Archive for November, 2005

Posted by Bob in General on 11/22/2005

I wish I hadn’t said some people don’t have a life.

I remember one good friend who was holding his first baby in his hands and saying he hadn’t known what life could be. I also remember when, some years later, he shot himself to death with a shotgun in his front yard.

Everybody thinks somebody else has a life. The married man with responsibilities envies the “free” bachelor. The bachelor feels lonely and cowardly for not having a family.

Derek, you REALLY have to give me a BREAK. I am very happy that you and Peter called me on this. The last people I need as blog raders are people who have heavy family commitments and can only treat the life of the mind as a passing hobby. So what I did was to accuse myself and those who are doing exactly what I say needs to be done of not having a life.

This world cannot be saved by people I said “Have a life.” That life will be meaningless unless people like me who say we don’t have a life do our jobs.

I have led a very rough existence. Parodying oneself is what every comedian who has had a hard life does. It is a defense mechanism, if I may use psycho speech. Humor is a way to survive. But sometimes in parodying myself I just plain screw up.

Anyone who lives a life of the mind pays for it. People you want to have a relationship with want you to concentrate on THEM, not on ideas.

Life is choices, and this is one of them.

Tim warmed my heart by poiting out that he was one of kids I was fighting for in my battle against busing. Nobody “with a life” could have done what I did.

I alone, and there is no question on this one, prevented the IRS from putting racial quotas on private schools. It was one of htose things I did when I could have been home with my wife and I wouldn’t be divorced now. But hundreds of thousands of kids were spared the Hell Hole Tim went through.

And, Tim, while I couldn’t help you, we did put brakes on it. I went to a white trash school and I have worked in prisons. I can only imagine what you went through being bused into the ghettoes. A child in that environment might as well be in a prison with hardened criminals, except that the criminals are watched more closely and the thugs you faced were considered innocent.

Unlike many a married man, I am satisfied with what I did do in my life. Very few people can actually say that.

More above.

4 Comments

International Law

Posted by Bob in History, How Things Work, Law and Order on 11/22/2005

When I took my first course in international law, I assumed there was no such thing. I thought it meant taking the League of Nations or the UN seriously.

I was, as everyone always does, taking it from the wrong end.

In the real world courts must decide on cases which involve more than one country. They have no choice. There is nothing theoretical about it. The courts in each country must pick its own precedents. American judges use a lot of British precendents and vice-versa, since both have a basis in the Common Law.

It had not occurred to me before I took the course that such cases HAVE to be decided, and the result is called international law, thought it is not international.

We have a similar problem with regard to interstate relations in the United States. The Constitution requires each state to give “full faith and credit” to the laws of other states. In other words, if one state allows homosexual marriage every other state must recognize it.

But they don’t. Since the beginning states have refused to extradict people convicted of criminal acts to the states where they were convicted.

There is the provision for full faith and credit, but there is no ENFORCEMENT mechanism. “Full faith and credit,” like international law, is a guideline, not a law.

If the Supreme Court told the president he had to use force to make one state extradict to another he would do it. Today the courts rule absolutely. But historically that was not the case.

When America extradicts a murderer from abroad, it has to guarantee the country extradicting that the nice guy will not face the death penalty here. Massachussetts can and probably will do exactly the same for murderere who escape there.

In Massachussetts the state supreme court decided that it didn’t like the state law that required that people cannot be married unless they are of different sexes. No other state accepts that.

In the United States you can be legally married to two different spouses. About 1945 North Carolina decided it would not accept Nevada’s easy divorce law. In fact until 1948 there was NO divorce law in SOUTH Carolina.
The court had no way to force North Carolina to accept Nevada divorces. So a man who was divorced and remarried in Nevada remained married to his original wife when he was in North Carolina but he was also legally married to his new wife in Nevada and states that accepted Nevada law.

As a matter of fact tens of thousands of people were and are legally married to two different partners in the United States. If any of them contracted a gay marriage in Massachussetts, they would legally married to three different people.

Under international law, America in general did not accept the easy Mexican divorces, even Nevada. So you could have your fourth spouse down there.

