, a big push in 2015. Probably the ragbag of peoples (not from Syria, as the Jewish media falsely report, but from Afghanistan, north and sub-Saharan Africa, expellees from Palestine, etc.) were tempted by offers of housing and money and cars, judging by the comments of some of them, where reported. There are no reports as to how the traffickers are funded; probably filth like Soros has a hand. As an illustrative example, a boat went off-course to Cyprus: not one single 'refugee' would get off the boat, as they'd been told, correctly, they would get no 'benefits'.
Forms of sabotage, theft, fraud, and damage—though these are dwarfed by the money fraud. These are fuelled by the accumulated build-up of Jewish frauds from the past: as an example, watch a youtube of 'Margaret Hodge', real name Oppenheimer, stated to be massively wealthy from steel in Egypt, and a member of the Labour Party, obviously for tactical reasons since she cannot possibly support organised labour. She looked desperate that anyone could challenge the huge fraud of the holocaust, or try to find out how much money she has from steel, or investigate child abuse which happened in 'her' part of north London, with the unmistakable fear and hate that her parasitism could be removed.
'Almost every piece of gun legislation in America has been introduced or sponsored by Jewish lawmakers (Emanuel Cellar, Howard Metzenbaum, Herbert Kohl, Howard Metzenbaum, Charles Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Arlen Specter, Frank Lautenberg, Barbara Boxer, Herbert Kohl, etc.).

[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Media Studies
Having just watched some pitiful US TV with heavily made-up women trying to express themselves; and some lies by the BBC about the deceased Mandela; and the much newer Russian RT.com with its uncritical acceptance of Jewish lies ... There are many issues with the media, and a lot happens there; the Jewish aspect of the media is well worth studying, but is not yet very obvious to large numbers of people.
Johan Galtung (Norwegian) is the only sociologist known to me to draw attention to Jewish media control. His life, work, and reactions to his studies are therefore worth examination. So are the related issues of control over distribution of information (bookshop chains, cinema chains, TV and radio networks, down to control over paper, media training, and so on.
People now are subject to far more messages than at any time in the past. A student ought to have some feel for the mental world of past generations: official primary education is still quite new, something like 150 years; before that, Christians had sermons, Muslims had rituals five times a day, and so on; armies, garrisons, guards must have had briefings and information; small towns must have had chat and gossip and some sort of communal opinion; the theatre was censored, something which seems absurd now, as the numbers involved now are so small. The ancient Greeks and Romans had theatres. There were oral traditions, such as sagas; after printing was invented, books became more and more common; daily or at least periodical newspapers came later, for example with Napoleon. Individual authors seem to be replaced by anonymous groups of writers. The New York Times though it looks European has been Jewish for more than a century. The twentieth century had phenomenal growth in electrical communication, from the hissing heterodyne sounds of early radio through to digital sound and full colour three-dimensional moving pictures.
On newspapers and encyclopedias, there is a lot of online material; it may cost. britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk is an archive of British newspapers. onlinenewspapers.com says it's a world-wide archive. Google's site is new.google.com/newspapers?nid= followed by the date and coded material. Much of this is from the 18th- and 19th-century; so you can look up (e.g.) Whitechapel murders. After large-scale computer writing and typesetting started, post-IBM PC in the mid-1980s, a lot of new material became available on hard disk and CDs etc. www.archive.org has US government films, archived websites, and generally lots of freely-downloadable material. The British Library has a site, but it tends to avoid serious material. Printed Encyclopedias can be valuable for their time-capsule aspect, since of course they can't be changed to reflect new twists and turns of policy. Changes of ownership, which so far have been almost entirely to Jews, allow study of changes in editorial policy.

There seems to be no instinctive or genetic way to interpret new things sceptically; many people believe soaps to be genuine, not having been shown the processes of specification, scripts, studio work, make-up, costumes, lighting, editing, foley sound work, green screens and all the rest of it. This is the basic material of psychological research: it's said that occupational employment shortage stories influenced career choices, that Sgt Bilko (and no doubt the conscription of the Everly Bros and Presley) led a lot of American youth to join up, the pop music was TV-driven; and we have it from Google itself that 'viral' Youtubes always go viral after being featured in mass internet media, rather than by friend-to-friend contact. The invention of printing must have had similar effects; by the time it was commonplace, Wordsworth complained of causes which flare up and 'blunt the discriminating power of the mind'. By 1900, Jewish media and news agencies affected entire perceptions of remote countries. By 1945, almost everyone accepted almost everything from their media sources. Some few people are relatively immune, usually I think through social separation from common information sources.
Image Building anti-British race book

(the 'image' expression comes from projecting slides or films) is a Jewish preoccupation. Examples that occur to me are the New York Times, which like an insect with protective camouflage mimics serious newspapers; 'Gerald Fleming', who worked in an audio-visual lab but was called 'Professor' because of his 'Holocaust' material; the entire Holohoax itself, of course; thick hefty books, mimicking serious research but on examination consisting of low grade material; Nobel 'Prizes' for example to spurious work in biology; the Einstein cult, based loosely on a parody of Newton; various Jews in robes in the House of Lords; the Constitution of the EU, a mimic of the USSR; multiple hoaxes, such as publication of 'UFO' nonsense as an available source of media-inspired fears, and an attempt to reinforce the myth of 'nuclear weapons' by pretending 'aliens' are nosing around them.
.
Invention and Amplification of Divisions Between Groups such as Nations, Political Parties, Religious Groups, Types of Worker have been enormously increased as rhetoric and writing have been technically improved by newspapers, encyclopedias, radio, TV and electronics. It seems obvious now that most people's feelings about (e.g.) Russia, China, monarchs, Germany, Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Vietnam were implanted, since they were held by people with little knowledge of such groups. And in turn this has been largely under Jewish control. The French as 'cheese-eating surrender monkeys' is a Jewish view of people not keen to be slaughtered in a war which Jews wanted, for example.
On faking news events, click for my article on fakeology (click the back-arrow to return here). This faking process isn't all one-way: already the rubbery effects in Star Wars and Spielberg's 'dinosaurs' look comical, and the staged ineffective weaponry looks a joke. But still it's not surprising there have been deep effects on people; possibly we're lucky things aren't worse. Anyway-

BBC. Note on the growth of skepticism: Intellectual self-defence against prolonged lies might reasonably be expected to grow, at least amongst educated populations; but, equally reasonably, there seem to be no obvious reasons why lies should lose their force. At the present time, let's take an actual example, the BBC and the presumed decline in trust of the BBC. I believe distrust is the highest it's ever been, but that doesn't mean the BBC was honourable in the past. In fact, ever since its establishment, the BBC has censored out everything which was not state policy, 'state' being defined as the intersecting set of interest groups, and notably Jews. Dissatisfaction, for typical people, sets in when their own experience is unreported. Since the BBC was founded, 'homes for heroes' was dishonoured; the 'Labour' Party has not supported workers; the entirety of Jewish influence on money and wars is unreported; murders of whites are unreported; immigrants, even murderers and rapists, are housed and financed; 'Foreign Aid' has no perceptible effect after many decades; war crimes are unreported; charities hold on to most of their donations; lottery 'good causes' are obviously political and anti-British; the 'Common Market' turned out to be political; the 'Royal Family' is obviously worthless; promises by takeover companies are flagrantly broken. These are typical issues at the level of individual lives and personal perceptions or the world.
• Personal, grass roots issues are interweaved with large-scale lies. These lies, when they are noticed, are usually seen as increasing, or out of place in the traditionally honest BBC; this is a sentimental attitude, not in keeping with the facts, but may still be the perception of most people. This is related to individual learning: as people get older they start to recognise patterns in fashion, in diets, in clothes, in books—and in hype, lies, over-emphases, repetitions, cover-ups. Victims of crimes are unlikely to forget their treatment, or lack of it, by the media. UK Enrichment News (not my site; the title is sarcastic) is one example of the unreported immigrant crimes website genre.

Examples of patterns by now familiar to many people include:–
• Building up to war. Many people believe what they've been told about the Second World War. Some have heard of the Gulf of Tonkin and the made-up 'incident'. South Africa was subjected to a long campaign: the facts of African competence, and of actual murders, compared with the present days proves that South Africa was shaped the way the main influences, presumably Jews, wanted it. Many people became somewhat immunised by the obvious lies during the Iraq War. This 'institutional memory' leads to amusingly grotesque results; a BBC Sherlock showed Big Ben doing a controlled demolition collapse, for example. Attempts at war against Iran have at the time of writing failed.
• Immigration into white countries. By now very many people distrust the official accounts. Some have found the Jewish motivation; many haven't and would be unable (yet) to believe it. Just as they cannot believe the 'Labour' Party is a Jewish-controlled pawn, as is the 'Conservative' Party.
• BBC's Mark Thompson liar in chief moved to Jew York Times

BBC's Mark Thompson liar in chief moved to Jew York Times

Promotion of certain issues such as removing the death penalty, promotion of homosexuality and child sex, Jewish mythologies about the Second World War, South Africa with Sharpeville as a cause celèbre. These campaigns may run for many years; it's difficult to know how average people react, but the BBC has numerous interview and 'focus groups', with the results kept secret, so there must be hidden data out there. Typical small-scale examples are Steven Lawrence in Britain, (the link reviews a 2000 book giving details of the scandalous legal malpractices (click the left arrow to return here) and absurd law cases) used in campaigns for years, and the Trayvon Martin (described as 'white') case in the USA. As I type, I recall a 'news' broadcast promoting Scottish independence, featuring the obviously fake Alex Salmond. Large-scale examples include wars, the 9/11 fraud, 'climate change'–the BBC's supposed expert investors put a fortune of the public's money into supposed 'green' projects...
Connoisseurs of this sort of thing can often piece together the causes being pushed, by noting repetition: the small item on a phoney 'Holocaust survivor'; the article promoting anal sex ('Where male love is banned' for example). It's usually possible to identify spurious 'truth' websites by their compulsive repetition of (e.g.) Putin on the Sochi Winter Olympics, or some junk Hollywood movie, or fake science ('AIDS', 'climate change', 'carbon footprint'), or support for drugs to damage communities.
Worldwide Coincidences are helpful in identifying what has been going on behind the scenes: homosexual 'marriage' for example has been legalised, for the moment, in many countries, at almost the same time; it's not possible this could have been done without co-operation. Gold was seized in the USSR between the world wars; it was also seized in the USA. The EU began as a Free Trade area, but representatives of all the countries knew this was fraudulent. This applies to the history of the last few centuries: declarations of war, and undeclared war, generally need co-operative secret planning. Sometimes dramatic evidence comes to light, usually much later: the King's Speech on Germans and WW2, and F Roosevelt on Pearl Harbor, for example are now known to have been pre-written. The further extension of the Pearl Harbor conspiracy—that it was a false flag, the bombing being American—has led a submerged life; in my case, only noticed in 2016.
• Synthesis of Pseudo-News. Generally this is space-filling padding, and part of the previous category of deliberate pushing of issues, and the correlated absence of other issues. I recently saw a leading item on the tenth anniversary of the drowning of Chinese illegal cockle-pickers in Morecambe Bay; there was no comment on the organised crime gangs who move immigrants, or on the causes of deaths. Recently, the BBC covered the moving after I think a decade or so, of gipsies from a massive dump they had generated, all without any serious comment. Naturally, rape of white children by Muslims, or mass death of Iraqis, or Israeli snipers killing US troops in the Middle East, are unreported.
• Tacit Assumptions Which are Untrue. 'Human Rights' and 'The International Community' are assumed–when it suits Jewish groups to do so. Not, for example, in Palestine. These, arguably, are better-known now than they were, but other assumptions are often smuggled in: Microsoft was attacked for allowing Chinese censorship of some websites, but the complete US censorship of war crimes, arguably far more important, isn't mentioned. Nor is the long-term 'Holocaust' mythology. Censorship of Jews and the Fed, Bank of England, and other countries is complete.
• Indirect Publicity, Money-Making Schemes such as the Radio Times (which for a long time had a monopoly supply of its information), the National Lottery notorious for its being given to an organisation with doubts hanging over it, and for funding numerous projects following the Jewish agenda. The BBC can publish its own material: here's a review of a junk book by James Naughtie a fairly typical BBC hack.
• Awards, Prizes, for Promoting Jewish Agenda Nobel Prizes, Pulitzer Prizes, Media Awards, 'Music of Black Origin', Money for 'good causes' from lotteries and 'Trusts' etc, money to promote anal and child sex, are worth studying.
BBC 'news' item only jews need apply for sympathy

BBC 'news' item only jews need apply for sympathy

• No mention of failed projects; to this day genocide in Vietnam is a taboo with the BBC and other media, even including textbooks and museums. So of course are unwanted facts about the First and Second World Wars. To this day, blacks who wanted whites to stay in South Africa are never quoted; because Jews exploit divisions, the possibility of black-white co-operation in southern Africa is entirely censored in favour of violence and chaos, though other blacks such as Samora Machel in Mozambique had said years ago that white skills were essential to Africa. One has to assume violence and chaos are what Jews wanted. It's important to try to bear in mind what filthy scum these people are. The picture (above) shows Mark Thompson, once of the BBC, moved according to reports to the Jew York Times, though my guess is his employment is merely token, and part of the motive is Thompson's wish to evade investigation on the BBC's support for paedophiles. Between them their organisations have lied, as deliberate policy, constantly, on Germany, war, eastern Europe, south-east Asia, crimes against whites, genocides in Africa, and frauds on a colossal scale. Here's a long article on Vietnam and war crimes, all covered up by these disgusting turds. This is better documented than most modern war crimes.
• No summaries of Wars; that is, no attempt to draw up a list of changes wars have brought about. This is so established (at least since Napoleon's time) that it takes quite a perceptual effort to notice it. However, it's obviously related to Jews making money, non-Jews being killed, Jewish bank takeovers, asset takeovers.
• Stacked Audiences, Prearranged Plants, Secret Shills, and 'News' BBC Radio news about the Second World War is difficult to study, as recording techniques were new. Typical highlights are Chamberlain's speech that 'we are at war with', rather then the more truthful 'we are declaring war on'; and the Jew Sefton Delmer relishing war against (something like) malodorous breath of the horrid Germans. Some of the first BBC television propaganda (as opposed to 1920s and 1930s radio) was Richard Dimbleby, a portly man, who reported from Belsen in 1945, laying the foundation of the later 'Holocaust' mythology. His two sons were actually featured in a black and white film programme for BBC viewers, showing how wonderfully suitable they were for BBC careers, which of course they subsequently had.
In 2009 Nick Griffin, of the BNP, was featured on Question Time, an extremely dull, long-running TV programme which has always been 100% propagandist. The point is that the format was entirely changed for this edition, with a stacked audience encouraged to heckle and scream. Many people may have wondered if this was new for the BBC. In fact, thanks to Youtube and other video websites, we can rewind time, and watch, for example, David Frost with Oswald Mosley, on 15th November 1967. Mosley spoke in cliches and had little to say beyond slogans such as 'overproduction'; and Frost (now dead) was featherweight; but the point here is the anonymous audience was clearly stacked, and had been told to bring photos and printed stuff, and to heckle, so nothing useful got through. Students should assess old material in this way. Note that Barry Cryer and Eric Idle, comic writers, are credited at the end. Unlike writers of news, who probably depend on agencies such as Reuters and other shadowy figures, some of the production peoples' careers can be traced in some detail. Idle apparently is still alive, physically if not mentally, in the USA. Some plants/ shills are external, in the streets: look at Jews and Unions (above; click the back arrow to return here) for some insight into the way industries were deliberately destroyed. Another BBC 'news' programme often regarded as from a golden age, is the 'satire' interval of the early 1960s, for example That Was The Week That Was, a rather bizarre effort conceived on the lines of a cabaret, complete with a small brass band on stage, a singer dressed as a bunny girl tart, and David Frost squinting to read his autocue (or whatever the trade name was). BBC 'documentaries' are farcical, and always have been.
• Canned Laughter and Absurd Background Music may be worth a brief note: let's hope these conventions may wither away. I'd vote Have I Got News For You with the pig-faced Hislop the most desperately 'sweetened' bit of TV.
• Trivia, Usually Reinforcing Jewish-Related Beliefs. I've just watched or short item on a then-new film about Nelson Mandela; with, of course, not the slightest reference to any facts about South Africa. This was preceded by sequences of stormy weather; the BBC for years put money into shady 'green' schemes, and has to try to back these, despite the fact accurate reports on storms, which usually of course do little damage, are available from the Met Office. Another typical item is time spent on a ski accident of a motor driver called Schumacher, as though it was a hugely important incident. This is, of course, not new, though the smell of the garbage varies with time. When there was a miners' strike, the BBC gave no information whatever on coal, but instead showed always-anonymous demonstrators, a supposedly American banker with a bag over his head—anything trivial. Football seems to be shown primarily to show black, i.e. not British, players. It's the BBC's invariable practice to describe immigrant rapists and murderers as 'British', or even 'Swedish' or whatever it might be.
The newsreaders are actors, though this fact is probably little-known, and not discussed outside acting schools. The writers are almost entirely anonymous. The sources—press releases, government departments, army and airforce puppets, quango spokespeople, Jewish-funded pressure groups such as the 'Rowntree Foundation', Reuters—are kept hidden. I hope in years to come the shocking piffling worthlessness of the BBC will become an accepted part of folk wisdom.
Jew Cohen dictator of BBC TV

At the time of writing someone called Cohen [picture] is nominal head of BBC TV. Watch for the Jewish agenda. And try to visualise the news items which that piece of shit will conceal. Worth noting that in 1945, the head of the BBC was someone called General Jacobs, who must have helped start the train of lies concerning Belsen, Auschwitz etc.
• Failure to Credit Information Sources which of course is in keeping with the amateurism and anti-intellectual BBC approach. As I type, I see David Irving on PQ17 was fronted by someone called Jeremy Clarkson, an unintellectual type who likes fast cars. Irving's book on the subject was unmentioned. BBC 'documentaries' usually follow this convention: Attenborough's material on flora and fauna is not his, for example. So of course does their 'news'. A lot of material is deliberately suppressed: figures for black and brown crime in white countries, and white crime in black countries, are routinely suppressed.
• Omission of Information. The BBC's treatment of coal strike was mentioned here as an example of omission of information. It's impossible to know if this is deliberate: the BBC's entire staff seem to be failed actors and failed writers, with little knowledge of the world. At the time of writing, there has been at least a month of flooding in parts of Britain. There must be an issue with amount of rain, local variations, water runoff and concrete and tree cover, and so on; and with rivers and dredging, banks, spare capacity for water retention, and the effects on flooded areas. But 'news reports' show nothing but the video equivalent of children saying ooh, look at this; and PR employees and politicians with rehearsed lies or nothingnesses, such as the Jewish Prime Minister clearly without a clue talking about 'our [sic] country'. Only an organisation with no self-criticism could produce such trash.
Jew head of 'BBC' news

• BBC Hierarchy Over Time. There are no reliable in-house accounts anywhere. It's possible to try to piece together the atmosphere from books by ex-BBC people and e.g. BBC 'Yearbooks'. Worth noting that BBC people still (I think) have some cachet; I think Margaret Drabble's novel Jerusalem the Golden (1967) has a touching scene when the northern girl shags a BBC man; it'll be some time before that would be regarded the way shagging Goebbels would be by many people now. The whole business of BBC casting couch, BBC patronage and other power, is still pretty much secret; as I watch a piano player called Jools reappears on New Year's Eve for the fifth? Tenth? Fifteenth? Consecutive year... Anyway just a tiny sample follows of published material:
Biography of Reith, the first administrator of the BBC when it was radio only. Reith had a high opinion of himself, which people thoughtlessly repeat; he established the quasi-military administrative structure, with unexplained decisions handed down to the underlings.
Much later: ex-BBC boss Greg Dyke tries self-justification in his horrifyingly shallow Inside Story.
BBC's idea of self-criticism: Tenth-rate book by Robin Aitken unimportant issues only; no big picture.
BBC's idea of science during the Cold War. Patrick Moore.
BBC's idea of entertainment: Carla Lane, sitcom writer who mentions a long-term secret affair with a BBC producer. It occurs to me she might have written an amusing sit-com about life at the BBC...
BBC's idea of history. Holohoax junk by Laurence Rees.
BBC's idea of modern history. James Naughtie, a radio speaker tries to select representative people in Britain.
• BBC and Race. BBC policy is to show whites as shites (note: widespread phrase). White serial killers get promotion; black serial killers are suppressed so successfully some people think there are none. Whites are shown starting wars. White girls are shown as tarts and whores. Whites are shown as idle spongers; the truth about immigrant fraud and violence and incompetence is essentially barely ever shown. News items are selected to show (e.g.) white criminals of various types. The main drumbeat however is still about Jews, so much so that there must by now be reaction against Jewish exclusive selfish greed: whites are falsely shown in faked 'holocaust' situations; white deaths in wars are ignored—for example British pilots and sailors during the Second World War— or minimised and sentimentalised. Media students should check information on these things, where it hasn't been suppressed, to get a feel for the extent of misrepresentations.

All students of Jews should pay special attention to Internet, and of course its controlled media: Wikipedia is a perfect example. Recent takeovers of Internet companies which host large numbers of sites may foreshadow problems in future.
Swedish Jew publisher monopoly

Media by Country. It's certain that European wars in the 20th century had groundwork (anti-German in Britain, anti-British in Germany, anti-Russian everywhere) in Jewish-owned media. There's every reason to believe this is still true; Sweden's publishing, for example, is dominated by Bonnier, who relentlessly push for immigration into Sweden to eliminate Swedes.
Imaginative students of media might try to visualise (e.g.) Jewish-owned media in Africa; no doubt it would be simple, and no doubt full of lies—black inventors, slavery as run by whites (not Jews!), plugs for African musicians run by Jews, anti-white material aimed at white genocide, nothing useful on what blacks could do, nothing to help develop critical and constructive abilities, simple competitions. And nothing about Jews. Jewish lessons from the past might include the 'black legend' applied to white Spaniards, similar to present-day 'white guilt' Jewish slogans.
Students might try to visualise new programming for white countries: for example, there are short stories in every white country, and possibly there could be an exchange of video/filmed stories, made by promising directors, based on English, French, German, Italian, Russian, US, Spanish, Swedish etc stories, dubbed into different languages.
Russian TV rt.com has all the appearance of Jewish ownership; its English-language material is probably intended to have a disruptive effect, as the BBC does in mirror image in its overseas material. In view of the saturation censorship of European media, Russian TV has plenty of suppressed stories to work on.
Fighting Back. Judging by the past, fighting back will proceed in stages. In fiction and drama, first will be presentation of individual issues. A Jewish fraud in finance, for example: the Fed in storylines. A hint that Jews aren't always quite honest. Jews in plot lines, taking the place of whites in Jewish productions now. Perhaps some sex issue, Slav or Vietnamese girls used by Jews as prostitutes. Jews cheating so that their unqualified fellow racists get jobs they can't do. Dramatised synagogues with their true implications spelt out. Jews around the world arranging to import dangerous criminals, gleeful at the results. Jews shown as defective, insane, vicious, will be inserted into stories. Jewish women will of course be shown in various accurate stereotypes: the insane Barbara Specter/ Susan Sontag types, the anti-little-girl uglies. Jews as criminals might use the vast number of real-world examples. Jews will be shown with blacks, Congolese fishermen, and lesbian one-legged Hispanic lesbians. The occasional Jew rentier in America, screwing rents from blacks. Storylines of Jewish groups made to change their minds by attractive non-Jews. Hints that teachers are leaned on to tell lies, and Jews fabricate publications and qualifications to get jobs for life, may appear, with 'positive discrimination', showing Jews trying to enter once-elite institutions. Later, legal stories showing Jewish judges or lawyers might become as well-known as a genre as detective stories now: garbage of the type of Midsomer Murders and Inspector Morse and their spin-offs is as stylised and remote from reality as mediaeval lives of saints. The use of mercenaries by Jews could make many TV series: towns, regions, entire countries wrecked and ruined. Historical dramas as inverse of Spielberg might show dramatised murders—the Russian Tsar and his daughters, Abraham Lincoln, central European nobles exterminated, Hungary and Bela Kun, Ukrainian history. British and American officials organising wars might make for more realistic updated genres than, for example, the garbage of the John 'Le Carre' and Frederick Forsyth types. Meetings of so-called Jews might make good drama: the sort of things in the Protocols of Zion, for instance. Thrillers could include poisonings by Jews with fluoride, dangerous drugs resulting from faked research, nuclear research faked by Jews, mercenary teams sent in secret to wreck countries and install puppets, corrupt Jewish Home Secretaries jailing innocent people who had the effrontery to complain, Jewish fake think-tanks spreading lies and collecting their Rothschild paper money. Peter Jackson might direct vast-canvas films of Gulags and Russians exterminated by Jews, including the huge teams of Jewish liars—writers, fakers of figures, press agents, Jews as agents in diverse countries, bribers, thugs—in the style of 1984. The truth about Lenin, Trotsky and others might be made into film series. The American Civil War and the 20th-century world wars might be the basis of revisionist TV and film productions making the present rubbish look like what it is, propaganda for simpletons. (Here's my modest contribution: a script based in 1945 exploring the idea of faking nuclear weapons). As time goes on, we may have a Jew,Jack the Ripper, thrillers; 19th century London's East End (the cheap part) flooded by penniless vagrant Jews; Cable Street presented accurately.
American freedom of speech rules have so far worked mostly in favour of Jews: their fake money enabled them to push (for example) porn, false flags, easy profits with no pretence of competition, and lies about wars. With luck the ideology of free speech will remain, but Jewish control over the product will evaporate, so that the Jewish bias will come to seem painfully stupid. [ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Media: Books, Booklets, Newspapers, Magazines

Anyone seriously examining Jews and related activity must obviously have some sort of library. Almost all books and journals are Jewish-influenced and may provide helpful evidence; for example if you own National Geographic, the material on NASA, nuclear issues, wars and so on cannot be thrown into a memory-hole. Specialist legal, medical, military, religious journals may have important evidence waiting to be interpreted. So must pressure groups such as the NAACP and 'Southern Poverty Law Center'. Libraries often throw out books considered as old; this is quite likely deliberate destruction of the past, since, in view of government waste of all kinds, storage of a few books is a negligible cost.
National and regional books are of exceptional interest to some groups: Americans with Ukrainian, German, Hungarian, Scandinavian etc ancestors; whites with South African, Dutch, Scottish, English etc ancestry; Spaniards; Portuguese; Italian ... Very many groups ought to try to identify Jewish influence in their backgrounds, of which of course they may be entirely unaware. As an example more or less at random George Mikes (Hungarian Jew; pronounced something like 'mee-kesh') wrote Boomerang, a look at Australia; many years ago this book included a dismissive comment on the 'White Australia' policy.
Runs of magazines, journal etc are worth studying; some interested people may happen to have collections. Here's a look at a British institution, Private Eye with fairly detailed in-depth criticisms.
Let me just add here that some anti-Jewish material is thoroughly censored, and hard to find in its original hard-copy form. Anyone who happens to find (say) a copy of Israel Cohen on white race extinction as a Jewish policy ought to put it onto Internet, with scanned original pages, and preferably a video of the book being opened and the pages turned, as evidence that it's not faked or edited. My OCR version of Jane Birdwood's The Longest Hatred went online in 2000, after I found nobody had taken the trouble, though I didn't put up memory-heavy large files. I posted an American booklet by Frank Britton. Very many interesting books are now on Internet, for example Nesta Webster's and J A Hobson's and John Reed's, which only a few decades ago were difficult to find, but even so there must be many more books by small publishers, and leaflets on many topics which people at the time felt they ought to publicise, in obscurity.
Books vs Newspapers Even the most popular books sell far fewer copies than popular newspapers sell over the same time-period. This suggests the influence of newspapers is underestimated, since influential books tend to be assumed to be far more important than journalism. Most people have heard of Karl Marx, but Jewish media cumulatively have been vastly more important than his tomes.
Note for researchers: Biographies often contain useful information; for example Eisenhower, a 'Swedish Jew', was promoted over the heads of scores of experienced soldiers. He also presided over mass killing in eastern Europe. Coincidence? An important source of information is books by people who are maligned by Jews. Nesta Webster, Ezra Pound, Adolf Hitler, F J Irsigler, Archibald Ramsay, Douglas Reed are just a few.
Note for authors and the future: examine the systematic insulting of numerous races/ countries/ nations. With luck, soon enough these will be publishable. A film on Napoleon and Rothschild; an update of Les Miserables; an updated War and Peace; the story of the Jewish coup in Russia; a true biography of Churchill; 'Jews' flooding into New York; the true story of the Fed, Kissinger and mass murders for money; the history of Jews and slavery. Ibsen's Doll's House could be rewritten on the theme of Jewish pornographers. A rich field for new genres is opening up. Satirical songwriters might rework Gilbert and Sullivan's 'Ruler of the Queen's Navy' around Mandela as office boy for corrupt Jewish lawyers - "I polished up the knocker on the big front door". The Eton Boating Song can be reworked for homosexual and paedophile Jews. Country & Western songs could make a rich new genre: with money, frauds, wars, porn, garbage media, blacks, anti-black Civil Rights, Kennedy murder, attacks on Christianity etc.

Note for researchers: You may find it worthwhile to extend your reading both in language and in time. Other nations' views may well differ from widely-accepted views in ways which illuminate hidden recesses. Old books can have the same effect. Here's an example that amused me (about Joseph Conrad): '... his curious preference for a narrative form in which one man tells the tale of of a man who tells the tale to another who relates the conversation of two men about the hero is sometimes a little trying and bewildering.'
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Media: Movies, TV, Visual Media, Fiction
Digital media, and Youtube (founded 2005), have made it possible for the first time to do a revisionist history of visual media, notably television: news, sitcoms, documentaries, movies made for TV, specials, and other second-half-of-the-20th-century leftovers and scraps. A lot of early material is lost, as VCRs and even audio tapes weren't around for home users. But there's enough for a comprehensive revisionist workover; I hope students, or teams of people, come up with accurate and devastating material, birds' eye views of the mountains of dross. To date, this hasn't happened: there are no intelligent histories of TV propaganda: rather sad, in view of the huge numbers of supposedly educated and literate people. Students may need some sort of revisionist framework: here's a 'Cold War' outline, and here's a look at the JFK murder as a coup which unfortunately gave Jews even more power. There are many news items, and the student might like to estimate how many were orchestrated. For example, there's a whole complex around the supposed H bomb, Stalin, McCarthy, Jewish atom spies, radiation scares, secrecy and weapons spending. Starting-points could be a constellation of events, a single event, newsreel, TV, and newspaper/magazine treatment, or an arrangement of events in date order to check plausibilities.
The ownership and control of studios, networks, programmes etc should be checked (preferably without taking too much effort)
The BBC website is a great data-mining opportunity. It includes information for trainees—timid inductees told what to do by Jews, with nothing about sources of news. News Agencies need to be surveyed.
Museum, Art and Photography Galleries often present falsified world-views. For example the Director of Britain's National Gellery in Trafalgar Square, London was Sir Michael Levey, from 1973-1986. Norman Rosenthal arranged exhibitions at the Royal Academy, which exhibits new art. It's no surprise to find anti-Catholic exhibitions at intervals; and no surprise to find no representations of Jewish activities, notably in the USSR. Students of official arts might check on private galleries and the pressures on them. The Imperial War Museum (five locations in Britain) is shamelessly propagandist. Even the Public Record Office/ National Archives at Kew have or had Jewish control—how much is not very clear.

