Roger Stone concocted Pizzagate for Trump?

roger-stone-pizzagateBy Timothy Fizpatrick
December 31, 2016 Anno Domini

It appears that Donald Trump political operative Roger Stone made up the “Pizzagate” conspiracy theory in order to aid the defeat of Hillary Clinton and distract from Trump’s promises reveral and Zionist manoeuvrings.

Hillary Clinton opponents, alt right pundits, conspiracy theorists, and members of the “truther” community alike are all still chasing the apparent Stone-rigged dangling carrot in the form of an elaborate, provocative, and seductive conspiracy theory alleging that members of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign for president are operating an underground child-trafficking ring from a set of Clinton-connected ma-and-pa businesses in Washington D.C., namely from the non-existent basement of a pizza joint called Comet Ping Pong.

The Pizzagate dirty trick—which alleges that Clinton campaigners John and Tony Podesta are the masterminds of the ring, extending to Europe—is based on a conveniently anonymous March 2016 hack of the John Podesta’s emails published on Wikileaks, a suspected CIA/Mossad front. Also convenient was the timing of the publishing of the emails by Wikileaks, on October 7, 2016, just in time for the election. The Pizzagate theory “broke” at the end of October.

Days later, on Oct. 11, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta told reporters that GOP dirty trickster Roger Stone may have had advanced knowledge of the breach and the subsequent publishing of the emails on Wikileaks.[i]

“I think it is a reasonable assumption—or at least a reasonable conclusion—that Mr. Stone had advance warning and the Trump campaign had advance warning about what [Wikileaks founder Julian] Assange was going to do,” Podesta said. “I think there is a reasonable belief that Mr. Assange may have passed this information on to Mr. Stone.”

Podesta referred to an August 21, 2016 tweet by Stone in which he cryptically warned, “Trust me, it will soon” be “Podesta’s time in the barrel.”[ii]

screen-shot-2016-12-31-at-1-09-59-pm

“Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon also pointed to a interview Stone did in August with Alex Jones’ InfoWars, when he said he had been in touch with Assange through ‘mutual friends.’ In late September and early October, Stone repeatedly touted that Assange would soon release more information on Clinton, both on his Twitter and in another interview with Jones.”[iii]

Stone has denied the suggestion by Podesta; however, Podesta’s claim that Wikileaks timed the release of his emails to cover up the leak of the embarrassing Billy Bush-Trump interview is plausible. Furthermore, it may have been timed to overshadow Trump’s then-pending rape allegation by Katie Johnson[iv], which was tied to convicted child prostitute pimp Jeffrey Epstein, and to distract from Trump’s about face following his election victory, in which he began to refill the swamp with his Goldman Sachs cronies and other villains and shill for the Likud-controlled state of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, and the international Jewish organized crime syndicate.[v]

The claim that the Podesta emails were hacked by Russia is likely a distraction from the real hackers, who are probably operatives in the CIA, NSA, and Mossad—Wikileaks itself likely being a creation of the CIA and Israeli intelligence. Also, we don’t know that the emails published are legitimate. With Trump and Stone’s deep-state ties, it’s not implausible that Stone could have been given warning about the planned hack of Clinton campaigners or the plan create a scandal involving the Clintons (not that there aren’t legitimate ones). But did Stone himself develop the Pizzagate theory based on his knowledge of the Podesta email contents or was he fed it by the hackers? Going buy Stone’s past political trickery, perhaps a little bit of both. What is clear, though, is that Stone had the motive, skills, and time to orchestrate a dirty trick like Pizzagate.

Stone the dirty trickster and agent provocateur

Swingers Stone and Cohn.

Swingers Stone and Cohn.

If Roger Stone were indeed the author or co-author of the Pizzagate conspiracy theory, it wouldn’t be the first time the middle-aged swinger has pulled dirty tricks for the Likud-controlled U.S. Republican Party. He has operated for both George H.W. and George W. Bush, Ronald Regan, Richard Nixon, Donald Trump (business and politics), and other prominent people. A lot of his skills were learned from his mentor, Roy Cohn, a Jewish pederast and sexual blackmail operator working in the U.S. government. Cohn was also the mentor of Donald Trump. Retired New York Police Department detective James Rothstein claims that Stone was part of Cohn’s pedophile entrapment ring.

According to Stone critic Mark Ames, the three major points of the Trump-Stone association rests on:

  1. Roger Stone’s dirty tricks specialty is manipulating voter fractures, and weaponizing anti-establishment politics to serve the electoral needs of mainstream Republican candidates;
  2. Roger Stone and Donald Trump have been working together since the mid-1980s, mostly on sleazy campaigns to help Trump’s casino business, but also in politics;
  3. Roger Stone and Donald Trump worked together in at least two major “black bag” operations manipulating anti-establishment politics to help the mainstream Republican presidential candidate.[vi]

Aside from Pizzagate, most recently, Stone implicated Trump’s internal GOP opponent Ted Cruz with the assassination of John F. Kennedy. It’s no coincidence that Stone’s longtime associates are, themselves, connected to the organized crime syndicate that orchestrated the murder of the Kennedys.[vii] Like Pizzagate, Stone attempts to use photographic evidence to prove his smear of Cruz.[viii] Perhaps Stone even came up with the “Alex Jones is really Bill Hicks” meme (also based on supposed photographic evidence), in an attempt to discredit Alex Jones’ critics and advance Likud’s false opponents in the alternative media.[ix] As with many of Stone’s dirty tricks, Trump publicly echoed the Cruz-JFK theory during his campaign run.

In 1972, when Stone was barely out of his teenage years, the ambitious Republican trickster went to work by entrapping Richard Nixon’s opponent for the Republican nomination Paul McCloskey. Stone had been working for Nixon’s re-election committee, CREEP, appropriately nicknamed by Nixon’s opponents. Using the fake name “Jason Rainier”, Stone donated funds to McCloskey under the pretext that it was on behalf of the Young Socialist Alliance. Stone then told the press that the would-be GOP nominee had accepted the funds, implying that McCloskey was an undercover socialist. The trick must have worked, as Nixon was eventually won the nominee.[x]

After aiding in the successful presidential campaigns of celebrity president Ronald Regan in the 1980s, Stone’s career of trickery encountered a bit of a setback and he was forced to resign from Bob Dole’s 1996 campaign. Ironically, the National Enqirer, a publication Stone has used to aid in his political black operating, exposed Stone’s sexual libertinism—namely that he was a bisexual swinger.[xi] Whether or not Stone was involved in Lew Rosenstiel and Roy Cohn’s boy-loving sex ring at Trump’s former Plaza Hotel suite 233[xii] is unknown.

Cover of tabloid Star from 1996 showing the blacked-out face of Roger Stone in its article on his swingers ad.

Cover of tabloid Star from 1996 showing the blacked-out face of Roger Stone in its article on his swingers ad.