In case you think this is pure theory, remember that a person married to an American citizen has the right to permanent residence in the United States.

Here is a person married to an American citizen in half the states but not in the other half. If both wives are foreigners, which one gets the permanent visa?

Which gives you an idea of what international law looks like.

Answer to Derek

Posted by Bob in Comment Responses on 11/22/2005

I did NOT say that those who are interested in abstract ideas do not have a life.

I said that those who look forward to an old-fashioned societal collapse are usually the ones who have no lives.

In fact, what I said was that we need to package our ideas, not wait around for a collapse or obsess over Iraq.

I get tired every time what I say is taken personally. Mostly I was making fun of me.

NO MORE Posts to bob@whitakeronline.org

Posted by Bob in General on 11/21/2005

My server went down and I can’t reply.

No Comments

A Warning I Posted on Stormfront

Posted by Bob in Coaching Session on 11/21/2005

Leftism is based on self-hatred. White liberals got away with being anti-white for a very long time. But when the Vietnam War came, leftists let it all hang out, and it was ugly.

The Love Generation called every American soldier in Vietnam “a paid killer.” They had phone banks to call families with sons in Nam pretending to be DoD and telling them falsely that their son had been killed in action.

Since the Love Generation has now decided that it was “anti-War not anti-troops” back then all this has gone down the media Memory Hole.

But meanwhile, back on Earth during the Vietnam War, they were fanatically anti-troops. Especially since the troops were the people they looked down on for being too poor to avoid the draft in college.

We on SF love our own. Yes, we American SFers love our country. That just makes it WORSE for us when our country is WRONG.

For a liberal, it’s just “We horrible white American gentiles are just being horrible again.”

For us American Stormfronters, it HURTS.

It took a long time, but we FINALLY began to call liberals what they are: anti-white.

What’s funny is that, while some people felt that “anti-white” was extreme, it is actually the most believable label for the American public in general. Liberals HATE America and everybody knows it. Liberals HATE white people and everybody knows it.

The reason liberals now have to call themselves “progressives” is because the very word “liberals” now stands for self-hatred.

It would be truly tragic if we, who LOVE out own people, got tarred with the same brush.

So let’s make a resolution RIGHT NOW.

We all know that we must never advocate violence.

We SF Americans must also NEVER be anti-American. Europeans can do as they wish, but WE must never cross the line between being anti-War and being against the troops.

We love our country. We hate its policy.

The Collection Plate

Posted by Bob in Bob on 11/21/2005

You remember that I said that I was the one who had the gun at my congressman boss’s gambling sessions?

No, this is not fiction, this is real.

His brother had recently been strangled to death by the mob for gambling debts.

I should have told him this was bad. But I didn’t. Partly because I needed the job.

But several times I put my job on the line for principles. One I mentioned here was in vitro. If he wanted a staffer to take the lead on that, I told him, he had to look elsewhere.

John was relieved. I made up his mind: he wouldn’t oppose in vitro. There are thirty thousand or so people alive today who are from in vitro.

The “pro-life movement” regrets that. They are pro-life, so they regret those lives exist. I preached to my boss on that.

So why didn’t I preach to him on gambling?

On his choice to gamble I was not his God. His PERSONAL life was personal.

If you want to you can find an excuse to govern anybody’s personal life. I could have said he was giving money to organized crime, which was true.

Unfortunately I am also aware that if you put money into ANY church collection plate, you are also doing something WORSE that paying off the Mafia.

I saw what the guerrillas did who were supported by the World Council of Churches. I can’t even describe here what the “freedom fighters” did.

And are doing.

But your collection plate money paid for it.

I have seen the results of the “Christian” program to get people in the North Carolina mountains to adopt third worlders. Many a fundamentalist will say he is no part of it, but he still calls those who do it his “brothers.”

If you pay money for gambling or illegal drugs you give money to organized crime. If you put money in the collection plate of any church, you are paying for what “the brothers” do.

Sea Change IV

Posted by Bob in Coaching Session, Comment Responses on 11/21/2005

Those who did not live in the time of ancient Rome may not realize that you need to read Sea Change, Sea Change II and Sea Change III before you get to Sea Change IV.