Most people's view of the world if they can't travel is 90% from visual media, which gives fiction great importance. It's an efficient way to transmit attitudes to groups of people, and is highly effective with people who don't travel much. Cheese-eating surrender monkeys (click back-arrow to return here) comments on this historically important issue, which (for example) led to prolonged wars against Russia and Germany, and led to the complete absence of stock Jewish figures from the media.
Black and white films include Eisenstein's laughable propaganda, and hosts of anti-German films aimed at innocent Americans—Casablanca, Chaplin's ridiculous The Great Dictator. Here's a review of a Jewish film on the deep south, with the usual artificial view of both whites and blacks. Fast forwarding, Tom Hanks is possibly the leading propagandist actor, having been in moon landing, AIDS, World War 2, and skillfully playing a subnormal white in some Vietnam bullshit. The Sound of Music and Cabaret are early propaganda pieces on Austria and Germany. The Sound of Music has some first-class online criticism. Dr Zhivago is a whitewash of the USSR. Cabaret helped introduce the Jewish promotion of homosexuality. Kubrick was a nuke propagandist (How I Learned to Stop Worrying etc) and helped lie to Americans about NASA. Spielberg did propagandist material on the Second World War, and even nuclear weapons—there's a special effect atom bomb test, no doubt to reinforce Jewish fake science, in The Crystal Skull, an unconsciously funny Harrison Ford film. I suspect with camcorders and digital technology, Spielberg's star will wane, and convert into something rather different.
An interesting field is the 'Cold War' and the extent to which this was a Jewish fiction: The Manchurian Candidate indicates something of the 'brainwashing' mythology. Here's an unenthusiastic review of The Fourth Protocol. Jews seem to have instinctively shied away from anything approaching war realism: despite decades of the most ruthless war, there's nothing about from Vietnam apart from junk of the M.A.S.H. type, the bare-chested undersized Sylvester Stallone, and Apocalype Now based on Joseph Conrad on central Africa, Jews of course presenting the idea of 'gooks' as savages, and de Niro as some vicious sniper type. In centuries to come, people will I hope look back on this shallow irresponsible inhuman garbage as evidence of Jewish psychopathy.
Media students ought to develop a feel for the amount of propaganda inserted: the easiest way is simply to scene-set with the unexamined assumption that some group are evil. Some propaganda films (on nuclear issues for example) must have been part of a planned Jewish strategy. There's international planning: propagandist fiction includes television's All in the Family (US) and Till Death Us Do Part (UK) one copied from the other and each from the same 1970s era. To this day immigration issues are erased: New Tricks, supposedly about crimes revisited years later, has nothing on immigrant crime, or MPs and paedophilia. Detective stories are an effective way to plant ideas; typically criminal activities of immigrants are transposed onto whites. There are no reopened cases of Jews' donations to shady causes. Jewish attitudes are never challenged: Blackadder written by at least one Jew, and acted by two homosexual Jews, shows a First World War sentimentalised death sequence; Fawlty Towers has Cleese saying the Germans invaded Poland, as an obviously unquestionable casus belli. A BBC TV series, following the BBC tradition of keeping abuse to women and children secret, called Ripper Street, glorifying a Jewish murderer of London women; I found it unwatchable, but I'd take a heavy bet that the influx of smelly Jews into east London, and such events as Churchill (the 'half breed adventurer') filibustering Parliament to prevent action, were not mentioned.
A genre which is wearing a bit thin is the great detective and white murders, usually in romanticised settings. One of the few amusing aspects of BBC 'drama' is the recycling of actors, seemingly forever; the same ones may occur several times in one evening, and the same is true of the dialogue. Attitudes to the USSR, South Africa etc changed in unison in all the Jewish media; 9/11 was presented in the same way everywhere, even for example in Love Actually, along with a flattering image of a Tony Bliar-style Prime Minister, mixed-race-but-no-Jews scenes apparently compulsory in the Jewish media; homosexual 'marriage' was simultaneously introduced by Jews in many white countries. The same signs show up in Peter Jackson's films of Tolkien: the influence of the First World War—the feeling of betrayal on returning from the Front, with many men killed and finding money-making schemes, auctions, isn't caught; the people saved from 'certain death' in Mirkwood, turning on them, exactly mimics Jewish propagandist attitudes: just tell them what to believe; the mixed race theme with an abnormally tall Kili and female fighting elf, not of course in Tolkien; the mixed race crowds, the complete lack of Tolkienesque language of the 'child of the kindly West' type...
It's not easy to judge the actual exposures of populations to media propaganda. Printed papers quote 'circulation' by multiplying sales, and free copies, by quite a large number to allow people passing them round. Figures are given for takings from cinemas; but of course the numbers of people aren't given, and the percentage getting through to the film companies can't be very high. TV viewings aren't likely to be accurate; the samples are tiny and interviewers aren't likely to probe to check viewers actually viewed, and of course higher figures would be greatly appreciated. Viewing figures by Internet links are secret.
It's worth remembering that in most of this period wars were raging; total deaths must have been 20 or 30 million, in eastern Europe, China, Korea, Vietnam, Africa. In that sense, the propaganda did its job of deadening emotions. One of the functions of propaganda is to normalise horror, and the mental jail of the BBC is part of this problem.
CNBC media Jews

Students of this sort of thing might look specifically at film scripts. The German film Das Boot ('The Boat', meaning submarine) must have passed German censorship laws. It would be an interesting exercise for film students to dub their own soundtrack, talking about British politicians declaring war, hyperinflation, Lenin destroying Russia, Churchill starting civilian bombing, Jews provoking Germany into attacking Poland.
James Bond films as propaganda study subjects Just a brief survey. The first six James Bond films (out of 7 with Sean Connery) 1962 Dr No 'a scientific genius bent on destroying the U.S. space program.' | 1963 From Russia with Love '.. SPECTRE and the Soviet Union' | 1964 Goldfinger '..destroying all the gold in Fort Knox' | 1965 Thunderball 'threatening .. nuclear holocaust' | 1967 You Only Live Twice '.. disaster in space..' | 1971 Diamonds are Forever '.. a deadly laser satellite..' all include Jewish frauds. 1977 The Spy who Loved Me has supposedly nuclear explosions probably from US fake films (as in Dr Strangelove). The director's alternative sound track discusses nuclear submarines and the special effect missile launches. 1999 The World is Not Enough is a nuclear exit strategy film.

Here is Radio Islam's Jews in the US media mugshot photos page (with example photos).

There are endless ancillary industries and connections: Casting agencies, TV and magazine ads by Jewish advertising agencies, always putting mixed races and anti-white comments in (there are some Youtubes on this, and the race-mixing agenda by Jews, but only for non-Jews. When did you see an advertisement warning against Jewish lies and frauds?). Book distributors and printers, film distributors etc, co-operate to keep readers and viewers from truths: David Irving had difficulties getting his books printed and distributed—printers were threatened, bookshop window broken, dustjackets slashed. Alternative films simply will not be shown in cinema chains. As to reviews and notices: many Jews can't even understand that reviews can be honest; maybe it's a genetic attitude; look at Amazon comments, for example.

Fakeology. Students of Jews need to be aware of fake images (in addition of course to the stories) made possible by photography and moving pictures, and of course soundtracks too. Here's a link back to Modern Techniques of Image Fakery (Click the back-arrow button to return here). One of several new genres is of faked murders, with faked families reading out their scripts: these may (like 9/11) be intended to stoke up hate against Jewish targets; or they may be to show the supposed tolerance and benevolence of other Jewish targets, or victims of Jewish policies.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Criticism
Literary, Film, TV Criticism. Serious film and TV criticism can hardly be said to exist yet. We've all met people who aren't complete fools who still think (e.g.) that Casablanca is a great film. This attitude exists partly because of the monolithic Jewish control over publishing: the processes analogous to people being laughed at for reading comics are suppressed, for obvious commercial reasons. So are the processes analogous to people being frowned on for wasting money. From our point of view, the essentials of a 'good' critic are to never mention Jewish malevolence, and therefore never mention any Jewish subtext material, such as anti-white racism. One such critic, who existed at the BBC for years, was a pullovered nonentity called Barry Norman, whose job must have been to promote films for the week as primed by film companies, and avoid any other films. His background seems to have been someone who loved watching films for children when tiny, then films for adolescents, then films nominally for adults: he just loved the atmosphere, the world served up by others. I don't think he ever said anything genuinely interesting about films and the film industry. Marginally more interesting was Clive James, who seems to have had a degree in English, and was therefore doubly qualified—he had a large collection of handy cliché phrases, combined with little knowledge of anything. His written pieces reproduce student essays: told to write on something, he dutifully produced pieces with minimal effort and a few superficial comments and jokes, showing no deep knowledge. Others might suspect that (e.g.) immigrants are unrealistically represented, or crime fiction understates blacks and MPs, or terrorists seem invariably to be groups that Jews don't like, or wars are presented in a gung-ho fashion inconsistent with realities of politics, people, weaponry and finance. But the true critic feels no subtext and has no subtext.
Film and TV are relative novelties; literary critics have been around for centuries, often of course as subservient commentators. Here's my attempt to survey mid-range culture in Britain after Napoleon. Recent-ish examples include F R Leavis (The Great Tradition, with little in the way of examination of social roots), and Edward Said (on literature and colonial Europeans in North Africa, also with little on oriental social roots). Robert Faurisson expanded from criticism of 19th century French poets (or, more accurately, criticism of their readers) into holocaust revisionism. A side-issue here is promotion of inferior works, something of a Jewish industry. Thus Anne Frank has been promoted endlessly; diaries, if they exist, by other girl victims of the most horrific deaths, get zero promotion. Russian Jews' books get promotion, but Solzhenitsyn is still partly untranslated.
Criticism of genres (as opposed to individual authors) offers a typical project in Jewish studies. A good example is post-1945 spy thrillers: as far as I know, there's no mention anywhere in John le Carré's novels of the part played by Jews before, during and after the Second World War. So there's plenty of scope for analysing the books and commenting on the promotion of his rubbish.
Cross-media Criticism in which (say) TV persons comment on films, or radio persons comment on books, or printed media persons comment on TV have an added interest in the sense they are more-or-less inevitably part of the publicity process. What used to be called 'notices' were part of this: for example, there's an online facsimile letter written by Jews in New York discouraging editors from 'noticing' certain books. My review of James Naughtie's New Elizabethans includes an elegant on-line comment: ' ... It's all done as a sort of pecking order, indeed just as a typical communist state is set up. If you listen to [BBC] Radio 4 they often have the liberal elite giving out advice to their underlings. First of all they don't tend to communicate in a logical manner, rather they are into the arts, but the arts are the transmission medium for the ideology. It works on the psychological level. For example, you will often get a member of the liberal elite saying this or that work is absolutely fantastic and wonderful, as in novels or plays of one sort or another, and this stuff is essentially mind control. ...' Radio 4's book programmes invariably promote fiction of the Frankfurt School Type, as of course do the supposedly non-fiction programmes.
Here's a similar comment, from the Occidental Observer, reacting to Jewish media promotion on a fake photo of a drowned boy (not, of course, a photo of a victim of Jews): 'Creative, right-brain people typically cannot think in quantitative terms. [sic; the 'right brain' idea was dropped decades ago; 'creative' is usually a euphemism for third-rate types.] They are governed by emotions, and ooze with empathy, which has become the buzzword of pathological altruism. They are typically innumerate ... When they tell us that we must fund the Arts, or invest more in education or the health care system or daycare or outreach programs for under-represented minorities, they will not say how much. When they tell us that we must run a deficit to kick-start the economy, they will not say how much or when it will be paid down. When they tell us that we must accept more immigrants or refugees, they won't tell us how many. ... Their demands are always open-ended. ... They make a point of showcasing their "compassion," ... Slogans like "People before profits" and "The economy exists to serve the people, not the other way around" fit their mindset. When you want to appeal to emotions to win the day, it always useful to present a false antithesis. ... public radio and television in the U.S., presents itself as the voice of elite ... in order to mobilize the vast numbers of people who "think" in this fashion, the [Jewish] media frame the refugee debate in purely emotional terms. Pictures of desperate people, of tragedy being played out every day and every hour, must be front and centre of every news item on the subject. The tragedy must be given a human face. ... those in the host countries who must move over for these migrants, or see their social safety net collapse from the burden, or face future job displacement from cheap labour, are left unseen by the cameras. ...'
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Education, Training, Careers, Work

Pierre de Craon June 14, 2015 - 6:59 pm wrote in TheOccidentalObserver.net

Rerevisionist: The US system ... in its avoidance of any discussion of Jews, ... has wrecked serious study of history, economics, philosophy, and science...

I congratulate Rerevisionist on an excellent summation of one of the central problems of modernity, at least for anyone interested in the truth: the Jews’ corruption of education via malinstruction and misinformation.

Thanks. Note that in New York City, something like a half of all teachers in 'public schools' (i.e. no fees) think they are Jews! This appalling fact deserves a lot of attention by Americans, concerned at the terrifyingly low achievements of American 'education'. If you don't believe this, here's an authentic quotation:

'Sigal Samuel' in Jewish forward.com (March 5, 2015): Jews had gravitated toward the New York City public schools since the 1930s... Jews had established an informal network that operated to draw co-religionists into the system, providing information on vacancies, job contacts, and test preparation assistance, among other advantages. By the 1960s, in New York, it was almost an instinctive reaction for a Jewish college graduate to consider teaching in the city's schools as a career option.

Flanders says: January 5, 2021 at 02:24

Israel acts on behalf of Jewry’s banking interests, as does the B’nai Brith, both of which guide and influence the ADL and Freemasons, and most certainly the jew populations inside all the various countries of the world in which jews reside.

“Jewish Teacher Claims Jewish Schools Indoctrinate Jews To Be More Loyal To Israel Than America”

“I’ve heard teachers or administrators say at assemblies things like “you don’t belong in America,” “Israel is your country” and “the IDF are your soldiers.” When Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to the United States Congress in opposition to the Iran nuclear deal, against the wishes of President Obama, the high school where I was working cancelled classes to watch “our Prime Minister.” That’s a real quote.

In the six schools at which I have taught, HaTikvah was sung more often than the Pledge of Allegiance or the Star Spangled Banner. Israeli national holidays are taught with a reverence or solemnity that outstrips what is accorded to religious or American ones. Veteran’s Day was never discussed, but Yom HaZikaron, Israel’s Memorial Day, had special projects and assemblies. Many of these schools receive grants from the Avi Chai Foundation, which requires recipients to declare that they “seek to instill in our students an attachment to the State of Israel and its people.”

From https://christiansfortruth.com/jewish-teacher-claims-jewish-schools-indoctrinate-jews-to-have-loyalty-to-israel-over-america/

Education is a huge consumer of effort, at least in countries with some infrastructure and wealth. This is a relatively new situation, only dating from (say) the mid-19th century. It may well decline, if make-work and pseudo-education and token studies and low intelligence populations keep growing. In South Africa now, it's claimed a black woman has more chance of being raped than being taught to read.
Changes Over Time: Dumbing Down? A Coleman & M McNee's The Great Reading Disaster looks at the introduction of 'look-say' in Britain after 1945, as promoted by a 'guru' figure, who, typically, came from nowhere, Fred Schonell. The review looks at Anthony C Sutton on the same process in the USA. Charlotte Iserbyt's Deliberate Dumbing Down of America is alarmist on the same topic. None of these people examine the plausible hypothesis that Jews damaged education deliberately, because they prefer uneducated and 'brainwashed' populations. It certainly deserves a long hard look. A book by Paulo Leone, apparently a scientologist, blames Germans in what I assume is a distractionist attempt. Anyone examining Jewish influence must search for counteracting lies, websites, schools of 'thought', publishing companies, and so on.
Why Johnny Can't Think is another book on a related theme, a salaried professoriat who have no talent or inclination to revise their views. As early education gets worse, there are opportunities for remedial work, usually by teachers who wouldn't otherwise teach. Education as a bureaucratic career (as opposed to the idealist theory that education should inspire children to become free citizens of the universe) was a popular theme in the 1950s and 1960s, the basis of quite a few depressing films.
Sex Education is another example of Jewish attitudes operating alongside white opinion. Many people think sex education is good at a young age, providing information needed for sound decisions. The Jewish attitude as expressed in the Talmud and other sources is that sex with young white goyim, including boys, is desired by them. However, they are cautious: for example, Jews have promoted anal sex for years, but where are the sex education programmes explaining anal sex?
Subtle corruptions and Omissions of Universities are important; many students sense these things, but without pinning down what's being put over them, and why. Here's a detailed review of Brian Pullan on twenty years of Manchester University. I've tried to highlight the way serious issues are ignored.
What ought to be a contentious issue is textbooks written by Jews. Here's my take on just one book, aimed at people doing history degrees. G R Elton on The Reformation where the sensitive subjects of money and Christian religion are dished up by a Jew. Economics textbooks, I need hardly bother to say, have nothing on paper money and its liability to fraud; or money from weapons. In the same way that Jewish lawyers work hard at law, through self-interest rather than concern for justice, there are endless Jewish books, and they are much simpler to write than serious works trying to deal with the full complications of life.
Private, Paid-for Education has of course been left alone, except to the extent that—almost certainly—control of money by Jews has allowed any serious study of Jews to be completely missed out. Equally seriously, science frauds have flourished. Young people starting a career in biology research may find they have wasted their time when it's too late.
Because of its universality, oral testimony of teachers, students, pupils can be valuable. I remember personally being rather shocked by examples of university careerism: people 'feathering their nests' and settling in for life, almost impossible to remove, irrespective of quality. In the expansion in the 1970s, great numbers of obviously not very good sociologists, philosophers, historians, English lit people, and lecturers in vague subjects and remedial types got promotion, evidently all the more keen to cling to their jobs because they were overpaid. Obviously, paid early education and nepotism help young people aware of the system to insert themselves. The NUS (National Union of Students) and other unions were and are full of people of that type.
Examiners' Reports and Other Meta-Education Sources over time could (in principle) be valuable sources of information: actual scripts and multiple-choice selections; the preference for safe statements; selection of subject-matter could provide information on dumbing-down, misunderstandings, and the vast islands of ignorance. It's unlikely the practitioners and controllers would be helpful; they would be very likely to hide behind secrecy and claims of confidentiality. Nor would the people who set exams and who arrange the content of professional exams in the law, medical specialities, administration, civil service be likely to be forthcoming. But perhaps this will change.
Website Research www.teach.org is a US site obviously designed to enrol low quality teachers—just what 'Jews' want.

SOCIAL SCIENCE JEWISH EXAM PAPER (ADVANCED). JOKE?)

[1] Jack's brother has been caught molesting children. An investigation is deemed unavoidable. Three senior police officers and two judges are involved. If a judge can be bought for $40,000 and a police officer for $20,000 calculate the bill for Jack's brother to be freed to a grateful society. Discuss whether money could be saved by entrapment of officials beforehand.

[2] A central bank controlling paper money requires 3% of face value in interest. One $10 note costs 5 cents to print. Calculate the amount of 'quantitative easing' needed to earn a profit of $1 billion.

[3] Describe how to estimate the defense capability of a typical Middle East country X in manpower and equipment. Estimate a multiplier to make US troops feel safe. Make an informed guess as to the cost of all media (including X's state broadcasting) and the cost of Senators to promote the project. Give an account of the relationship between GNP of X and likely return from control of X's new central bank.

[4] Montague Dummkopf's work compares a musical note's waveform to propaganda frauds. Describe the attack/establishment, plateau, and decay phases in (1) The Holocaust Fraud, (2) Climate Frauds, (3) the AIDS fraud. The dacay phases are not complete: give your prediction for the exit strategies and the final outcome, with reasons.

[5] Assume an average immigrant costs $45,000 per year including rent, health, advice, translation, education, food, heating, and all other costs. How many immigrants are needed in five years to produce a budget deficit of $100 billion? Outline the advantage to Jews of deficits.

[6] Average promotional path in the police is Y years per grade. There are G grades. Given a policy of ignoring race crime against whites when possible, make estimates of Y and G to optimise the balance between prosecutions against the police and resignations of officers.

[7] Ken Deadstein after assessment is to be 'run' for life as an infiltrator. Assuming an annual payment of $30,000 and a nominal interest rate of 5%, calculate the lump sum required to 'run' Mr Deadstein. Approximations may be used. Draft four experimental propaganda campaigns, based on different criteria, designed to ensure the goyim pay that lump sum.

[8] Talmudic and related studies. (1) Compare oral teachings with written teachings, and account for the differences. (2) Discuss the Talmudic treatments of blood, child sex, prostitution, and killing goyim.

[9] Estimate the cost of propaganda services in a typical country X, as a percentage of Gross National Product. Include the state broadcasting system, civil servants, costs of controlling teachers and teaching unions, press and magazine costs including journalist unions, the proportion of school and university budgets spent on Propaganda, funding for pressure groups and fake think tanks, and legal aid to corrupt lawyers. Assume the productivity of these 'workers' is zero.

[10] A race-based Country I has a policy that different race women are legally usable as prostitutes even under coercion. Comment on this policy, including profitability, desirability criteria, and public relations issues.

[11] An African country J has valuable raw materials. Draft a scheme to ensure the system of holding companies maximises outflow of money, raw materials, and possibly finished goods if the natives can be forced to work. The company system must also conceal ownership. Discuss the use of offshore companies, commenting on their suitability, and likely relative processing costs within J and out of J.

[12] News management in history. Concealment of mass deaths in the USSR was a principal aim of 20th century Jewish policy in the West. Outline the methods adopted (1) Up to 1939, (2) Up to 1991, (3) After 1991. Divide the methods into propaganda, physical force, and finance, and consider their application in at least three western countries.

[13] The British 'Speaker of the House of Commons' has the ability to delay or prevent speeches, to delay or prevent legislation being permitted, and several other powers. List these powers, and give one historical examples of the use of each technique.

[14] In a 'Funding Initiative' scheme, 15,000 schools in Country B are to be demolished, then rebuilt 800 metres away. The announced price per new school is 10 million currency units. The secretly agreed true final price is 20 million currency units. Assuming the demolition cost (including scrap recovery) to be .5 million, and the cost of building 8 million currency units, calculate the profitability of the entire scheme.

[15] Discuss 'divide and rule' as applied in the following cases: (1) Payments to Napoleon after 1789; (2) Working classes vs the rest in Germany before 1914; (3) Czechoslovakia and central Europe in the 1930s; (4) Ukrainians vs Russians in the 1930s; (5) whites vs blacks in the USA before J F Kennedy was liquidated to make way for L B Johnson.

[16] Wording technicians help devise advertising campaigns, political movements, academic subject restrictions, wars, and false flag disinformation. Give several examples of each, with specific illustrations of slogans, phrases and manufactured ad hoc proper names. The examples should include carefully-worded near-opposites for appropriate use. (Examples: 'Decadent'/'gay'. 'Only whites are racist'/'Race is a construct'. 'Unions want war jobs'/'Don't attack Israel')

[17] American troops are usually called up from the poorest or least intelligent whites and blacks. Try to separate atrocities by 'American' troops from Jewish warmakers and their white subordinates, such as Clinton and MacNamara. Most US military force has been used outside the USA; consider the US Civil War to estimate the manipulability of Americans when fighting among themselves. Give policy recommendations.

[18] Survey so far as is known the geography of exit locations, first amongst ancient empires, then mediaeval Europe, and finally modern. Consider small populations of war criminals, then larger populations: tax shelters (e.g. Monaco), islands (e.g. in the Caribbean), hill regions of India, large relatively low population areas (e.g. Madagascar/Malagasy, Birobidjan), and suggest one other.

[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Science
The corrupting effect of Jews on science, the vast waste and damage, is not well-known, yet. However, this will, I hope, change.

First, let's see why the Jewish mentality is very consonant with scientific fraud.
• First, money power is not adapted to the scientific outlook: very few aristocrats have achieved anything in science, mainly because they are otherwise engaged, maintaining their assets and with power struggles. They naturally tend to assume experts can be bought, and not usually for very much. The same psychology has obtained when Jews have gained power, notably in the USSR. Their technology and skills have all been copied and imported. They weren't able even to invent such things as battery chicken farms. A 1955 book by Harry Hodgkinson, The Language of Communism, has a list of inventions claimed by Jewish propagandists in Russia; it reads rather like the lists of mythical black inventions.
• Second, science needs attention to detail, patient observation, prolonged concentration, repetitive experimentation, intellectual honesty, and other characteristics. The Jewish tradition is legalistic hairsplitting, and dishonest manipulation; something like the exact opposite of scientific methodology. And learning what a rabbi-like figure believes, to 'get on'.
• Third, as things are at present, large-scale official science is ruled by committees, by Jewish finance, and by examinations with fixed official answers, and by other output, such as publications. All this is under patent restrictions, and subject to promotion by the Jewish media. The result is it's far easier to fake results than get them. There are now so many publications it is possible to make up the names of spurious papers or books with a high chance of being undetected.
• Fourth, any group with an inherited natural aggression will have an attitude to science that differs from less pathological types. One motive for science is disinterested curiosity; another is a feeling that it may increase power; another is to damage out-group people. Thus fluoridating drinking water seems to match Jewish attitudes: the fact the material is damaging (poisonous, and calcium phosphate in teeth is not the same structure as calcium fluoride) appeals to them, since it harms people; forcing it by control of information amuses them; and presumably Jews avoid fluoridated drinking water.

Humphrey Pledge's book Science Since 1500 is now about sixty years old and therefore free from post-1945 errors. Read my review to see why I recommend this as a catch-up and overview for anyone intelligent who has received the usual low-grade mal-education.

Let me give a few varied examples, out of many more; I'll state these without justification—the reader will need to put in some work for that:

• Physics Without going into painful detail, it's clear that the philosophical aspects of relativity are distractions from the main work of physics, in weaponry. Here's some material on the mythology of Einstein (this is on his letter to F D Roosevelt); Einstein as plagiarist; and relativity as nonsense which is kept bubbling for political reasons.
• Nuclear physics Here's an entire forum, originally inspired by the discovery that film of Hiroshima and of nuclear tests is faked. The Jewish connections, including links with the Soviet Union, occur throughout.
• Biology and Medicine This is my attempt to explain errors in cell biology, and why as a result medicine makes progress only in technological stuff like drug doses and accurate measurements. Bernard Katz started with errors about synapses. Steven Rose is an example of a Jewish academic, with bogus experiments on memory combined with Jewish-race material on denial of race. About a decade ago Susan Greenfield in Britain became an instant media 'expert' in the Jewish-controlled press; typical of the type who would not debate the subject, she went on, if I have the story right, to ruin the Royal Institution, cancelling its previously-regular publication, and doing expensive makeovers of their building by disposing of other buildings. Now I remember it, John Krebs chaired an inquiry into BSE (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy) the point of which was NOT to investigate organophosphate insecticides poured onto cows' backs.
• Darwinism and Genetics and related ideas have been suspended for many years, where there has been Jewish interference. As a result, there are widespread misunderstandings. ("I don't see cats turning into dogs" - "You won't make a monkey out of me" - "Radiation strengthens creatures"). There are mistakes in biological science which correctly give some arguments of the non-evolutionists validity, because some structures couldn't have evolved. The most dangerous misunderstandings (I think) are those where machinery is taken as biological. My copy of Essays in Human Evolution (by Sir Arthur Keith) has fifty essays from 1942-1944, on the Second World War; Keith was a palaeontologist. His motive was to promote WW2; he had no idea what Hitler wanted, that conscription was used after 1914, who was behind the 'Russian Revolution', or the size of the forces against Hitler. He thought progress needed isolation and conflict, though none of his evidence was modern; it leaned on suppositions of events many thousand of years ago. He had no explanation for aggression being externalised; why shouldn't it operate inside groups, resulting in dictatorial boss types?
The essential thing to remember is that in year X, there will be a worldwide gene pool: maybe the whole human population's gene structures could be stored digitally in principle. In year Y, there will be another world-wide gene pool. The populations in years X and Y will be divided into sets. The question is how do they differ, and can one be said to be better than the other? Of course the Jewish tribalist racist attitude focusses attention on differentials: Jewish ethics want Jews to dominate, whilst also exploiting, a difficult, perhaps impossible, combination. 'Survival of the fittest' even where it applies is not quantified: the Second World War killed of vast numbers of whites, for example. So the genetic issue is not a matter of simple slogans, but of assessing distributions of genes.
• Space Science By this time, it surely can't be news that NASA faked the entire series of 'moon landings' and the lessons will take many years to be absorbed. The extent to which the frauds were Jewish will no doubt slowly and painfully be teased out. Meanwhile we—this is Britain; other countries have their equivalents—have had the spectacle of the late Patrick Moore and Couper & Henbests' Planets as examples of money bringing forth the sleep of reason. Brian Cox, a rather ridiculous media type, is trying to carry on the tradition.
• Psychology has obviously been heavily influenced by Jews, notably Freud, who by now of course is largely discounted. But other Jewish-related influences include: brainwashing as an evasionist device to avoid the issue of US war crimes in Korea; Jewish phony psychology based around the holocaust fraud; Wilhelm Reich as a founder of a Jewish fraud; research of a sort into the best way to force immigration on whites; Kamin's infantile stuff on intelligence.