Enquirer article in Swinger Stone. Click to enlarge.

Enquirer article in Swinger Stone. Click to enlarge.

Stone would eventually make his way back into black operating for the Likudniks during the Bush II era. He helped out George W. Bush in his 2000 campaign while under threat from the Reform Party and its candidate Pat Buchanan. Stone got Trump to join the Reform party and then leave it, under the guise of disillusionment, in an attempt to derail the Reform party’s growing popularity and split votes. Stone was also behind the alleged Buchanan baby scandal in a further attempt to divide and weaken Bush’s opponent, securing Bush’s victory for the Zionist cryptocracy.[xiii]

“The Stone-inspired Reform infighting served multiple Bush interests: It killed any possibility of a third Perot run, blocked the candidacy of former Connecticut governor Lowell Weicker, and forced out the party’s only elected official, Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura. Buchanan’s vanishing act—after Stone cajoled him to run Reform—left nearly a dozen party leaders contacted by the Voice convinced that he and Stone were conscious agents of doom.”[xiv]

 

Stone would pull off one more significant act of deception for the Likudniks running the Bush II campaign: obstructing justice in the Bush election theft.

Later that year, Stone, who calls himself “the GOP hitman,” spearheaded the Brooks Brothers riot that thwarted Florida’s ballot recount. By his account, Stone managed to rally right-wing protesters to assemble outside a voting center in Miami-Dade—a diverse county sympathetic to Gore. “The idea we were putting out there was that this was a left-wing power grab by Gore, the same way Fidel Castro did it in Cuba. We were very explicitly drawing that analogy,” Stone recalled. “The idea was to shut it down, stop the recount here in Miami.”[xv]

False-flagging, agent provocateuring, and causing infighting—these are the rotten fruits of Roger Stone.

In 2004, during the Bush. Jr. re-election campaign, Stone reportedly used FBI informant-black activist Al Sharpton to steal the nomination from Democrat Al Gore in order for Sharpton to become a strawman opponent to Bush.

“As it turns out, Al Sharpton entered the 2004 Democratic primaries on the payroll and orders of Roger Stone, who directed Sharpton’s attacks from the race politics-left against Howard Dean. And as the New York Times revealed that year, it was Donald Trump who took credit for introducing Al Sharpton—a one-time FBI informant—to his old friend and lobbyist, GOP dirty trickster Roger Stone,” writes Ames.[xvi]

One wonders from where Stone was getting the money to pay for stunts like this. Was it coming from Tel Aviv or through one of Israel’s CIA conduits?

“After neutralizing the Reform Party and blocking the Florida recount with his hired “Brooks Brothers mob” Roger Stone was rewarded by President Bush by being put in charge of the Bush-Cheney 2000 transition team’s Indian Bureau Affairs appointments. Even in this, Trump did a solid for Stone, signing his name on a fake letter written by Stone in order to sink the nomination of the “wrong” Indian tribal leader who wasn’t Stone’s man. The fake Trump letter ensured that Stone’s man, Neal McCaleb, was given the job as head of Bush’s Indian Affairs Bureau instead.”

These are just some of the Stone-Trump dirty tricks politics. I am sure we will learn some more as the Trump administration devolves into an even greater Likud front and the opposition grows more tired of the lies and treachery.

Zionist David Seaman, the Pizzagate fall guy?

Either David Seaman is the real author or co-author of Pizzagate or he is the front should Stone’s potential role behind it be revealed to the public. Either way, Seaman is as suspicious as Stone. The former mainstream media journalist’s surname is ironic considering the content of the Pizzagate conspiracy claims. His role in the Trump campaign earlier this fall seems to have been to promote the theory that Hillary Clinton was on the verge of dying. And he had help from almost all in the alternative media in spreading this distraction, which turned out to be false. Clinton is alive and well, it seems. For what purpose this little tale served is for speculation. With so many damning revelations about Trump and his character during the presidential race, it could have served to distract from dozens of things. Overall, it was a suspicious diversion coming from a mainstream media “reporter”, who ended up allegedly being fired as a result of fixating on this one topic. Following this firing, he apparently moved on to Pizzagate. Seaman is Jewish and also Zionist.[xvii] With this, his role in the Likud-controlled GOP and its propagation of the Pizzagate conspiracy theory makes more sense.

pizzagatehoax

The Pizzagate evidence

blogmapnapkinThe initial Pizzagate evidence was the supposed pedophile code John Podesta used in his emails. It was based on a “pizza-related map” on a handkerchief, which could have been nothing more than a logo-clad napkin with a map to a pizzeria. Secondary evidence, most of which has been debunked, included a series of perverted photos, some of which involved Kim Noble’s Satanic ritual abuse art and had nothing to do with anyone involved in Pizzagate. Like Stone’s other dubious photographic evidence, Pizzagate theorists used a batch of photos supposedly obtained from Comet Ping Pong owner James Alefantis’ social media accounts to advance their theories. It’s pointless to comment on the supposed photos until it can be proven that they are authentic. The same goes for the Podesta emails. But what we can comment on is the photoshopping of the fictitious pedophile code used to scandalize Podesta. Also, Stone’s apparent history of forging documents lends credibility to the thesis of this article. The photoshopper (Stone or Seaman?) added a “white” category to the homosexual underground handkerchief code (did Stone select this handkerchief code based on his own knowledge of this code, himself being involved in the homosexual underworld?). The photoshopped graphic describes the category as “pedo/virgin”. A simple online search of a more exhaustive homosexual handkerchief[xviii] code does indeed reveal a white category; however, it does not mean pedo or virgin. Furthermore, the code is not necessarily universally adopted by all homosexuals, or other sexual deviants. Evidence suggests that some perverts use localized codes, ones that they develop specifically for their group, like in the case of 4chan, which does seem to use “cheese pizza” as sort of adaptive acronym for “child porn”. Ironically, 4chan, a known pedophile hangout, was instrumental in spreading the Pizzagate theory. Regardless, there is nothing to substantiate the alleged code used in the Podesta emails. It’s all wild speculation and reaching.

Another photographic piece of “evidence” used by the theorists is a police sketching of the supposed Madeline McCann kidnapper. Even though the police sketching is two different renderings of one man, the Pizzagaters use it to prop up their theory that it’s two renderings of two men—whom they claim is John and Tony Podesta. From there, there is virtually nowhere the Pizzagate theorists won’t go. They try to to tie Pizzagate to every child-sex scandal in history and then accuse skeptics of being pedophiles and child rapist sympathizers for not automatically accepting their cockamamie theories.

Some Pizzagaters will admit to the flimsiness of the core evidence but will ask “what about all the other stuff?”. Using a basic chain of logic, the other stuff is all meaningless until the primary evidence can be proven.

