Taking Back Our Stolen History


According to the Encyclopedia Britannica entry written by Michael Berenbaum, the term was originally coined by Wilhelm Marr in 1897 to designate the anti-Jewish campaigns under way in central Europe at that time [2]. It was coined because the term “Semite” had become a popular euphemism for “Jew”, use of which in anything other than approving terms and in similar fashion to today, invited immediate hostility and condemnation from Jewish leaders. It remains in widespread use and with similar notional meaning in Official Narratives and with its root “Semite” meaning “Jew/Jewish/Judaic”.

However, in semantic terms it is a gross and confusing misnomer in that Semitic defines a group of languages far more accurately than it does race or religion and in both usages it encompasses vastly more non-Jewish (especially Arab) than Jewish peoples – which renders it particularly absurd in the context of the Middle East.

“If you would know who controls you see who you may not criticize.” ― Tacitus

In the nineteenth century it was used as much as a self-description by people wishing to proclaim their dislike or opposition to Jewry; whereas in nowadays the term “antisemite” is used as an exonym to describe those opposed by the Israel lobby. It has no substantive meaning other than as an insulting epithet and, like its close relative “Holocaust Denier”, its primary usage is to demonize and close down rational debate on matters deemed offensive or otherwise critical of important Judaic Official Narratives.

Gilad Atzmon noted that The more Jewish bodies campaign against anti-Semitism the more opposition to Jewish politics is detected. [3]

Roger Waters was quoted in 2016 as stating about the music industry that

My industry has been particularly recalcitrant in even raising a voice [against Israel]. There’s me and Elvis Costello, Brian Eno, Manic Street Preachers, one or two others, but there’s nobody in the United States where I live. I’ve talked to a lot of them, and they are scared s***less. If they say something in public they will no longer have a career. They will be destroyed.[4]

A former Israeli minister admitted:

“Anti-semitic, it’s a trick we always use”

It is rare to hear this sort of truth stated quite so boldly. The video is from a Democracy Now interview of former Israeli minister Shulamit Aloni by Ami Goodman broadcast in June 2010.[5]

In 2015, Stephen Sizer was vilified by the commercially-controlled media and disciplined by the establishment who claimed that merely posting a Facebook link to the Wikispooks page “9-11/Israel did it” (not even alleging that he believed the contents were true), was in itself an “anti-semitic” act.

Peter Drew, UK Coordinator for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, asked the Church of England:

“Has the Church of England ever asked our government officials and media to provide evidence of their allegations against Muslims, or if they can’t provide this evidence then to stop spreading these false allegations about Muslims being the perpetrators of 9/11?”[6]

In Jackie Patru’s article Jewish Persecution: Plan of the International Zionist Plan for World Dominion, she states:

“We shall discover that Jewish Persecution has always been orchestrated — though not necessarily implemented — by the Priesthood and its minions; that Jewish Persecution has played a critical role in the successful implementation, to this point, of the plan for World Dominion; and that the sufferers of Jewish Persecution, the ‘lesser brethren’, are born and bred to suffer.

“Nowadays if any States raise a protest against us it is only pro forma at our discretion and by our direction, for their anti-Semitism is indispensable to us for the management of our lesser brethren.” Protocol No. 9 (emphasis added)

Because of the orchestrated and often false claims of Jewish Persecution and anti-Semitism, hate crime laws have been passed in many countries which forbid the mere discussion of the Jewish Question. At the mere mention of the ‘J’ word, cries of anti-Semitism ring out so those who would reveal the truth of the evils of Zionism are castigated and/or imprisoned.

Without Jewish Persecution in this final phase of the last 3,000 years the plan could not have succeeded to its present point because, according to their own words: without hatred, divisiveness, racial discontent and all which that implies, there would surely be TRUE PEACE AMONG MEN AND AMONG THE NATIONS OF THE WORLD. In our heart of hearts we all know that:


The Jews have hotly denied the Protocols, claiming they are a forgery. So do Christians who haven’t read and researched the issue. I was recently asked by a Judeo-Christian friend: “Why are you still quoting from this piece of fraudulent trash?”
The following comments from Henry Ford’s Dearborn Independent of July 1920 put them in the same perspective as Mr. Reed who we quoted at the beginning:

“When you see how closely the Jews are united by various organizations in the United States, and when you see how with practiced hand they bring those organizations to bear as if with tried confidence in their pressure, it is at least not inconceivable that what can be done within a country — can be done, or has been done between all the countries where the Jews live.
“At any rate, in the American Hebrew of June 25, 1920, Herman Bernstein writes thus:

About a year ago a representative of the Department of Justice submitted to me a copy of the manuscript of ‘The Jewish Peril’ by Professor Nilus, and asked for my opinion of the work. He said that the manuscript was a translation of a Russian book published in 1905 which was later suppressed.
The manuscript was supposed to contain ‘protocols’ of the Wise Men of Zion and was supposed to have been read by Dr. Herzl at a secret conference of the Zionist Congress at Basle.
He expressed the opinion that the work was probably that of Dr. Theodor Herzl… He said that some American Senators who had seen the manuscript were amazed to find that so many years ago a scheme had been elaborated by the Jews which is now being carried out, and that Bolshevism had been planned years ago by Jews who sought to destroy the world’.