Students of science and its history ought to be aware of the main factors allowing fraud: one is the expense of equipment; the other is strict secrecy. Both of course favour Jews, at present. For example, if electron microscopes had been as cheap as optical microscopes, it's unlikely that their fake discoveries could have been concealed for more than fifty years. Similarly with space rockets. And nuclear issues. There is, often luckily, a counter-process in which types of equipment get cheaper; image processing software and its hardware are a good example, and their availability has had a huge effect on the propaganda industries, such as the Jewish 9/11 promoters.
The separation of science from social issues is illustrated by the Royal Society's original charter, dating after Cromwell introduced Jews back into Britain, which states that the new Society should not 'meddle' by investigating social arrangements.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Modern Scientific Method
Scientific Method involves (in no special order) collection of data, possibly with instruments, possibly around the world, possibly from the past; experimentation, attempting to control for variables; experimentation just to see what happens, and to test predictions; surveying hypotheses that already exist; making up plausible hypotheses to be tested; experimental design; use of symbols, diagrams, charts, logic and mathematical models etc to predict consequences; trying to apply common sense to complicated, difficult, or concealed situations; suspending judgment until evidence is available; inventing new distinctions, and new machinery, if these seem necessary; keeping notebooks; discussions with other people; predicting possible outcomes; rising above everyday beliefs about time, scale, psychology.
The New Scientific Method has supplementary clauses, of these types:
• Can this research benefit Jews? (Are there patents Jews can buy, or are the ideas uselessly non-patentable? Are the researchers under contract to Jews? Is the equipment, weaponry, or what have you made by Jewish companies?)
• Can this social science research benefit Jews? (Can it be slanted to damage non-Jews? Is it anti-white? Will it lead to jobs for Jews?)
• Can a new profitable fraud be invented to benefit Jews? (AIDS is an important example; no doubt NASA, particle accelerators, electron microscopes applied to biology, global warming ideas, are other examples).
• Looking at Universities, commissions, 'think-tanks', research organisations, prize awarders etc. (Can they hide failed test results? Can they be presented as news, and advertised in Jewish controlled media? Can they suppress criticisms without answering them?).
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Medicine, Nutrition
As noted just above, the basic science of biology contains numerous flaws. These flaws include misunderstandings of the brain. It's not surprising that drug companies, even after endless experiments with synthetic molecules, cannot find drugs that work. There's a whole vocabulary, including relabelling effects 'side effects', to try to muffle this fact.
Many readers will point out that medical science must surely have made progress. This is partly true, but most of the work doesn't deal with fundamental biology. It's usually a matter of technical improvements - better ambulances, more precise measurements, higher chemical purity of anaesthetics (though how they work is not known), better equipment sterility. Meanwhile, hosts of problems lie in wait, some caused by deliberate harm, for example fluoridation: it's perfectly well-known that calcium fluoride is incompatible with the crystallography of tooth formation.
The best pioneer known to me in this school of thought is Dr Harold Hillman (Click for my explanation of his life and work on this site). Gilbert Ling is another, a Chinese who worked in the USA, but who was in my opinion politically naive.
Biochemical is a newish science; I include a few notes on nutrition. Here's a link to a talk by David Horrobin on clashes in the food science 'community' since it started in earnest after 1945, on essential fatty acids, eczema, smoking and lung cancer and Japan, personality clashes with Hugh Sinclair as the loser, and the work of Ancel Keys, who started the idea that saturated fats led to heart disease.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Group Health vs Intentional Harm
Individual health is one thing, and group health, race health, national health, preventative medicine, another. A survey which is now forty years old, Alan Norton's Drugs, Science, and Society concluded what many others concluded, that the drop in infections was not due to immunisation etc, but more and better food, cleaner water, less overcrowding, better warming when cold. Many people were aware of the failures of vaccination and immunisation: the real discoverer of the theory of evolution, Alfred Russel Wallace, for example; the intelligent man of the world Frank Harris; and Bismarck. However, Norton omitted war; presumably the survival figures he quotes would have been higher without the First, and the Second, World Wars. And he wrote before the proliferation of fraud in biology. What has turned out worse is the fact that not everyone wants healthy populations, just as not everybody wants educated populations. If more money can be made from fraudulent, expensive, or repetitive 'treatments', then there will be pressures for such 'treatments'. Entire fake illnesses (e.g. 'AIDS') have made fortunes. And again Jewish finance must be suspected: US healthcare revolves around money, and US policy under ZOG is obviously not aimed at increasing the health of overseas populations. British private hospitals have an impressively bad record. The whole subject is surrounded by obscurity, and this obscurity is always found where Jewish liars are at work. I hope someone comes up with an objective way of looking at this tangle.
An unquestionable example of Jewish pressure, mostly against whites, is their move against eugenics for whites, more or less in parallel with the move for immigration of people historically uncreative and dangerous. Here's a link to Eugenics (click the back-arrow to return here) which I hope might be valuable to people terrified away from the subject by Jewish media shrieks.
Intentional harm is quite a noticeable aspect of 'Jewish' activities. I'm not considering here the large-scale harm of wars, genocides, mass destruction and so on, but everyday activities intentionally designed to cause harm. Fluoride in water is a good example. So is the promotion of anal sex: it's well known and obvious that this is harmful, but the 'Jewish' media typically simply ignore all that. Another example (thanks to Frank McManus in Australia) is the campaign against salt in food, which is essential to human life: download or watch my video talk with Frank for helpful detail. Another example is of course the worldwide fraud of 'COVID-19'. Many diseases by now have been reliably identified and countered, so there is increasing pressure on frauds to find new scams. Aids is a perfect example. Vaccine damage is unlikely to escape investigation despite increasing Jewish lying. Another misfortune I noticed is hypercalcaemia, hypervitaminosis-D, in which excess vitamin D causes bone damage and 'elfin-face syndrome'. This seems to have been renamed, and also confused with other problems: it's the sort of thing Jews do. Diseases and infestations which may be brought by immigrants are deliberately ignored: for example TB has been known for years to be imported by immigrants. Incompetent surgeons may operate for years with no practicable action available to victims. Another example is obesity: this is obviously likely to lead to long-term damage to individuals, yet there is a movement to promote obesity, as can be seen in TV shows aimed at uneducated people. No doubt promotion of dangerous drugs is in this category. In all these cases, 'Jews' provide scripts with advertising-style slogans.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Agriculture
Students and researchers might
• Try to take a long view of agriculture, rent, security of tenure, and so on. Agriculture, and crops, are vulnerable to theft, destruction, and ransom, and it's not surprising that it is, and was, the subject of power struggles.
For the last few centuries, one trend has been the installation of money systems in non-western societies, generally demanding tax and forcing people off land. This may have been pioneered in Britain, where the peasantry were arguably dispossessed after Cromwell. (A 'peasant' being a farmer of his own land, with some sort of market system).
Another trend, possibly part of the same trend, has been controlling money to buy land, as in the 1930 US depression.
• Government or para-Governmental Action is a subject where Jewish money can be expected to have an influence. Wartime measures are one example; so are activities such as the unelected EU kommissars, who can and do impose measures to restrict the genetic ranges of animals, fruits, plants, and trees. The BSE scare in Britain, clearly caused by dangerous insecticides applied direct to cattle in area with warble-fly, gave the 'Labour' government an opportunity to destroy a large part of the 'national herd' of cattle. The final result may have been reliance on other countries; there is no summary I know of. There seems to be a bureaucratic compulsion to ruin things where possible, for example in Foot and Mouth cases. Rudy Stanko's 1986 book on Texas beef is worth studying. The special features of farming—long delays, uncertainties of weather, uncertainties of total output, need for land, need for seed, possible need for intermittent finance, vulnerabilities to poaching etc, preservation techniques, international competition and supplementation—need to be studied as an aspect of Jewish interests.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

History

Projects

Are educational courses in which one person targets another, who is seen as a suitable case for introduction to the Jewish Question. A 'project' may take a week; or a month; or many months. Since decades of lies are to be reversed, time and patience are necessary. The promise of better understanding of the world is the prize.

Projects may be felt to be futile, because, at present, Jews have an overwhelming control of money and media. And yet, who knows: on reading biographies of revisionist researchers, it's at least possible that well-timed sceptical whisperings may have improved their Jew-naive views. David Duke was critically influenced by one woman; Bradley Smith by a solitary protestor; Lady Renouf by Irving; Dennis Wise by his father. Truth about Jews has been censored for four hundred years and more; present-day progress is, in comparison, lightning-fast. A ‘Jewish History month’ may plant seeds, to grow later—if such a thing could be imagined.

This is a sprawling set of subjects. The object of students of Jewish influence should be to identify Jewish components and do their best to estimate, if they can, the power and influence of Jews in different times and places. I expect there will be progress in deep revisionism of the Khazars, an essential component in understanding the Middle Ages, and I'd predict local schools of thought in the territories around the Black Sea and Caspian Sea. I hope to see accurate assessments of such matters as fake pleas of pogroms and military service impositions: Andrew Joyce is good on this.
Try to get a feel for evidence, and its reliability. Read, or at least browse, books which were once accepted as standard. C K Adams Manual of Historical Literature is more than 100 years old; it is a once-popular collection of reviews of histories, mostly of white countries, with surveys of countries and their events. Read revisionist books and examine their evidence: Did Six Million Really Die is fairly short, and downloadable. David Irving's website has downloadable histories based squarely on documentary evidence. Look at Did Jesus Exist?
Don't fall for shallow generalisations: 'All religions are the same' - 'All wars are caused by religion' - 'Great powers are always in conflict' - 'People are all the same' - 'Jews are just like everyone else' - 'There's always been prostitution' - "You can't blame them" - 'ideas are dangerous' - 'the biggest propaganda influence is advertising' - 'if you don't learn from history you repeat it' - 'All history is the history of class war'. Check them with a minimum of three examples or counter-examples; three to give some spread of sample spaces.
Try to get a feel for missing evidence, either where it's been deliberately hidden, or made up, or been lost, or (notably with archives) destroyed. This feel is important when studying Jews, in view of their possibly genetic compulsive secrecy, lying, and hatred for other cultures. A typical bias is missing out finance and money. Here's a revisionist look at Napoleon taking account of money and theft, and the costs of armies, and Napoleonic propaganda. The Boer War is an important 'recent' example: gold mines and money are not part of most histories. The First and Second World Wars are very impressive in this respect: vague generalities substitute for hard facts on war profits and lending profits, despite their importance. Another typical bias is missing out violence; for example many Americans have no idea what happened in Vietnam. Or in Africa: '[1964, Stanleyville] ... the order to fire. There was a great crackle of shots from machine guns and our deadly new Belgian rifles. Women screamed and fell. Little children ... cartwheeled hideously ... Some threw phosphorus hand grenades, which turned human beings into blazing, inextinguishable torches of fire. ...' Another bias is omission of technical data: for example, the 'industrial revolution' started in areas where there was coal, not places without coal. Mark Twain wrote somewhere I think that railways in Egypt were fuelled by burning human mummies.
Because Jews have been hidden from history, try to conceptualise events as being explained partly in traditional ways, and part Jewish. For example, the 'British Empire' needs to be examined as part-British, and part-Jewish. The latter can often be assumed to be vicious, sordid, secretive, and money-grabbing. The former as unintellectual, emotional, mercenary, but also with reasonable elements.Another example is the Second World War: whites tend to gullibly assume those wars were isolated, standalone events, things in themselves, with a definite start and end, finished with a "job done" attitude, after which normal life is resumed. David Irving's histories of the Second World War show this outlook. But the Jewish attitude was that WW2 was just part of a continuum: throughout the war, Jews were planning for international money control, central bank expansions, policies on blacks, the Holocaust fraud, nuclear frauds, invading Palestine, getting control of deadlier weapons: they regarded so-called veterans as they might look at used bullet cases or redundant bombers.
Search for and read 'alternative' histories. With Internet, this is easier than it has ever been. Hilaire Belloc's The Jews (1922), Denis Fahey's Rulers of Russia (1938), Archibald Ramsay's The Nameless War (1952), William Guy Carr's Pawns in the Game (1958), F J P Veale's Advance to Barbarism (1968), illustrate the sort of thing. Some of these books (such as Ramsay's) point to Jewish intervention; others (such as Veale's) don't. There are (but with obvious censorship problems) similar books from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and Spain. Russian and Ukrainian books as yet are under-represented, though Solzhenitsyn is good and to be recommended. Not all his work has been translated. USA and Canadian books can be hoped to become more common; David Duke's My Awakening (2002) was (I think) pathbreaking. German books before the First World War are important because of their clear recognition of Jewish problems; if (by historical chance) German had been the USA's leading language, they would have been highly influential. Wilhelm Marr is an example. France had similar writers, tending to be Roman Catholic rather than concerned with industry. Revisionism of Japan, and in Japan, began some time ago. The 'Rape of Nanking' for example appears to be fabricated Jewish propaganda (in for example Victor Gollancz's book Shall Our Children Live or Die? published in Britain about the time Pearl Harbor was arranged).
Churchill example Here's an online discussion about Winston Churchill. Remember this online article and discussion (July 2015) dates more than seventy years after most of Churchill's activities. Churchill did his best to get Jewish hordes into the East End of London. He knew about Jews when the Jewish coup in Russia was finally publicised. He must have known of Jews trading with the enemy during the First World War. He became known as aggressive, a 'half-breed adventurer', and his activities were ludicrously exaggerated. A clutch of his technical advisors were Jews (usually with English-sounding names, pseudonyms, honorary titles etc). He must have known of Jewish press and publications, and Jews in the BBC. He must have known that the wartime publicist Sefton Delmer and many like him were Jews. And he must obviously have known about the Focus Group and their sources of money. He probably knew about the Fed with his American contacts; and the Bank of England. He knew the 'British' Empire had a British component, but was financially Jewish. He knew Rothschild collected information on British war-time inventions. He knew of wartime controls and businesses taken over and given to Jews.
British Empire as an example of non-understanding. After 1945 it was elided from popular perceptions in Britain, mostly of course through media control: the BBC for example presented an entirely Jewish view (and started the fraud later labelled 'The Holocaust'). Britain had an earlier empire, before the American colonies rebelled—or thought they rebelled. In any case, the history of ships and shipping—oak tree depletion, linen sails, lemon juice (then called lime juice), sextants and chronometers, secret charts, steamships, ports, sailors and their pay rates, coaling stations—is all more or less ignored and lost. This seems to be because British public schoolboys, brought up on Julius Caesar and monarchy and links to regiments, would be offered jobs in Bengal or Tanganyika or Nigeria or Ceylon, and would go, maybe with a wife, neither having any idea of what they would be doing there. And collect medals, pay, pensions. Whereas Jews would have their eyes on assets or ore or exploitable opportunities, operating with zero visibility. The job pursuit happened similarly with airmen, later. This of course is more or less the same pattern as simple US troops, especially after 1945.
Be Aware of Presuppositions About History. Chronologies are or may be the earliest or simplest type of history; a list of events implies no feeling for causation, beyond selection of what is believed to be important. The events chosen in effect make history in the l'histoire sense, a story. The 19th century educated attitude to the past was that we had Greece, then Rome; then a gap, and the Middle Ages; and then modern times. This framework made for fairly simple history: the history of war, or of the growth of towns, or of women, implied a romp through events according to this framework. With the advent of Darwinism, and technical progress, a different view of history was 'evolutionary'; not in any biological sense, but in the sense that changes came along, and were 'progressive'. A rival view came from the Reformation: when the Bible was first translated, it was the nearest thing to a universal history, with such authority that to this day, notably in America, such things as creation in seven days about 4004 BC, Noah's Ark, 'cities of the plain', assorted genealogies, the Resurrection, clutter up the minds of people who might be doing something more useful. Muslims, Hindus, Chinese, and Japanese may have traditional beliefs mixed uncomfortably with newer ones. Catholic history is inevitably concerned with conversions, the great days of the Papacy, monasteries, Crusades, and so on. Black history is unfortunately something of a joke, though truths are starting to surface or resurface, for example about black slavery and black Africa. Jew-unaware people might spend time examining (for example) the Talmud, at least in part; I suspect it's too long for most readers. It's strange to find a written compilation so tribal; most tribes were unable to combine the civilisation needed to develop all the organisation of writing, writing materials, the storage of written materials, and some sort of class to deal with them. Anyway, the view of history is purely Jewish-centric, something like a history of (literally) thugs, an attitude carried over by Jews in the USA where lies about the USSR, Churchill, JFK, LBJ, 9/11 and the rest are routine to them.
Projection of Modern Attitudes Back in Time (and other anachronisms and projections) are common enough when people think about the past. Times change, and whatever has been learned, often with some difficulty, in the present may well be projected back in time or across the world. For example, the Jewish attitude to war seems analogous to most people's attitude to a building project. In building, various materials are put together by hired labour, according to an architectural plan, after which the labour has little or no further interest. The Jewish attitude to war (in say) Cromwell's time, Napoleon's, Russia after the Jewish coup ('revolution'), Vietnam, Iraq and so on is similar: some Jewish plan is secretly adopted; Jewish money or pseudo-money pays for equipment, and labour; the land or treasure is occupied, stolen, rented out or whatever; and the labour, the soldiers etc, sacked, ignored, left to die, or used more. (Another type of war is different - money is made by making and selling the disposable hardware, bases etc). When there are occasional news reports of homeless soldiers, this seems natural to Jews: they've done their work; what do they expect? Politicians, if they can be forced to comment, are amazed, blank-eyed, at such odd attitudes. Whereas there may be a view amongst the goyim that soldiers are fighting for their country, or honour, and ought to be respected. Another example is legal systems, the Jewish attitude being that laws are to be manipulated in what Jews think are their interests, while the European outlook is that laws are for equity, justice, fairness, or something similar. Another example is families and upbringing. In times before social security there were, no doubt, periodic famines, something easy for people in industrialised countries to forget. And survival, in a time before policed states, must have been unpredictable: a headline "[?Pakistani] Mother admits to punching her son to death" is a reminder that survival is not guaranteed. It's perfectly possible one of the effects of Talmudic material on Khazars was the killing of young people and their families who ridiculed or rejected that material, by Talmudic head honchos and self-appointed props: this would affect the genetic structure of the population.
Watch for displacement of blame - there is endless scope for discussing irrelevant or not-very-relevant material: just watch TV 'news' for proof. Here's a discussion on whether Catholics or ZOG? rule much of the world. As I write this (Dec 2013) there seems to be a new Jewish lie that 'nigger power' runs things. These days blaming the Germans is rather unfashionable. A later example (2015) is that 'Libya' will insist on coloured immigration into Europe: this is after the murder of Gaddafi by Jewish puppets, so the true interpretation is that Jews want immigration into Europe—not of course into Palestine! An interesting example at the personal level is this sort of thing: +Colonel Veers I understand you got to blame somebody for your failures in life. +Robert Rae So-called Jews killed in the so-called Holocaust blame others for their failure, don't they?
Note the apparent difficulty of predicting the future. Norris's novel The Octopus presents the US railway system when new as having a life of its own. Tolstoy's novel War and Peace has many asides where Tolstoy remarks that men do horrible things, but there's no good reason. George Orwell's 1984 describes a static situation, but without much account of where it was going. Planning, assassinations, control of loans, money, targeting groups and fomenting divisions, paying thugs, aiming at wars, which have been common activities of Jews, are omitted. This helps give the feeling that people are helpless victims of fate.
Knowing About Societies and How Quickly They Can Change Over Time. This is overview material, not detailed: it's probably impossible to deeply understand a large number of societies. The Roman Catholic, Hilaire Belloc, said the pagan Roman Empire, Europe under Pope Innocent, Europe under the Antonines, and Jews under Islam in Spain were all very different, at least as much so as the world under science, now. ... The French in Vietnam introduced a cash economy, beggaring rice farmers. Britain's shipping in 1900 was so large that 'a threat to British seapower was unthinkable'. The whole direction of world trade shifted after the Americas were discovered. Peasants ceased to exist in economies controlled by Jews. The USAF killed more children than any other organisation. ... Understanding Jews means trying to separate out the components of Jewish influence, and related types; it's valuable to have a feel for the past, since it was once a working system—if it's described accurately.
Try to get a feel for subtle changes in the meanings of words. 'War' has been applied to small skirmishes which were almost unnoticed, up to international butchery with millions of people involved. 'Slavery' can mean brutal exploitation and death, through to situations hardly different legally from non-slavery. (On black African slavery, Tony Martin and others have carried out documentary research on the involvement of Jews). 'Peasants' may mean wretches starving, up to self-sufficient tough villagers. 'Rule' can mean a few barely-noticeable bureaucrats, through to complete impoverishment. This is obvious enough, but it's easy to slip up: there's a difference between a 'Jewish-run state in Israel', and a 'Jewish homeland in Palestine under British rule'. A 'minority' is a majority somewhere else. Jews have invented, changed meanings, and repeated slogans ad nauseam - 'racism', 'communism', 'dictatorship of the proletariat', 'kulaks', 'people's democracy', 'competition', 'liberal', 'brainwashing', 'market', 'adult' - and there are plenty of analogies from the past.

20th century history books have been dominated by Jewish influence, directly and indirectly. The 'Federal Reserve', First World War, the so-called 'Russian Revolution' (in fact a coup or putsch by Jews), the 'Great Depression', the Second World War and the huge numbers of white deaths, the story of nuclear weapons and Jewish spies and the Cold War, Cuba, Kennedy's murder, the Vietnam War and later activities, including Reagan/ Thatcher moving public assets into Jewish hands: all these events need massive revisionist work. Students should read accounts of the 20th century which have no mention of Jews, and compare the explanatory power of the Jewish hypothesis: everything, or at least many things, fall into place. Here for example is a careful look at A J P Taylor, a 'British' historian, well-known in his time, by being featured by the BBC. Élie Haléevy is another good example: a French Jew born in 1870, he wrote what was supposed to be a detailed history of 19th century England, including the organised Labour movements. To conceal Jewish money and Jewish penetration by Freemasons, and by removal of 'disabilities', and by immigration taking advantage of manhood suffrage, Haléevy presents as important many more-or-less insignificant Christian cults, and his partial analysis includes such things as 'imperialism' and 'democracy', where finance and Jewish influences are implicitly ignored. Books specifically about Jews tend to live a half-life; here's my review of The Kent-Wolkoff Affair (ever heard of it?) as an example. Here's a short overview of Jews in British academic life (not his phrase), by Perry Anderson.
The Second World War and the subsequent rigging of 'the Holocaust', and the many frauds operated by Jews, and their genocidal policies, are an integral part of this website. The serious questions, now, are to do with the next move: what should be done? But for people to whom this is new material, here are a few links out of very many: Holocaust Revisionism (with notes on sources etc); the Cold War and the Jewish connection on the Jewish leaders in the USSR and USA and Britain arranging the pretence that the USSR was powerfully armed; 'Nuclear Weapons' and Jews and other sites show how the nuclear fraud was used as a scare by Jews, including such details as the Lucky Dragon Japanese fishing boat, Kennedy's murder and of course much more.
A few questions: Was Castro a Marrano Jew? This could explain why he was not killed, but Guevara was; why Cuba was never bombed, though other places, harder to reach, were; if the Cuba 'crisis' was rigged; and how JFK might have been removed. If so, such events as Cuban soldiers in Angola get a different slant. And China: was Mao funded by Jews and the CIA? Note the similarities with Russia, the printed matter propaganda, the rumoured large-scale killings with information suppressed by the Jewish media. Cambodia: could this have been Jewish, with 'Pol Pot' the political puppet; as the Armenian genocide was? South Africa: the Rivonia trial revealed large amounts of hidden weaponry; who paid for it? Who supplied it? After Mandela's official death, the South African Communist Party revealed he'd been a member, and lied about it; to make his Jewish connections less obvious? Ireland: it's now clear Jews are ruining Ireland; can Sinn Fein all along have been a phoney? [Joseph Banister's Our Judaeo-Irish Labour Party was published in 1931 by The Britons' Publishing Society]

Chinese almost invariably have straight black hair. Possibly therefore a 'Chinese Jew' showing crypsis. The location is unclear, but may well be private.

[On China: China as yet seems naive about nukes, the holohoax, even 9/11 and the 'Federal Reserve': but there seems to be study of Jews as money-makers, without shrewd awareness of what 'money' means. There's study of Jews such as Kissinger. Here's a longish online comment by Dick Eastman, of Texas A&M University, which gives some indication of where China and revisionism may be going; note the consideration of new hypotheses, but also the lack of quantification of paper money influence and the lack of information on science:

Jews in America are responsible for the defeat of the Republic of China on the mainland. Roosevelt liked Jiang Zhongzheng but Bernard Baruch and the Rothschilds liked Zhou En-lai whose ancestors were go-betweens between the East India Company opium dealers, owned by Jewish bankers of the City of London, and the Manchu Dynasty. The communist revolution in Russia was also something the Jews wanted. And most interesting and little known -- the Jews were even behind the Japanese attack on China in 1936. They bribed and made it very worthwhile for officials and military advisers to advocate war. The wiser and loyal military did not like this idea. One February 2, 1936 these military killed many leaders who were for invading China. Their effort failed and the Jews won. Had the insubordination, "gekokujo," succeeded Japan would have made peace with the Guomindang while strengthening Manchukuo with the intention of attacking the Soviet Union (Stalin) in the year 1952, after three five-year plans to industrialize Manchuria and develop its natural resources. The Jews were backing Stalin and wanted communist revolution in China. They did not want a liberal independent China with open trade becoming a power on its own and trading freely with everyone in the West. The Jews (British Empire) liked China to be closed, so that merchant bankers could enjoy monopoly profits handing East West trade. The communist revolution allowed China to be again closed to the West by the Bamboo curtain. What I am saying, dear friends, is that the Chinese should not be so sure that they are not in the pockets of the Jews. Consider how fragile China is; how vulnerable to a fall in international demand that will make her investments go bad and produce a debt crisis and deflation. The Jews control through the Bank of England system of debt-based money and private control of the expansion and contraction of credit. Remember this warning.]

Example: Revisionist History and Poland. (By Indrek Pringi; added as comments to a Youtube video on Himmler. That site is subject to alterations. His principal claim is that Jews were moved from Germany, not by violence, but by laws for the purpose, much as Jews, now, use laws against whites. However, other countries later under Hitler threw them out—and many ended up in Poland).
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

International History ... and the 'Third World'
Because 'Jews' have invented a tradition of parasitising many countries, it makes perfect sense to study their history internationally, and study other international groups for comparison and for lessons.
A recent example is the idea of homosexual 'marriage', a typically absurd Jewish idea, presumably intended as part of their anti-family policy. Many observers have noticed that many countries in turn within a few years (Netherlands, Belgium, a U.S. state, Spain, Canada, South Africa ... according to Wiki) legalised this, though popular detail of the legislations remains sketchy. The issue is so minor it is impossible it could have been implemented without international, presumably Jewish, support.
A better example is books on Jews in France, by Anne Kling (currently at this link: Anne Kling on Jews and France) who examines LICRA and CRIF, and pushes the analysis back to the Second World War. She seems not to have written going back in time—about the fake 'Shoah', fake nuclear weapons, Algeria, the First World War, France in the middle east, Vietnam and the France's Empires, Africa and France's empires, and the Banque de France and Napoleonic Wars, just a few subjects with shadowy Jewish influence.
The invention and spread of Internet make such comparisons and studies far easier than before. I hope many discoveries and clarifications will be made. But no doubt there will be puzzles: look at videos from Japan (I don't vouch for the accuracy of the translations) on race war and white genocide.

The general view of world politics and power structures will I hope be revised to take into account Jews and their criminality. A good example is reconsideration of Russia from about 1900: rather than the simple classically-mal-educated civil servants and so on reading their Jewish press reports and wanting Russia harmed, they may have done better to strengthen Russia, which would have strengthened the west, since Russia could have been more resistant to Jewish incursions. Now (2015) Europe would be strengthened if borders were stronger in eastern Europe.

Jews and their Policies in the 'Third World'
It's a matter of great controversy whether the 'Third World' is responsible for its condition, whether improvement is possible given the people there, whether the 'First World' can sustain itself, and how much damage Jews have done and can do. There is no question that the world has huge evils. But, here, let's just consider the question of specifically Jewish policies, and how Jews hope to use evil for themselves.
This is me, musing over an old book, during a weekend trip—a book on India and Poverty. (Click return arrow to come back here). Such books show Jews write: repeated claims, over and over, without good evidence, make up most of the book. Such evidence as there is comes from Jewish media: Jewish news sources, Jewish books, Jewish 'experts', Jewish reports generally under the name of non-Jews. Once you see the pattern, it becomes relatively easy to work out what's behind it.
An easier example to understand is pushing for wars that Jews collectively want. The aim is simple, and usually it's obvious what they're doing: many people now understand that Jews wanted war with Germany, and with Vietnam, and with Iraq, and with Syria. Here's a very detailed set of examples of books published in Britain, from 1908-1948, with the clear object of getting Britain and the USA into war with Germany. I've tried to give some idea of the huge amount of effort Jews put both into propaganda lies, and suppressing truth. In the USA, exactly the same comments apply to the National Geographic and Reader's Digest and endless other material.
So what can we find out about the Third World from Jewish propaganda? I'll refer here to another old book, which I picked out more or less at random: a Pelican paperback, Rich Against Poor: The Reality of Aid by C. R. Hensman, first published in 1971. The biographical blurb says Hensman was born 1923, 'a freelance writer, broadcaster and lecturer', first published in 1971. Hensman 'edited the quarterly Community from 1954-1958; became 'Research Secretary for the Overseas Council' in London, 'worked as a producer for the B.B.C.', and 'wrote or edited' four previous books. I haven't bothered to check any of these things; note that Avotaynu 'Jewish surname index' lists Hainzman, Heincman, Henysman, Henzman, Hinschmann and many variants as 'soundex' matches for Hensman. Community I'd guess was a Jewish 'journal' aimed to disguise the truth about black immigrants to London. (On the subject of the Empire Windrush and its Jewish ownership, see Andrew Joyce in The Occidental Observer). Probably the 'Overseas Council' was something similar, maybe giving British social security money to immigrants. And so on—with Internet, these things, and Hensman's qualification or otherwise, are far more easily checked than at the time the book was published. Watch for this sort of thing: The Citizens' Board of Inquiry into Hunger and Malnutrition in the US. Their report, Hunger USA, described conditions of appalling poverty ... this group [was] sponsored by the Citizens' Crusade Against Poverty ... Ask yourself: who are these people? Look at the names, not the fronts: why these: Geiger, Frank, Horowitz, Myers, Dankwart, Hayter, Lach, Flaumenhaft, Basil Davidson? Who is this 'humanist', that 'popular speaker', the 'panel of scientists'?

I'm confident enough of this material to note it down without checking; perhaps readers might like to try. Now let's try to identify the point of C R Hensman's book (and there must have been billions of copies of such books in print, if all the titles, and all the markets, are added together).
• Emphasis on Money. This is a post-World War 2 identifier of Jews. For several reasons: Jews had learned (after the Bank of England, banking in the USA after Lincoln, and particularly the Federal Reserve of 1913) that control of the issue of money was an effortless way to make money from any country, even the poorest. The control allowed Jews to buy up assets: no special business skill required, except on the part of people doing the genuine work. A country steered into debt could be made even more subservient to Jews. (Another issue was spending on weapons, and wars). However, the primary object was control of paper money. Most peasants had little use for money; they wanted land, goods, clean water, housing, and so on. This is the sort of thing to watch for: vague pseudo-science on 'wealth': Robert Lampman's 1962 study that 'top wealth-holders owned 27.4% of gross and 28.3% of net prime wealth in 1953, but increased their share to 30.2% and 32.0% by 1958.' And this sort of thing: ... hard-core poverty problem .. millions who grow up... raise more children, and die in poverty ... contributing little or nothing to the daily operation of society and the economy...
So, with Jews, Watch for emphasis on money, not on real goods.
• Targeting of indigenous industries or (more likely) natural assets. Jews wanted things to 'buy' in exchange for worthless paper. They must have drawn up lists of targets: land, timber, minerals, types of food, and so on. Part of this process needed a strong or thuggish central government, needed to force some strange made-up local currency on people. Previously, they may have had (say) Sterling; or their own silver currency. Watch for this sort of thing:
So, with Jews, Watch for emphasis on strong ruthless central government, putting outside interests first.
• Offloading military costs; usually onto whites. This follows from the previous paragraph; bases, weapons, deliberately bad military education, Jewish media control naturally can be expected. And note another important issue: Jews had learned from the First World War, and the Second, that enormous money could be made from wars. The story of war profiteers of course is largely censored. But any spare capacity of any economy could be used profitably by Jews, who could buy up or finance weapons plants, bases, navies and so on and use them as profit centres.
So, with Jews, Watch for support for militarisation, but without clear reasons, to avoid drawing more attention to Jewish profits from death and destruction.
• Control had to be got of minerals etc. The Boer Wars may have been a practice run. Part of the process is to claim that locals were incompetent to deal with these things: whether true or not hardly mattered.
So, with Jews, Watch for claims that food is short, or minerals not handled wisely, or populations are out of control, or education is bad, or terrorism is rife ... anything, true or false, claiming the locals are incompetent, lazy, won't work, are superstitious. Here are some food-related examples: 'Hungry people are combustible people.. next 24 to 28 years are going to be the most critical [written in 1962; note the appeal to weapons and militarism] ... Cuba, the Congo, .. Indonesia, Nigeria and Vietnam torn by strife and bloodshed... Note the pretence that these countries were attacked by Jews because of food issues! And the implication money-making wars by Jews will be absolutely necessary!
• Full propaganda power had to be turned onto critics of Jews. We've already noted that war profiteers had to be unnamed. The real behind-the-scenes people—Rothschilds, Warburg, Schiff, Bernard Baruch, for example—had to have minimal exposure. Wars were censored: consider how little you have been told about the Opium Wars, the Boer Wars, the coup in Russia by Jews against Slavs, mass rapes in Germany, the situation in Palestine, atrocities in Vietnam and Iraq. This is deliberate policy: telling lies about atrocities seems genetically natural to co-called 'Jews'. This book does not have Palestine in its index. It is not categorised—that might help people organise their thoughts. Jews are not indexed; nor of course is the Federal Reserve.
So, with Jews • Expect almost total censorship of wars, even very recent ones, and of crimes and atrocities within countries. These things are irrelevant to Jews in pursuit of power. In the book I was reading, at that time it was considered impossible not to mention the destruction of Vietnam by Americans, under order from Jews. It's worth checking the details of all this—money spent, unmentioned Jewish profits, undiscussed Jewish propaganda involvements, World War 2-style total support for what Jews considered their interests, and indifference, ignorance, or pleasure in the real victims. It seems genetic within Jews to routinely censor opposing views, something noticeable in 'Holocaust' lies, 9/11 lies, Jewish money fraud lies, and all the rest. It's what they do. So, in my randomly-picked book, The Process of Anti-Development mentions Biafran babies, always more tear-jerking than dead adults; And the US-supported regime of Chiang-Kai Shek in Honan province—in 1946, twenty-five years before this book was published.
So much for matters which Jews want to publicise with all the media power they have. But remember • Jews operate much more importantly behind the scenes, and their publicity there is always secret. The secrecy helps explain the frantic reactions to the Protocols of Zion, facts about the Bank of England and Federal Reserve, exposures of Jewish mass killings in Russia, Ukraine, Palestine, Africa, and other censored topics. There are roughly four sets of non-Jews who must be expected to be targeted. (1) Whites co-operating with Jewish money power at the highest levels. (2) Whites who control, technically important industries, but who are dependent on Jewish money and therefore permanently in danger of being financially extinguished. (3) Whites who make an interface with large numbers of whites to be controlled: Freemasons, state education controllers, BBC, Stasi, Common Purpose, EU 'migration' officials illustrate the types. (4) Whites in military structures where these are not just (as in 'nuclear' matters and much research) money-making frauds and sinecures.
With practice, skilled readers can infer much of this material, and of course some will peep out through the general censorship. Much of the material is decided centrally; the vocabulary and assumptions give this away.