That’s OK. As we Germanics like to point out, “Rome was not burned in a day.”

So if you did your homework, reading the articles below, you will realize that the next Sea Change will guarantee that stability will be protected while a real revolution takes place.

That is why the Perot Revolution ALMOST took place.

That is why Mussolini almost missed the March on Rome.

Mousilini offered a solution to the Bolshevik Problem that included stability.

Perot seemed to offer common sense WITHOUT Total Collapse. He would close the borders. He would do what everybody knew needed to be done and he would take the responsibility in the teeth of Political Correctness.

But those who have a life would not be threatened.

Blacks and Jews and Hispanics included.

It is true that today’s suburbanites could not care less about reality when it comes to free speech. No respectable conservative will ever protest about David Irving being wiretapped into facing a twenty-years prison sentence in Austria.

But they DO worry about the property of a Jew or a Hispanic or a black having his PROPERTY threatened. They know that could expand to them.

They have stable world, and they do not want it threatened. They want someone who will defend that stable world.

A lot of us talk about how America will become part of the Third World.

I’ve been in the Third World.

A lot.

Those who live at the top in the third world live very well indeed.

When people living in the South talked about how bad the South was, Lewis Grizzard loved to quote the Delta Airlines slogan, “Delta is ready when you are.”

Those who live at the top in the third world can leave any time they feel like it. So saying we are becoming a third world country bothers the working class white.

But I have tried it, and the working class white is as hopelessly obedient as the Greatest Generation.

So we end where we began, Peter’s question, what do we do when the sea change comes?

The sea change will come, not because there is a Total Collapse, but because everybody is waiting for it.

Someone needs to offer common sense. Someone has to say, “I will take total responsibility for common sense.”

You may say that people are cowards, or you may say that the average person wants to do his own thing, raise and secure his own family, and he wants someone else to take responsibility for doing what needs to be done, no matter how bad it sounds.

I would do what needs to be done. I would guarantee permanent stability. And I would put what people know must be done in plain English.

There is no THEORY about repeat criminals. They will not be tolerated.

There is no THEORY about open borders. They will be closed by snipers or razor wire or anything else it takes. And the armed forces first responsibility is our borders.

There is no THEORY about the white race. Marxists always fall themselves anti-racists because they are anti-WHITE. I will give minorities everything they have a right to EXCEPT MY RACE’S EXISTENCE.

There is no THEORY about America’s role in the world. America exists for “We the People of the United States of America.” NOBODY, including Israelis, can have dual citizenship. Israel is responsible for Israel. Anyone, Jew or Old Testament Christian who accords Israel a special place in his life is an Israeli, and ‘Delta is ready when you are.”

But that is what we will SAY, not what we will DO. You will be censored, not kicked out.

The point of our program is the people.

If a black man wants a white girl, he will be disappointed. If you want Political Correctness, you’re toast.

But if all you care about is abstracts, you don’t have a life anyway.

Nobody takes today’s revolutionaries seriously. They also don’t take our establishment seriously.

People simply want someone to come along and cut the crap.

We can MAKE the Sea Change if we concentrate on that.

What do we do when the sea change comes along?

We keep saying what the sea change will say.

Try to remember what a political sea change IS. It is when somebody states the formula everybody already has in mind.

Ok, enough of that.

Let’s get back to how Bush lied about Iraq.

We can keep doing that until the sea change hits us in the back.

6 Comments

Sea Change III

Posted by Bob in Coaching Session, Comment Responses on 11/21/2005

As I said in the article below, which you need to look at before you read this one, all the other revolutionaries are pushing the chair leg. The chair leg is the establishment they see as the Permanent Establishment of the Holy Now.

I see an establishment that is teetering on the edge.

So Peter, who likes to make it hard on the old man, askes what we do when the sea changes.

The remarks in the parens are for Peter and Richard. No one else should read them:

(Peter, you are a very mean person who will not let me be vague and stick with theorizing.)

(Peter, I am going to get you for this and I have already promised to get Richard.)

Since you obediently did not read what is in parent, let us go back to “I see an establishment that is teetering on the edge.”