“This quotation is made merely to put on record the fact that it was a representative of the Department of Justice of the United States Government, who introduced this document to Mr. Bernstein, and expressed a certain opinion upon it, namely, ‘that the work was probably that of Dr. Theodor Herzl’. Also that ‘some American Senators’ were amazed to note the comparison between what a publication of the year 1905 proposed and what the year 1920 revealed.

“The incident is all the more preoccupying because it occurred by action of the representative of a government who today is very largely in the hands of, or under the influence of, Jewish interests. It is more than probable that as soon as the activity became known, the investigation was stopped.
“A copy of the Protocols was deposited in the British Museum and bears on it the stamp of that institution, ‘August 10, 1906’.

“The document was published in England recently under auspices that challenged attention for it, in spite of the unfortunate title under which it appeared. Eyre and Spotiswoode are the appointed printers to the British Government, and it was they who brought out the pamphlet. It was as if the Government Printing Office at Washington should issue them in this country. While there was the usual outcry by the Jewish press, the London Times in a review pronounced all the Jewish counter-attacks as ‘unsatisfactory’.

“. . . The interest of the Protocols at this time is their bearing on the questions: Have the Jews an organized world system? What is its policy? How is it being worked?

“The Protocols are a World Program — there is no doubt anywhere of that. Whose program, is stated within the articles themselves. But as for outer confirmation, which would be the more valuable — a signature, or six signatures, or twenty signatures, or a 25-year unbroken line of effort fulfilling that program?

“The point of interest for this and other countries is not that a ‘criminal or a madman’ conceived such a program, but that, when conceived, this program found means of getting itself fulfilled in its most important particulars. The document is comparatively unimportant; the conditions to which it calls attention are of a very high degree of importance.” — Dearborn Independent – Issue of July 10, 1920.

Nesta Webster was a respected historian whose books most of us knew nothing about because they are not (and to my knowledge, never were) available in the Zionist-controlled book stores. The following excerpts are from Germany and England, Chapter V, titled “Hitler”;

“Before the War [WWI] they [Jews] had again and again expressed all their passionate loyalty to Germany as the one country on which all their hopes were set.

“For although despised and hated, they were able to make money in a country where, as Hitler says, “gold was a god” to a larger extent than in any other except perhaps the United States.

“They were also allowed to occupy positions in the learned and professional classes out of all proportion to those held by Germans. Though largely barred by society, they were encouraged by the Hohenzollerns, who had always believed in making use of them, from Frederick the Great with his münzenjude to Wilhelm II with his Rathenau at the end of a private telephone wire.

“It was thus that during the War so many of the Jews in this country [England] hoped for the final victory of Germany and provided some of her most useful spies and informers. . .

“But in the main, it was Russia that the Jews — including those in England — regarded as their principal enemy, and it was out of hatred for Russia that they sided with Germany against the Allies.

“After Russia had been brought low and a hideous revenge taken on her by the predominantly Jewish Bolsheviks, and the Kaiser had been got rid of, the Jews started Bolshevising Germany, and having got her almost completely under their control they remained pro-German until the rise of Hitler.

“It was then that the whole Jewish power was turned against Germany.

“The Jews had not minded a certain amount of persecution, which after all mainly affected the humbler classes of their race, as long as they were given power in the State. But this is precisely what Hitler took from them, hence largely the cry of persecution.

“Hitler himself had been slow to adopt an attitude of anti-Semitism.

“As he relates in Mein Kampf, he was at first revolted by the hostility shown towards the Jews which he encountered in Austria and attributed to their religion:

“As I thought they were persecuted on that account, my aversion to remarks in their disfavour almost grew into abhorrence. . .
“I considered that tone, especially that adopted by the anti-Semitic Press of Vienna, unworthy of cultural traditions of a great nation.”

“But by degrees he came to the conclusion that “the Jewish religion” was really a misnomer:

“Through his own original being the Jew cannot possess any form of idealism, and therewith belief in the Hereafter is completely foreign to him. One cannot however imagine a religion according to the Aryan conceptions in which the conviction of life after death in some form is lacking.”

“This statement entirely accords with those made to me by two Jews, quite independently of each other, who assured me with deep regret that the Jews of Western Europe rarely believe in God or the immortality of the soul; their outlook is entirely material.

“For this reason it is not surprising that — Karl Marx having declared that ‘religion is the opium of the people’ — Jews should, as Hitler further observed, have become the chief propagandists of Marxism: ‘that world pestilence’.