Here's a short snippet supposedly on 'aid':
'The exchange of manufactures, ideas, skills, technology and useful materials has been going on since the beginnings of civilized life. Different communities... have shown a marked ability to make discoveries or inventions in particular fields of activity; in that way they take a share in the pioneering which is necessary for continual 'modernization' of human society and its modes of production and its social organization, and its enrichment through scientific and moral discoveries. What was possible for some men, e.g. the Chinese technique of iron-casting or manufacture of gunpowder, demonstrates what is possible for others. ...'
Note the vagueness, the absurd attribution of iron working to the Chinese (any group may be flattered insincerely), the absence of any evidence that they have solutions, or that their solutions would work. This suits Jews: parasitic power is what's wanted. Jewish vocabulary, including 'Marxism', in propaganda mode, is always in that style—vague, useless, aimed at weakness, intended to divide and rule, rigorously ignoring every bit of counter-evidence.

But it's essential to remember that this is an inverted iceberg; the all-important tip is hidden, and only the great mass of propaganda is overpoweringly visible.
Another important thing to remember is Jews want whites and others to kill each other; but they're not really interested in the truth of world events.
• This is why 'Jewish' comments are a strange mixture of lies, vagueness, fanatical shrieking, and moving targets. Some of the readers here will recall the justification for the Second World War: the defence of Poland. This of course was obviously fake: the Poles had problems—vast numbers of parasitic Jews, mass murderer Stalin next door, both Germans and Poles desperately trying to move Jews out. But the pretext of supporting Poland by the Jew-dominated British 'government' clearly was impossible. In the same way, many of the readers here will recall maybe ten or twenty people being identified as the next 'Hitler'. Alien invasion into white countries is lied about by Jews: refugees? Hard workers? Diverse? Source of strength?—Jews don't even bother to make their lies consistent. Many Jewish propaganda pieces are inconsistent; probably the hacks don't bother to read their lies when working from scripts. For example I found: ... living in filth has been forced on people. Nirmar Bose notes... 'the tremendous contrast between what is public and what is private. The dwellings are clean and tidy inside, though they may be overcrowded. To have to live in filth is a regression; ..' Here's an amusing footnote, possibly demanded by an irate non-Jew: The 2200 calories minimum has, justifiably, been the subject of controversy. It was noticed that in Ceylon, normally healthy people who ate a variety of good food (and could afford to eat as much as they wanted) were by this 'minimum' classified as 'under-fed'. It would have been a gross exaggeration to say that two thirds of the world is hungry. ... Another reason for inconsistency is of course the fact that times can change: tomorrow's friend is redefined as an enemy, as with Saddam Hussein. Here's a list of names, all of course at the time approved or trained by Jews: Nelson Mandela, Mao Tse-tung, Che Guevara, Josue de Castro, Mehdi Ben Barka, Soong Ching-ling, Luis de la Puente, Frantz Fanon, Julius Nyerere, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro. Just one example is Castro, probably a Marrano Jew and part of the 'Cold War' nuclear hoax.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Classics
The Renaissance arguably was part of the recovery from the anaesthetic of Roman Catholicism. The lack of an equivalent in eastern churches' areas perhaps heightens its preciousness. But from today's perspective classics date from the 19th century: political problems included mythologising Napoleon and his backers, so that few people would ask questions about his loot and his damage; and gaining power from white groups who clearly were showing new potential. What better than material dealing with ancient times, in an untechnical, story-telling fashion? George Grote's History of Greece was published from 1846-1856. (Grote—1794-1871. Wikipedia in its always conventional way says he was 'banker, MP and a founder of London University'). There's no question about Grote's political involvement. C N Parkinson noted that ancient Greece 'became a democracy' in nineteenth century England; i.e. as a propagandist device. As a demolition note, here's Hendrik van Loon's The Home of Mankind (1933, new edition 1948): '.. a nation overrun .. by Macedonians, by Romans, by Goths and Vandals and Slavs, conquered and turned into a colony by Normans, Byzantines, Venetians, and the unspeakable riff-raff of the Crusades, then almost completely depopulated and repopulated by the Albanians, forced to live under Turkish domination for almost four entire centuries ...' There are still occasional uses of the Classics in politics: Sparta and the shocking German Nazzies being an obvious example.
There are, now, serious doubts both about the accuracy of the texts and their dates. Before the 19th century, classics were more the preserve of linguists and would-be linguists, donating new words to old languages: most medical terms are derived from ancient languages applied to anatomy and physiology, for example, including odd co-options of slang, symbols and vague resemblances.
As regards Britain, this was a successful movement, for its members: the nineteenth-century Oxbridge man stating that the classics enabled him to look down with contempt on people who had not enjoyed its advantages illustrates; as does the fact that by the 1850s half Oxbridge graduates went into the Church of England, to enjoy guaranteed 'livings'. Since this high point, classics have been eroded by archaeological findings, anthropological findings, and critics such as Martin Bernal, son of presumably Jewish J D Bernal (Science for a Developing World). Martin Bernal's Black Athena appears to accept the idea or legend of Greek genius (despite the fact that geometry, and anatomical ideas, for example, must have developed elsewhere), but tries to relocate it to areas previously considered lacking in achievement.
It's unrealistic to suppose 18-21 year-olds will contribute much to revisionism. Consider just some of the obstacles: they would need a grasp of at least two ancient languages, and a grasp for reasons they were studied; and a grasp of the realities of archaeology and historiography, and interest groups, some with no hesitation whatever about destroying evidence; and a grasp of forces such as finance and law which are difficult to detect. And that assumes they have some genuine curiosity: looking, online, at a typical classics department, I find their output is claimed to have gained the 'ability to communicate views clearly and coherently, both spoken and written/ individual and team work skills/ ability to digest, analyse and summarise content and interpretive views/ critical awareness of strengths/weaknesses in arguments/ time management ... [and] a range of specific, practical, intellectual, theoretical and transferable skills.'
Classics graduates used to be a highish proportion of graduates. As would be expected by the less optimistic type, they included obstinate types at their plateau; such as the man who never accepted Michael Ventris on Linear B, and of course innumerable vicars and rectors. Denis Healey was a similar self-satisfied type, who actually became a minister in a 'Labour' (read: Jewish) government in post-WW2 Britain—ideally qualified because he knew nothing of science and had no suspicions about nuclear matters. The most famous Classics person at the present day, as far as my limited knowledge extends, is J K Rowling.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Local History
There will I hope be some movement towards more serious studying of local history.
• Many local and regional once-prominent and interesting figures have been suppressed and elided away by the oppressive dominance of jewish media and educational control.
• The impact of such activities as press-gangs, violent bands and groups, kidnappers; and expulsions, mutilations, removals of promising people as janissaries, child soldiers, prostitutes and so on, ought to be understood.
• Local adaptations, usages and customs in what now seem primitive ways were at one time important.
• It may be possible to build better views of the past in such matters as Avebury and Stonehenge, the Celtic world, defenceless areas and the effects of weak defences, the Mediterranean, the developments of China and India. And so on.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Economic History
Students of large-scale and long-term economics should examine the revisionist view of the last four or five centuries, notably the transition of trade from the Mediterranean and the east to western European ports and the Americas. This includes Spain, bullion from the Americas, Venice, the rise of Holland, Britain, Cromwell, the Bank of England and the City of London, the fall of the Hanseatic League, shipbuilding, the start of the Russian Empire, tobacco, sugar and rum, India, tea, black slaves, the USA, the French Revolution and Napoleon, US wars over money, industrialism, the opium wars, Japanese industrialism, and 20th century world wars, steel, oil, and what turns out to be the myth of uranium. And Korea, Vietnam, Iraq ... Quite a range of subjects and quite a panorama of misunderstandings, horrors, but also progress. From this site's viewpoint, of course, Jewish involvement should be disentangled and understood.

All these events are liable to misunderstandings, some deep, some casual. Here's a piece on bullion and the Americas and Europe. Here's an overview of Cromwell, the Bank of England, and the US 'Civil War': Bank of England. Here's a piece on the frontier and settling the US west, a process much more carefully planned than libertarians seem to imagine. American West and after all why wouldn't it be planned, financed, paid-for?
Economic history is liable to misinterpretation because efficient and typical activities are often in relatively small areas: towns often retain road layouts for centuries, even though buildings change; and fields and agriculture may have much continuity. But shipyards, docks, ropewalks, windmills, shot-towers, canals, mines, pumps, weaving equipment, storage rooms, sheds, wells, quarries, brickworks, blacksmiths' equipment and all the rest aren't often preserved. I think this can cause a serious underestimate of the support structures needed for life: the Jews in the USSR show the sort of thing that can happen when ignorant fanatics get control.

India provides a test-case for revisionism as it pushes back through history. Was it a rich, but localised, varied, and tribal collection of kingdoms and regions, but defenceless against European weaponry of the time? And if so who funded the various actions in India; who benefited? Biographies of Clive of India, down to the peasant-boy paedophile Mountbatten, are at present unlikely to mention Jewish money, which, however, may have played the major part in British and French activities there.
South Africa is another test-case, isolated from most of the rest of the world and therefore a good independent test for Jewish hypotheses. A book by Irsigler is an example of the examination of history taking into account Jewish activity. More recently, Stephen Goodson has developed a very serious critique of Jews, both economic and in long-term historical perspective. There are speeches online, but as far as I know he has no great Internet presence.
Slavery 'The trade in slaves constituted the main source of livelihood for the Roman Jews.' - The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (Editor Isaak Landman).
'In the dark ages, the commerce of Western Europe was largely in his [the Jew's] hand, in particular the Slave Trade.' - Encyclopedia Britannica (Jacob Marcus, Jewish Historian).
'The traffic of slaves was a royal monopoly, and the Jews were often appointed as agents of the crown for their sale.' and 'The ships were not only owned by Jews, but manned by Jewish crews and sailed under the command of Jewish captains.' - New World Jewry, 1483-1825 (Seymour Liebman, Jewish Historian).
Adam Smith is a typical economist in need of a revisionist makeover. His 18th-century book (1776, The Wealth of Nations postdates the Cromwell/ Ireland/ Great Fire/ Bank of England nexus; it pre-dates the 'French Revolution', but there is a possible link through the Auld Alliance of centuries earlier. The Scots (and northern English) had a rather inexplicable rôle in finance. Adam Smith said nothing whatever about Jewish finance, as far as I know. Maybe a researcher can find more dots and connect them? It's interesting to speculate whether the 'hidden hand' was a nod to the workings of Freemasonry. (And whether some portraits signalled this). Most 'social science' has evolved under conditions in which honest comments on Jews were discouraged in one way or another.
Smaller-scale (but still important) economics: a critical eye should be cast on takeovers, buy-outs, credit cuts, fire-sales prices and so on. How did so many organisations come under Jewish ownership? And how is that ownership often concealed? Interesting questions of interest to everyone, including trades unionists who are serious about their jobs and membership. Obviously. 19th/early 20th century muck-raking journalists (Ida Tarbell writing on Rockefeller for example) point the way, but of course are light on Jewish studies.
There is, therefore, food for economic history revisionism, and predictions for the future: all this includes the framework of money; there is for example a theory that double-entry book-keeping was the basis of Italian banking. The laws on interest (re-introduced by Henry VIII as part of the Reformation in England), and the Adam Smith style half-pretence of free trade, and the growth of legal frameworks around the ill-defined concept of capitalism had a lot of Jewish input. Apparently small changes in (say) limited liability, or bankruptcy law, or tax concessions, or bank cash requirements, or legal rights to recover stolen property, can work into long-term changes. These topics are usually not discussed reliably. I'm told Werner Sombart's The Jews and Modern Capitalism is a helpful book (Jewish activities in Germany were important) but I've never even seen a review of that book.
Income Tax is historically very recent. Here's a popular meme on the subject: 'Up until 1913 Americans kept all of their earnings. Despite this, we still had: schools, colleges, roads, vast railroads, streets, subways, the Army, Navy, and the Marine Corps (who managed to win 8 wars). Tell me again why We The People need to be extorted?' (There were also houses, farms, factories). Herbert Spencer's The Man Versus the State was roughly at the date when income tax was being phased in. One revisionist question here is the extent to which income tax directed money to Jews.
Usury is worth examining as a contentious issue which has been deliberately pushed aside and ignored. The definition of usury appears to be—this applied centuries ago, and is often regarded as contrary to the position of the Catholic Church— not excessive interest, but the charging of interest on 'unproductive loans'. We are (or were) accustomed to the practice of putting 'money' into a bank and getting some rate of interest on it. But if a bank has nothing in which to invest, why should interest be charged? If someone gives you (say) an apple, and you return an apple later, why should you charge extra on it? (This is an actual example given me by a Muslim). Compound interest has, over time, a huge effect: Manhattan Island, bought with a few trinkets worth almost nothing, if accumulated at a small rate of interest, now amounts to billions.
In an era of virtually free printed paper money, on which interest is paid as though it was owed, this is a serious issue: the 'Federal Reserve', established in 1913, is a perfect example of usury: the only 'reserve' it has is its own paper money, intrinsically worthless; and it can print money ad lib with no audit. And it extorts interest payments from the U.S. government. It has become seriously predatory and harmful, turning its paper into assets for Jews).
Another version of the meaning of usury is that of The Merchant of Venice, which specifically says of usury (the precise wording isn't known)

And if the sums are not repaid on time
Then, as forfeit, they would take everything;
All that the man has earned in his lifetime...

In other words, usury is the practice of seizing everything of a debtor if he defaults. The plot in The Merchant of Venice of course revolved around Shylock wanting a death penalty for Antonio's default for a loan on his argosies, which were believed to have sunk. I can't tell how this would have worked in practice: there must have been many Papal pronouncements on the subject. And of course with a huge penalty hanging over someone's head, they would seem to have every motive to pay up.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ] Facebook's Open Borders for Israel group

Facebook's Open Borders for Israel group

Psychology
The human brain isn't understood; even the physiology isn't reliably known, quite apart from the way consciousness exists within it, and thinking takes place—if indeed it does. It's therefore to be expected that social events will affect beliefs about psychology, since there's such uncertainty, and power struggles will help determine beliefs. Excluding people who are obviously not normal, any unscrupulous group may help themselves to advantages, and it's well known that people have been found 'mad' or inconvenient for having illegitimate children, for rejecting religion, for not wanting to fight in wars, for stealing rather than working, for crimes of passion, for being homosexual, for disbelieving in AIDS. It's unsurprising that Jews have colonised some of this territory: and that not much in the way of practical results has emerged, and there is huge uncritical publicity in Jewish media, that costs are high. It remains far easier to assess persons on their own than their interactions, trust, distrust, families, groups, hatred, worries, co-operation and what have you. Here's an example to show how problematical psychological research is: Problems in Schizophrenia.
Short history of psychology from 1900 with hints at Jewish influence: Anthropologists puzzled over strange behaviours, including some very cruel ones; the First World War ushered in shell-shock, and also mass testing for basic abilities by cheap tests; the USSR led to the extension of Pavlov's work on tethered-up dogs to non-Jews; Freud is widely believed to have said something like "everything is sex", but in fact many followers of Freud have followed the Jewish party line, and been concerned to diagnose white societies as being 'antisemitic': Kevin MacDonald is good on this. Eddie Bernays (Freud's nephew) looked at advertising, and is often viewed as a pioneering genius, but probably his results were simply effects of the huge growth of mass media. Wartime propagandists usually relied simply on censorship and repetition without much that could be called 'psychology'. In the USSR, incarceration of people who disliked the regime was common enough; it happened in the USA too. Jews, it is now known, engaged in huge campaigns of lies, but, again, this is more to do with media control over newspapers and cinemas than anything else. But emotionally charged events such as Pearl Harbor and supposed mass deaths of Jews were used in a way perhaps typical of Jews: they cared nothing for their victims, and this attitude is useful in arranging propaganda campaigns, just as a butcher isn't too concerned about the animals giving meat. "Oy vey, dem goyim actually care about dead children so let's use lotsa dem in our campaign" seemed to be the type of procedure when scripting Nuremburg.
Widespread fear of nuclear weapons (in this site's view, faked) seems to have been used only at power politics levels, in particular to prevent the USSR being threatened and invaded and investigated, something Jews were very anxious indeed to prevent. In the 1950s the Korean War led to 'brainwashing' as a fake explanation to bury the truth about US war crimes. Other Jewish inputs include e.g. Leon Kamin on IQ, and of course there are many 'popular' examples of Jewish activities: the women behind the Jewish version of women's liberation are an example.
Note that pleasant emotions are important in propaganda too: people told they're fighting for their country, or that they are bringing civilisation by bombing, or that they did the right thing all along killing Germans, or that they measure at 'genius-level', don't usually seek counter-evidence against these assurances.
Behaviorism is flavoured with Jewish attitudes. Their interest was in (for example) controlling soldiers to do what Jews want, on command. Obviously there are mental processes involved; equally obviously, such mental processes need not be concerned with truth or accuracy. It's not correct to assume that behaviorism assumed people don't have thoughts; behaviorism rose, unsurprisingly, at the time of Jewish media control of radio, newspapers, magazines, and books, derived from control of paper money.
Jewish Psychology in the USA Thomas Szasz's 1961 book The Myth of Mental Illness says in effect the brain doesn't get diseased, therefore 'mentally ill' is meaningless—unhelpful stuff. Jewish researchers (or, more accurately) writers include people like Festinger of 'cognitive dissonance', a typically unclassical Jewish coining; Cohen's Attitude Change trying to work out how best to embarrass goyim into accepting things like desegregation; and the Jews Milgram and Zimbardo (and doubts about their experiments) which can be interpreted as an anti-white propagandist. R D Laing and others' (not Jews) 'existential psychiatry' coincided with the Vietnam War, and is in my view a typically surreal reaction to ruthless cruelty and tortures which are difficult to speak of; during all that time, the New York Times and BBC and other media censored virtually all aspects of US crimes in Vietnam. Most people to this day have not even the beginning of an idea of the unspeakable stories censored by these media turds (or whatever strong word you prefer).
Another US example is 'false memory syndrome', which seems to be a device invented to try to discredit paedophile/ child abuse victims.
Through all this time there were fraudsters, hoaxers, mediums, conjurers, numerologists, hypnotists, palmists, dowsers, remote viewers, ghost hunters, psychic surgeons and so on, exploiting peoples' gullibility, though the scale of their activity is tiny compared with the real crooks.
Commercial Psychology in market research, TV viewing habits, political understanding, jury research and so on, is mostly a matter of statistics. Paradoxically, the issues may involve a lot of money, so there may be pressure for the experiments, such as they are, to be far more rigorous than standard politically-correct work. John Lauritsen was a market researcher, and one of the first to expose defects in AZT trials.
Everyday Psychology Could become a new discipline, and might do good. For example, it's noticeable that family breakdown legal cases may continue for years, with disastrous results for some of the members. The informal organisations for divorced fathers all, as far as I know, have not the slightest understanding of the Frankfurt School approach to white societies: they don't understand Jews intend to undermine and damage these societies, and that their money is no object, so the fathers' societies' struggles are usually rather laughable and ineffective. They also have no statistical evidence of the best approach to these cases, based on large numbers of other cases, and the way the systems manipulate the actors in these dramas.

Avoidance of Examination of Group Psychology is an important aspect of Jewish influence. They want to distract from the study of groups acting secretly in unison to get what they want.
Material left over from Jewish attacks is disappointing. There are studies of 'group psychology' prompted by the fanaticism of the First World War. Trotter's Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War pretends that the 'educated classes' are immune from war panics. There are accounts of national characteristics, 'French ingenuity', 'German discipline' and so on, but books of this sort are as rare as books on human races, under the impact of Jewish censorship. But, obviously, as with races, groups tend to have similar backgrounds, problems, needs, histories, and they are likely to have, in fact certainly do have, group commonalties.
Avoidance of Any Suggestion that Some People are Exceptional is another aspect of Jewish information control. If the goyim are insignificant scum, then it's absurd to suggest any of them are remarkable. This is obviously nonsense, and tends to rule where there are weak, unrepresented people, such as schoolchildren.
Avoidance of Research into Triggers of Aggression, Concealment etc, & Intelligence as Cunning & Deception since of course these are prime Jewish activities.
Memes as slightly analogous to genes are important in everyday psychology: they can be generated by repetition: 'Yes we can!!', 'Red sky at night', 'It's a free country', 'Drink Coca-Cola', 'You can't win', 'But, hey!'. This sort of thing suggests memes are on a similar footing to words, but a bit more complicated, and a bit less permanent. Memes seem to have a limited life: 'Hang the Kaiser', 'Sister Susie Sews Shirts', 'Charles Laughton' are more or less forgotten. 'Atheist', 'bastard', 'queer' used to be a shocking expressions; 'Catholic' and 'Protestant' still seem to be in Ireland, along with 'racist', 'anti-semite' and the absurdly-constructed 'homophobe' (fear of things which resemble other things?), though my impression is their force is failing. A new meme is 'anti-racism is a code word for anti-white' which is aiming for Internet spread. Memes can be grouped in clusters, analogously to animals made up of genes: there is a convincing analyses of Islam and Christianity on this basis, and researchers ought to do the same with Judaics. There are analogies with competition between single memes, and between groups of memes. Here's an audio recorded talk on memes by Susan Blackmore in 1996, with Richard Dawkins in the audience. Not very well recorded, I'm afraid. She is cheery, and has little idea of possible evils; the examples are old enough to be considered relatively objectively.

DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) is the USA's contribution to the science of psychology; the point about statistics is that vague diseases descriptions need vague descriptions. The series of volumes gives some indication of social pressures over time: homosexuality for example was reclassified under Jewish and other pressure. Of interest here is the changing status of psychopath, sociopath, 'antisocial personality disorder', 'dissocial personality', narcism/ narcissism etc. The syndrome usually surrounding Jews is a complex included in such definitions, but of course they have to modified, in the same way legislation against 'hate' avoids the subject of Jewish hates. There's a similar problem with military psychology. However, I leave investigation to others with the necessary patience.
Let me point out a few issues which researchers into Jews might take up:–
Lies Are of course explicitly part of Talmudic Judaism
Sadism Is also of course part of Talmudic Judaism; media control ensures it is understated or omitted.
Parasitism Is not literally true, but applied to the secondary aspects of economic life: trade, money, percentages, rents, etc. Here's an article Parasitism exploring the issue. (Click the back-arrow to return).
Fanaticism Very roughly, this is acting on beliefs disproportionately to evidence. It's become a tradition, in the 'west', to suppose fanaticism always fails, based on a few historical generalisations. In fact there are advantages to fanaticism; here's a short account advantages of fanaticism (click the back-arrow to return here). Genetically, it's easy to see why a proportion of a population with fanaticism may help the total population. When you read of e.g. Kissinger chairing a 9/11 inquiry, or a Jewish Supreme Court judge or Attorney General siding with some Jewish consensus, or a Jewish-funded group corrupting electoral systems or engaging in years of lies, it's easier to understand how for example long-term bombing of innocent people, long-term violence, long-term destruction and ruin, become institutionalised
Hate Seems to be automatically attributed to others; an argument I've seen deployed is that if there were no Jews, then other groups would be hated. This seems wrong: in any analogous situation, such as a household or group of dangerous thugs or nuisances, if they go, everyone else is grateful and relieved
Self-Deception Many non-Jews, puzzling over Jewish behaviour, concluded that they deceive themselves. I'd suggest this is more of a case of the non-Jews deceiving themselves! If people clearly follow some pattern of behaviour—possibly genetically-determined damage to anyone or any group perceived as a threat—and follow it systematically, all the time, invariably—they cannot be deceiving themselves. The non-Jews deceive themselves in not checking the hypothesis of inbuilt attack supported by camouflage, where this is possible. The amnesia test. I was told by Maurice Pappworth that in the Second World War his job was to identify genuine cases of amnesia among troops who were not fighting. (Pappworth, who believed himself to be a Jew, naturally didn't fight). His test was to see if they had ripped off identification, such as name tags or regimental information. Pappworth thought, if they had, they must have remembered what these things meant. Application of this test shows Jews know perfectly well they are engaged in deceit.
Others The ways people view others, either singly or in groups, are under-researched, I think, mainly because of the difficulties of catching subtleties. There's plenty of scope for prejudice, misunderstanding, and misinterpretation, in spite of a supposed instinctive feel for self-interest and self-preservation. And there's plenty of scope for approximations: Jews are apparently taught to think others have absolutely no worth; many class feelings are similar; so are many race feelings; national characteristics may be assessed correctly.
Possible ways forward include
• Investigating old ideas. For example, the 'principle of association' was a staple in psychology courses before the 20th century. It's likely that very simple biological creatures associate their senses, partly because they are small creatures, partly because their senses are unlikely to be accurate and well-defined: so, for them, smell, taste, feel, sounds and sight may combine in ways which are primitive and basic. Jewish techniques of continual repetition and use (e.g.) of one colour and a simple sound may work at a deeply basic level, appropriate to the simple-mindedness of Jews. This is obvious with people who panic at keywords such as 'commie' or 'nazi', but also applies at a higher level. For example, I've seen people unable to separate the ideas of 'eugenics' and 'population reduction' however carefully I pointed out there's no necessary connection. In the same way, many people can't separate population movement issues from 'Hitler': they aren't able to realise that one billion Africans as an issue is not connected with Hitler or other leaders. The same happens in science: many people think 'relativity' must either be true or false, as they can't understand it is made up of a complex network of separate beliefs.
• Careful investigation of the ways people perceive their surroundings. For example, senses that people are aware of in an everyday sense are always those which can be varied: most people know sight is something to do with their eyes, because they can close their eyes, and make an obvious difference to what they are sensing. But (e.g.) the sense of balance cannot be turned off, unless maybe as the result of some form of poisoning; if this happens, the victim realises how hard it can be to balance normally. Some senses&—such as the instinctive feel in another person's presence—may be explorable only with difficult techniques.
• Race differences may be studied by careful checking of hypotheses: for example perhaps whites are, for evolutionary reasons, exceptionally easy to trap by opportunistic means.
• Specifically Jewish beliefs, and behaviour, can be investigated now more easily than ever before: not just their superstitious supremacist hate literature, but products under Jewish control, such as film and The New York Times. Jewish propaganda before the Second World War, for example, is being investigated, and it seems unlikely that back issues can be erased in the memory-hole way. There are some exceptions: NASA's 'moon landing' records seem to have been destroyed, unsurprisingly. An owner of the Daily Express, funded by pornography, reportedly destroyed an edition showing British soldiers hanged by Jews, though I'd guess microfiche versions exist. (Metapedia states that Wikipedia too was funded by Jews from pornography).
• It's likely that study of Jews will lead to legal controls on lies, just as there are legal controls on poisons now.

Quantitative Psychology is of course difficult; nobody knows how the brain works, and if they did the knowledge might not be practically useful. Everyone knows there are problems with questionnaires and IQ tests. But speculative work can give interesting pointers and perhaps results. For example, the 'bell curve' ('normal distribution') may apply to many aspects of psychology, not just IQ. So may other distributions; fixation on the 'bell curve' can be a mistake. If we consider the Jewish issue, it appears that even being able to understand this issue needs, at present, quite a lot of ability. Can societies be stable if a proportion of the highest IQs is wasting its time countering Jews? If so, what proportion is so high as to be dangerous? I don't know the answer, but this sort of question, beyond the usual conventions of psychology, may yield important insights.
www.fathersmanifesto.net/jewsiq.htm (and www.fathersmanifesto.net/ashkenazijews.htm; note that links to sites may change) are interesting, in insisting 'Jewish' IQs are low, as they were found to be in the 1920s, and in giving detailed evidence. That evidence is all USA-based, and suffers from years of censorship of all kinds, including of statistics which exclude Jews as a separate group. And the problems of testing aren't examined. However, conclusions include the idea that Jews favour 'positive discrimination' to help themselves and blacks. The articles are not dated, and not in my opinion easy to read.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Anthropology
Wells Outline of History

There are two issues here: (1) genuine anthropology, the study of man around the world; and (2) the extent to which it has been made into a pseudoscience by Jews.

(1) Genuine Anthropology Only a century or so ago, anthropology was influenced by old, or traditional, Biblical views—three races and habits appropriate to the Middle East. H. G. Wells' Outline of History (1920 ish) was the first popular book to present a universal view, from the earth's formation and geology and early life, to the tens of thousands of years of relatively recent humanity up to the First World War. Wells was a global socialist in the genuine sense, believing in something like a family of man. (See illustration). He incorporated superstitions, religious beliefs—travellers found similar stories to virgin births and resurrections for example; if they'd known Talmudic material, no doubt they'd have found similar stories, too. Many customs were astonishingly cruel. But from those times, particularly since 1945, such global visions have progressively been submerged as Jewish fanatics, funded by parasitic money arrangements, have chipped away at rational worldviews.
J R Baker's book Race (1974), reviewed here is (I think) the last book on race for forty years or so. Such books have been progressively harder to find, until now: internet, digital processing, print-on-demand, and online buying enable readers to build up computer libraries and/or hard copy books. (Ostara Publications specialises in reprints of books on race).
Serious students of anthropology ought to note studies of modern groups. Raymond Rudorff's The Myth of France was an attempt at a popular but serious account of French history, though of course the Jewish money element was missing. At the present time, scientists and technologists form groups spreading across nations, and can easily have similar effects to Jews. Civil services, and 'intelligence communities', are also secretive top-down organisations of otherwise not very employable specialists, ideal seed-beds for huge groups blindly following undebated policies. The entire nuclear bomb story now appears to be a Jewish fraud; serious researchers might attempt to penetrate the secrecy and lies. Here's a tiny piece of the evidence: an account of the supposed early development of nuclear weapons: Robert Jungk's 'Brighter Than a Thousand Suns.
As Jewish corruption reduces, there will probably be new realistic trends in anthropology. For example, it seems likely that Arab and black slave traders transported blacks on foot, and fed them by cannibalisation of some of the group: no preserved food needed.