The problem with revolutionaries, including me, is that we don’t have lives. People WITH lives have families to support, mutual funds to worry about. Those of us who live for revolution look back to the revolutions of the past and we salivate over Total Collapse.

The Sea Change of 1914-1918, World War I that wiped out a generation and brought the Weimar Republic and Kerensky and other temporary vacuum-fillers into power, followed by Hitler, Lenin, Stalin and the rest, was the sort of Total Catastrophe we salivate over.

The Sea Change of 1929, the Great Depression, was also a Total Catastrophe.

Nobody who has a life wants a Total Catastrophe.

Ross Perot offered a solution for people who have lives.

What Perot and Jesse Ventura and a string of other examples keep demonstrating is that the people who have lives want a revolution. They see that things are going to hell.

But they want a revolution of common sense.

Our political system is incapable of delivering common sense. From respectable conservatives to Stormfront our whole attention is directed to Revolution Versus Minor Correction.

Perot offered a bit of common sense. He did not say that his Revolution would wait until Everything Goes Down And Then You Will Realize I Was Right.

I offer common sense. Anti-racism is a code word for anti-white.

Look at “Societal Property Rights.” It was my article in “The New Right Papers.” I put the whole book together to get that one point out. The rest of the book is made up of common sense, too.

The only reason I am considered an extremist is because I say what everybody knows.

This bothers the establishment, the chair leg, enormously.

This is not what the real people, the people with lives, are concerned about.

In order to prevent the revolution that is ACHING to happen, the establishment must portray all opposition as Total Catastrophe opposition.

The reason that I have to be anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews has nthing to do with the Holocaust. It has to do with the idea that I am a RADICAL. I am a Total Catastrophe type.

If you have children and a life, you are afraid of the future the present establishment offers you, but your first loyalty is not to a race or a cause, but to the stable world white humanity, after a billion years of evolution, has FINALLY been able to enjoy.

The Sea Change will not be a carbon copy of either of the earlier Sea Changes.

In fact, neither of hte earlier Sea Changes were even vaguely alike. As I said before, World War I began after the greatest economic year anyone had ever seen before, 1913. The Great Depression began with the worst, 1929.

These things jump out at me.

Nobody else notices them.

OK. Now see Sea Change IV above.

Sea Change II

Posted by Bob in Coaching Session, Comment Responses, How Things Work on 11/21/2005

Peter asks, “What do we do when the sea changes?”

Let us start with what we are doing now. Apparently a lot of people think that if they breathlessly report that Bush lied or the Iraq War is wrong, the public will suddenly wake up and react.

And that all goes back to the fact that an insect is smarter than a college professor.

In this case I am talking about respectable conservative college professors.

As I said on one of my radio programs, the difference between the EverReady Man and aninsect is that if an EverReady Man hits a chair leg, it just keeps going and going and going…

Insects, who had to SURVIVE, learned to go AROUND the table leg or stump a billion years ago.

So waht we see now is a giant table leg, an established establishment which is immovable. So we keep going and going and going…

Conservatives get paid for that.

Remember, things jump out at me that others don’t even notice.

I will NEVER forget that Ross Perot, nutcase that he is, almost overthrew the presidential electoral process in America by accident. On one of hte least-watched national television shows in America Larry King asked Ross Perot if he would run for president in 1992.

Perot said yes. The next thing he knew he was leading both Carter and President Bush in all the elction polls. He was on the ballot in all 50 states.

Perot didn’t have to lift a finger.

Perot is no radical. He dropped out of the race on a nutcase excuse.

But everybody else has forgotten the incident. Bob hasn’t.

Everybody else sees a table leg. I see a system that is teetering on the edge.

See next chapter above.

Sea Change

Posted by Bob in Coaching Session on 11/20/2005

I was a professor of economics.

I am also the author of a book that says professors are morons.

Economics is important, but remember the rule that social scientists, like generals, are always still fighting the last war.

The last total sea change in world politics occurred as a result of the Great Depression, which put Roosevelt and Hitler into power — it is an incredible historical coincidence how those two men stayed in power for almost the exact same period — and led to World War II.

So everybody keeps telling me an economic collapse will cause the NEXT sea change. That’s the last war, so why shouldn’t it be this one?