Wikileaks the Zionist psyop

Assange

It’s debated whether Wikileaks has “leaked” anything from its archive of hacks that has had any significance in world affairs and politics. It’s also debated as to the legitimacy of its hacked content, which has been gathering for ten years now. But what is known is that Wikileaks has rarely, if ever, leaked anything of significance as it pertains to Zionism and the state of Israel. Out of all the scandals and corruption in the world, Wikileaks has never managed to implicate the world’s biggest conspirator in any significant wrongdoing. This wouldn’t be a coincidence had Wikileaks been a Mossad/CIA-controlled psyop. In fact, Wikileaks has not only omitted and covered up Israeli/Zionist crimes, it has worked to promote its propaganda, like the Likud lie that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.[xix] Furthermore, it appears that Wikileaks may be the direct creation of none other than the Rothschild dynasty. It goes without saying that the Rothschild agenda is the same as that of Likud and their lackeys in the American GOP. From wherever Wikileaks supposedly obtained the Podesta emails, it was with the blessing of the Zionist establishment.

Perhaps the biggest red flag to the legitimacy of Wikileaks is the miraculous elusiveness and survival of its founder Julian Assange, who has managed to dodge the greatest, most ubiquitous surveillance state in world history. Assange makes it all too easy to dismiss him as a Zionist-Rothschild COINTELPRO operative when he makes comments like the following:

“I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.”[xx]

As we can see, Roger Stone, Donald Trump, David Seaman, and Wikileaks all have one thing in common: Israel. Pizzagate can only be a clever Likud distraction to coverup the crimes and corruption of Trump and his loyalty to Israel and the money power.

Stone claims he has been in touch with Assange through “mutual friends”.[xxi] If true, it can only be intelligence friends, likely in the CIA/Mossad.

Pizzagate also serves to discredit the “truther” movement, aid Internet censorship agenda

While many in the truth community spend countless hours chasing the breadcrumbs likely left by Stone, and Assange, and coming up with yet more theories surrounding Pizzagate, the mainstream media and the conspirators poke fun at the truth movement and discredit it as a progenitor of fake news and lies. The mass hysteria resulting from this possible Roger Stone dirty trick has even eventuated in a recent false-flag attack, where an alleged gunman, provoked by a sense of Pizzagate justice, entered Comet Ping Pong for revenge. Fortunately, nothing serious happened. But in the near future, a more serious false-flag attack could occur at one of the alleged Pizzagate-associated businesses in Washington, DC, resulting in more serious demonization of the alternative media and truthers alike and likely new, sweeping Internet censorship legislation.

Pizzagate, like the Jade Helm, flat Earth, and Jesuit conspiracy theories, could be part of a Cass Sunstein-like attempt to discredit legitimate conspiracies by flooding the truth movement with plausible yet ultimately false and fake conspiracy theories. Of course, an operation like this would also have to be carried out by the intelligence community and its hatchet men like Roger Stone.

Notes:

[i] Goodwin, Liz, Podesta says Trump adviser Roger Stone may have had ‘advance knowledge’ of hack, Oct. 11, 2016, Yahoo! News – https://www.yahoo.com/news/podesta-says-trump-adviser-roger-stone-may-have-had-advance-knowledge-of-hack-020432912.html

[ii] @RogerJStoneJr, Twitter, Aug. 21, 2016 https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/767366825743097856?p=v

[iii] Goodwin, Liz, Podesta says Trump adviser Roger Stone may have had ‘advance knowledge’ of hack, Oct. 11, 2016, Yahoo! News – https://www.yahoo.com/news/podesta-says-trump-adviser-roger-stone-may-have-had-advance-knowledge-of-hack-020432912.html

[iv] Fitzpatrick, Timothy, Trump controlled by the Mossad – Part III, Fitzpatrick Informer, Nov. 19, 2016 – https://fitzinfo.wordpress.com/2016/11/19/trump-controlled-by-the-mossad-part-iii/

[v] American Free Press, Is Trump a Populist or a Pro-Zionist Spoiler?, Oct. 19, 2015 – https://americanfreepress.net/is-trump-a-populist-or-a-pro-zionist-spoiler/

[vi] Ames, Mark, Behind the scenes of the Donald Trump – Roger Stone show, August 11, 2015, Pando – https://pando.com/2015/08/11/behind-scenes-donald-trump-roger-stone-show/

[vii] Fitzpatrick, Timothy, Trump controlled by the Mossad – Part II, November 8, 2016, Fitzpatrick Informer – https://fitzinfo.wordpress.com/2016/11/08/trump-controlled-by-the-mossad-part-ii/

[viii] Durkin, J.D., Roger Stone ‘Confirms’ Rafael Cruz Was Tied to JFK in the Most Roger Stone Way Imaginable, May 4, 2016, Mediate – http://www.mediaite.com/online/roger-stone-confirms-rafael-cruz-was-tied-to-jfk-in-the-most-roger-stone-way-imaginable/

[ix] Fitzpatrick, Timothy, Is Alex Jones behind the conspiracy theory that he is Bill Hicks?, Nov. 26, 2014, Fitzpatrick Informer – https://fitzinfo.wordpress.com/2014/11/26/is-alex-jones-behind-the-conspiracy-theory-that-he-is-bill-hicks/

[x] Preza, Elizabeth, Trump’s Dirty Trickster: The Staggeringly Shady Dealings of Political Operative Roger Stone, May 11, 2016, AlterNet – http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/trumps-dirty-trickster-staggeringly-shady-dealings-political-operative-roger-stone

[xi] ibid

[xii] Fitzpatrick, Timothy, Trump controlled by the Mossad – Part III, November 8, 2016, Fitzpatrick Informer – https://fitzinfo.wordpress.com/2016/11/19/trump-controlled-by-the-mossad-part-iii/

[xiii] Barrett, Wayne, The sex scandal that put Bush in the White House, May 11, 2004, The Village Voice – http://www.villagevoice.com/news/the-sex-scandal-that-put-bush-in-the-white-house-6407173

[xiv] ibid

[xv] Preza, Elizabeth, Trump’s Dirty Trickster: The Staggeringly Shady Dealings of Political Operative Roger Stone, May 11, 2016, AlterNet – http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/trumps-dirty-trickster-staggeringly-shady-dealings-political-operative-roger-stone

[xvi] Ames, Mark, Behind the scenes of the Donald Trump – Roger Stone show, August 11, 2015, Pando – https://pando.com/2015/08/11/behind-scenes-donald-trump-roger-stone-show/

[xvii] Pizzagate researcher David Seaman shills for Israel – http://www.infostormer.com/pizzagate-researcher-david-seaman-shills-for-israel/

[xviii] Gay hanky codes – https://user.xmission.com/~trevin/hanky.html

[xix] Azaziah, Jonathan, Wikileaks is Zionist poison, Oct. 28, 2010, Mask of Zion – http://www.maskofzion.com/2010/10/wikileaks-is-zionist-poison.html