(2) Anthropology as a Pseudo-Science One of Kevin MacDonald's books, reviewed here Kevin B. MacDonald: The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements details the Boasian school of anthropology, a Jewish pseudo-scientific movement. He mentions as proof of dishonesty (not his phrase) a book on primitive warfare, Harry Turney-High Primitive Warfare (1949) which was ignored by the anthropology 'profession'. Rousseau's noble savage is probably something similar, and it's not a coincidence that Rousseau helped form the French Revolution, which of course was Jewish. It's part of the submerged Jewish anti-white agenda. And no doubt Matthew Arnold's Scholar Gipsy reflects the same outlook. And probably W. Arens's The Man-Eating Myth: Anthropology and Anthropophagy (1979) was motivated by Jewish anti-white attitudes. There are many reports on cannibalism, notably before 1914. Simon Sheppard's heretical.com website has a collection of accounts of cannibalism, tracked down from Garry Hogg's Cannibalism and Human Sacrifice (Robert Hale & Co., 1958). Not for the easily upset. Arens's surname is listed in the Avotnayu Jewish surname index.
Another name is Lawrence H. Keeley, PhD (1948-2017) Professor Emeritus Anthropology. Another American academic who wrote on primitive warfare (inc. Rousseau Noble Savage, and the 'pacified past'. In Separation and its Discontents and Culture of Critique, both one-page entries in the introductions. Keeley's views however look Jewish to me.
Meanwhile, statistics of IQ are kept hidden; reading and writing attainments of ethnic groups are secret; statistics of diseases such as TB, of violent crime, of population replacements, are kept secret deliberately by infinitely irresponsible and self-obsessed Jews.
On the subject of 'IQ', there have been many violent exchanges; here is Eysenck vs Kamin with the Jew Kamin lying, as seems inevitable with Jews. 'IQ' is a measure of such things as recognising alphabets, and seeing patterns in numbers and diagrams. It measures what appear to be simple mental capacities—simple until you find there are vast numbers of people lacking them. Sadly, people with high IQs, or who are tested high with covert assistance, are not immune to social pressures. Here's my review of the Mensa magazine in Britain. And here's a Mensan in the USA, John 'Birdman' Bryant, doing his best to make these people think for themselves.
On the subject of race, class, gender, and IQ researchers ought to watch for unjustified claims, which may cause problems. For example, people who genuinely insists there are no race differences (I don't include Jews here, who are the predominant people with racist attitudes - click left-arrow button to return here), but well-meaning people, shielded from genuine evidence, who can freight people with problems caused by their inability to understand topics.
Worth noticing is Jewish influences, presumably from the Talmud or related sources, which of course have been largely unnoticed, because of the secrecy of such material. For example, Mary Douglas wrote on pollution, dirt, purity, taboos, the 'abominations of Leviticus' and so on. Material on 'sex in the childhood years' no doubt comes from the same source. 'Guilt and shame cultures' have been written about—but not, as far as I know, 'lie cultures' or 'deception cultures'. The acceptance of prostitution (for example during the Vietnam War) is another Jewish influence.
Margaret Mead, a once-famous 'anthropologist', author of Coming of Age in Samoa, is one of the few American Jewish-promoted frauds who has been exposed as fake. If the reader hasn't heard the details, the topic is included here and I leave you to further online searches; but the bottom line is that Mead was found to have had no knowledge of the relevant languages, and made up her south sea islands stuff, no doubt on salacious grounds. Let's hope she's just the first of many to be discredited. [Note added 3 Jan 2014: I've just read that Mead was firmly convinced that UFOs exist. I've made no attempt to check this]. It's entirely possible that people unqualified in the supposed discipline of anthropology can do useful work; here's a man writing about Nepal in 1986 saying some useful, if depressing, things.

(3) Archaeology as a Related Pseudo-Science It's no surprise that when Jewish lies conflict with truth, Jews as by instinct will, all together, as a unit, lie. Biblical archaeology; Middle East archaeology of Egypt, Babylon and so on; US archaeology (see e.g. Ward Churchill's work on 'native Americans'); the whole of eastern Europe (see an amusing example, which doesn't appear to be university-backed, C Sturdy Collis and Treblinka, late 2013); Jewish influences in Africa; all show this pattern. I'm not suggesting this is exclusive to Jews, as of course there are plenty of similar examples (e.g. the Piltdown faked skull, fake Christian relics), but students of Jewish influence might like to check the quality of evidence and the relationship with Jewish media power.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Evolution

'Evolution' deals with all life that has ever existed on earth, and can be regarded as the most important science, though it needs factual backing to understand. There are remarks throughout this site (including reviews of books on evolution by Dawkins) and I'd like to list some discussion points, without expecting complete certainty to emerge. Not so much thinking outside the box of evolution, but thinking inside the biggest box. In my opinion, anyone wanting an unmathematical review of evolution, free of recent accumulated nonsense, should study Alfred Russel Wallace, the originator of the theory of evolution, rather than Darwin. Wallace was fourteen years younger than Darwin, and had time to ponder and reconsider his own theory in depth. His Darwinism (1889) seems the best source.

• 'Evolution' in the strict sense deals with things that replicate, and carry the means for replication within themselves. This is not the same use of the word as in phrases like 'the evolution of language' or 'the evolution of diplomacy' or 'the evolution of furniture'.
• If replicating things change, all the intermediate changes must each be viable. I'm thinking for example of growth: from the tiniest creature to the fully-grown, each phase must be able to survive.
• All replicating things must be consistent with chemical and physical laws (if the laws are accurate!) and these laws must impose limitations. For example, the chemical properties of the 90 or so elements impose limits.
• Thus DNA (if the science is correct) cannot have been present at the start of life: the replicating mechanisms must have been simpler, and there probably must have been many different mechanisms, many now extinct.
• Once life developed, future life is pyramided on this new circumstance. For example, it seems unlikely that free oxygen in the atmosphere (and dissolved in water) could have existed before organisms freed oxygen from rocks and/or water using, presumably, the sun's energy. There must have been aeons in which the only life was simple and anaerobic. In a similar way, carnivorous animals/fish could not have existed before non-carnivorous animals/fish, herbivores could not have existed before leaves, sugar-collecting insects before plants which exuded sugar, and fully-developed parasites before hosts.
• Replicating processes may have existed in many forms; if so DNA appears to have emerged as the best so far, but has limitations/ features such as being very elaborate. Sexual reproduction may have been a way to stabilise populations by throwing away some DNA, with statistical results which on balance survived better than asexual reproduction, or interspecies mating (they have DNA too), or other processes.
• 'Dominant' and recessive' must presumably be logically necessary once two sets of genes had developed.
• All stages of life must have had limitations imposed by raw physics. For example, in the simplest forms of life, ruled by 'simple' chemistry and physics, it's been suggested that magnesium formed the best way to trap sunlight (in chlorophyll), but could also operate in fibre contraction, so there was a bifurcation between plants and animals. It seems clear enough that a wheel with an axle could not have evolved; nor could X-ray vision; nor could very mobile aquatic creatures below the freezing point of water.
• It's clear enough why an organism would divide into something resembling itself: it must be viable, so something similar may be viable. It seems unlikely that creatures could develop with very different descendants. But part of the evolution of the system of reproduction may have been some sort of parameter(s) to allow variation, perhaps within limits, perhaps not.
• The eye is one traditional example of a well-developed evolutionary process which seems hard to explain. Another is the life-cycle of insects: egg, larva, pupa and perfect insect. A perhaps simpler example is scaling: fish are supported by water, and many species simply grow without apparent limit. But birds move in a much thinner medium, and need to evolve control over their size.
• Mechanisms must have developed more or less in step with physical creatures, where they could provide advantages: for example, flight from danger in motile creatures seems very common: even tiny spiders run from what they presumably 'perceive' as dangers, though it's hard to believe there is a thought process along the lines of 'the further away I am, the less the probability is that I'm harmed'. In human beings, there must have been a process of caring for young; however this worked, without it, they could hardly have survived years of infancy, and no doubt pre-human ancestors must have had some similar mechanisms. Herbivores which need to spend a high proportion of their lives eating have developed herd warning systems. Strong general tendencies to suicide cannot have been common.
• Distributions of ability must have some significance; ants and other social insects show a rather extreme form. In human populations, a certain proportion of psychopaths, willing to take dangerous risks, may well work to group advantage, though an entire community couldn't operate on such a basis. Inventions, discoveries, and new approaches vs imitation, copying, continuation need variations in personal characteristics.
• At present, many aspects of life are so far from explanation that they remain mysterious. The way the brain (presumably) works in thinking and processing, as far as I know, isn't remotely understood. Cell biology is on such a small scale that present techniques are not good enough for reliable deductions to be made. This seems to mean that mystical or unexpected or counter-intuitive explanations may have a place, perhaps temporarily.
• Because of the need, at least in the past, for intermediate stages of life to be viable, there may be many characteristics which, however desirable, never evolved. For example, it's easy to see why love and affection are desirable developments. And it's easy to see why this is usually, or perhaps always, limited to individuals: a group is unlikely to evolve in a way that all fall in love with all of another group. It's easy to understand that eyesight would be an individual sense, and why collective sight (or collective hearing, collective feel, collective thought) could not evolve.
• It's easy to see why some sort of decision-making is necessary for any organism able to move. But it's difficult to pin down what 'intelligence' means: maybe much of it is an illusion, the organism simply running through some algorithm. It's easy to see why trees haven't grown brains, since a clever tree could no more escape danger than a brainless tree. If the world had been mostly a homogeneous soup, or motion very difficult, maybe intelligence would have developed differently, or not at all if its 'costs' were too high.
• It seems possible that very simple controlling systems remain even in much more elaborated forms of life. Here's a possible analogy: a computer program, Microchess, fitted entirely into 1K of memory; this had to include moves, assessments of positions, even a diagram of the board. Later, the pictorial and instructional material was elaborated, but the small kernel remained. Is it possible the supposed hierarchies of the brain have inherited something simple, surrounded by layers of elaborate visual processing, sound and language processing, and the other senses?
• Possibilities such as Europe's unique geography (divided by barriers into territories, large enough to need co-operative work) and climate (cold and dark in winter, needing fuel and shelter, fewer animals and vegetation—more expensive to live in) conducing to brain development, Africa's geography (huge, vast expanses) and climate (hot on average, survivable with minimal fuel) conducing to raids and theft, unrestricted population in areas with unpredictability (locusts, parasites) may prove to be accurately correlated with genetics.
• As regards humanity at the present day, possibly different types of mental ability will be identified, including some which are barely named. IQ is something like a cheap pencil-and-paper test of types of employability. Depth of knowledge, persuasiveness, secret co-operation, thinking ahead, inclination to violence for some purpose, ability to correlate beliefs, are not tested. In the same way that average height and some measure of distribution can describe a population's heights, so maybe several parameters could describe a population closely enough. Perhaps such statistical analyses of types of intelligence and their distributions through populations will be testable; maybe effects of meetings, clashes, short- and long-term results might be attempted, though with technological change this is (to put it mildly) difficult.
• The formation of gene pools—with variations presumably dependent on the past—and races needs to be understood. Population genetic variations may be anything from the simple molecular level (able to digest alcohol, able to digest milk, able to smell thiourea...) to 'simple' alleles (red blood cells and sickle cell, inability to make insulin...) through to large numbers of alleles making up racial characteristics.
• Mutations—mistakes in copying DNA, or DNAs, or other information systems—are not always harmful. Presumably alleles were all mutations at one time; lethal mutations would not reproduce, among organisms with sex; but recessive mutations of the sickle cell type could persist.
• Effects of interbreeding need to be understood better; domesticated animals and plants were studied by Darwin and others and point the way. They should have practical things to say about numbers of generations needed to form races. It may be that computer modelling of genes could model thousands or millions of generations.
• The idea that genes are shared with relatives on a 1/2, 1/4, 1/8 basis seems over-simple. Some of the alleles may be actively harmful, for example. And in any closed group the amount of sharing must in any case be enormous.
• Given that two parents prolongs the life of species by allowing defective genes an even chance of being passed on, computer models may be able to simulate very long-term accumulations of defective genes. ('Defective' meaning almost certainly harmful to the bearer). It could be that eugenics might seek individuals who happen to be low in defective genes, rather than having obvious superiorities or differences.
• Everyone knows about 'the bell curve', and multiple 'bell curves' trying to measure assorted aspects of living things. The breadth of spread (range, standard deviation etc) is more important than perhaps is usually realised. For example, inbreeding and removal of square pegs seems to have narrowed the differential between 'jews', so they are generally similar to each other, with similar interests and similar tendencies to learn. Absurd fanatical women (D Lipstadt, B Spectre, S Sontag et al) are very similar to fanatical males (H Kissinger, Cheney, Netanyahu, Miliband et al) which must promote mutual action and a similar range of abilities. Jews seem intellectually narrow, with few leaders, but many similar specialists, very possibly as a result of exposure to the same texts and influences. Jews commit many money frauds but seem unable to develop economic systems beyond grabbing what short-sightedly seems 'good for Jews'. Their 'verbal intelligence' hasn't produced impressive writings, or impressive oratory, unless 8 hour rants by Trotsky count. Whites seem more varied, well adapted perhaps to the bronze age or mediaeval life, but with too many simple people to vote shrewdly.
• The unique capacity of human beings to receive ideas and images unrelated to their own personal experience ('knowledge by description' is one philosophical expression) must have affected human subspeciation. It's possible the violence of Jews, who assume unconsciously that victory means cruelty, slaughter, rape, theft, and extermination, must have been promoted by feedback between violent Talmudic writings and offspring of persons exposed to such writings.
• If attitudes and thoughts can be modelled approximately, in something like the way chemical compounds can be classified as long chains, small inert molecules, unstable and explosive compounds, alloys with lowered melting points etc, perhaps feelings of liking and disliking, changes over time, reactions to others, ability to change might be modelled to give some approximation to human populations, towns, migrations, groups of believers, and so on. Perhaps many generations could be modelled.
• But it may be possible to model broadly-likely outcomes, something along the lines of predator-prey variations (more predation means less prey, which means fewer predators, then more prey...) or long-term economic booms, then depressions, then booms. Possibly some connection could be found between degrees of liking/ hostility to likely sizes of groups and their interaction. Possibly the rise, decline, and falls of civilisations and other lifestyles will be better understood from a biological viewpoint.
• There's no obvious reason why brains should not genetically veer off in odd directions: could large populations become suicidal, or obsessed with just one subject, such as death or sex. The only feedback seems to be the blunt real world, plus the effects in support or opposition of other people. As far as the subject of this article in concerned, the genetics of so-called Jews is a principal subject, along with the feedback effects of man-made devices such as books and electronic media on human psychology.
• Mental space, mentospheres, shared cultures, stories and attitudes fed back to children, etc may be among the most important component of human activities. Language groups, human specialisms, the local in-depth knowledge of lands and topography and assets, technical skill sets, and the shared outlook of groups cutting across other groups, must have played huge roles in human history. The main reason for Jewish control is a shared sense of awareness of large numbers of population groups, and secret traditions of misleading them and playing them off with each other.
• Mental activities, and new technology, are peculiar in having almost no evolutionary defence mechanisms. Writing, reading, radio, TV and the rest have no evolved defences, something Jews have exploited parasitically in lies, propaganda films, false flags, and so on where they have had media control over different groups. With (e.g.) amplified sound, according to Simon Sheppard, elderly rock musicians are often deaf, since there's no evolutionary defence. There is obviously no evolutionary defence from weapons—at least, I hope it's obviously true.
• Eugenics is obviously important. I've heard it suggested that irradiation improves life by killing some off; but fortunately this misunderstanding is easy to demolish. But there are plenty of decisions on genetics, which will affect human lives for many centuries. If some agreement on the likely results of eugenic policies, or no policies, can be found, at least this would be a basis for sound policy. At present, the primitive silliness of simple-minded powerful 'Jews' is likely to have catastrophic effects unless changes are made.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

... Evolution of White Races
• Note for people new to this topic: Please, please make an attempt to understand these issues. I'm not asking for agreement; I'm not saying everything here is true; unquestionably, discoveries remain to be made. But I am saying ignorance is unlikely to be bliss, and the path to wisdom includes many difficult byways. I've included links, mostly within this site, with amplifications and enlargements of the discussion.

90 second video: click to watch.

What do these people have in common? Thatcher's advisor, Blair, Griffin's subject matter, staged demo, George Galloway in South Africa, George Soros, US entertainer, Dimbleby

Let's discuss human evolution on the relatively micro scale: as with other mammals, we assume the basic body plan remains in micro-evolution, but within its limits astonishingly wide variations are possible, especially under artificial selection, usually by man: Dogs for example have a huge range of varieties, despite being the same species. Most of artificial selection has been by commonsense trials. But it's important to note that the brain and the emotions are not understood; these are of course of huge importance in man, so as regards character we're all steering more or less blindly. But the general principle that genetics imply similarity must hold. Incidentally, it's surprising to me how little understanding ordinary people have of evolution; I sometimes try chatrooms, and the fathomless general ignorance is quite remarkable. One person says he's never seen cats turn into dogs; another says he's not a monkey; another says his grandma built spitfire engines, so women don't just look after children; another says races are all equal; another says races don't exist because ginger hair doesn't mark the boundary of a race.
I'm inclined to think that the world may be pre-determined: there is evident experimental repeatability, and despite attempts to evade this (e.g. 'quantum theory') it's entirely possible that determinism rules. Many people can't understand the implications: if determinism is true, then everything in all eternity, including people (and their remarks, silly and otherwise) could be predicted—but only in principle. The complications are so huge that even simple events can't be humanly predicted. But there may be some logical proof that, even if predictions aren't possible, true statements can be made about large-scale events, in the way predictions are possible about planets and human bodies and large machines.
If determinism is true, then the whole of evolution is simply a continual process of chemicals, molecules, cells and so on being formed and inter-reacting with the physical real world plus other products of evolution and emerging at each stage with successful combinations, which, at the time, matched best with the underlying but unknown rules of nature. DNA must itself have evolved from simpler chemicals, and reproduction must somehow have emerged at some point as the best method of preserving successes up to that date.

Anyway, let's start with Jewish genetics: I'll select here the example of Richard Dimbleby and his two sons, David and Jonathan, names no doubt selected for some Jewish reason. All lived their lives in the BBC. Richard Dimbleby helped start the Jewish fraud later called—perhaps not 'christened'—the 'Holocaust'; the Dimbleby brothers have spent their lives telling lies—mass killings in Russia, mass killings in Germany, mass killings in Vietnam, suppression of evidence about Jews, lies about nuclear issues, lies about 9/11, lies about destruction of historical artefacts, lies about wars in the middle east. It's important to grasp the automaton, wind-up toy, running-on-rails style of behaviour, which appears fixed and immovable and beyond any reach of reason or argument. They do their Jewish thing without the slightest suggestion of doubt, self-examination, or criticism. Deaths, horrors, crimes, huge frauds, absurd waste, and ludicrously dishonest debates have not had the remotest deflecting effect from the Jewish robotic path of deceptions. And there are vast numbers of Jews with the identical psychology: it is obviously natural to them: there is no sign of anything like internal conflict, regret, remorse, or understanding; it's classic psychopathic/ sociopathic behaviour.
People new to the idea of racial evolution of human sub-types should read this short theory of 'Jewish' parasitic evolution (it's in another file) then click the return arrow to come back here.
Some readers might like the pre-scientific style of Hilaire Belloc, describing in his own words the marvellous ability of Jews to mimic their hosts.
For a possible genetic mechanism, look at colour blindness: A red filter over the eyes of someone with normal vision (try it!) cuts out many colours, leaving muted blues and greens, but not red. This is the commonest form of colour blindness. On rare occasions, this is useful: for example, with autumn/fall colours, but, now, more usually, with specially-designed human tests. After millennia of human changes to the natural world, there may be an analogy: maybe telling lies WAS selected against; but now, truth may be simply filtered out, and in some man-made situations may have selective advantage. Probably something like this explains Jew evolution.

Genetics and instinctive behaviour must be some sort of match: some people like creative work and effort, some like exertion, some like company and chat and society, some are erratic and variable, some are adventurous, some prefer cruelty and child sex and destruction, some do and believe what they're told; some are fluid and mobile. How behaviour is related to genetics is not known: I doubt if it's even known why lions hunt when they're hungry; what are the actual mechanisms? Does fear of death exist as an isolated emotion? Are such things as pride and hate based in physiology? Is an instinctive tendency to destroy found in Jews?—perhaps based on envy, or inbred hostility to 'enemies', or an apperception of types of destruction which damage others, or fear and worry at the sight of puzzling creations they cannot themselves achieve? Maybe tribal Khazars (who appear to be the ancestors of most modern 'Jews') after exposure to Talmudic writings, inbred in a way consistent with those writings, artificially selecting themselves in the direction of aggressive simple-minded fanaticism, combined with deception, hostility and destruction of all people not part of the Jewish supremacist race—the 'goyim'.
It's not even clear what to count as an 'emotion': a traditional list is lust (even if only in the mind); drink and gluttony; greed both for things and for sensuality; laziness; any form of strongly-felt anger; resentful envy; and pride that comes 'before a fall'. These assessments involve a mixture of personal well-being, the likely reactions of others and advisability of self-control, and implications of the likely times for assertion and inaction. 'Maslow's hierarchy' is a typical piece of Jewish unoriginality, another list. It's not even clear what 'basic' needs are, apart from food and water; is reproduction a need, for example? Often it must just be an outcome of desire. What about acquisitiveness, rivalry, vanity, and love of power? How can 'love of power', with its requirement for knowledge and awareness and prediction and assessments of groups, be driven by instinct?
And it's not even clear what to name such emotions as are identified: many states of mind and attitudes have no simple name, or no name at all. The obviously not-very-scientific Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals in their various editions have long, detailed, painful lists of symptoms and signs. Popularish psychology has a staple subdiet of syndromes (Clerambault's, Korsakoff's, Lady Macbeth, Munchhausen...) and phenomena ('brainwashing', 'Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder', black schizophrenia, hypnosis, multiple personalities, S.A.D., 'manic depressiveness'). Many of these are more-or-less fake constructs to promote some view or other—often 'Jewish', in view of their media dominance. Where there's no reputation or money to be made, there's no obvious reason why important but obscure psychological mechanisms should be described at all, though sometimes ('sudden Jihad symptom') they emerge.
But whatever the mental and physical mechanisms, the plain fact is that the practical activities of Jews are unusually destructive and what victims regard as evil. The paradigmatic example is now the USSR. And many people have come to the conclusion this must be genetic: they observe it's what Jews do, and what they do if they move to some new territory or some new vocation or new organisation. At the time of writing, Jews in Australia, the USA, Germany, France, Britain, Canada are all carrying out more or less identical policies, to flood these countries with immigrants, with costs to be paid in future. And there are correlative characteristics: manipulation is necessary, and therefore deceit is necessary, and therefore persuasiveness, and therefore cunning in dealing with evidence, and therefore unscrupulousness. Whether the genetic mechanism can legitimately be described as actively and deliberately harmful, or simply a resultant of impulses which have much the same effect, as Jews by their group failure in self-criticism implicitly claim, is something discussed only in a few circles.
It's often said that Jews ask "Does it benefit Jews?" before deciding on some group crime, fraud, or whatever. This seems to be an attempt to make their behaviour sound reasonable, to make it appear calculated. But it seems unlikely to be true. Consider for example paedophilia and child sex abuse: does that behaviour, which is specifically approved in Jewish Talmudic and Rabbinical material, in fact further Jewish interests? Does the united front Jews present against comments on bombing Palestinians, or telling the truth about Jack the Ripper, or investigating the Liberty, or discussing violence against whites in their media, really advance Jewish interests? Or is an alternative explanation—they genetically tend to child sex, violence, and harm against anyone perceived not to be in their supremacist tribe—more convincing?
However, if determinism is true, and Jews perhaps illustrate this, then presumably white races must be predictable too, in their own ways. (And of course black and other races). So let's look at white micro-evolution.
Let me try a new approach: examining subgroups of whites—Whites because of their unique contributions. I won't repeat here the well-known approach particularly of J Philippe Rushton, comparing African low investment into post-birth children + high breeding rate vs modern European high care for children + lower breeding rate, both considered as long-term responses to the local environments, including food supplies. Another approach, notably of Kevin MacDonald, is the idea of pathological altruism—that whites are averse to turning people away, possibly to freeze to death. MacDonald's view seems to me a case of Americans having been lied to by the Jewish media, as they chose to do—more usually Jewish media shows whites as inept or disgusting. The facts show whites who fought Germans, Koreans, Vietnamese displayed almost no limits to cruelty and sordidness; the genetic explanation of tolerance to immigration, since about 1945, as 'pathological altruism' seems rather to be the pathology of just believing what's being repeated, and just carrying out orders when supported by real or apparent power.
The genetics of curiosity: some explanation is needed for the inventiveness of whites, which seems to have been greater than any other group, so far as information survives. Looking at early man, techniques and inventions presumably must have been mostly suggested by natural things. But these would need coaxing and control. For example, polyploidy in grasses is common, but must have needed care to convert into wheat; the original observations alone could not have been enough. Just as with Cox, the clergyman, and his orange pippin. Taming horses, breeding sheep, finding clean water, examining the properties of woods from different trees, making fire, the medicinal (or poisonous) properties of plants, testing foods, illustrate the need for inventiveness. Probably metal smelting must have been discovered by chance, or perhaps trial, once fire had been more or less domesticated and some of its effects noticed.
It's easy to guess how geometry and arithmetic and mechanics might grow from plots of land, enumerating objects, and making things. Maybe the process needed increases in brain size—which, by a masterpiece of inconsistency, now tend to be disregarded by Jewish 'science'. But, as some human beings have developed technology, clearly the next generation has to be able to master it to continue. There are obvious possibilities that techniques may be lost, and certainties that knowledge of remoter pasts will be lost.
There's an interesting possibility that the genetics of this type of creativity may lead to oddities and hypertrophied activities and what might be called perversions, of inner thrusts and impulses attaching themselves to oddities, like ducklings imprinted with some other animal. David Horrobin thought schizophrenia shaped humanity, but at a more normal level, perhaps genetic impulses now prompting adults to knit scarves, make working model railways, get their own welding kits, play croquet to championship level, develop card-sharing skills, or grow giant marrows, are in some sense inherited playfulness. Such derivative things as anagrams (which need an alphabet), prime number theorems (which probably needed a feeling for stacking items), optical illusions (which need some sort of familiarity with diagrams), and symbols such as signposts, runes, and secret markers, all have features not needed in basic living. Perhaps significantly, they are included in 'IQ' tests.
(I'm tempted to suggest that some of the people spending much of their lives on unsolved issues in theology, philosophy and relativity—are metaphorically living their lives adapted to long dark nights).
'Perversion' may seem an odd word to use; but it's possible that some people have a genetic tendency to become over-absorbed in activities, as perhaps was Archimedes telling a Roman soldier not to spoil his sand diagram, and being killed as a result. Maybe the pyramids, now believed to have been built by whites, and stonehenge, were driven by the urge to experiment? Even trial of new foods, important for omnivores, must be largely experimental: he was a bold man who first ate an oyster. Could it be that cartoons, smiley faces, ambiguous films, parables in books, sagas and tales, project misunderstandings into the brain? So that bullshit baffles brains of such people? After all, some brains are needed even to be baffled. Maybe a clearer view of trees is needed not to see the wood?
Perhaps genetics influences entire lifestyles and perceptions: some people decide to become accountants or lawyers; some follow a tradition and become academic or medical people; some people think an empty building must have been a prison, or a storage place, or a dressing room, or a kitchen. This is something to do with learning: it's hard to see how anyone can learn activities and perceptions which don't yet exist.
The genetics of white subgroups: in view of the primacy of whites, let's try to consider groups of them. An interesting approach is the genetics of specialisation: mediaeval guilds and craftsmen illustrate the sort of thing. These groups tended to intermarry, keep together, and share trade and other secrets, for obvious geographical and educational reasons. Before formal and state and church education, obviously it made sense for specialists, and for farmers, sailors, blacksmiths, dealers, to share knowledge amongst themselves. Possibly there was some genetic separation into subgroups. There may have been separation by character: agriculture needed people able to tolerate long winters, brief harvest-times, long watchful times, and the ability to plan and store, a type vaguely analogous to bears which hibernate over winter.
The genetics of the spread of ability types after many generations presumably gets itself encoded into genes: but some environments need a wider spread of characteristics than others, and this may introduce the possibility that co-operation becomes more difficult between the varying types, so perhaps some environments induce people to evolve into groups which are disunited and uncooperative under stress. And of course other environments may induce evolution of a sort which has fewer unusual types, but cannot adapt well if sudden new changes occur.
Whites' formation of bonds: it's observable that families, army groups, school classes, bureaucracies, businesses tend to form groups which feel bonds. Looking at recent times, historically speaking, one such bond is technically skilled whites: Spain, Portugal, Holland, Britain, France, and Russia each had empires. Whites formed a layer around much of the world, a technical elite. Sailing ships, steamships, railways, telegraphs, towns and cities, radio, airways were organised by whites. India copied steam trains; China never built a jet engine. In the 'third world' we have the oddity that wars were fought with both sides using much the same equipment. Almost incredibly, Jews funded all sides of these aspects of life: where white groups faced other white groups, Jews were able to exploit and harm each pair of such groups. Whites' technical arrangements kept them from observing Jewish activities; and Jews were very careful to remain unobserved, with a possibly genetically-determined parasitic skill which only became noticed by significant numbers of whites in modern times after the 'Great War', later renamed the First World War. Perhaps there's a genetic tendency for most whites to do what they're told, as part of big projects—after all, there may well have been relatively few creative inventors, dependent on the rest to do work they didn't fully comprehend. Looking (for example) at the Second World War, there are still celebrations by survivors of all the participants, most of whom seem unable to notice how much they lost. It seems completely natural to them, just as the ordinary BBC worker finds it natural to output their propagandist junk for their entire working life. The parasitical view of Jews is that they have one simple fixed aim to focus on, and can no more consider change than a tapeworm decides to explore the world. This may explain the Jewish panic when faced with a challenge: they have a single lifestyle with no genetic leeway for novelty.
The genetics of bringing up children: possibly men and women grouped separately for many purposes, including inventiveness, and including parental specialisation. The very long period of children's helplessness made care essential: even (say) a 1 in 20 chance of homicide of a child in one year could extinguish a group or tribe. It's unsurprising that parents care for offspring more or less in proportion to the effort that needs to go into their upbringing. However this long process allows possibilities of child kidnappings and slavery and 'abuse', all of which are found where there is hostility or little affection or food shortage. Male lions are said to kill cubs of displaced males; this is usually attributed to jealousy or something like 'selfish genes', but might be a perception that there are too many mouths for a hunting range. There seems to be some natural, perhaps sex-linked, evolution here: maybe significantly, women may have had charge of cookery and children since the dawn of time, but men seem to have worked out principles of food and childcare, though of course it's impossible to be certain.
The genetics of culture, collective memories, and the sense of history. Evolution seems to have found no way to pass on memories, except in the sense that behaviour patterns with some survival value must have tended to be retained, as they must in animals which die before their offspring grows, or plants which obviously cannot learn from their parents. In human beings, love, rage, caution, trial and error, learning, aggression and many vague impulses must be instinctive, but must vary between individuals, as for example in psychopaths. There is scope, with groups, for the equivalent of false memory syndrome in individuals. Many Jews seem to seriously believe they are descended from Abraham, or Adam, or Moses, despite the lack of evidence.
Perhaps genetics comes into long-term beliefs, and long-term planning; F J Irsigler wrote on Jews and their long fake memories (as the Khazars and many Jewish historical activities prove) and their grudges; probably there's a connection with writings and/or incantations. All this may seem completely convincing to their minds: unshakeable belief in Cain and Abel, the Tower of Babel, poisoning of wells, killing the best goyim, twirling chickens around the head, the great virtue of Jews are typical fantastic beliefs which it seems genetically natural for Jews to adhere to. Possibly their adamant belief in goyim as 'sheeple' will harm parts of the world irretrievably: sheep make meat, wool, and other things, such as bonemeal. But they do not invent anything, so Jewish harm to whites may lead to dangerous decline in the level of the world's competence.

The genetics of Parasitism. (Click the back arrow to return here). Parasites feed on parts of other creatures; that's the simple version. But there are complications. One way to study them is to try thought experiments. Consider for example the genetics of extinction of parasites: probably very big, visible, parasites, which feed excessively, will in time kill themselves off as their hosts either die or take extreme action. What's left in the long term will be tapeworms, botflies, guinea worms, fleas etc. The title of a 1978 book, Why Big Fierce Animals Are Rare illustrates the point, though perhaps it dates from an epoch with secure human control. There are also few huge parasitic plants: rafflesia is unusual in this; mistletoe, though a parasite, is quite small; ivy seems to be a saprophyte. Other thought experiments might puzzle over countermeasures to parasites. Why can't nesting birds co-operate to remove cuckoo chicks or, better, eggs? Why can't fish co-operate in removing lampreys? Evidently, all present-day parasites have evolved 'successfully'—they live, and so do their hosts. I have never heard of research into paleo-parasitism, but perhaps there are studies of long-extinct parasites, amid those of other extinct species. Conceivably there might be lessons.