The political sea change before the Great Depression occurred in the 1914-1918 World War One and its aftermath. Actually, one of the best economic years on record was 1913. If you had been looking at the economy you would have been hit in the back of the head by what actually happened.

No one notices that we are showing symptoms of a collapse of our rule by default, my article below.

Keep looking at economics. Keep looking at the Iraq War. They are IMPORTANT. But do not drown in them.

If you want to look for a sea change, your periscope has to be ABOVE the water line.

Rule by Default

Posted by Bob in How Things Work on 11/20/2005

I remember a liberal senator being asked what a law that was being considered actually MEANT. He took the deep, exasperated breath Politically Correct people take when a person does not Understand How Things Are and said,

“We have something called The Supreme Court. THEY will decided exactlywhat the law means.”

To quote Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, “To say that a law means what it says is PERNICIOUS oversimplification.”

Constitutional Law is also referred to as “judge-made law.” That is its official title. While conservatives talk endlessly about strict construction, none of them means a word of it. No conservative will EVER criticize the decision striking down all antimiscegenation laws in 1968, and the Cour openly threw all intent and any kind of construction at all out to get that one.

OPENLY.

So conservatives were stunned when Roe vs. Wade, which was far more based on original intent — many states that ratified the Constitution had no antiabortion laws but ALL of them had antimiscegenation laws –was decided. “Where” they universally screamed, did THIS come from?

It came from YOU. You acquiesced or praised the 1968 decision.

The Constitution specifically outlaws judge made law. The first word of Article I of the United States Constitution is “ALL.”

As in “ALL legislative powers are vested in the congress…”

But today all legislative power is going to the courts by default. In a multicultural, multiracial country law simply cannot be made by common consent. In a multicultural society society there is, BY DEFINITION, no common consent.

In a system as weighted down with checks and balances and separation of powers like ours, which was developed for a monoracial, monocultural country, nothing but a dictatorship can function. The only dictators who can function freely are the courts.

As the senator quoted at the outset of this piece stated, the courts will become more and more the sole lawmakers.

Until somebody takes power from THEM.

There is a point here that is so obvious that only Bob would notice it:

The courts did not TAKE power. They got power by DEFAULT. No one else can exercise it.

But rule by default NEVER lasts.

Kerensky took over Russia for a year to fill the vacuum left by the fall of the Tsar. The Weimar Republic ruled Germany to fill the vacuum left by the fall of the Kaiser.

Moussilini just mentioned in a speech that he would like to march on Rome and take power. He was so astonished by the reaction that he almost MISSED the March on Rome. This is real history. The default government was so weak that the march began without him.

In 1992 Ross Perot was actually leading in the polls for the presidency when he dropped out. He had just mentioned on Larry King that he would be willing to run for president and the movement exploded, to his astonishment, the way it did with Moussilini.

Nobody but me remembers that, and what it MEANT.

We are being governed by default. Whent he change comes, we who are doing the talking do not realize how close we are to a March on Rome by somebody.

As President Jackson demonstrated, the courts’ fatal weakness is that they are not in DIRECT command of the armed forces.

In a monoracial monocultural society Jackson’s telling the Supreme Court he would not enforce its decision has been largely a matter of historical detail. No one was surprised when the Republican platform of 1860 was based on the fact that the Party would not enforce the Dred Scot Decision.

In 1860 no one said the executive or legislative branches HAD to enforce Supreme Court decisions. But NO ONE would say that today.

Least of all respectable conservatives. The last one to say that was Barry Goldwater, and he backed down.

Now everybody looks first to the courts to decide ALL major matters of policy. The other branches of government openly act at the sufferance of the courts. The executive has no power that the courts do not grant it. The congress has no power unless the courts grant it. The states certainly have exactly the power the Federal courts allow them. “We the people of the United States” in referenda are routinely subject to court approval.

A call for a constitutional convention would have to be declared valid by the courts. Only a tiny oligarchy of lifetime appointees CAN make policy in a multiracial, multicultural society.

Today power is becoming less and less a matter of abstract discussion and more and more a matter of bareknuckled force. The facade is wearing thin.