[xx] Bell, Matthew, Wanted by the CIA: The man who keeps no secrets, July 17, 2010, The Independent – http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/online/wanted-by-the-cia-the-man-who-keeps-no-secrets-2029083.html

[xxi] Jones, Alex, Roger Stone breaks down Hillary’s kill count, Aug. 13, 2016, Youtube – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L-k897lV_I

 

Michael Hoffman’s infatuation with Protestantism

By Northsider
November 26, 2015 Anno Domini
Part I

Untitled-1Michael Hoffman, the revisionist writer, clearly regards it as one of his missions in life to shift blame for the rise of “Christian” usury from Protestantism to the Catholic Church. In many articles and books Hoffman has asserted that Protestants, specifically Calvinists, have been unjustly scapegoated for usurious hegemony in the west. Hoffman’s method of argumentation on his website and elsewhere is to simply ignore facts that don’t support his thesis of Protestants as radical foes of usury. Thus he ignores or downplays the huge and well documented role of Calvinists and other Protestants in the rise of modern industrial usurious capitalism – a role modern Protestants and philo-Protestants not only admit, but brag about (1). He also ignores, or attempts to explain away, some central facts of post-Reformation history, such as, for example, the rise of great usurious Protestant capitalist powers in the centuries after the Reformation.

For example, Britain as a fanatically Protestant polity, became the world’s leading usurious industrial power in the post-Reformation age. Moreover overseas territories settled by Protestant Britons likewise eagerly embraced usurious capitalism (2). In this context it must be noted that since the Whig sponsored Dutch Orangeist conquest of England, it has never had a Catholic monarch or Prime Minister.

Anglo-usury and Anglo anti-Catholicism went together. The United States, another capitalist superpower with a long history of anti-Catholic persecution and discrimination, only got its first Catholic president in 1960, and we know what happened to him. The all-pervasive hatred of Catholicism that characterised both the British Empire, and to a lesser extent, the U.S., makes the idea that some form of subtle or subliminal Catholic influence explained these nations’ fervent embrace of state-sponsored usury bizarrely far-fetched.

Why, in any case, would Protestants, especially radical Protestants, obediently follow the lead of the hated Papists in something so fundamental, especially since the whole point of the Reformation was revolt against Rome? The question gains even more force when one remembers the central pivot of Hoffman’s thesis: the notion that during the Renaissance the Catholic Church broke with the teaching of the Medieval Church on financial matters, and that disgust at Catholic financial corruption partly drove the Protestant “reformers”. How likely was it that Protestants who rebelled against Rome, in part because of perceived financial corruption, and who repudiated apostolic succession and many ancient dogmas of the faith, would blindly sign up to a new anti-Christian financial dispensation, simply because their religious arch-enemy had already done so? If they revolted so violently against ancient teachings of the hated Papists, and went on an iconoclastic altar and statue smashing rampage across great swathes of Europe to prove the point, why on earth would they eagerly embrace newly minted Catholic teachings – unless, that is, such alleged new teachings dovetailed with their own materialistic agenda?

hoffman2In an exchange on his blog, Hoffman noted that when Calvin endorsed usury, several prominent Puritans, including John Cotton, reproved him. Far from admitting the obvious implication of this statement, which is that the founder of the most successful radical Protestant sect decisively broke with the anti-usury traditions of Christendom, Hoffman attempts to argue that it proves the anti-usury outlook of many radical Protestants.

Not only is this highly disingenuous – Calvin defined the spirit of radical Protestantism far more than John Cotton did – but it also points to a more profound misapprehension on Hoffman’s part. He seems to be believe that the tendencies of Reformation and post-Reformation radical Protestantism can be illustrated simply by citing anti-usury writings and sermons of some prominent Puritans. Thus is if a prominent New England Puritan like Cotton condemns loan-sharking, this for Hoffman proves that the Puritans cannot be blamed for the rise of usurious capitalism. This is grossly simplistic on several levels.

First of all condemnations are one thing – actions are quite another. When it comes to the Catholic Church, Hoffman attaches no credibility whatsoever to the post-Renaissance Church’s many condemnations of usurious capitalism and freemasonry. According to him, all such condemnations amounted to nothing more than cunning and hypocritical ploys on the part of Rome, to disguise its true occultist-usurious agenda. On the other hand he takes all the statements by early Protestant leaders condemning usury or Judaic corruption completely at face value – even when they come from the mouths or pens of men such as Luther, who condoned all forms of sin including lying, and enthused about occult practices such as alchemy (3). Emotionally and spiritually, then, Hoffman is anything but a detached unbiased scholar when it comes to evaluating the merits of post-Reformation Catholicism on the one hand, and early Protestant movements on the other.

Another problem with cherry-picking anti-usurious or anti-Judaic statements of early Protestants is that this type of reductionism often fails to take note of the underlying trends at work in historic political or religious movements. For example, if most 1960s liberals had been asked what they thought of same sex unions, the vast majority of them would have said they deplored such a grotesque idea, and that social conservatives who suggested otherwise were simply scare-mongering. Indeed as recently as 2012 Barack Obama claimed to be opposed to “gay marriage”. Yet when the American Supreme Court ratified this evil sham in June 2015, the U.S. President celebrated by lighting up the White House with the colours of the LGBT rainbow flag. Revolutionary movements aren’t always open about what their true endgame is, and sometimes aren’t even sure themselves, so their past statements are by no means an infallible guide to their future actions.

Hoffman himself spots subtle “gradualism” everywhere where Rome is concerned, but ignores much more glaring examples of the phenomenon in the history of Protestantism. Thus he cites Pope Leo’s Papal Bull “Inter Multiplicis” as beginning the gradual process of abandonment of the Catholic Church’s prohibition against usury, but denies that Calvin’s much more definitive embrace of usury played a decisive role in the rise of loan-shark hegemony.

Unfortunately for his thesis, the historical facts speak for themselves. Protestant and Jewish families shaped the modern financial system in Britain and its dominions (including Ireland), and in the U.S., Prussia, Switzerland, Scandinavia and elsewhere. Even in predominantly Catholic nations like France, Protestants were at the heart of usurious banking. The rhetorical hostility of certain Puritans to usury does not in any way negate the huge role radical Protestants played in the rise of the usurious state, any more than the opposition of certain traditionalist Anglicans to “women priests” proves that Protestants have had no truck with feminism.

The Reformation unleashed forces which at least some of its devotees neither encouraged nor desired, but as with early social liberals, this in no way absolves the reckless “reformers” from blame for the predictable consequences of their revolutionary pride. That pride made it inevitable that greed and the love of money would follow in the wake of their revolution.