Jews as highly specialised parasites. Many people now still fail to include Jews in their worldview, largely of course because of the intense censorship. Historically, this is a typical stage in the situation of Jews vs 'Gentiles'. After awareness of Jews rises, there is typically some reaction, and a conclusion; after this, memories fade or are submerged, and the process begins again. Hilaire Belloc in 1920 gave an account of increasing Jewish entry into English society during the 19th century, which I think he regarded as seeded by Rothschild rumour-mongering and profit-taking after Napoleon was finally defeated. Part of the picture is certainly the 'Talmud' which was all but unknown to non-Jews for most of the time it existed.
This piece on 'sayanim' shows how the recommended policies of the Talmud are operated in practice by their simple-minded believers: Sayanim and Hasbarat.
Within this long file (Click the left-arrow to return here) here are just a few earlier articles written by me on this subject:–

Eugenics is my attempt to explain how Jews intentionally want other populations, notably whites, to be harmed, by ignoring the possibilities of modern medicine.
Paper money/ e-money as the root of Jewish influence at the present day. This of course has not always been the case. But it is essential to understand, and the related facts of Jews wanting to lend money to governments so they collect interest, offloading the payments onto the citizens.
The following related article explains how the two-tier system looks to ordinary people, and how 'economics' has been crippled into a pseudo-science by Jews: Jewish Control of Money. And Deliberately Missing Economic Theory.
And it is important to have some idea how Jewish media control is used: Jewish lies and deception. These lies apply throughout the world: remember this when you read that (say) blacks built New York, or Asians built Blackburn, or white stole black inventions, or there is a 'Judeo-Christian' tradition, or Stalin was humanitarian, or the USA's policy is pro-immigration, or whatever other contemptible trash is being promoted.
And ponder the issue of ultimate reparations from Jews back to whites: Reparations to Whites in future.

Other human genetic issues. I hope serious researchers will resume work from the 19th century into the remote mental processes of different races. It may be for example that 'muti', the belief that body parts have magical properties, is something unique to blacks. European medical beliefs included what may be similar beliefs, but I won't go into that here. It's stated black tribes when newly-discovered have no concept of natural deaths, but always blame death on other people. Whether this was a genuine belief, or reports about groups which hardly ever survived to old age, I can't say. Lack of understanding of change, of abstractions such as time and number, simple languages are other claimed characteristics. The genetics of short term and long term reactions are other typically interesting issues; do people tolerate to be tolerated? Do they bear grudges, and if so, for how long? Will it be possible to examine or model genetic changes over (say) 100 human generations? The genetics of population change are relevant to times of war, and times of peace. After population crashes, typically there are new varieties, and these, typically, stabilise to a somewhat different pattern from before. What might happen after the Jewish-pushed genetic changes are either repelled or become unavoidable?
Genetics Under Islam. Worth noting the similarities between Muslims and Judaics. Both are intensely tribal; both have severe penalties or people considering leaving; and the longish-term genetics of each must have been influenced by their 'holy' books. Both groups mainly started very roughly 700 AD, Islam first. Both have similar books which presumably must later have fed back into their habits and genetics. The main differences (in my view) were (1) Islam allowed and encouraged conversion; this permitted much greater and faster expansion, but must have had some genetic effects making for less fanaticism. It meant 'kuffar' and 'goyim' aren't analogous; 'goyim' are more or less permanently fixed. It also makes difficulties in establishing whether 'Muslims' were in fact related to Arabs—mass conversions (especially to avoid tax) can make conquest seem more large-scale than it could have been. (2) Islam encourages multiple 'wives'; 'wives' in quotes because they are not wives in the conventional western sense. This presumably had some narrowing effects on genetics. (3) There was not a narrow priestly caste in Islam; literacy was less important, laws were less important, simply carrying the book around was felt to be impressive. (4) Parasitism was not as evolved as with Jews. Here is another example which genetics ought to be able to say important things about. (China, Catholics with celibacy, Gipsies, and the thuggee (=deceivers) cult, are four further examples. Gipsies have been mentioned a few times, for example here. I've sometimes wondered whether imitativeness and such habits as habitual cheating in exams are a result of prolonged inbreeding within very static societies with developed bureaucracies/ mandarinates).
Are there decent Jews? Direct me to original research by Jews condemning the Fed and Jews in both world wars, condemning Jewish mass murders in the USSR, condemning the immense Holohoax fraud, condemning Kissinger's mass murders, condemning Jews in Palestine, Jews and 9/11. And condemning Jews and the black slave trade, the opium wars, Jewish media lies... - If there are so many decent Jews you'll have no difficulty finding plenty of examples. Will you? (This may be very slightly unfair: Benjamin Freedman is perhaps the only example).
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Engineering & Architecture
The 9/11 fraud must have politicised many civil engineers. The nuclear weapons frauds (and video evidence) is beginning to be known to scientists and technologists. Military engineers must be aware of the Jewish connections—ownership of weapons companies, of aerospace corporations, Jewish contractors, Jewish war propagandists, Jewish control of thugs and covert military groups, writing-off of money to Jews for failed projects, and all the rest of it. Electrical engineers must I hope have some information on the likely money-making pretence of nuclear power. I hope some of the people involved in these things will make some effort, in whatever ways they may contrive, to document and expose such things.
This afterthought, on architecture, is suggested by Jewish museums and other propagandist structures. For example the British 'Imperial War Museum North' is a sort of Jewish triumphalist religious monument, housed in a structure owing more to civil and structural engineers than design. Naturally, it's often described as being by a 'brilliant' Jewish architect.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Math & Computer Models
Econometrics and Computer Models It's unsurprising that computer models of economies are not successful: the main reason is that no allowance is made for Jewish control on the issue of money, and the likely profit-maximising behaviour resulting from that control. This is probably the main reason computer models have fallen out of favour—or, just as likely, been pushed out for the very reason they'd draw attention to control of money. This is disappointing: since the days when Forrester made some attempts to model global activities, with special emphasis on rather vaguely-defined 'pollution', despite the huge progress in computing, not much has happened. But there is scope for work here, testing theoretical models and possibly modelling such things as depressions caused by money withdrawal, profits made from wars, expenditure on propaganda needed to keep the system going, and inflation caused by borrowing paper money against future real earnings.
One obvious modification to what's called macroeconomics is to do with National Income, Y. If this is reduced, made smaller by specifically Jewish activities, such as frauds + interest + costs of propaganda + costs of Jewish-related legal and police actions + external costs of wars and subsidies + opportunity costs lost by Jewish actions, some approach might be made to quantifying Jews.

P T Jenkins Theory of Monetary Economics

P T Jenkins Theory of Monetary Economics

This double page photo shows a part of a 1975 paper by P T Jenkins. Note, in the diagram, the three parts to his monetary circulation: Industrial circulation, Financial circulation, and Bank of England. The latter could of course be the Federal reserve or other national or international Jewish groups. Jenkins is or was an actuary, a Fellow of the Institute of Actuaries, to whom problems of investment, and knowledge of such vehicles as gilts (government securities), shares (stocks) of various types, cash and other holdings, were his daily work. As far as I know, he was the first to separate uses of money in this way. However, he did not consider machinations of those people controlling the Bank of England: he was motivated by the formation of OPEC, and inflation in the 1970s.

Lewis Fry Richardson as a pioneer in mathematics of conflicts and wars. I'm a bit reluctant to recommend Lewis Fry Richardson, because his pioneering work isn't very satisfactory. He used mathematics with considerable skill—mostly calculus. He also used newer styles in mathematics, including statistical tests, difference methods, and sampling. This link (largely from Internet) outlines Richardson's work and my opinions on his deficiencies. But it's possible his methods could simply be extended into the real world of Jewish influence over money and wars and propaganda.
It's a possibility that Jews have contributed to the general uselessness of modern mathematics: the symbolism offers ever-larger scope for symbolic oddities. Looking back, I wonder if René Thom was in fact Jewish, in view of the possibly artificial promotional activity around him, and the (as far as I could see) complete lack of any results.
New Approach? I sometimes wonder whether some new theory can be invented. A few millennia after counting and geometry modelled parts of the world, calculus (based on algebra) managed to trap rates of change, introducing new methods which still rule much of mathematics. In tandem with a well-considered approach to mass, this led to planetary motion theories, huge buildings, huge ships, railways, airplanes, dams, and bombs. Another intellectual achievement was evolution, which, although scientific, differed enormously from dynamics, for example in not being able to predict with any precision. Assuming there will be a 'next' ideas breakthough, it may well be very different from both. I like to hope it may be specifically human: could it sum up the effects of large numbers of different minds? Or the results which follow from the inevitably rather small number of friends anyone can have? Or net lifetime inputs, outputs, and efforts? Perhaps some sort of result from intersecting sets and their enlargements or shrinkages? Or changes in relative power of a number of groups? Is there some limit to the absorption of ideas?—I don't know, but some ingenious idea might be out there awaiting discovery.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Women's studies/ Feminism
Susan Sontag

In The Trial of Stephen Ward (an 'osteopath') by Ludovic Kennedy (1964) is a note on perjury by women: (p 215)--
'... Towards the end of a long life at the Bar the great judge, Sir Travers Humphreys, said that miscarriages of justice were almost always caused by unforeseeable circumstances or perjury by women.' Others with a similar opinion include C E M Joad, the plagiarist philosopher, and Antonio Ludovici's backspin defence of women as prompted by instinct: "... And now turn your eyes on Life itself! Look at the girl! Provided that he is not watching her too closely, her eyes are scanning every inch of his body, with a penetration, an attention, a fierce criticism, that is allowing no detail to escape, no indication of virile potency to go unnoticed. Her hands may be cold, even moist with emotion; but Life in her is neither cold nor moist: it is at white heat, working its hardest, and deciding for her whether it shall be Aye or Nay! ..." Emotional stuff; Ludovici praised women for, as he thought, being in touch with philoprogenitive instincts, leading them to be low on reason. One of Ludovici's arguments is that, even in spheres of life where women had control—food, childcare, clothes—all important discoveries were made by men, as witness male chefs, male child psychologists, male clothes designers. To this day women are reputed to go to great lengths to avoid science and mathematics—these subjects being partly rewritten, or, less politely, "dumbed down".
Anyone studying the Jewish issue should honestly face women's limitations, and examine the way Jewish lies have had their effects. Let's hope something can be done. On education as tokenism, here's a review of Jane Robinson's Century of Education on women fighting, or supposedly fighting, for education, and the wonders of women working in war and getting paid to kill Germans. Another British feminist, who spent most of her life in universities, is Sheila Rowbotham writing on 20th century women, with no insight whatever into real problems. And here are comments on women nuclear protestors, who simply uncritically accept everything they've been fed by the Jewish media: Women nuclear protestors as useful idiots, which stresses the inability of women to go to the roots of scientific method; the same comment applies to physics, of course. (I'm not denying vast numbers of men do just the same thing). And here's an article by Stephen Whittle, writing as Luke O'Farrell, on Jewish fake feminism (see the photo of Susan Sontag, 'the' 'Jewish' 'thinker'). Here's another depressing exhibit: a review of Susan Brownmiller on rape, where the Jewish author accepts any amount of wartime propaganda (Bryce Report, on the First World War; 'Jew York Times' completely censoring rapes by Jewish-run USSR hordes in the Second World War; and brushes off routine US rapes in Vietnam, and black on white rapes in the USA).
Another school of thought on women wonders if money and power are hard-wired routes to sex; this was Ludovici's view, and this at present of course favours Jews. Yet another set of commentators looks at evidence that Jews in Israel are the centre of massive prostitution rackets.
Race mixing is a theme of Jewish attitudes that white women need to know. Jews hate whites, therefore they think it's obvious that sex crimes against white girls and women should be unreported and unpunished, and that alien races should be given money and housing at the expense of whites. TV and cinema and ads, under Jewish control, do their best to encourage race mixing. Abortion is targeted against whites, with 'life' clinics offering no support to women hesitant to abort. And so on. This sort of observation is virtually a guarantee that Jewish interests are operating behind the scenes.
Geneticists ought to investigate the facts of race mixing: Good? Best of both worlds? I've read some books which claim mixed race children have intelligent parents; probably this is based on propaganda as applied to the USA. Genetically, are they free of inbreeding; or maladapted to the world? Is a small introduction into a gene pool self-extinguishing, and if so in how many generations? Do they have a schizophrenic or fragmented reality, with family half way round the world, with incompatible cultures and languages? To what extant is Jewish promotion of war responsible for 'war babies'?—these are questions which the Jewish hold on media make impossible to discuss freely, at present, but which serious researchers must face.

Women and Persuasion Women may need to be aimed at specifically if important issues are to be understood throughout entire communities. Female revisionists are comparatively few; female shrill protestors and sentimentalists seem too common. I noticed that only about 9% of my Youtube videos are watched by women, assuming their stats are fairly correct. Without disputing that there are plenty of dim and not very teachable males, women need revisionist websites and information.

Women's Movements in History, e.g. the Suffragettes It's essential to understand the way such movements have been used as fronts, in the same way that individuals have been used in fronts for Jewish movements. An interesting examples is the suffragettes in England. (Nothing to do with suffering; suffrage means given a vote). Thanks to Simon Webb's book on suffragettes it struck me that bombing outrages from about 1910 may have been carried out by Jews, who wanted war in Europe. I have not made any attempt to examine evidence for this plausible hypothesis. This link expands on the idea. The most interesting writer on gender and law known to me is English, E. Belfort Bax; his 1913-published book, The Fraud of Feminism (free download from e.g. archive.org) suggests to me that 'sex war' was a Jewish move to split Britain and the USA, either to damage them or lead to war. Unfortunately Bax is not for my taste a very systematic, or numerate, writer; he was tutored in 'March of Mind' Victorianism, and taught music and German philosophy, but appears to have drawn on other people for his legal material. The hypothesis about Jews and women might be tested against the experiences of Russia, Poland, Hungary, and Germany—each with high Jewish populations—though there are large language barriers.

Erica Sherova-Marcuse ('Ricky Marcuse'), 2nd wife of Herbert Marcuse of the 'Frankfurt School'

Women and Wars and Conflicts This is Bertrand Russell (Psychology and Politics c 1928): 'In the [First World] War, elderly spinsters developed a ferocity partly attributable to their indignation with young men for having neglected them. They are still abnormally bellicose. I remember soon after the Armistice ... seeing many battleships... Two elderly spinsters in the [train] carriage turned to each other and murmured: 'Isn't it sad to see them all lying idle!' ...' Simon Sheppard of www.heretical.org seems to blame the First World War, and the viciousness of modern wars, on women. Ludovico thought elderly women were not fit to rule over young women. There's some scope for this sort of analysis; in view of our topic, Jewish women acting in groups make a topic needing investigation.
Violence and race-mixing. The last few centuries must be exceptional in world history for race mixing. Examples include: Jews and African slavery; north African muslim black and white slaves; colonisation of the Americas; South Africa from about 1900. (The origin of 'coloureds' as far as I know is undiscussed. A Doris Lessing short story describes a Jew in South Africa, fathering children on an entire African village. Hoogstraten in Zimbabwe seems to be continuing this habit). American invaders in Vietnam, whole businesses in Thailand... And Jewish-inflicted deliberate immigration into white countries is intended to have similar results. It's a sad commentary on the funding of 'feminists' that these things go almost entirely undiscussed.
This is John Costello on sex in the Second World War (1985) quoted by Simon Sheppard. Western Europe; not eastern Europe.

[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Economics
At present 'economics' is used more-or-less as a synonym for money. Most economic policy is to do with finance (just after WW2 the US set up the IMF and World Bank, as though money was the most important thing) and this must be attributed to Jewish influence, in the same way 20th century wars are attributable to Jews. This means the whole theory of economics has to be reconstructed; the importance should be on actualities rather than money. Economics is presumably to do with making things, moving them about, and arranging them, rather as a body has inputs of food and air and outputs of other things, while moving around and doing things over its lifetime. Economics is bounded by knowledge and communication and invention and the biology of populations: wheat had to be found wild, or bred, before it could be a useful crop; nobody would manufacture vitamin pills if vitamins hadn't been discovered; there was no glass in China for centuries, as no Chinese knew of it; before the Spanish introduced horses, nobody in the Americas could travel fast; curved buildings weren't feasible before computer stress calculations; alcoholic drinks weren't liked by people without alcohol dehydrogenase; if the sun's energy can be successfully harvested, oil will be less needed; if a tiny explosive could destroy the world, it's unlikely life could continue.

1950 ish. So-called 'computer' to model the British economy. (There are photos online). I can't resist putting this here. Of course the Jewish paper money aspect is not modelled.

The Missing Theory of Macrofinance (click back-arrow to return here) is a plea for a theory to predict the behaviour of money controllers; surely it's not that difficult? And surely money issue doesn't have to be in notoriously corrupt Jewish hands? Here's a site on money reform without attempting to form an opinion on it.
I'll reproduce here from that piece my comments on fairly simple economic 'laws', all ignoring the macrofinancial aspects, as of course is appropriate for the small-time people it's intended for, just as TV business reports are small descriptions, not analyses:–

The way supply and demand vary with price (one goes up with price increase, the other goes down) makes sense at a commonsense level; so does marginal utility - the idea that absolute values of utility are generally less relevant (and less measurable) than changes to the current positions of 'utility' of food, water, transport, whatever. 'Comparative advantage' generalises this sort of view to large geographical groups, and to customs unions. Fixed and variable costs are conceptually simple enough. Marginal costs of production give an explanation of profit maximisation points. 'Gresham's Law' (bad money drives out good) attributes the status of 'law' to the fact that most people hold on to more valuable types of money. The 'Quantity Theory of Money' tries to relate inflation or deflation to the amount of money and its rate of circulation. More sophisticated maths applies to (for example) the idea that VAT (a tax on 'added value') is neutral; it is supposed not to affect competitive marginal situations, and the 'proof' uses calculus.

Most or all economics textbooks are by Jews; Samuelson and Lipsey are rather old examples. It's no surprise to find the issue of money supply control is muffled and barely-discussed. And the same is true of power-redistribution: armies, weapons, dangerous drugs, propaganda and education and media, legal matters, taxes and tax evasion, and so on. Probably the Jewish attitude is that, since the goyim's role is to work, economics textbooks which ignore all the most expensive items of governments (money and borrowing, wars, military bases and equipment, education, housing, oil and other major businesses) are suitable for them.
Question marks hang over economics: is there, for example, some link between productivity and violence, since there may be more spare time than human psychology can take? Is it necessary that people feel fear to make them work? Is there some law about co-operation between some human groups, giving advantages over un-co-operative people? If one form of power or production dominates (e.g. priests, or lawyers, or soldiers, or money; or land for crops, or trade-routes, or metalworkers) is there some rule of transition and change? Most professional economists have been unadventurous, and it's not surprising that unofficial economics is important, just as maverick philosophers have often been more important than official schoolmen. John Stuart Mill and Marshall and Robinson and Keynes and others tackled issues which turned out to be rather unimportant. It's not surprising that Marx, Friedrich List, Henry George, Hayek and many others had some popularity. Henry George's land tax idea is still around; here's a site about New York.
The Economist is no doubt Jewish (details are secret) and it is something of a touchstone: if this publication supports something, anything—nuclear power, Obama, mass killings, immigration into white countries, paedophilia, abortion, some or other oil policy, some or other housing policy, some legal manoeuvre—it can be assumed that 'Jews' think it's in their interest, unless the policy is to fleece the gullible, impose local recession, manipulate exchange rates or whatever it might be.

Here are six important Jewish-related economics issues:–
(1) 'Wealth Creation' and 'wealth protection'. This is a simple introductory note! 'Wealth Creation' is usually a Jewish synonym for making money and holding on to it. A bank robber or fraudster stealing money and successfully hiding it is a 'Wealth generator' in Jewish parlance. The unspoken assumption is making money from goyim for Jews.
(2) The effects of transnational groups of people. For example, international control of trade unions can arrange for production to move away from countries on a huge scale, by fomenting problems to be used as reasons/excuses for closures. International companies can arrange market share between countries on a huge scale. International science and technology groups can dominate production in fields which are (or appear to be) high-tech. US bases around the world have supported endless wars.
(3) And of course Jewish financial control can tap into countries, with overwhelming back-up, just as the USSR was kept going by Jewish-controlled money. Ideas of competition and success through risky hard work can be reserved for the gullible.
(4) In order to keep their financial control, Jews have supported wars, fomented divisions to the point of explosion, funded war propaganda, arranged to make money from weapons, funded anti-white trusts, arranged jobs for unqualified people to deliberately cause harm to the host communities, and promoted money-making fake science. (For a scratch at the surface of science fraud, see Sociology and Economics of Science and Weapon Frauds). These things are hard to quantify, but any new science of economics must at least estimate these things. If/when they do, Reparations to Korea, Vietnam, USA, Britain, France, Germany, Scandinavia, Palestine, Ukraine, Poland, Russia, Armenia, Turkey etc etc will have to be carefully considered. (Click back-arrow to return here).
(5) Marxist Economics is obviously a collection of examples all pointing in one direction, excluding anything that doesn't conform. However, it's worth noting another aspect, which is that Marxism has little interest in people who can be considered seriously oppressed. I noticed this at a meeting, where a black woman said that coffee growers get 10 cents (or 1 cent, whatever) a day, or a week (whatever). Another comrade said their analysis was that the rate of exploitation meant that serious exploitation only occurred when there was more money involved!
(6) Jewish Octopus is another aspect of Jewish power. As an example, the British Daily Telegraph newspaper is allegedly owned by two Catholic brothers. However, it seems unlikely to me that if they embarked on revelations of Jewish power, they would be able to buy newsprint, continue distribution, get advertising, and so on. Any printer of revisionist books is liable to problems; no film would be shown in normal cinemas if it (for example) showed anything like the truth of the 'Russian Revolution'. The control of worthless money gives tremendous leverage up to decisions far more important than these. For example, Hitler would have liked to ally with the then British Empire. But if the 'British Empire' were not in fact British, there would be problems.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Business Studies
Jewish media choice 1968

As shown above, Jewish control of money, coupled with their corruption and dishonesty, puts non-Jews (unless they collaborate) at an impossible disadvantage. It makes sense to recognise this fact and factor it in to every analysis. For example, there is a myth of competition—that efficiency, skill, and friendliness will win. This is true at the second-tier level, and Jews will typically wait for a successful venture before either destroying it, copying it, or buying it outright. Jewish control of money permits selective funding of Jewish 'think tanks' and related groups of liars: click for information on charities, 'think tanks', thugs, and other Jewish pressure groups. Incredibly, some of these corrupt organisations are treated as though they are independent and genuine.
At the present day, most shops in most cities are owned by multinationals of one sort or another. (Check this out, if you like). This tends to be concealed by the retention of old names, trade marks, familiar brands, and so on. And there's an appearance of choice in cigarettes, food, news (see photographs; most of the stuff has the same message) petrol/gas, drinks, advertising, and so on. I suspect there is a myth of economies of scale. If the Jewish money advantage is discounted, I suspect many unified ownership schemes would be found to be inefficient. Shopping malls for example are, world-wide, largely controlled by Jews. But if they had to work for the money, it seems entirely possible that smaller local schemes may be better. Ingenious researchers may be able to verify this.
Looking at the labour side of things, Labour Unions (click back-arrow to return here) when they are international can be controlled by Jews. For example, under Margaret Thatcher, the coal unions and shipbuilding unions were used to direct production to where international Jews thought best for them.
With the domination of advertising, and control over taxation and rents, new pseudo-businesses have grown up. In Britain, charities are exempt from Freedom of Information enquiries, and are very poorly policed and regulated. At least since the 1960s they have been run as major money-spinners, the management and staff making fortunes, and the payouts to the deserving being negligible. Generally the money legally has to be held as capital, only interest payments being allowed for the nominal purposes of the charities. When interest rates are low, they are allowed to invest in their own schemes, which may or may not be sound. It was recently (2013) shown that BBC 'Children in Need' put the money donated by the gullible public, moved by photos of starving black children, into arms companies and other profitable companies. Another issue, and another typical fraud, is the 'Big Issue', a magazine supposedly concerned with housing. If illegal immigrants stand on street corners holding the rag, they are legally classified as 'self employed' and used to promote the Jewish myth that those people are 'entrepreneurs'.
An interesting issue is to see past the complacent and/or misleading ways businesses are described. I recently read an online blog by an advertiser, who claimed ad agencies are something like a myth—hiring people if there's a new contract, firing them if it doesn't work. He claimed many supposed big agencies lived off one or two widely-discussed contracts; when their time was up, the agencies barely continued.

Valuations and City Bankruptcies, Industry Bankrupties, Public Utility Sales etc. Most people are not in a position to check figures; as a result in all large-scale business there is scope for fraud by misrepresentation. It's easy to use vague wording and misleading expressions to hide assets and liabilities. This sort of things seems to be happening in Detroit, for example, and certainly happened when public assets were sold off under Thatcherism. Another, possibly the most important, misrepresentation is to telescope many years of spending or income into one year. It's worth knowing how to value, in money terms, many years of spending or income as one single present value: an interest rate is assigned, of (say) 8%, because money in future is worth less than money now. An infinite stream of payments, or of income, is valued at 12.5 times one year's payment or income. Valuing pensions payouts depends on assumptions about lifespans.
Valuations came to prominence during the Treaty of Versailles. A footnote to The Economic Consequences of the Peace says e.g. German ores were valued by from estimated reserves of metals underground, ignoring mining costs and length of time to produce finished products. Like valuing a field by multiplying the value crops to the end of time. With universal lying, watch out for this sort of thing.

Valuations of Unseen, Hidden, and Undiscussed Assets. This seems to be a gap in theoretical economics, though it's real enough in life. Oil reserves are unknown and possibly unknowable. Land Banks are stored up for the future by builders, stores, etc. African countries have been surveyed to some extent but there's potential conflict between the interests of local people and the interests of companies specialising in the relevant materials.

Changes Pending Removal of Jews. It remains to be seen whether Russia in particular, and Europe, will achieve justice and finally remove Jews as a force. There are of course straws in the wind: an interesting example is IKEA, which, significantly, is active in many areas recovering from Jewish 'Communist' ruin, and has its own financial arm.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Military
An important contribution researchers ought to make is to attempt to quantify wars. My best guess is that prolonged conflicts, such as the Vietnam War, were almost entirely used to make money for Jews, both by destruction of ordnance and by replacement of airplanes etc. There may have been an element of testing weapons of mass destruction, though on the face of it, it's not that hard to predict the effects of explosions, fragmentation bombs, napalm and so on. There's also the issue of careers for 'soldiers' and their vast support staff. So far as I know, the net effects of gains, losses, damages, and who, in particular, benefited have not been carried out.
Military sociology is an almost completely neglected field. This is not surprising. Many race-aware people point to Africans as being exceptionally low in IQ, and this appears to be true. However the fact that vast atrocities were carried out by Europeans ought to be factored in. When you consider the atrocities by Jews in the USSR, there can be no doubt that similar atrocities were and are carried out in Africa; consider for example the Boer War and the Belgian Congo's links with rubber, and uranium ore. Probably Jews were involved in the genocide in Cambodia.
There's also the issue of blocs or groups, and specialist types, as for example Gurkhas used by the British, presumably mostly for terrorism.
Investigators of Jews must look for evidence that Jews follow different interests from the goyim schmuck soldiery. For example, an Israeli sniper who shot many US troops might be of interest to Americans. So might palettes loaded with paper 'money' in Iraq.

May I enter here a plea for honesty. Many men who fought in the Second World War refused to talk about it, ever. Many of the very young Americans sent to Vietnam will not talk about it. The inequality in weapons and supplies was staggering, so much so that describing them as 'veterans' is something close to a joke. After all truth needs collections of facts; a factual basis is needed for any decisions or awareness. And of course there's the Jewish issue, as there has been in all 20th century wars; Kissinger, unelected, carried on wars for years, no doubt accompanied by his animals.

An entirely separate issue is the Jewish 'nuclear weapons' industry, which ever since the Manhattan Project appears to have been a complete fraud. This is a vast subject, spanning about 70 years, of the sort that's called "controversial", meaning there is no Jewish media controversy. Here's a link to a tour of the Nuke Lies forum, which has one year's contributions and established most of the groundwork.

War Finance Many people wonder why there are cuts announced, at the same time that expensive wars are started. Why is there money for war, but not money for people? The way this works is, roughly, that people are paid from taxes, if they are lucky, or of course if they are favoured by governments. (In the USA, this means anti-white actions favoured by 'Jews'). But wars are paid for differently, not from taxes, but by printing money, and by government borrowing. In this way inflation is set up for the future, and Jews make more money.

Wars as Indicators of Subsistence Levels. This is not something yet relevant to the USA. But in countries on the receiving end of wars, note that such events can be usefully regarded as indicating subsistence levels for these areas. Britain during World War 2 had rationing, control of fuel, and low wages. Everything above that level can be regarded as extra. This may help in assessing modern economies; how much of the quantities above minimal level goes into harmful or damaging expenditure? One activity of Jews is to damage societies by financial fraud, increasing crime levels by freeing criminal, importing foreigners with associated costs, using media to control information. Probably some estimate of their effects might be made, very approximately, along such lines as these.