“He saw them, too, as the oppressors of the working-classes and at the same time the agitators who stir them to revolt. He realised ‘their glibness’ and ‘their artfulness in lying’ on which Martin Luther in his treatise “Von den Juden and ihren Lügen” (Concerning the Jews and their Lies) had expressed himself with far greater violence some four hundred years earlier.

“Above all, Hitler saw the fear they are able to inspire in order to drive all rivals or opponents off the field:

“Anyone with intelligence enough to resist the Jewish lure is broken by intimidation, however determined and intelligent he may be.”

“Mein Kampf is really an amazing book when one considers that it was written by a young soldier with little education, most of whose life had been spent in the direst poverty or in the trenches. Hitler writes in no spirit of Jew-baiting but as a bacteriologist calmly examining through his microscope the action of certain noxious bacilli on the human body.

“He observes the influence exercised by the Jews in the world of art; he sees them as:

“the inspired creators of those hideous inventions for the cinema and the theatre,” of: “those unclean products of artistic life as given to the people.”

“It was pestilence, spiritual pestilence, worse than the Black Death, with which the nation was being inoculated”

“– especially the youth of Germany.

“Anyone who has not lost the capacity for entering into the souls of the young will realize that it must lead to their grave injury.” . . .

“In his strictures on pre-Nazi Germany, Hitler is undeniably justified; it was a matter of common knowledge just before and after the War that Berlin became a center of iniquity, its night life worse in some respects than that of Paris; vice of an unspeakable kind was flaunted with impunity, nude midnight orgies took place in the West End of the city – a cult that may in fact be said to have originated in Germany; the Jugendbewegung, chaotic and uncontrolled, encouraged license among the young; filthy and blasphemous books poured forth from the German Press.

“Whether Hitler is right in attributing all this to the Jews we cannot tell; there are depraved elements of every nation which need no inciting to vice.

“The fact remains, however, that since Hitler started to purge town life in Germany, pornographic books and pictures have disappeared from the shops, the Youth movements have become clean and healthy, the cult of nudity has been suppressed. And all this has coincided with the expulsion or voluntary departure of a number of Jews from Germany – not of Jews in the mass, since thousands still live there in peace, but without the power to influence the public mind which they formerly enjoyed.

“Once-Christian England, in welcoming Jewish refugees indiscriminately to her shores, shows surprisingly little concern for the effect some of them may have on the minds and morals of her people, especially on the youth of the country.

“We cannot help, moreover, noting, since this influx began, the change that has come over our Press; a once decent popular paper has boomed the nudity movement; another, which a few years ago could have been safely placed in the hands of a child, publishes matter exalting immorality and sneering at virtue; cartoons by artists not of British race, vulgar and not in the least funny, designed to create bad blood between classes and nations, are published with impunity.

“Meanwhile the view of those to whom all these things are hateful, of those who crave to see their country restored to its former greatness as a beacon shedding the light of truth and justice on the world, are denied a hearing.

“If this is the ‘liberty of the Press’ enjoyed under ‘democracy’, I should prefer the censorship of the Dictators.

Mrs. Webster’s final statement there gives one cause to pause. . . and ponder the thought. When this type of contradictory information about Germany under National Socialism first came into the light, it was very confusing to say the least. However, the information has been confirmed by many suppressed authors and expanded upon in personal conversations I have had with people who lived in Germany under Adolf Hitler’s rule. He was not the Devil incarnate; on the contrary, his love for Germany and her people was made manifest time and again.

The nagging piece of that puzzle that wouldn’t resolve itself was the fact that: “Hitler was a dictator!”

Perhaps the resolution in my mind is merely a justification as to “why” a national leader — hated by the world for decades and whom I have come to respect over the past several years by reading dozens of suppressed books — became a dictator, rather than merely a ‘president’.

When Adolf Hitler was running for office there were over a hundred political parties in Germany; all of them (according to Hans Schmidt, in his book End Times, End Games) were Communist/Bolshevik front groups. It just happens that the majority of the Russian Communist/Bolsheviks were Jews, so admitted in their own literature and Jewish Encyclopedias.

Agents provocateur from the fledgling Soviet Union infiltrated Germany during the first World War and sabotaged the war effort, going so far as inciting strikes in the munitions plants — during a war! When we see the power and control they assumed in the Weimar Republic, and the devastation they created, it would seem impossible that a ‘president’ could keep them out of government offices. A dictator could — and did — do just that. He also ejected them from other positions of power and influence. And he ejected the money-lenders from their places of control over the German economy.

It is a matter of history (certainly not history that’s taught in schools and universities) that during those years, before Germany was forced into the planned second World War, the nation and the people thrived under National Socialism, in all aspects of their lives.

In her book Mrs. Webster stated that (in 1938) the German government was openly anti-Semitic, and Germany was thriving. At the same time, she said, England was being secretly ruled and destroyed from within by the powerful cabal that had grabbed hold the reins of the British government, the press, education, etc.