The usurious spirit cannot be divorced from liberal pridefulness generally – it is interwoven in the fabric of modern post-Catholic culture. If love of money is the root of all evil it is because money facilitates the commission of all other sins Rebellious pride was at the very heart of Protestantism from Luther to Henry VIII to Thomas Cromwell, from to John Calvin to Oliver Cromwell. That incidentally is why Whiggish Neo-conservatives, including pseudo-Catholics like Michael Novak, are such philo-Protestants: they grasp, in a way that seems to completely elude Hoffman, that the Reformation was the beginning of the modern revolutionary capitalist age. Those early Protestants who condemned usury did so because they still lived in post-Catholic post Medieval culture, just as the 1960s liberal who condemned sexual promiscuity, or abortion on demand, still lived in a world informed by vestigial Catholic morality.

Yet another problem with Hoffman’s approach to evaluating early Protestant statements on usury is his own definition of Puritanism. There is more than a touch of the “No True Scotsman” fallacy at work here, whereby Hoffman defines a Puritan as any radical Protestant who happens to meet his definition of what a good Christian should be. Thus when objectors point out that many Protestant denominations directly descended from Puritan sects – Congregationalists, low church Anglicans, Unitarians, and so on – pioneered a worldly liberal approach to moral issues, including usury, Hoffman blithely denies that such sects have any claim on the Puritan name (4). He adopts a similar form of circular logic in attempting to address the incontestable evidence that many of the pioneering usurious banks in Britain, New England, Geneva and elsewhere were owned by Calvinists or Puritans, or their descendants. A Puritan in his parlance is simply the type of Protestant who agrees with him on religious, political questions.

For example he says that to accuse Puritans of liberal tendencies is to adopt an “elastic” definition of Puritanism. But Puritanism WAS elastic in most matters religious – apart, that is, from its hatred of Catholicism. Modern Whigs revere Oliver Cromwell because, like them, he loathed the Catholic Church, but not so paradoxically also embraced an early form of ecumenical liberalism, and tolerated many Protestant sects – ranging from Anglicans to Independents to Presbyterians and Unitarians – sects that disagreed with each other on many things, but shared a deep hatred of Catholicism. In other words liberals find Cromwell a congenial figure because his religious views don’t differ significantly from their own, and can be summed up as “ARBC” – Any Religion But Catholicism”.

The political and social authoritarianism of early radical Protestants should not blind us to this truth: Puritans were elastic in terms of religious dogma, but nonetheless deeply inflexible towards those who challenged their spiritual and political authority. In this they foreshadowed the modern left and the modern Neo-cons, who change their mind on a sixpence, but are utterly ruthless in their repression of dissent. Not so very long ago Communists persecuted homosexuals as bourgeois degenerates; now their hard left ideological descendants persecute critics of homosexual “marriage” as hate criminals. Like communism, with which it shares certain traits, Puritanism never lacked in fervour and authoritarianism – what it lacked was any coherent concept of moral and spiritual authority.

Notes:

(1.) Lagrave, Christian, “The Origins of the New World Order”, Apropos Journal, No. 29, Christmas 2011. This invaluable essay (translated from the French original), lays bare the pivotal role of British Reformation and post-Reformation Protestantism in the development of the NWO. As the late great Solange Hertz used to say: when it comes to tracing the roots of Judaeo-Masonic global tyranny, “all roads lead to London”.

(2.) Anger, Matthew, Chojnowski, Dr. Peter, Novak, Fr. Michael, “Puritans Progress: An Authentic American History”, Angelus Press, 1996. The role of Protestants in the rise of Anglo-American usurious capitalism is glaringly obvious; so glaringly obvious that it’s well nigh impossible to take seriously an argument based on denying or downplaying this central fact of American history. Furthermore writers such as the late Professor Anthony Sutton have documented just how steeped in occultism and corruption the Anglo-Protestant self-anointed “elite old-line” American families were and are. See his book, “America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Skull & Bones”, Liberty House Press, 1986.

(3) Muggeridge, Anne Roche, “The Desolate City: Revolution in the Catholic Church.” Harper, San Francisco, 1985.  For more on Luther’s proto-Reichian sexual revolutionary tendencies, see also Dr E. Michael Jones 1993 Ignatius Press book, “Degenerate Moderns; Modernity as Rationalized Sexual Misbehaviour”.

(4) In an exchange with the author on Hoffman’s blog, “On The Contrary” in May 2015, Hoffman categorically denied that any Protestant who endorses sexual libertinism can legitimately be called a Puritan. In truth at the time of the Reformation, Catholics viewed the “Reformers” as dangerously indulgent on sexual matters. Hoffman is correct in saying that the idea of  the Puritans as strait-laced dour ascetics is a distortion, but it’s a distortion that, in a certain measure, works in Protestantism’s favour – tending as it does to obscure just how much the original Puritans had in common with modern liberals. If the Puritans were “joyless”, that joylessness stemmed from their materialist rationalism, rather than from the stringent nature of their creed.

(5.) Fahey, Fr. Denis, “The Mystical Body of Christ In The Modern World”, Browne & Nolan, Dublin, 1935. Even in an overwhelmingly Catholic country like Eamonn de Valera’s Ireland (over 95 per cent Catholic in those days), all of the major financial institutions were in the hands of Protestants or Jews. The same applied to most big commercial and industrial concerns, and to the Irish media. The role of exiled French Huguenots in advancing the Industrial Revolution, and in the rise of British usurious banking is well known – although, to the best of my knowledge, Hoffman largely passes over it.

(6) Lagrave: In his aforementioned essay, “The Origins of the New World Order”, Lagrave quotes the Scottish historian/philosopher David Hume’s description of Cromwell as in practice a religious “indifferentist” when it came to the various Protestant sects – a man who sought to form a united anti-Catholic international front of all the denominations, regardless of their doctrines. Indeed, such was his indifferentism many continentals believed him to be a Freemason. Whatever the truth here, it is certain that Cromwell’s policies dovetailed uncannily with those of “the Craft”. In modern times Neo-cons and other Zionist stooges on left and right are the most ardent members of the Cromwell fan club. Tony Blair keeps a bust of the vile old hypocrite on his desk. Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised at one mass murderer revering another.

Part II
Part III

The rabbinic curse and the Kennedys

JFK Mossad Hit

 “`Nothing in the universe is coincidence,’ Rabbi Meir Yeshurun of the Kabbalah Center in Boca Raton, Florida, told a reporter for The Palm Beach Post. ‘Somebody in the [Kennedy] family did something to open the family to this negative energy, and that has been plaguing the Kennedys for decades.’ According to a story that is told in mystical Jewish circles . . . [JFK’s father] Joseph Kennedy . . . returned to the United States aboard an ocean liner that was also carrying Israel Jacobson, a poor Lubavitcher rabbi, and six of his yeshiva students, who were fleeing the Nazis.
. . . “A notorious anti-Semite, Kennedy complained to the captain that the bearded, black-clad Jews were upsetting the first class passengers by praying on the Jewish high holy day of Rosh Hashanah . . . In retaliation, or so the story goes, Rabbi Jacobson put a curse on Kennedy, damning him and all his male offspring to tragic fates.
. . . “. . . It is a curious fact that the very same people who scoff at the concept of Kismet, or fate, find it difficult to dismiss the concept of curses . . . [The Kennedy family] made the fatal mistake of thinking of themselves as divine.”