Reconsidering Wars from First Principles: Will Patterns Emerge?
And the subsidiary question: will Jewish influence be removed, and. if so, will horrific wars continue? Here are six examples; they are remote from conventional military history and it has to be hoped something might come from analysis. 'Tomatobubble' listed 'backstabbings' by 'the NWO gang', presumably meaning Jews, in 2014–
JAPAN: 1904-05 | THE HONEY: the U.S. branch of the NWO gang made a sweet offer to Japan: "Fight Tsarist Russia for us. We will finance you big time and you'll get you a chunk of Manchuria after the war." | THE STAB-IN-THE-BACK: Japan won the war and established control over much of Manchuria (see maps above). But just 36 years later, the U.S. picked a fight with Japan. The Japanese Empire would be destroyed by the NWO, and Manchuria was handed over to Soviet control.
RUSSIA: 1907 | THE HONEY: the NWO gang made a sweet offer to Tsarist Russia: "Join the British-French in the Triple Entente Alliance. When the coming Great War against Germany & Turkey is settled, you'll get Constantinople (Istanbul) back from the Ottoman Turks who conquered the great city of the Orthodox Byzantine Empire in 1453." | THE STAB-IN-THE-BACK: World War I proved devastating for Russia. The NWO-funded Bolsheviks used the disaster to bring an end to the Russian Empire and usher in a reign of Red Terror. [To this day, genocide of Armenians as a Jewish plan with Turkey is barely discussed].
POLAND: 1939 | THE HONEY: The British & French branch of the NWO gang made a sweet offer to Poland: "Pick a fight with Hitler's Germany. We'll back you up and you can have a huge chunk of German territory. The old Empire of Poland will be restored." | THE STAB-IN-THE-BACK: After provoking a German invasion, Poland was left out to dry by the Allies. Not only did Britain & France do nothing to help Poland fight Germany, they later remained silent as the Soviet Union invaded Poland from the East; murdering much of the leadership of Poland's military.
CHINA: 1937-45 | THE HONEY: The U.S. branch of the NWO gang made a sweet offer to Nationalist China (Chiang Kai Shek). "You fight Japan and we will support you. After the war, Manchuria will be Chinese and we will do lots of business together." | THE STAB-IN-THE-BACK: After World War II ended, Manchuria was taken from Japan and placed under Stalin's control, not China's! Chiang Kai Shek was shocked by the betrayal. From Manchuria, Stalin was able to arm the Chinese Communist rebels under Mao Tse Tung. U.S. pressure on Chiang Kai Shek would later undermine his ability to suppress the Communist rebels. China finally fell to Mao's Reds in 1949. Manchuria was then given to Communist China as Chiang Kai Shek and his Nationalist followers fled for their lives, to the island of Taiwan.
IRAQ: 1980 | THE HONEY: The U.S. branch of the NWO gang made a sweet offer to Iraq (Saddam Hussein): "You fight Iran and we'll arm you. After the war, you can have control of Shatt al-Arab Waterway and we'll do lots of business together." | THE STAB-IN-THE-BACK: The mutually destructive 8 year war finally ended in 1988. Two years later, the U.S. attacked Iraq and imposed 13 years of brutal economic sanctions. In 2003, the U.S. invaded Iraq, ruining the country and killing Saddam Hussein.
LIBYA: 2003-2011 | THE HONEY: The U.S. branch of the NWO gang made a sweet offer to Libya: "Give up your Weapons of Mass Destruction and your nuclear program, ask Iran to do likewise, and we'll establish good relations and business ties with Libya." | THE STAB-IN-THE-BACK: After foolishly giving up Libya's best defenses, Qaddafi's Libya was invaded by NATO jets, US Special Forces, and CIA trained "rebels". The invaders attacked Qaddafi's convoy; capturing him, and then torturing and murdering him on film. Libya remains in chaos.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Military Education and Teaching Military History
One of the most serious discoveries in the social sciences in the last hundred years or so is the fact that Jews were behind most of the biggest wars: Cromwell, US Revolutionary Wars, Napoleon, Opium Wars, US 'Civil War', Boer Wars, First and Second World Wars, Korea and Vietnam, Iran and Iraq and Afghanistan. And other smaller wars, and wars caused as a by-product, caused by e.g. starvation, for example in India and China. Some may think it's fantastic to refer to demonstrations of Jewish intervention a 'discovery'. But, in historical perspective, it's as importance as the discovery of the Americas—from stories and legends, all the way to the current everyday familiarity.
I would hope military education becomes more scientific and accurate: instead of battles and the Second World War, or computer games scenarios, I'd hope a more useful auditing becomes habitual: who profited? What were the long-term effects? What were the costs in resources and manpower?
The most important issue in technique and equipment is the nuclear issue: serious education should of course address the question of likely nuclear weapon fraud, how it was done, and by whom.
General Montgomery ('Monty') edited a big book, published in 1968, A History of Warfare. In it, he said one of the lessons of history was "Don't invade Russia". Let's hope future investigators of human power make that phrase seem laughably amateurish.
The use of mercenaries, and their commanders (for example, by the 'purchase system' in Britain, where the command of whole regiments seems to have been purchased) ought to be examined. To what extent were young males made use of? Were 'press gangs' in Britain in fact under state command, or were they part of the system of Jewish corruption? Were there analogies to janissaries in European countries? Good questions.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Military Intelligence
This topic is under-investigated for simple enough reasons: cocoons of secrecy, concealment of policies, self-defence of individual interest groups such as nuclear vs the rest, army vs navy, officers vs the rest, and the intangible dislike of academics for messy real-word activities.
We might consider the internal systems and attitudes, promotions and rivalry and disputes; and, as separate issues, the way such organisations present information to their bosses and to the outside world. There's a split between the pre-First World War, and the aftermath of that event. Technologies allowed progressively more visual spying, communication, spying by sound, faster movement, more effective killing, and so on. But also effective counter-measures: It appears to be a fact that few people, outside, presumably, the Jews funding the USSR, had any idea of Stalin's war build-up, for example. As far as I know, nobody has found universal laws from which the maximum extent of control over other people can be deduced. But at least many people have survived and with luck this will continue; things may even get better.
As a starting-point of sorts, we could consider Ian Fleming, who popularised the 'operational type', though in a post-war sense. And the John le Carre/ Frederick Forsyth style of author and film. Here's a review of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (remake) trying to draw attention to its avoidance of historical truth, notably the Jewish aspect of the USSR and war against Germany. John le Carre dislikes the BBC-style activist intelligence misrepresentation—black, woman, and another run fast to stop some plot— insisting on the prolonged reading, thinking, interviewing, interrogations etc. Summing up intelligence work isn't easy, because of the hidden aspects, but (for example) the First World War was it seems prolonged by Britain murdering Rasputin, who might have stopped the entire post-WW1 mess. 'Intelligence' about the Vietnam War was essentially an evil joke; a permanent stain on US competence. The following thriller review Stella Rimington: At Risk is my attempt to describe the irresponsible, self-absorbed, unaudited world of 'intelligence'. This piece on 9/11, and Eliza Manningham-Buller's BBC Reith Lecture is terrifying in its simple-minded approach to 9/11. Here's a link to a review of a book by R Aldrich on British Intelligence, MI5, and GCHQ trying to show the bias caused by evading the Jewish issue.

... Aldrich has the curious moral imbecility which comes with accepting all conventional views. Aldrich talks of the 'notorious South African secret service (BOSS)' but thinks nothing of the millions of deaths of Vietnamese, for example, and the forcible movement of populations there—some of the biggest ever in human history. His book gives the general impression that powerful countries can afford expensive intelligence, which helps them do what their steering elites think they want - the quality of the intelligence being more-or-less irrelevant.
.... the fall of the Soviet Union - my guess is because the Jewish mafiosi no longer thought it worth keeping on - Aldrich prefers to think it was magic. And 9/11 - Aldrich, comically, repeats all the Al Quaeda stuff; this alone shows his book is official and worthless. Many generally-censored topics don't make it into the book: there's just a little bit about massacres in Indonesia - compare Pilger on this. The genocide in Clinton's time in Africa doesn't get in. Nor do many of the wars in Africa - Biafra was one - although intelligence must have been involved. No comment even on Pakistan/India war in 1948. ...
Some omissions probably exist for ideological reasons. Hungary 1956 is omitted. Vanunu is omitted. A Rothschild made money after the defeat of Napoleon, by reliance on a private signalling system ... though of course Aldrich wouldn't mention that (though there was a Director of Economic Intelligence - Michael Kaiser - in the MoD who intercepted 'a large number of commercial telegrams'). Given that Soros and others speculate, presumably with more or less indefinite backing, against other currencies, this is of some public interest. ... etc etc

Military intelligence shades into covert, undeclared military action, assassinations, and into economics and business. Separating the relative parts of Jews and Americans is important. Here's a very long investigation into US War Crimes in Vietnam, and I presume to this day most of the facts are secret. The relation between Jews and Mossad and the CIA is presumably still mysterious (though for all I know it may have been published) though the fact that the Pentagon was the subject of a ridiculous false flag shows there's still a close link.
The combination of secrecy with unscrupulous violence, plus discoveries in physiology (drugs etc), and such things as shell-shock has led to alarmism about brainwashing, which was a Jewish media way to conceal US war crimes in Korea. The level of pseudoscience is suggested by the coining of 'post stress disorder syndrome'—applied only to allies, of course. Victims need not apply.

Here's a piece on Alex Jones and 'Strategic Forecasting' (STRATFOR) though this is commentariat stuff, unlikely to give away helpful information, rather than the Blackwater style with mercenaries.
On political murders here's a speculative piece on Europe: Aldo Moro, Olof Palme, Lindh, Gaitskell, Smith, Kelly, Cook...

Secrecy and spying on civilians is a difficult issue, in my view. Communications are easier than they have ever been, and presumably therefore plots and dangerous schemes are easier than ever. It has to be expected that the Jewish attitude will be to combine spying on non-Jews with the claim they aren't doing that. They will also publically profess to be opposed to spying—I've seen George Galloway, who likes Jewish destruction except in Israel, thunder out opposition to secret spying without a scrap of genuine reasoning.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Weapon Distribution, Self-defence, Policing. Including such weapons as poisons, sabotage, freeing violent men, and population swamping.
Until about 1900 it may have been thought there was little need to discuss armed militia, self-defence, the history of castles and forts, and weapons distribution, since there was widespread police control, and obedience to law, and in any case weapons could be seen as not very powerful. The usual technique was been for small armed groups to be controllable by larger armed groups, assumed to be available to be called upon. Since a few world wars it's clear some better-thought out approach is necessary. We have had the destruction of vast numbers of unarmed groups (Russia, for example); huge weapons frauds (the Jewish nuke and Jewish 'Cold War' mythologies), systematic campaigns including false flags to disarm populations (See The Occidental Observer on Jews and US Gun Control lobbies, for example), and the tactical arming of suppose government troops and mercenaries to destroy whole countries (Palestine, Iraq, Syria for example).
And all these involve weapons and enemies in the obvious sense: most people are still easily swayed by claims that (e.g.) Germany, or Iraq, or Russia are suddenly evil, or shocked at the idea that whites are collectively under threat by deliberately forced immigration by 'Jewish' crackpots.

I would guess much of the education of places like West Point still includes such things as officer etiquette, Napoleon in Russia, World War I trenches, and details like the use of rape by US forces in Vietnam, and simple-minded talk about US bases. Probably those organisations are as largely worthless as the supposed leading universities.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Arts
There are many links between Jews and official arts. Just a few examples: Damien Hirst's reputation (according to the Daily Telegraph) was 'almost single-handedly made' by Charles Saatchi, believed to be a Iraqi Jew and advertiser. Some reports say Hirst decided to go it alone, with the result that his saleability plummeted. Some years ago, Bernard Berenson (whose villa I Tatti is now Harvards) was involved posthumously in scandals... his authentications 'relied on instincts', and on percentages of his appraisal values. A standard 3-volume work on the money value of aesthetics is Jewish. Many 'abstract impressionists' relied on Jewish promotion. Concert pianists seem to be controlled by Jews, broadly speaking. Needless to say, for the moment Wagner operas are produced by Jews with scenes set as garbage dumps and so on.
People seem to find the manufacture of reputation difficult to understand. But given Jewish control over money, and the related control over media, it's simple enough: first of all a potential artist can be given a studio, painting materials, canvases, instruments, or whatever; with equipment—maybe for photography, welding, casting, electronics; with framing, gallery exhibits, concerts, elegant manifestoes and catalogues, laudatory write-ups in the press, and TV promotion. Simple!
Miles Mathis on modernity is a very good writer, critic, and indeed artist, on this and related subjects.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Housing
As with farming, housing is peculiar in needing land, and is possibly even more static and fixed than farming, and therefore vulnerable. It's not surprising that housing is low quality in areas liable to wars and invasions, or that rents can be extorted, or that fortified houses have existed, perhaps more now than ever, and that ownership is uncertain in warlike times. Possibly there is some as-yet undiscovered relationship between housing, populations, population skill and intelligence, climate, possibilities of violence, and possibilities of defence.
This is another set of issues where control of money is important: after the Second World War, inflation worked to the advantage of property speculators—in Britain, names such as Hyams and Rachmann became household words in Britain. In the USA, returning 'heroes' were liable to find areas of New York filled with Jewish 'refugees'. Mortgage policies can have the same effect. Juggling with taxation etc may cause people to put money into housing instead of alternatives, making them however vulnerable to future rises in property taxes, compulsory purchase, and so on. There are possibilities of heritage destruction, always a prime Jewish object.
In the UK, a huge issue was the sale of council housing. This policy is usually ascribed to Margaret Thatcher, though the manoeuvre was in fact a plan to get housing under Jewish control. One argument was that many people in council accommodation had paid so much rent over the years that they were entitled to buy. What they didn't say was that they weren't counting the costs of maintaining and renewing housing. So far the plan seems to have worked.
Another issue is paper-money related, namely the house price issue, where inflation let to increase in house prices. By 1980, the BBC was broadcasting that 'house prices have improved' so many percent. In earlier times, in the 1930s, cheap housing was the current slogan.
The Revised Joint Tenancy Agreement 2001 in Britain was used to house illegal immigrants, and maybe still is; the housing being finished to a high standard and all the facilities paid for, including TV and phone bills. At the time of writing (2014) this appears to be under an 'exit strategy' mode, being undiscussed and denied. Researchers might like to find information about this anti-white policy in Research, Development And Statistics Occasional Paper No67 - Migration: An Economic And Social Analysis, published January 2001 by the Home Office, then run by Jack Straw, who believes himself to be a Jew. Names listed on the document were: Stephen Glover, Ceri Gott , Anaïs Loizillon, Jonathan Portes, Richard Price, Sarah Spencer, Vasanthi Srinivasan and Carole Willis, apparently acting under someone called Barbara Roche.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Politics
Government. Viewing government as a bloc, opposed to the people, is a way of viewing things which seems to have often recurred. Anarchism in Spain was mostly hostility to the government there. Herbert Spencer's short book The Man Versus the State has a terrific account of some people liking 'the state' because it offers careers, at the expense of good qualities. The ultimate development may be something like black South Africa now, which has more civil servants per head than almost any country, and probably the most useless and ill-qualified ones. There is, or seems to be, more government now than ever in human history. This may be a consequence of technology and productivity, soaking up surplus energy of people. Is there a pendulum swing, so that at some point the state seems like withering away? I don't know. However the Jewish push is to complete subjection, on the model of Rabbis with a subservient population of inferiors. They are incompatible with democratic life.
Democracy. Revisionism of 'democracy' is long overdue. Probably the vagueness of the concept is yet another Jewish contribution, It's all very well to say democracy is necessary to prevent injustices; but how is this carried into practice, if at all? The modern system with representatives, parliaments, parties, and votes, is subject to many limitations, as Jews have unfortunately shown.
For example: (1) How did the original theoreticians tackle the problem of people not able to understand the issues? Did they, as seems very likely, specifically want partial democracy of e.g. property owners? (2) What was the genuine history of Parliaments? (3) How were problems such as financial corruption and personal threats supposed to have been dealt with? (4) Is direct democracy, as perhaps in Switzerland, viable? (5) Is the whole idea or representative democracy a delusion and imposture, intended all along to be subverted? (6) What effects do different election types (e.g. proportional representation) have? (7) What about international government? (8) Can decisions in fact match up to what's needed if the people aren't experts? — these are typical puzzles.
However from our point of view the interest is on Jewish corruption, of which there is superabundant evidence and which ought to be analysed. Once 'democracy' has been conceded as (say) equitable, or Christian, or decent, or progressive, the ground is laid out for the growth of parties, even if individual independence is believed desirable. So we must look at political parties.
Party Politics. It's a sad commentary on political debate that the first-past-the-post system (lots of constituencies; each with one winner) of the USA and Britain is hardly ever compared with proportional representation (fewer constituencies; each has several winners, roughly in proportion to votes). This latter is more common in Europe and (I'd guess) has something to do with Napoleon and the French Revolution's parties arranged in seating from left to right. First-past-the-post tends to coagulate into just two parties, which suits the divide-and-rule Jewish money power.
Since the UK's 'Manhood Suffrage' (1884) the nominal disputes (when not at war) have mostly been synthetic left vs right; issues such as should there be a monarchy? And should land be distributed? Should Jews run the 'Bank of England'? 'Is it right that Jewish immigrants should be able to vote?' are ignored. Hitler's national socialists were defined as left at first; only in the 1930s were they called 'right' by the so-called 'Labour' Party, which gives an idea of the imprecision of 'left' v 'right'. To this day faux debates are stirred up on unimportant issues, fairly successfully from their point of view. 'Leaders' are coached not to answer questions, but to deflect by criticising people in the other party.
As an example of the way parties are channelled away from important issues, consider the British 'Labour' Party. It was clear by the late 1800s that Jewish wealth was one of the most important undemocratic aspects of Britain. It was also clear that mobility was increasing: steam (and diesel) ships followed railways in enabling large population movements. So another issue was who was entitled to live in some chunk of land; this was before the large-scale introduction of passports. The Labour Party's 'Clause 4' drafted in 1917 by the Jew Sidney Webb was: 'to secure to the workers by hand and brain the full fruits of their labour through the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service'. Note that there's nothing about the super-rich Jewish bankers and the currency, and nothing about who was entitled to live and vote in Britain. Questioners on the point about money were shouted down as 'currency cranks'. The 'Manhood Suffrage' movement allowed Jew to move into London, and vote, a pattern followed by later immigrants under Jewish influence. The only thing Britons were allowed was the 'full fruits' of their labour, i.e. some extra wage, on the Jew Marx's claim that workers are exploited. There's also nothing on how parties, or any other think-tank/ report/ research/ informational groups, should be financed, which in practice so far has led to a huge expansion of Jewish-funded organisations, usually fronted by non-Jews
To control the party system, groups included together as X require their (real or supposed) interests to remain unmentioned. Parties A and B are to be supplied with policies which appear as controversial and opposed as possible, but without commenting on X's interests. Then party broadcasts by A will attack B (perhaps making some policy claims) and party broadcasts by B will attack A (perhaps making some claims). To confuse the issue, a few policies are assigned only to A, and others only to B. Probably some more-or-less false description will be added: 'Privatisation', 'Anti-racism', 'Free Enterprise', 'Defense of Freedom', 'Up the Workers', 'The Labour Party'. There can be sideline comments: "What's the point of voting?" - "All they do is argue" - "Politicians are all the same"...

The conclusion of course is that the system is not 'democracy'. Could democracy ever work, whether in complex or in the simplest societies? It seems uncertain. And again, it's sad to reflect on the absence of theory here. Maybe Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Lincoln, J S Mill and Bentham could help; I doubt it, but one part of revisionism must be to reopen and re-examine old texts.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Law
Law is a fascinating interface between sets of people; but it's less transparent than it seems. There is of course a power differential aspect; it seems unlikely that any legal system, ever, was even-handed—there were (or seem to have been) champion fighters, at one time; there now are official experts, who, in practice, are often far less expert than they might be. The legal interface can take on a life of its own: this is recognised in barratry, ambulance chasing, and other expressions. However we're here concerned with Jewish links, and very disappointingly it turns out these have so far trumped legal powers in most, if not all, jurisdictions around the world. Psychologically, this is unsurprising. A law career is more appealing if there's direct fanaticism and selfishness at play: much more exciting than the mundane do-gooding of study for the sake of justice. Much more powerful, influencing millions, where it is respected, than corrupt policing. The Jewish USSR illustrates both a corrupt legal system and corrupt 'policing'. So does Israel for that matter.
Laws can be promoted behind the scenes, accompanied by bribes, false flag events, blackmail, murders. Little wonder that Jews, as well as using their corrupt money power to buy assets, want to control all media. And little wonder they want to position Jews in important positions: Supreme Court of the USA, Attorney General in Britain, heads of US Departments, MPs and Lords. Torture in subject countries, and mass immigration and wars are just two results. So is damage to legal systems, parallel to damage to education, medicine, housing. The 'Crown Prosecution Service' in Britain, the outcome of a reorganisation, has as local heads coloured foreigners—every single one of them. At a lower level, the Legal Aid system is used to parcel out public money among groups of supposedly opposing lawyers, so they all take a share. There have been suggestions for a National Legal Service, by analogy with the NHS, which no doubt might have been uncomfortably equal.
Here's an article (22 Oct 2015) on Jewish judges and lawyers in Britain: Beneath the mask of the 'Human Rights' industry Jews advocate increases in 'refugees'. This piece by Francis Carr Begbie correctly identifies the 'Human Rights' industry as yet another counterfeit and duplicitous Jewish posture (in the same tradition as 'liberté, égalité, fraternité). I wonder how many people have any idea of the penetration of this group of shams? Palestinians are under no illusions, but control of the media seems to operate very effectively in many countries.
It's worth knowing that not all laws are passed even with the derisory levels of debate in (e.g.) the House of Commons. In Britain, 'Statutory Instruments' are a legal supplement, which vastly complicates the legal system. Planning law for example is burdened with a great deal of this material, which has to be examined by anyone seriously concerned to act.

Very important note on the limitations of law: National and local laws almost inevitably assume small-scale illegality: large-scale deliberate disruption and treachery are not usually part of ordinary legal schemes, since they are outside the scope of the legal framework. This has historically been important as regards Jews acting as a group outside legal boundaries. Jewish subversion has not so far been punished legally. Whether this will continue is uncertain; but the point is damage done by so-called Jews has not yet been punished with anything like full retribution.
Anyone serious about international law must work on this issue. Here's one blog on International Law and the Iraq War and the Chilcott Enquiry: Sir Michael Wood Damns Blair, Straw and ... Goldsmith raising the issue of how a handful of politicians could overrule legal experts. That blog need not be taken too seriously on international laws and wars, bearing in mind repeated wars and war crimes which were not opposed. But the principles are of course important. The whole system of so-called International Law has been clearly a fake since Nuremberg proved that Jews could override any supposed checks, balances, investigations. The lesson has been reinforced ever since: wars have been carried out without legal intervention when it suited people, who usually seem to have been Jews. Without taking these facts into account it's unrealistic to treat any such legal activity as in any way honest. This applies of course to earlier times: an online commenter mentioned an 18th century author, Emer (or Emerich) de Vattel, whose work in French is translated as The Law of Nations. An edition was published after the 'French Revolution', and there must be a suspicion that his work in international law is promoted by Jews, just as Nuremberg was, in the same way that Spinoza is promoted in philosophy by Jews.

European Legal Systems are often taken to be more codified and less made up of accumulated judgements than Anglo-American law, but this may be largely as a result of Napoleon's Jew-financed effects. (Napoleon himself played little part in assembling the Code Napoleon; see Napoleon and the 19th century or the longer Napoleon Revisited). Law in Jew-free countries ought to be studied as a genus or species of legal systems. These systems are not easy to study, as their mentalities are remote in time and difficult to bring back to mental life. A good example is Njals Saga on Iceland and its laws (described by Kyle Briscow). Perhaps Comparative Law will become a serious subject, as anthropology may be. Perhaps analogous writers to J R Green may emerge, seeking the equivalent of Green's Germanic tribes. Perhaps inferences can be drawn about genetics: traitors, murderers, adulterers, spies for example have been subject to death penalties, and their may be genetic bases for these combined with the more obvious power-seeking motives.
At present, as far as I know, the Jewish link is unperceived by most people; secret family courts, promotion of homosexuality, failure to act against heroin, attacks on the family, encouragement of immigration extending even to government advertising in Africa and elsewhere, selective housing aid to immigrants, all have Jews in common. As I write this, many elderly DJs in Britain are being prosecuted for alleged paedophile behaviour, ultimately by non-British heads of the 'Crown Prosecution Service', probably to distract attention for Muslim and Jewish behaviour. Many of the pressure groups nominally acting against injustices are funded by Jews; it must amuse them to watch the solemnly silly antics of such people.
Jewish Influence at the meta-law level (examining influences inbuilt into legal systems) is not of course an official subject at present. But there are unofficial researchers, for example Tony Shell (PDF file; about 3 MB, dated October 2013; I couldn't relocate it more recently). One of its themes is the subversion of Common Law by insinuating material which Jews think is to their benefit into the legal system. Watering-down of the jury system, extending votes to the most ridiculous people, making society more dangerous, and damaging education by legal means are typical themes. An important aspect, which isn't much commented on, is the offloading of costs onto 'the government'. It may well become policy to recover costs in a way which incurs no net loss to countries—why should a country lose to criminals? With luck some accurate philosophy will develop, superseding the current systems in which Jewish schemes are in effect insulated against loss, however evil their schemes. It may well be necessary to develop group laws, dealing with large numbers of people, since individual examination of (say) a million cases is simply not practicable. At present, some wars have this effect.
Jewish Influence traced in detail. Capital punishment is NOT now applied to 'Kosher Crimes', for example frauds against whites, however outrageous. The Jewish Talmud allows such practice as long as the victims of scam are not Jewish. In western countries, most major banking institutions are owned by Zionist Jews—Bernard Lawrence Madoff, the Jewish banker at the Wall Street who through his ponzi scheme milked nearly $60 billion from American investors, most of which he deposited in Israeli banks—was never sentenced to death in United States. He is living a very comfortable life as a 'Class A' prisoner in a Federal prison. 'In January 2014, the poor fella suffered heart attack which sent waves of concern among the organized Jewry.' Jewish spies and snipers and media liars and drug-traffickers, murderers, traitors, terrorists, pimps, body organ traders, are not prosecuted.
Family Law in Britain seems to be influenced by the 'Frankfurt School': the ruling model seems to assume fathers want to molest their children. (A friend of mine, Ivor Catt, was involved in fathers' rights issues; he did his best to campaign against Butler-Sloss and the whole system. Unfortunately he, and everyone else in sundry fathers' organisations, had no idea about the 'Frankfurt School' and never understood the Jewish source of their problems. So far, they've made zero progress).

Riots in English Towns 2011 links to an article on Jewish solicitors (Bindmans) offering advice to rioters.
Bindmans advice for money

For people not familiar with Prof Kevin MacDonald, Jewish legal pressures in the USA about immigration appear throughout his book The Culture of Critique: ... Jewish Involvement in ... Political Movements
Here are just a few reviews of books relevant to recent legal manoeuvres in Britain. Myles Harris on UK Asylum Policy (but Harris is naive; he doesn't realise the policy is deliberate).
Cherie Blairs Autobiography (includes evidence she set up legal 'chambers' knowing that publically-funded aid for phony asylum seekers would soon be made law).
Grayling on Modern Rights. (Standardised nonsense designed, among other things, to pretend that the 'west' is democratic, and that immigrants are entitled to live in countries nominated by Jews).
Peter Hain on Political Trials. (Interesting as documenting corruption. Hain was part of the huge Jewish anti-Apartheid movement; his lack of activity in helping whites, and Africans, in southern Africa suggests he is just another Jewish genetic fanatic).
Anti-Racist Social Work interesting as documentation of a form of sociopathy.
Dennis et al on Race and Pressure Group Politics is an account of the Stephen Lawrence affair, including the extraordinary promotion of Lawrence's mother. A truly astonishing parallel to BBC audience-riggings.

The USA Constitution is interesting for many reasons. One is for its list of Amendments, which provide a capsule history of items considered important at times after 1787. Of perhaps equal interest is study of Amendments which failed. Many were reasonable enough. These can shed light on significant power-groups. For example, attempts to influence banking, education, news media, states rights, and secrecy. At a legally lower level,
A typical project might be examining the 'Civil Rights Act' of Lyndon Johnson's régime, including its promoters, the arguments given, and the final text of the act. Was it intended to wreck blacks in the USA? Serious topic, and one which deserves attention, not of course by everyone, but by a team of researchers, or as PhD projects.
Changes Over Longish Periods of Time are worth studying, rather than individual laws. For example, compulsory education takes years to establish, before it becomes widely accepted. Laws on blasphemy, company law, migration, tax havens, inheritance, war and so on have produced effects often not appreciated by some of their proposers.
The 'Genocide' Precedent: the word was allegedly coined or popularised by a Jew, but the point here is that in a world of huge populations, laws are needed to react to much larger-scale events than in the past. Watch for the possibility of laws dealing with long-term crimes, such as the 'Holocaust' fraud. After half a century of money, housing and asset transfers etc, there will be calls for this to be reversed, and the implications are enormous, including perhaps punishing entire families and groups and organisations.

Criminology needs attention to tease out the Jewish elements within it. A good example is the use of Jewish judges to (for example) allow dangerous criminals to go free, provided they target whites, not Jews. But this may be obvious enough not to need pointing out.

Rules of Evidence are an interesting aspect of the entire methodology of legal systems. Presumably there have to be such rules. In modern western societies, apart from those influenced by Israel, confession under torture is not admitted. Nor is the use of champions, who were surrogate fighters, determining the outcome. Nor are practices such as casting runes and asking the opinion of oracles. Truth is now no defence in some categories of trial. Onlookers may be permitted to disrupt events, as in Stephen Lawrence. Specific rules apply to the very young. Secret courts may apply to family law. Vaguely-defined mental illness may be accepted as a device to evade the giving of evidence (as in Guinness). Secrecy may be complete, as appears to be the case in money and banking. Whole categories of evidence (for example, DNA) may be ruled out, for instance in fake human rights trials. (See for example this review of Myles Harris: What's Wrong with Britain's Asylum Policy?). There are difficulties where jurisdictions overlap.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Peace Studies
This is not a subject for the sky-blue optimist. There is a long history of pacifism, for example of King Asoka (or Ashoka) of India, and successful for some long time, popularised in the 20th century by H G Wells. but there's also a long history of warfare. The student of Jewish influence must note a break in history at the time of the Dutch Republic and Cromwell in Britain, when people who wanted whites and others to kill each other introduced what may be a discontinuity. The whole attitude to war changed, or may have changed, from medieval chivalric squalor to more mobile funded groups with muskets and cannon. Ships were something like the equivalent of airliners today, allowing unprecedented movements of people, weapons, and cargoes. There's no doubt that in the Jewish, recent, phase propaganda swelled in importance. This piece on Napoleon tries to show the vast number of books on Napoleon was a smokescreen to hide simple theft. The preceding centuries of the Reformation may, or may not, have been Jewish related; I don't know, or to what extent. Researchers might try to establish facts more firmly than has been permitted to date.
Revisionists must be prepared to check hypotheses that seem unimaginable in the full heat of wartime propaganda. For example, Polish Jews seem to have provoked the Polish government of the time in 1939 to be aggressive to Germany, and to attack and rape Germans, until Hitler was forced to respond. The fact that Stalin invaded Poland in 1939 without any objection from Churchill suggests this hypothesis is true. The fact that Stalin ordered a few tens of thousands of Polish officers murdered in Katyn forest suggests Jews in effect ruled Poland. Another example, not pleasant to Britons, is that if Hitler had wrecked the British forces trying to flee from Dunkirk, he may have got to Moscow, and just possibly the truth of the GULags would have got out, and a few million east European whites would have been spared. Somewhat later, the war between France and Algeria may have been encouraged by Jews.
In relatively modern times there were attempts to abolish wars, or civilise them, or somehow to constrain the multiplier effect of weapons as more powerful explosives were invented. Nobel's Peace Prize, and Baroness Bertha von Suttner's once-famous book Die Waffe nieder! (1889), translated as Lay Down Your Arms (1892), and various laws and rules of war illustrate that trend. Bertha von Suttner's ideas didn't prevent the Boer War; and she was perhaps lucky to die about a month before the Great War started in 1914.
The pacifist tradition remains with the Quakers, who however are more decorative than effective. (Added later: a brilliant piece by Miles Mathis (link is info on Mathis) on George Fox revises the conventional view of Quakers). They were humanitarian: I was told they helped Germans with food during the blockades by Britain, for example. Bertrand Russell's Peace Foundation published work by Michael Barratt Brown, a Quaker; and Quakers are or were represented at Bradford's Peace Studies Centre. I don't think any of these people had a clue about Jews and wars, or Jews in the USSR, or Jews and the fraud of 'nuclear weapons'. Here's an unflattering review of Geoffrey Best's book War and Law since 1945: Best simply quotes the Jewish media. None of these people seemed to grasp that Jewish policy was to pretend to want peace, for example in Israel; but as long as they thought they were profiting, peace would move itself out of reach. All this suggests an approach leaving out the psychology of people wanting war between other groups, and with a huge advantage in the shape of worthless currency which can be legally imposed, would generally not be a useful approach.

How Wars Don't End. Many readers will remember wars which drag on interminably. The 'Great War' or First World War showed this pattern; the German peace offer of 1916 was rejected. Was this because British generals loved the 'best of hotels' on the continent? Their positions of power? Was it out of respect for those soldiers already killed? Had war become a habit? Was it gerontological—old men wanted young men tipped into the oblivion of death before their time? Or could it have been that hard-faced men who'd done well out of war wanted more of the same?
How Wars End. There's a probably true hypothesis that Jews provoke wars, one motive being to get others to kill each other, but perhaps primarily to be in position to control central banks. It follows that a serious examination of wars should include a close look at the terms of treaties, surrenders, or other terminal points. It also follows that treaties are likely to be secret, or partly secret, or confusingly written, for the same reason. The Second World War particularly seems likely to be productive in this field of research.

A few mathematical attempts have been made to quantify and investigate war and peace: Sorokin, Lewis Fry Richardson, Quincy Jones are venerable names, but none of them faced the problem of secrecy within, and collusion outside, nations. See elsewhere on these.
Various peace movements are funded or distorted by Jews. Here's a hostile review of Kate Hudson's book on Britain's CND, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, the author clearly having no idea of the underlying war and Cold War dynamics, but being a funded academic, no doubt precisely because of that fact. There's a lot of similar material on Internet: Communist Parties in particular are propagandist groups which never mention Jewish money power and fanatical cruelty. I just found a 'Dr' Shirin Shafaie, at SOAS [London University School of Oriental and African Studies] supposedly in peace research, with absolutely no knowledge of 'nukes'.
Another example is the 4-volume 'Oxford International Encyclopedia of Peace': Sample pages, contents and persons show this tome is worthless, unless you're solely interested in people who presumably are covertly funded.
[1] There appears to be no recognition of nuclear frauds (see www.nukelies.org).
[2] There is little or nothing on people making money from wars, and specifically Jews.
[3] There appears to be no analysis of Jews and their pressure groups.
[4] Vast numbers of the listed names are Jews and fellow-travellers.
[5] Discussion of military careerism and the connection with money appears to be nil.
[6] Issues of punishment, compensation, restitution seem omitted. [ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Statistics
Statistical models run on computers haven't yet been very accurate, often of course because the inputs aren't chosen well. However, here we need to examine statistics in the everyday sense, 'lies, damned lies, and statistics'—columns of figures.

