“Scared?, ha! I ain’t never gonna be scared no more. I was though, for a while it looked as though we was beat, good and beat. Looked like we didn’t have nobody in the whole wide world but enemies. Like nobody was friendly no more. Made me feel kind of bad, and scared too. Like we was lost and nobody cared.

Well, maybe, but we sure taken a beatin’.

That’s what makes us tough. Rich fellas(jews) come up an’ they die an’ their kids ain’t no good, an’ they die out. But we keep a-comin’. We’re the people that live. They can’t wipe us out. They can’t lick us. And we’ll go on forever, Pa… ’cause… we’re the people.”
Jane Darwell as “Ma Joad” in John Ford’s adaptation
of John Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath 1940


9 thoughts on “>Scared?

  1. >Tim,Wrong or right, I try to hold a distinction between zionist jews and non-zionist jews.One problem with my division is that 94% of israelis supported the action of Cast Lead.The recent video by Brother K (a born jew converted to christianity) explains that all Talmod jews are taught that goyim are substandard.This would explain that it is both the zionist jews and the talmodic jews who are the enemy of mankind.The only righteous jews are those who condem zionism, condem talmodism, and those jews that accept Christ – messianic jews.I ask you, are there any people who call themselves jews who accept non-jews as equal in God's eyes to themselves.I hope there are because I don't want to give up on every single jew on the planet.Mouser

  2. >A bit from Douglas Reed's Controversy of Zion for the general hopper:In the French revolution itself (as distinct from the foregoing conspiracy) the part played by Jews is fairly clear, but seems to have been that of "abetting disorder" ascribed to them by the Koran, rather than that of control or direction. Indeed, it is often difficult to distinguish Jews, as such, in the records of the time, because writers of the day did not so separate them. Moreover, the revolution in its French phase appeared to be against all religion and all nationhood (in the Russian phase, again, this was no longer the case). Thus, the mob which brought crosses and chalices to the revolutionary assembly, while the churches of Paris were being given over to "Feasts of Reason", also included Jews who contributed ornaments from the synagogue to the display of profanation. Again, at "the Temple of Liberty", a citizen "brought up in the prejudices of the Jewish religion" undertook to prove "that all forms of worship are impostures equally degrading to man". Alexandre Lambert fils then gave voice to this protest against the bondage of the Talmud:"The bad faith, citizens, of which the Jewish nation is accused does not come from themselves but from their priests. Their religion, which would allow them only to lend to those of their nation at 5 percent, tells them to take all they can from Catholics; it is even hallowed as a custom in our morning prayers to solicit God's help in catching out a Christian. There is more, citizens, and it is the c1imax of abomination; if any mistake is made in commerce between Jews, they are ordered to make reparation: but if on 100 louis a Christian should have paid 25 too much, one is not bound to return them to him. What an abomination! What a horror! And where does that all come from but from the Rabbis? Who have excited proscriptions against us? Our priests! Ah, citizens, more than anything in the world we must abjure a religion which. . . by subjecting us to irksome and servile practices, makes it impossible for us to be good citizens". *If the Jews are anywhere identified as Jews (not simply as participants) in the worst deeds of the revolution, this is in Jewish vaunt, not Gentile accusation. For instance, such a writer as M. Leon Kahn goes far out of his way to associate Jews, by name, with the attack on the king and on religion, and that a hundred years after the events. This is an example of the laboured effort, which may be traced in much Judaist literature, to show that nothing of this kind can happen in the world save by the hand of Jehovah, that is to say, of Jews. M. Leon Kahn apparently could not picture the French revolution in any other terms than those of Daniel and Belshazzar. But for the Russian revolution, M. Leon Kahn might be forgotten; once again, it is our present-day that gives these depictments of old events their look of truth.(http://iamthewitness.com/books/Douglas.Reed/Douglas.Reed_The.Controversy.of.Zion.pdf)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s