Edward Klein, former Editor-in-Chief of The New York Times Magazine, writing in the opening pages of The Kennedy Curse (New York, St. Martin’s Press, 2003)

By Timothy Fitzpatrick

JFK-Final-Judgment-CoverIf you read only one book about the John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy, it should be Michael Collins Piper’s Final Judgment – The Missing Link In the JFK Assassination Conspiracy.

Published in the 1990s following the release of Mossad agent Arnon Milchan’s disinformational Hollywood film JFK, Final Judgment ties it all together. The book is full of gems and many little-known facts that the kosher book publishing firms and the mainstream media dare not touch.

I don’t believe there was a legitimate curse placed on the Kennedy family, but I do believe Jewish magicians believed in the validity of the curse they thought they were placing on Joe Kennedy and his male offspring. Nevertheless, there are Jewish HEXagrams all over the tragic history of the Kennedy dynasty. Below are some illustrations inspired by Piper’s book.

IMF Head-Perp Walk

(Marilyn Monroe also provided a convenient blackmail option should the Jews decide to scandalize the presidency)

JFK-Monroe-Israel

President Kennedy With David Ben Gurion

From Michael Hoffman’s Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare.

Judeo-Masonic Ritual Murder

SECRET SOCIETIES AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE [1992]

jfk warns of Judeo-Freemasonry

Mossad at Dealey Plaza

jew dealey plaza mossad JFK

Here is a lecture by Piper on his book:

Kinsey: The Crypto-Psychoanalyst

Providing the Gentile Veneer for the Jewish-led Sexual Revolution – Part 2

By Timothy Fitzpatrick 

There is perhaps no greater critic today of the late sexual revolutionary Alfred C. Kinsey than Jewish-American Judith Reisman, author and former investigator with the U.S. Department of Justice, who has “chased” Kinsey and his controversial sex researchers for more than 35 years.

Reisman, who plausibly asserts that Kinsey was a saboteur of the “Greatest Generation” onwards in the United States of America, claims that Kinsey was a co-conspirator in league with a Nazi-linked Rockefeller Foundation, based on her years of study of The Kinsey Sex Research Institute. Reisman stretches this and implies that Kinsey and the Sexual Revolution were part of a Nazi conspiracy against the West (she never explains the purpose of this conspiracy other than to say it benefits Big Pharma and Big Sexology). But the greater weight of evidence shows that Kinsey was more Jewish-linked than anything— particularly with the Jewish-dominated psychoanalytic movement—and that Reisman is engaging in deception or self-deception in reaching her conclusions—a trait common among strong self-identifying Jews.[1]

Reisman’s case for Kinsey and the sexual revolution being Nazi/fascist subversion of America

Reisman bases her claim that Kinsey was a stealth Nazi largely on the Kinsey Institute’s funding by the Rockefeller Foundation, which had financed parts of the Nazi regime during the Second World War.

But elites like the Rockefellers financing opposing factions is hardly out of the ordinary. What’s more, Jewish financiers, like Brown Brothers Harriman and the Warburg bank, also financed the Nazi war machine. High Jewish finance does not discriminate, especially when its loans give it the ability to manipulate both sides in a dispute or, in Nazi Germany’s case, the war.

“Was Kinsey, like his Rockefeller patrons, unsure which side would win? Could he have thought that, if Hitler won, his ‘work’ would receive continued support, greater funds, and more opportunity? After all, psychopathic scientists, such as Kinsey, did well—unhindered—under Hitler. Additional information about Kinsey’s links to fascists and Hitler’s henchmen suggest much is hidden.”[2] Reisman speculates that the Kinsey Institute must have hidden files locked away that demonstrate Kinsey’s Nazi associations.

But radical leftists were booted from and/or persecuted in Nazi Germany. What makes Reisman think Hitler wouldn’t have tossed Kinsey out of Germany had he been there? Even Sigmund Freud, perhaps the true father of the sexual revolution, and his psychoanalysts didn’t survive the Nazi purges in Germany.

Reisman points to Kinsey’s collaboration with Nazi pedophile Dr. Fritz von Balluseck as more evidence of Kinsey’s crypto-Nazism.

“Indeed, Kinsey and his fellow WWII draft-dodging team feared public exposure for aiding and abetting a WWII Gestapo agent in his ongoing, even murderous sexual violence against children.”[3]

A poster advertising a presentation by Judith Reisman depicts Kinsey and the Nazis.

She also points out his collaboration with serial child rapist Rex King but does not mention King’s Jewish ethnicity.[4] (At some point, King was given the gentile pseudonym of Mr. Green.) Reisman accuses Kinsey of being anti-Semitic, despite his collaboration with King and despite Kinsey’s friendship with his highly connected Jewish lawyer Morris L. Ernst and Jewish sexologist Harry Benjamin. Despite the Ernst-Benjamin-Kinsey connection, Reisman claims that Kinsey refused to employ Jews. Kinsey also received support from New York Times owner Arthur Hays Sulzberger, a practicing Jew who not only gave Kinsey’s books prominent coverage in the press, he also helped secure financing for Kinsey as a board member on the Rockefeller Foundation. Reisman makes no mention of this seemingly strange association. And without a friendly Jewish press to promote Kinsey’s falsified research, it’s questionable that his books would have sold like they did.

Reisman’s claims about Kinsey, the Nazis, and homosexuality are echoed in the The Pink Swastika (Lively, Abrams 1995), which attempts to further demonize all Jew haters, particularly Nazis, as closet homosexuals. While it may be true that Hitler and the Nazis engaged in homosexual behaviour, it is irrelevant in the bigger picture. The book is a sort of neoconservative treatise targeted at “Judeo-Christians,” an oxymoronic term Reisman also frequently uses in Sexual Sabotage (2010). (Reisman references Nazis no less than 47 times in this book). Joseph M. Schimmel and Christian J. Pinto’s 2007 film The Kinsey Syndrome, in which Reisman participated, carries on the theme of Kinsey representing a Nazi-led sexual conspiracy against the West.

Kinsey was an admitted eugenicist, something that Reisman uses to further her Nazi case. But Reisman fails to reveal the heavy Jewish hand in the eugenics movement, which predates Nazi Germany.[5] Eugenics was certainly not an exclusively Nazi practice.

Reisman also heavily identifies with Jewish suffering in the form of the iconic Holocaust dogma of Judaism. And she doesn’t hold back when linking it with Kinsey and the sexual revolution.