The US 'Department of Justice' finally includes Hispanics as a category—but still as part of 'whites'

Deliberate Classification Errors are part of the stock-in-trade of publicists who lie. Typical examples include fake racial classifications, a particularly American-Jewish thing. In Britain, Irish travellers (tinkers) are wrongly grouped with Gypsies because of vague lifestyle similarities; the police apparently classify Gypsies ("Roma") as white! And crime figures; it's sometimes said there are 40,000 rapes of white women by blacks in the USA; but it's never said by the Jewish media. Deaths in wars, frauds by Jews, money wasted by Jewish pressure groups, census errors, are the sort of thing most people faintly understand. Population figures are difficult: how many children go missing?—is a typical example of problematical figures where the origin is usually unstated. Anyone can be caught by repetitions in the Jewish media; assumptions (Cold War, missiles, IQs, average wages, population growth) become embedded in peoples' minds. Nothing very new in any of this; except that researchers should identify and separate out the Jewish influence.
Voting statistics need some caution; voting frauds, US machine counting frauds, sampling frauds, are examples. The Kerry/Bush 44% 'Latino' vote (2004) is a typical persistent error. So is the myth of a 'landslide' Labour Vote in Britain after 1945.
Here's a website with alarmist, wake-up statistics of the type which are deliberately suppressed by the media, in practice Jewish media. It's of course obvious that no one person can know all there is, even about his or her local area. I hope some methods can develop which will increase people's awareness of the need for accurate figures. It's also clear that there must be penalties for deception: perhaps in future there will be death sentences passed for behaviour which has been tolerated to date.
New, Alternative Statistics: can be important, since misinformation and disinformation are everywhere. Here's a review of Bjorn Lomborg's The Skeptical Environmentalist (2001) which was part of the opposition to the Global Warming/ Climate Change debate. Lomborg does not of course consider the extent to which cliques of Jews assembled the scheme of 'carbon credits'.
Deforming Public Opinion Surveys are important to Jews, who of course habitually deceive and lie. Here's a piece on Gallup Poll misrepresenting attitudes to Israel but it's not very clear.
GNP and GDP, omitting the Jewish sector. Here's an example (I'm not saying I completely agree) from macro-economics, by 'Arch Stanton' in 2020: The GDP is the clever scam by Jew money men to hide the truth. Remember the old GNP (Gross National Product) numbers? These numbers actually measured the wealth producing output of America’s manufacturing and industrial base. Wealth production comes from either mining a resource from the ground or manufacturing something from those mined resources.
So why was the GNP quietly changed to the GDP? The Jews had to change the GNP to GDP (Gross Domestic Product) to hide the alarming drop in wealth production. The GDP mixes in all sorts of worthless factors like “service sector” numbers that inflate and hide the real numbers underlying America’s vast, economic decline.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Not only 'Hispanics' are falsely counted by the FBI

Criminology, Crimes by Jews; Policing
Jews appear to be over-represented in crime, to an unprecedented extent: any serious student of society should investigate this. The section above lists just a few Jewish killings (click back-arrow to return here), though many of course have never been investigated properly, such as '9/11'. It's worth considering a similar tribal cult, Islam: Similarities between Jews and Muslims. The effects of Jews on legal systems has been noted by many; this site has comments on law here. (Click back-arrow to return). Here's a review of Koestler and others on removing capital punishment, unless of course Jews are involved, a 1960s campaign. Crime figures themselves can be distorted: this is a UK site crime as recorded by the police claiming widespread misallocation of crime figures. But (like many sites) it doesn't attempt to work out the ultimate effects.
Big Frauds by Jews William Pierce said somewhere that low level frauds can be committed by anyone; but all, all, the big frauds are by Jews. Obviously this hypothesis ought to be tested by serious investigators.

An often-noted aspect of Jews is their liking for sex crimes and perversions: Beria and Russian schoolgirls illustrate the sort of thing. This may form a significant part of the reformation against Jews. In Britain, there has been for years a BBC-linked child sex industry involving a now-dead DJ, Jimmy Savile, who allegedly was Hebrew-speaking, and a necrophiliac. There's a possible link with the shooting of Jill Dando, a journalist, and the BBC's supposed campaigns to help children. The BBC even secretly used public money in a campaign, thrown out by a jury, to keep secret Muslim paedophilia. Probably this was a factor in Thompson moving to the 'Jew York Times'—hardly the action of an honest man deeply concerned to clean up filth.
Easy Jewish money leads to crimes, and the complete censorship of Jewish activity by Jewish media, almost complete censorship by Jewish lawyers, make it seem general in populations. It's unsurprising that solicitors defraud legal aid, actuaries investing money defraud, charities pay out little, weapons dealers make money, police are bribed, coroners made to come up with the 'right' conclusions, and corruption generally spreads. The USSR's various evolutions are good examples of generalised frauds and incompetence. Whether this process can be reduced or stopped, remains to be seen.
A Project could be to use standard statistical arithmetic to test whether police activity is anti-white, understating black crime.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Jewish Marxism
Here's an interesting example of an apparently convinced Marxist's view of the last few centuries of the world. George Galloway M.P. addressed the US Senate on Iraq in 2005, in a very impressive display. However, it remains entirely possible he may be controlled opposition; his actual impact on those wars, and the bringing to justice of those responsible, appears to be zero. He supports the Holocaust fraud, the 9/11 fraud, and no doubt other Jewish frauds, such as the 'Russian Revolution'. And he never discusses the Fed.
The quotations (my transcription) are taken from a video of George Galloway addressing the Oxford Union (which appears to be completely separate from Oxford University; it may itself be a Jewish-funded outfit). Galloway admits "Jewish activists of the ANC" supplied "every house, dinner, and car" used in his "underground" anti-Apartheid activity in South Africa; and he names Dennis Goldberg, Albie Sachs, Joe Slovo and Ruth First. However, what's interesting here is that Galloway pleads with Jews (or so-called Jews; he seems to have no views on Judaics) to "reject apartheid Israel":

"Jews don't have to be on the side of apartheid. They can stand up against it. And I say to those who imagine they are friends of [Israel], turn away from the racist apartheid policy of Zionism! Turn back to where Jews were before the emergence and the hegemony of Zionism. The greatest people on the earth were Jews. The leaders of the socialist, communist, trades union, liberal, enlightenment, throughout the 17th, 18th, 19th centuries, were great Jews. Marx himself was a Jew. None of them believed that they, as Jews, should go and take somebody else's country, and drive millions of them around the world as refugees. All of them would have turned their back against such an ideology. ... the decades that I worked against apartheid in south Africa... why should I debate with a supporter of Israeli apartheid?"

Without discussing the accuracy of his dates, Galloway seems to know nothing of the use of Jewish money in fomenting wars, or of behaviour of Jews in the USSR, where tens of millions were murdered and worked to death. He doesn't know about the fraudulent extraction of money from Germany, or the devastation of eastern Europe. Of course he says nothing about Jewish neo-cons, Jewish weapons frauds. His ideology seems that of the naive paid faux-left of about 1900, after which Jewish involvement in the Boer War brought Jewish activity into some focus, reinforced in turn by the Russo-Japanese War and assassinations in Russia. The denial of Jewish malevolence was only made possible by propaganda and by bribery and violence.
(I was informed of a similar piece dated Nov 19 2013 by David Duke which I hadn't known about).
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

The Transition from Jew Ignorance to Jew Awareness
1. The Achievements of Jews So Far.
Let's examine the achievements of so-called 'Jews' in the recent few centuries. Most of their work was secretive, until the Jewish coup in Russia in 1917. The story of the destruction of the Russian Empire, the vast cruelties and stripping of assets, are fairly well-known and will probably become better known if more discoveries are made. The link with Jews in the USA and Europe will, I hope, become better known. The fake known later as 'the Holocaust' has been accompanied by other frauds, notably 'atom bombs' over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which never happened. All the evidence suggests they will simply never, ever, stop deception: Cuba, the 'Liberty', 9/11, false flags continue without end.
Another major 'achievement' has been the destruction of white power in South Africa, engineered by Jewish 'communists': Cecil 'Harris', Joe Slovo, Ronald Kasrils, Suzman, Helen Zille, and so on. Black IQs appear simply too low to achieve a modern civilisation. One measure of 'IQ' suggests Africans average 12- to 14-year old whites: the idea they want to be independent is fantasy. If anything, they need help, but Jews are not interested in helping blacks, and the result is mass deaths, murders, and squalor. It's interesting to see the Jewish promotion of Mandela, who was something like an office boy for Jews, at the time of writing subject to a Stalin-like advertising campaign. There's now in South Africa a violent 'Economic Freedom Party' and no doubt readers can work out just from the name who funds it. The Boers, who farmed their areas for centuries, have largely been impoverished, with zero interest from the Jewish media, BBC etc. Similar events have happened in Rhodesia, with Mugabe and Hoogstraten. They may have happened in China, Cambodia, and other places.
As regards Africa, 1900 marks the war against Boers, an action which, not surprisingly, permanently soured the Afrikaaners. Jews hired groups of thugs at least since the 'French' Revolution; and this seems the explanation of thuggery around 1900:

SIR, - Being in Hyde Park this afternoon with some friends, we came across a Meeting being held by a pro-Boer from Exeter Hall, who was denouncing your paper for urging on the attack to break up their meeting on Friday, but I am glad to say he had no hearing, for we closed around him, and hundreds of us started singing 'Rule Britannia' and 'God Save the Queen.' He was in a tighter corner than at Exeter Hall; he was nearly torn to pieces. He ran for his life down Oxford Street, but was stopped by a Hussar, and had what he deserved. ... All praise is due to your paper for announcing Friday's meeting in Friday's issue, so that the pro-Boers could not have it all their own way.
I am, yours, etc
True Born Englishman. [quoted from the 'London Globe']

A 1955 letter from Clement Davies in Bertrand Russell's Autobiography has a similar message. George Dangerfield's The Strange Death of Liberal England of the 1930s is yet another evasionist work which fails to mention Jews.
Both Mandela and de Klerk received the Nobel Peace Prize. Blacks nominally took over South Africa. Since 1993, 63,000 have been killed, and South Africa is possibly The MURDER capital of The World. Though some authorities say the figures are typical of black Africa.
There are other Jewish achievements: wars fought by naive Britons and Americans, for example. And the attempt of genocide of whites by invasion and miscegenation, a process still under way.
Short of inventing a time machine, it's impossible to predict the future, but all the above events remain short of world domination. If it is possible to judge from other movements, there may be an event which converts the rise to stasis, then another event which causes the movement to fail. All Students of Judaic Beliefs and Actions Should Attempt to Take a Broad, Long-Term View. With the genuine (or engineered—who knows for certain?) collapse of the USSR and subsequent events they now have one fairly complete exhibit.
Here's a chatty overview piece on Jewish numbers needed for de facto control of a country; this article counters the argument that it's impossible for a minority to be in control.

2. Partial and Increasing Revisionisms.
When a false world-view has been publicised for several centuries, it is natural that truer views will take time to work through the various barriers to truth. There are people who understand the First World War was a disaster, but nevertheless wear symbolic poppies, praise their men, and like the 'Dam Busters' march from the following war. They may be sentimental over the passing of Jewish newspapers. At an individual level, people vary, and often hold outdated beliefs through inertia. The most common effect of mass repetition is that some beliefs simply will not be considered by many people: for example, questioning whether Jesus ever lived was and is outside the range of many normal people brought up in the 'west'. Many people refuse to look at evidence about Jews. Harold Hillman, a fearless sceptic in the world of biology research, never allowed himself doubts about the 'Holocaust'. David Irving doesn't want to consider either that Jesus was a myth, or that the atom bomb story of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a fake. The Egyptian history critic, Peter James, would not consider AIDS is a fraud. Large numbers of Britons still think of Churchill as a bold fearless leader; the truth is unattractive, and one revisionist work, by Clive Pontin (1994), criticises Churchill in technical senses, based on newly-released papers, but never wondered whether his whole enterprise was justified. To this day, many Americans think Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack, and that Vietnam was a danger to the USA and heavy bombing was justified. As another example of inertia, the Boers fought on the same side as the USA in 1914, 1939, and Korea.
The post-1945 construction of the 'Holocaust' seems to be tottering, and undoubtedly could be given a coup d'état in just a few weeks' saturation coverage. So could NASA and the moon landing fraud. The nuclear weapons fake—Hiroshima and Nagasaki were undoubtedly not atom bombed—would take longer, but is possible given time. Race, crime, intelligence, violence, and the huge support by Jewish paper money of anti-white activities make a constellation that most people still don't think about, and which is completely censored by Jewish media, and has for years been building up concealed debt. These are just a few examples, but show that revisionism is likely to be a slow and erratic process, unless there's an official change, and in fact revisionism may never be completed.
Partial Revisionism as Found in the USA. As an example, we have the late David Bryant on Jews in the USA (2000) (click back-arrow to return here). Bryant obviously counts as a revisionist (as the attacks on him help show); and his piece outlines Jewish 'Communism', Jews and the wrecking of South Africa, Jews and Germany, the 'Holocaust' fraud, the UN, financial frauds such as the 'Fed', the ADL, and Jewish media. And the murder of Secretary of the Navy Forrestal. BUT he doesn't include much of the US Civil War, Jews and the Atlantic slave trade, the 'French' Revolution. And Bryant, like most people, including me up to 2008, thought nuclear weapons were genuine, and that Jewish 'atom spies' sent genuine secrets to the U.S.S.R. And he assumes wars had genuine military purposes, rather than simply making money for Jews.
Bryant indicates how slow revisionism is likely to be. The fake Cuba crisis, murder of JFK to consolidate Jewish power, the cruelty and sordidness of the US in Vietnam and other places, the waste of money and vast slag heaps of uranium tailings, the false-flags and fake video news items such as 9/11, the huge financial frauds, are all a long way from closure. Here's a link to a modern revisionist piece on Vietnam, J F Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, blacks and the 'Civil Rights' Act, and drugs, 1945-1965 illustrating the way revisionism is likely to go.

Here's another example of incomplete revisionism: [John Tyndall, British nationalist, undated comment:] Gaddafi ... helped to finance the IRA, was behind the gang responsible for the killing of WPC Yvonne Fletcher in a London street in 1984 and is generally perceived ... to have instigated the Lockerbie air disaster. Tyndall obviously considered his argument decisive; in fact of course it hides quite a few assumptions, e.g. that the IRA was a genuine Irish terrorist movement.
Another example is Arthur Kemp, the writer and publisher, brought up in southern Africa: despite the Boer War, diamonds and gold, Joe Slovo and the rest, the 'Communist Party', Jewish lawyers, and anti-white racism, he has refused to admit any part of Jews in events in Africa, or in 9/11. Is he serious? Only time will tell.
Another example is the patriotism, or sham patriotism, which leads people to support what they think were their own forces on their own side. It's a painful duty of revisionists to try to assess wars. The two biggest were the Great War and Second World War; fortunately a lot of work has been done and continues to be done.
Yet another example is the shameful sheeplike stupidity of e.g. ordinary women, who quote the fake diary of Anne Frank, but say nothing about atrocities in vast numbers against white women, south east Asian women and others.
Jewish issues aren't the only possible revisionist topics. This site includes the sciences, the existence of Jesus, and even Shakespeare authorship. These other issues have their own interest and lessons, and also act as control experiments.

Karl Marx and John D. Rockefeller, J. P. Morgan, John D. Ryan, Morgan partner George W. Perkins, and 'Andy' Carnegie. Behind Karl Marx is Teddy Roosevelt, leader of the Progressive Party.

The pre-Federal Reserve message is obscure; but doubts over 'individualism' vs 'collectivism' or 'socialism' have never been stilled. Here are some comments on Planned Economy as just one example.

3. Challenges and Reform Movements, and Lessons From the Past.
Lesson 1: There appears to be no need for logical consistency. The Jewish worldview includes the 'Chosen people' idea, and yet, if they really had God on their side, then they'd have no worries. If they were sharp businessmen, they'd have less reason to resort to frauds and financial control. They often claim to be non-racist, with great indignation, and yet of course their policies are saturated with anti-white intention. The Holocaust fraud, the lies about Turkey and Russia, and all the rest still remain. They may claim to be a tiny minority, but the population figures such as they are are those for a small country. They sometimes claim people are inciting violence, when in fact Jews incite wars all the time, now; the truth about Jews should reduce wars. All this assumes they have media control, however.
Lesson 2: Never underestimate the vast, intentional, systematic, planned evil of Jews. If you can't believe this, read up on the USSR. Note also the lack of any sort of gratitude: even after the US and UK and USSR defeated Germany, there isn't the slightest sign of any gratitude. Many people still refuse to believe this sort of thing: they can't believe anyone would destroy cities, landscapes, entire countries, to make money. Most people think war is serious, and can't imagine any group causing wars just to make money. Most people still can't understand the Jewish attitude to debt: for controllers of money Debt is an asset. For everyone else, Debt is a liability. This is why Jews run up huge debts, offloading the repayments onto ordinary inhabitants of countries.
Lesson 3: Seizing the Commanding Heights. Jewish paper money power has been historically their most important point of leverage. ...
Lesson 4: ... but coupled with intense secrecy and intense social pressure: blackmail of adulterers through to paedophiles, assassinations and murders, masquerades with name-changing and acting, intermarriage for status. ("Keep a straight face when a Jew claims to be an aristocrat" - elderly Russian woman survivor).
Lesson 5: Different styles and types of Jews can be identified. For example, Hungarian Jews seem to be a specific type; a lot of the US nuclear fraud was carried out by Hungarian Jews.
Lesson 6: Don't underestimate the power of fanaticism. Many Jewish journalists, teachers, 'historians', lawyers, are happy to spend their entire lives telling lies.

All this suggests a reform movement may need secrecy, lies, and so on while under way. And this may be true. It is likely to need detailed planning. "Carthago delenda est" may come to be applied to Jews. Maybe there will be sudden changes: arrests of Rothschilds? Replacement of the BBC? New personnel at the Federal Reserve? Taking over of assets currently Jewish-owned through fraud in a large-scale redistribution? Detailed post-'Holohoax' reparations? Removal of Jewish MPs, ministers etc? Army takeover? Crash of civilisation with food, water, electricity, fuel turned off?
Whites are being robbed of their homelands, bit-by-bit, by Third World colonisers deliberately imported by the Zionist Jew/Cultural Marxist political Establishment. This covert White genocide-by-stealth was implemented with absolutely no mandate from the indigenous White populations, who are repressed by 'anti-hate' laws drafted by the same Zionist Jew anti-White haters.

4. New Academic Subjects May Well Come Into Existence...
Because Jews have used economic and military power to suppress many lines of thought, it seems possible that new subjects, existing in no present-day curriculum, may be defined and become important. Bertrand Russell suggested a subject of Power, in his 1938 book, meaning human power and power-structures; it's possible that Jewish expertise in lies, frauds, and secrecy may provide powerful lessons for the future. It may happen that free thought and free speech will be better delineated to maximise (for example) human happiness. It is possible that the Jewish clan-like knowledge, extending across continents, will lead to new psychological discoveries: if 'knowledge' is defined to include anything which improves predictions, then 'technical' knowledge of mining, shipping, ports, ships; and 'force' in police, military and security senses; and the influence of lies, secrecy, legal decisions; all might coalesce to maximise accurate predications about the future.
... And Other Material Be Discarded. Part of this process will probably be to revisit and reassess partly-forgotten Jewish authors and politicians. Gramsci is an example: was he in fact influential, or just an obscure Italian misdirecting attention from other Jews? Piero Sraffa was a once fairly famous Jewish economist, who supposedly (according to fellow-traveller Joan Robinson) established some economic certainties; did he, in fact, make any useful discoveries? Wittgenstein was a once fairly famous philosopher; I suspect he simply regurgitated aspects of a Jewish world-view. Sidney Hook had some 'Cold War' influence...
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Rise and Fall of Civilisations. And Futurology of Jews
The Rise and Fall of Civilisations The first question is to decide what 'civilisation' is. (The etymology means 'living in cities'). The whole issue is contaminated by centuries of 'Jewish' nonsense, for example their hypocritical pretence that even the most unimpressive arrangements are 'culture'. It's also interesting to try to assess when the question seemed important; Chinese people in the 19th century might well have felt civilisation was vanishing, as must Russians in much of the 20th. Times of big change are likely to be times when thinkers wonder about 'civilisation'. Piranesi's mid-18th century engravings of the remains of Rome, and Jane Jacobs remarks on cities and their remains world-wide (though of course not financial or military issues) illustrate just a couple of aspects.
Looking back (to try to avoid excessive 'Jew' influence) we find Toynbee's multi-volume attempt at historical survey; unfortunately he seems to have liked the idea that Christianity, which he liked, emerged from the decay of Rome, and therefore deaths of civilisations were a good thing—an awful warning not to seize on single issue 'proofs'
Further back, here's Herbert Spencer on excessive tax (1884, The Man Versus the State:–

'... In Gaul, during the decline of the Roman Empire, "so numerous were the receivers in comparison with the payers, and so enormous the weight of taxation, that the labourer broke down, the plains became deserts, and woods grew where the plough had been." In like manner, when the French Revolution was approaching, the public burdens had become such, that many farms remained uncultivated and many were deserted: one-quarter of the soil was absolutely lying waste; and in some provinces one-half was in health. Nor have we been without incidents of a kindred nature at home. Besides the facts that under the old Poor Law the rates had in some parishes risen to half the rental, and that in various places farms were lying idle, there is the fact that in one case the rates had absorbed the whole proceeds of the soil. ...'

An incident, far less well-known than it deserves, are the Moslem invasions of India. These seem to have been popularised in 1935 by an American, Will Durant.

" ... Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter. ..." ...

How true this is, and how true other mass slaughters were (for example, the Huns, and Jews in the USSR), are not settled issues, but most people would consider that adequate defence is part of 'civilisation'
Misuse of resources is something that has to be considered. What of lead poisoning in Rome, food adulteration with industrialisation, fluoride poisoning now? These issues ought to be analysable now more than at any other time, with the increase in general knowledge (particularly chemistry) and the increase in specific information by regions.
The human population issues need to be analysed. 'Jewish' influence has been positively malign, wasting times and setting back work into the achievements and abilities of (for example) white populations, other populations, effects of immigration, effects on reproduction rates of subsidies, abortions and so on. My best guess at understanding the world is that human evolution will become far better understood. The way populations match their lifestyles, and the possible rates of change with new conditions, and the effects of human inventions themselves, will, I hope, be better understood. There are many complications: here's an account of the tropics:

' ... skin cancers, rodent ulcers, dengue fever, filaria, malaria, chronic bowel and skin disease, and the constant battle with rampant growth ... pythons, ticks, termites, rain, mould, and lethargy caused by heat exhaustion. ... Humid heat induces a lethargy compounded by chronic illness in many populations. Water-borne and mosquito-transmitted diseases are almost impossible to totally control, given the aerial reservoirs of water developed by palms and bromeliads. ...'

That quotation is from a book on Permaculture, in which human, animal, and plant biology, with geology and climatology and hydrography are considered together. It's possible dictionaries of inventions by date and country might provoke hypotheses. There's a great amount of knowledge about human genetic problems, and also genetic variability—some groups can't digest alcohol, or cow's milk, for example. It is, still, not well know that the oddities in research in the U.S.S.R. were Jewish—denial that human races exist (Jews in USA) and belief heredity can be smashed (USSR) are variants on Jewish-based fanaticism.
Whether human psychology makes civilisations unstable in another possibility. Other animals are locked into their ordinary perceptions—eyesight, physical abilities, mobility. Human beings are the only creatures able to visualise ownership, empires, properties out of sight, valuable assets. They can also attach opinions and values: children, parents, landscapes, entertainments, neighbourhoods, for example, all have different assessments attached by different people. o do knowledge nets, the knowledge and opinions and familiarity held by different people, but adding up to some sort of holistic pattern. Possibly the numbers of people needed to organise holding structures has some inherent problem. The 'Jewish' success in ferreting out weaknesses and potential conflicts provides powerful lessons in how human activities can be made to go wrong dramatically. I hope progress will be made identifying how Jewish fanaticism evolved.
With increased information, it's possible legal systems might be improved—perhaps penalties will be imposed which bear some relation to the crime or offence. Anyone looking at the absurdities of Jewish-influenced systems must conclude there is huge scope for improvement!
These are just a few comments, thrown together. The future of civilisation may depend on precautionary steps taken soon. Any guidance, the sounder based the better, will be helpful in stemming the build-up of future problems, and perhaps future disasters.
[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

Futurology of Jews Some websites showcase peoples' views of (say) the USA or Europe in (say) 30 years' time. Mostly, of course, the Jewish component is unknown or ignored. I'd suggest a key factor in such predictions is assessing whether Jewish power will (a) decline, (b) continue much the same, or (c) increase. If it remains much the same, the reasoner should try to assess what he/she/they consider have been the main Jewish motives as revealed by history: to control money? To cause wars where possible? To kill rivals? To identify new substrates for parasitism? Simple theft? To battle specific targets at any one time—Germany, Russia, white people? Opinions legitimately differ on these things; but at least some idea of the future can be constructed on that basis. If Jewish power gets even stronger, presumably a prediction will be on similar lines, but more so.
If Jewish power drops, or collapses, there have to be two parts to the futurological prediction: one is how the collapse may happen, and the second what the results may be. This would have to cover removing money power from Jews; prosecutions for such things as 9/11 and JFK's murder; war investigations; restoration of gold and other stolen assets; restitution to (for example) Germany and Vietnam; removal of Jews from any media control and from education; prosecutions for science fraud; removal of Jewish immigration laws; reform of some legal company structures; reform of for example the EU. Work of this sort is potentially very important indeed; the whole future may depend on getting a workable outline plan.

Here is a possible approach to predicting Jewish collapse. Because of its precarious position, balanced between a large number of dishonest poles, Jews may fail. Maybe in a sequence like their increase in power, but running back through time.
Let me give an analogy with Governments taking excessive taxes: every possible source of tax revenue is taxed to the hilt; the marginal situation of each of each type of tax, i.e. the percentage, varies a lot, and depends on such factors as need (e.g. gasoline, water, food, shelter); objections made (food for example may be less taxed); awareness it happens at all (concealed taxes on purchases, rare taxes such as death duties and house purchase, taxes on companies, taxes on lotteries); addiction (tobacco, alcohol); taxes on imports or exports. Such a system may fail at any one of a number of points. Now let's transfer this analogy to the multiple forms of Jewish power:-
Everyone knows the 'Fed' and 'Bank of England' have monopoly powers in issuing legal, but otherwise worthless, currency. Other countries have similar Central Banks. Perhaps at some point groups experienced in banking will rebel and take over the functions for themselves, possibly paying off notional debt at huge discounts or otherwise removing them. It's very likely debts will be owed to legitimate groups, since Jews would tend to want to damage them (e.g. pensioners may find the assets sold them by Jews are worthless).
In this case, legal experts may find ways to re-allocate debts so that pensioners are legally allocated Jewish real assets. Legal experts could at any time e.g. investigate 9/11, investigate Holocaust frauds, or investigate many Jewish frauds, and reallocate e.g. insurance moneys, fake 'survivor' moneys, or extorted moneys, presumably allowing for inflation. There may be international law applied to war crimes, as another possibility: perhaps Israeli involvement in atrocities will spark off sufficient outrage.
Or conceivably military or police authorities will refuse to co-operate in some particularly corrupt or anti-white activity. If this were to happen, many people may be pulled in, and have to make their own decisions about the future. It's presumably possible this would coincide with shrinking Jewish fortunes, and perhaps with internal fighting between Jewish groups if they feel their grip slipping.
Or perhaps media people, propagandists, archivists, reporters might find some Jewish absurdity to be unacceptable to them. For example they may be ordered to tell lies about some outrage, destroy clear evidence, or invent stories with obviously harmful effects.
Possibly science might play a part: if fluoridation were proven to be a Jewish method of poisoning goyim, perhaps with documentary proof, a precedent may be set of sacking and penalising corrupt Jews. In my opinion this might apply to psychiatry, biochemistry and drugs, 'climate change' and 'carbon credit' and other Jewish money-making schemes, and particularly nuclear power and nuclear energy, both of which may soon be established to have been fraudulent. The same thing applies to the more frivolous frauds of NASA—'moon landings', 'Space Station', and so on. If it can be convincingly shown that Jews played a lead role in these frauds, using sufficient muscle as to make it plausible that non-Jews had little alternative but collaborate, all these frauds might collapse without much harm to non-Jews.
As Jewish money collapses, the media would be looked at; I would hope Jews would be kept out of the media in perpetuity, and from education. They could perhaps be bought up at fire-sale prices, and clauses included to keep any repetition of Jewish lies excluded. Such outfits as B'nai B'rith, the ADL, AIPAC would have to be completely erased. Freemasons and Common Purpose would have to be disinfected. Laws promoted by Jews, for example on Immigration, would be repealed or perhaps simply nullified as invalid. Such creatures as Kissinger and Soros and Cheney would be dealt with.
At an international level, arrangements would have to be made. Perhaps there would be mistakes, but I doubt whether the arrangements could be worse than the disasters inflicted by Jews have been.
Whether these events will happen, I don't of course know. I would suspect one initial breach in the Jewish fabric would not be enough; several leaks in the dyke would I'd hope grow and reinforce each other. Judging just by the Reformation, one might predict this could take years, and might take huge wars; but the fact is, most wars of the last few centuries were stoked up by Jewish money, or promises; if this were seen to be unreliable, a collapse might be faster than now seems possible. After all, it's propped up on little more than secrecy and paper promises. And people may take a hint from Jewish covert activities, secrecy, frontmen and the rest of it, and make plans in secret. If so, it may be found that unexpected allies pop up.

Talmud Notes
Here's a separate piece Notes on the Talmud and online sites on the Talmud and other Jewish material, which may have caused the evolution of the sub-race of modern so-called Jews from the Khazars.
It is perfectly possible, and indeed likely, that the various attitudes, tactics and strategies against non-Jews, and against Jews who did not conform, are in the 'holy books'. If some group of people—perhaps language scholars, historians, psychologists and military strategists—could spend time in extracting messages (and purging the antique language) it's almost certain that their handbooks on hatred might finally be laid bare.
Here's an example: Jewish ritual freeing from guilt: "Knowledge in Plain Sight" is part of their teachings in the Zohar. Kabbalists believe that if they publicly reveal their plans, it spiritually frees them of any guilt. The novel "The Wreck of the Titan" before the sinking of Titanic, "The Lone Gunman" TV episode before 911, the "Dancing Israelis" driving a van with a depiction of a plane crash painted on the side. (Quotation from Internet).
Possibly the Protocols of the Elders of Zion were intentionally leaked to Tsarist spies, revealing their plans. Possibly the faked photos and films of 'nuclear weapons' (the absurd 'phallic flame') and 'moon landings' (camera with no cameraman) and '9/11' were a type of Jewish religious expiation. Possibly some Jewish writers are following this tradition: I F Stone wrote The Hidden History of the Korean War and it's entirely possible the vast atrocities of Korea were an American, European and USSR Jew collaboration. It might be expected that US Presidential terms (4 years; maximum 8) would drive Jewish activity, with a 4- or 8- year cycle in maximising profit from weapon production, weapon use in wars, debt build-up to collect government interest.
The future: Here are some notes on possible rationalist attacks on 'Judaism', and on the possibility that it might be transmitted to new groups of people.

[ Start of 'Teaching About Jews' ]

HTML, effort © Rae West. This file separated from big-lies.org/jews/index.html 2018-04-11 mostly to shorten the file, but also to make it less concealed in the second half of the index. 6 Apr 2020 Phillips hydraulic thing.