“And while Hitler’s Gestapo and SS tortured, shot, hung, and gassed millions on their march toward world domination, the Kinsey lobby prepared a sexual revolution for Western Society.”[6] Reisman likens the subversive cartoons contained in Playboy, Hustler, and Penthouse to the political cartoons of Nazi Germany.

Where Reisman is forced to reveal the Jewish nature of the psychoanalytic movement, she simply refers to them as German or European. The implication then is that it is a fundamentally Nazi movement.

“…European sex ‘science’ radicals preceded Kinsey. For example, by 1895, the German homosexual movement had grown so rapidly that they were a major power lobby,” she writes.[7]

Reisman was born to German and Russian Jewish communist parents, something that would also predispose her to anti-Nazi, anti-nationalist sentiment.[8]

Who really was Kinsey?

On the exterior, Kinsey was neither a homosexual nor a revolutionary. He voted Republican as a capitalist (Christian raised), believed in restricting immigration, and even advocated eugenics. But on the inside, he was a tormented and possibly demonically possessed man, starting in early childhood. Kinsey engaged in self-torture (as a form of pleasure), other perversions, and likely serious crimes. He was a bi-sexual at best and a pederast and full-blown homosexual at worst. And according to U.S. Congress, he caused “incalculable” damage to the moral structure of American society with the publishing of his Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and the following female volume (1953).

As Kinsey matured on the outside, becoming an adult, he brought his perversions with him to Indiana University, where he became known as a perverted professor who would constantly harass and stalk men, and especially women, on campus for his so-called sex research.  Where Kinsey couldn’t obtain actual research on average Americans, which was the case most of the time, he allegedly used prostitutes, homosexuals, pederasts, pedophiles, and rapists—who provided the bulk of his data. The sexual revolution in 1950s America turned out to be based almost entirely on the habits of these sexual deviants, and not everyday Americans as most were led to believe.

The case for Kinsey as crypto-psychoanalyst

U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy and U.S. Congress viewed Kinsey and his sex research institute as communist insurgents and the furtherance of the Jewish psychoanalytic movement, fulfilling the words of psychoanalytic father Freud, who said the psychoanalysts were “bringing them [Americans] the plague.”

“Psychoanalysts think Kinsey’s work will advance the status of psychoanalysis by 50 years. I am inclined to think that it will change a good many things,” wrote Robert S. Morrison in his diary about Kinsey and his “research,” which was being given prominent coverage in the press. Morrison was associate director of the Medical Science Division of the Rockefeller Foundation, assistant to director Alan Gregg.

Psychoanalysis appears to be a Kabbalistic[9] black art, culminating in the victim being mind controlled and supplanted with false memories and/or ideas. Freud was a Zionist and Lurianic Kabbalist. Kinsey’s use of this black art managed to fool the entire American public into thinking average men and women were largely promiscuous, homosexual, and repressed wild animals. And like Freud, Kinsey would psychoanalyze (gather sex history) his colleagues and financial backers in order to control them, or blackmail them if necessary. Kinsey was every bit the charismatic cult leader that Freud was.[10] Another similarity between Kinsey and Freud was their views on “childhood sexuality.” Freud said that children were sexual but that it was latent until puberty; Kinsey took this further, saying children were completely sexual from birth. Even the Jewish founder of Playboy, Hugh Hefner, didn’t leave out Freud when he said Freud and Kinsey “have done more for sex than any other men who ever lived.” Hefner even recommends The Freudian Approach and The Kinsey Approach when trying to seduce a female virgin. At times, Reisman appears to defend her fellow Jew Freud in contrast to the monster Kinsey.[11]

Unfortunately, and not surprisingly, the good people in the Reece Committee (Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations, 1952-54), after years of trying, failed to shut down Kinsey and his institute of perversion, following a lengthy examination of U.S. tax-exempt foundations. The Rockefeller alliance with the already radically left-wing Jewish media proved to be too much, as did the Zionist control of then President Harry Truman, a 33rd degree Freemason. Ironically, Reisman admits that Kinsey had powerful allies in the media. But of course, we are supposed to believe the U.S. media then was Nazi-controlled, not Jewish-controlled.[12] She even goes as far as saying that the Rockefellers carried out a “media Blitzkrieg” to promote Kinsey and his work. Perhaps had Reisman known that the enemy wasn’t simply Nazis, assuming she was ignorant, she would have been better prepared when academia and the media attacked her research on Kinsey. (See overrepresentation of Jews in the sexual liberation movement)

Perhaps seeing the U.S. Congressional attempts to eradicate subversive homosexual elements as a threat to the greater goals of the psychoanalytic movement in which he was carrying out, Kinsey soon agreed to serve on an advisory committee to the communist Mattachine Foundation, an early gay rights organization co-founded by the Jewish Franklin E. Kameny, one of America’s most significant gay rights activists.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender activist Larry Kramer (Jewish) holding up a Kinsey Institute T-Shirt. Notice the Illuminist “6” beside the half hexagram. The Kinsey Institute’s current director is the Jewish Julia Heiman.

Kinsey may have shown disdain for Judaism as a religious institution as it relates to perceived moral restraint, but there doesn’t seem to be any evidence that he engaged in any anti-Semitism. And like Freud, Kinsey expressed his view that sexual repression (self-control) led to pathology.[13] University of California-Long Beach Professor of psychology Kevin MacDonald, perhaps Freud’s greatest modern critic, explains in The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements (1998),“Many early proponents viewed psychoanalysis as a redemptive messianic movement that would end anti-Semitism by freeing the world of neuroses produced by sexually repressive Western civilization…. The cure for aggression characteristic of anti-Semitism was therefore believed to lie in freeing gentiles from their sexual repressions. Although Freud himself eventually developed the idea of a death instinct to explain aggression, a consistent theme of the Freudian critique of Western culture, as exemplified for example by Norman O. Brown, Herbert Marcuse, and Wilhelm Reich, has been that the liberation of sexual repressions would lead to lowered aggression and usher in an era of universal love.” (Pages 112-113).

Kinsey’s alleged anti-Semitism did carry with it the advantage of giving the sexual revolution in America a gentile appearance, following years of speculation that Freud and the Frankfurt School were part of a Jewish plot against the West.

“He has the temperament of a reformer rather than a scientist: fierily against hypocrisy and repressive law of every sort, censorship, etc., and against Judaism and Catholicism and Irishy,” writes Kinsey’s biographer James H. Jones. (page 611)  Are Jones and Kinsey ignorant of the Talmud? Or do they carry out the charade that Judaism is the same bastion of sexual morality that is Christianity?

Jones gives us some insight into his and Kinsey’s convenient ignorance of the highly sexually immoral Babylonian Talmud.

“Current sex offender laws, he (Kinsey) explained, were based on English-American common law traditions, which in turn were ‘a direct constitution of the Talmudic proscriptions on such activities and not the product of scientific judgments.’”[14]

MacDonald explains Freud’s strategic use of gentiles in the psychoanalytic movement.

“Deception is also indicated by the evidence that Freud felt that one reason psychoanalysis needed highly visible gentiles was because he viewed psychoanalysis as subverting gentile culture. After publishing Little Hans in 1908, he wrote Karl Abraham that the book would create an uproar: ‘German ideals threatened again! Our Aryan comrades are really completely indispensable to us, otherwise psychoanalysis would succumb to anti-Semitism.’ (in Yerushalami, 1991, 43).”

“Moreover, there were conscious attempts at deception directed at making Jewish involvement in radical political movements invisible by placing an American face on what was in reality largely a Jewish movement (Liebman 1979, 527ff). Both the Socialist Party and the CPUSA took pains to have gentiles prominently displayed as leaders, and the CPUSA actively encouraged Jewish members to take gentile-sounding names…. Despite representing over half the membership in both the Socialist Party and the CPUSA during some periods, neither party ever had Jews as presidential candidates and no Jew held the top position in the CPUSA after 1929. Gentiles were brought from long distances and given highly visible staff positions in Jewish-dominated socialist organizations in New York. Jewish domination of these organizations not uncommonly led gentiles to leave when they realized their role as window dressing in a fundamentally Jewish organization.” (MacDonald 1998, 111 and 94 respectively)

The powerful cabal that helped bring Kinsey to prominence likely saw him as the perfect gentile window dressing for the continuance of the Jewish psychoanalytic movement.

Kinsey, Freemasonry, and the Illuminati

Contrary to what Reisman leads people to believe, the sexual revolution didn’t start with Kinsey. Freud had an arguably larger and more influential role in the revolution, and according to author E. Michael Jones, the sexual revolution began in the 18th century when the Illuminati and Freemasons were gutting Europe of the Christian theocracy. Revolutionary Marquis de Sade (possibly Jewish but definitely an Illuminist), from whom we get the term “sadism”, was another key figure—possibly the pioneer of sexual revolution. And if Illuminism was largely a Jewish movement, then sexual revolution was a Jewish byproduct, helping to fulfill the Talmudic goal of bloting out the memory and name of Jesus Christ and the moralist standards attached to Him. Illuminists like the French Revolutionaries, Rockefellers, and the Frankfurt Schoolers have all played central roles in fomenting sexual revolution among the populations, yet Reisman has the sexual conspiracy beginning and ending with Kinsey and the Nazis. Ironically, Kinsey’s participation in the sexual revolution arguably began in 1948, the same year that Israel became an official nation.

Illuminist Aleister Crowley

It is not certain whether Kinsey was a Freemason; although, he was associated with many high level Illuminists. He had to be, in order to get the backing of the Illuminist Rockefellers and the support from the Illuminist-controlled press. Kinsey was untouchable even though there was clear evidence that he and/or his colleagues were sexually abusing children.[15]  Interestingly, the Kinsey Institute Logo, designed by David Enock in 1986, appears to be stylized after the Jewish star of Moloch (six-pointed star or hexagram). The Masonic square and compass itself was stylized after the hexagram. Then there is Kinsey’s association with high Illuminist Aleister Crowley. Kinsey allegedly went on a voyage seeking Crowley’s psychosexual occultist diaries.

The title page of Illuminist revolutionary Marquis de Sade’s Justine depicts the Illuminist triangle with the Cabalistic tetragrammaton. The Marquis de Sade was a key figure in the bloody French Revolution and also the father of Sadism.

Conclusion

While Reisman did likely pose a significant threat to the sex industrial complex during the Reagan Administration’s porn inquiries, she is also acting as a gatekeeper by not revealing the real movers and shakers in it as well as its pre-Kinsey history. Her intentions in exposing Kinsey appear to be sincere (Reisman’s daughter was the victim of a pornography-induced rape.[16]); however, it is difficult to believe that she is not aware of the leading role that Jews and Jewish organizations have played in the shaping of ideas of human sexuality in our culture. Her obsessive use of Nazism and the Holocaust in her works exposing Kinsey are nothing more than sensationalism and intellectual dishonesty. However, her work through the Justice Department analyzing and exposing the sinister nature of Kinsey, for example his child orgasm charts (tables 30-34, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male) as well as the resulting American Law Institute Model Penal Code, is impeccable, as is her work showing the negative effects of pornography on culture. It’s unfortunate that she hasn’t expanded the scope of her investigations. Perhaps she did but chose not to reveal it. Perhaps she is ashamed of the work of her revolutionary parents.

Alfred Kinsey appears to have been a psychoanalyst in the tradition of Freud and other Judaic sexual revolutionaries. There is no evidence that he was conspiring with some Nazi agenda to subvert Western social mores. History shows that the Nazis persecuted psychoanalysts and sexual liberationists; therefore, Kinsey could not have been taking direction from them. But her certainly fell in line with the eugenic goals of the Protestant WASP ruling class of his time. We are only left with the Frankfurt School and the Jewish New York Intellectuals, through the Rockefeller Foundation, as providing Kinsey’s direction.

[1] Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements, 1st Books Library, Second Edition, 1998, p. 55

[2] Judith Reisman, Sexual Sabotage: How One Mad Scientist Unleashed a Plague of Corruption and Contagion on America, 2010, p. 336

[3] On Kinsey’s German, Nazi Pedophile Aide; The New York Times Asks: “Alfred Kinsey: Liberator or Pervert?” http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2007/02/on_kinseys_germ_1.html

[4] Judith Reisman, Sexual Sabotage: How One Mad Scientist Unleashed a Plague of Corruption and Contagion on America, 2010, p. 29-30

[5] `Do not have children if they won’t be healthy!’ Haaretz, Tamara Traubmann Nov. 6, 2004 – http://www.haaretz.com/do-not-have-children-if-they-won-t-be-healthy-1.124913

[6] Judith Reisman, Sexual Sabotage: How One Mad Scientist Unleashed a Plague of Corruption and Contagion on America, 2010, p. 59

[7] Ibid, p. 171

[8] E. Michael Jones, Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control, 2002, St. Augustine’s Press, South Bend Indiana, p. 571

[9] David Bakan, Sigmund Freud and the Jewish Mystical Tradition, Free Association Books, 2004

[10] Judith Reisman, Sexual Sabotage: How One Mad Scientist Unleashed a Plague of Corruption and Contagion on America, 2010, p. 52-53

[11] Ibid, p. 174

[12] Ibid, p. 71-72

[13] Ibid, p. 44

[14] James H. Jones, Alfred C. Kinsey, A Public/Private Life, W. W. Norton & Company, New York, 1997, p. 619

[15] Judith Reisman, Sexual Sabotage: How One Mad Scientist Unleashed a Plague of Corruption and Contagion on America, 2010, p. 55