And in the real world, nobody has power or money that someone else will not try to take away from them. Somebody forgot to tell those who things are settled that simple fact of life.

Someone who is not a respectable conservative, someone who sees America as a country ready to obey ANYBODY, will want that power and take it.

No, it won’t call itself a dictatorship. And in the real world, ALL governments are oligarchies.

The racial coalitions will form, and it will not be a loud revolution.

They will simply tell the courgts to go to hell.

And the courts, just like the executive and the legislative branches and the states and the people have already done, will do just that.

The Bricker Amendment

Posted by Bob in History, Law and Order on 11/20/2005

The left “exercising its right to free speech.”

The right “hides behind the first amendment.”

This is hte official language used in the media. So Holocaust deniers who do their denying on the internet are, according to official media language, “Hiding behind the first amendment in the United States.”

In plain English, that means that they avoiding the years in prison that they deserve.

But the first amendment isnot a very safe hiding place.

Many years ago the Supreme Court decided that treaties are not subject to constitutional guarantees. The treaty that established the United Nations is exempt from the Constitution.

In case you think this is a detail of history, Senator Bricker of Ohio fought for years for his constitutional amendment which would overrule the Supreme Court and make treaties subject to the United States Constitution.

They are NOT.

So the first amendment does NOT protect you from extradition to Europe for internet Holocaust denial. The UNited Nations, which is exempt from the first amendment, has demanded it.

Under present so-called constitutional law, which means whatever the Supreme Court feels like, the United States is obligated to extradict any person to France if he violates French Holocaust Denial law.

Or Israeli Holocaust denial law.

If that were NOT the case, the Bricker Amendment would have passed. Bricker fought for it a LONG time. It’s the real thing.

It happens to be true that if the United Nations declared worldwide gun control, the United States is obligated to obey.

It happens to be the case that if the United Nations says that Americans accused of war crimes by Sweden must be extradicted, what we call constitutional law requires us to do it.

And when the UN gets wround to THAT, the conservatives will start screaming, just as they did with Roe versus Wade, “How could THIS have happened?”

These things ALWAYS start with “a blow against racism” like the 1968 Supreme Court decision voiding all state antimiscegenation laws. The conservatives ALWAYS fail to notice it.

Then it ALWAYS comes home to roost.

How MANY Jews Must You Believe in?

Posted by Bob in Law and Order on 11/20/2005

In an episode right out of Orwell’s novel 1984, the Austrian police found that the Brirtish historian David Irving was in that country and arested him for Holocaust Denial. He faces up to twenty years in prison.

Like other European countries, Austria requires that anyone extradicted to the United States be guaranteed to be exempt from capital punishmentand is on record as officially condemning the United States for having capital punishment.

So what respectable cosnervative has even whispered any criticism of Austria’s arrest of Irving for saying what he believes?

Nada.

Canada arrested and extradicted Ernst Zundel for Holocaust Denial to Germany. He will get six years as I understand it.

On November 1, 2005 a UN Resolution which was not voted on but passed unanimously outlaws Holocaust and requires every country inthe UN, including the United States, to extradite Holocaust Deniers.

How many respectable conservatives have mentioned this?

Nada. And they won’t.

When the cops come for them for supporting capital punishment, they will squeal as loudly as the pope did when the Supreme Court decided Roe vs. Wade.

But the Catholic wildly applauded when the Supreme Court openly declared both constitutional intent and indeed any reference to the Constitution unimportant by voiding all state miscegenation laws in 1968. That decision very openly made the Constitution anything the Supreme Court dfecides is “modern.”

Catholics are still whining about Roe vs. Wade, but do they say about the decision that gave the Supreme absolute power?

Nada. They approved it. The Church will fight for it.

So you have to be extradicted for expressing any doubts about the official version of the Holocaust.

What ARE the details you cannot deny?

Irving says about 300,000 Jews died in the Holocaust. He does not deny there was one, the way French historians almost unanimously denied the Ukrainian holocaust, the starvation where between five and 22 million Ukrainians died.

Alan Colmes has stated flatly that comparing the death of Ukrainians to the death of Jews is “trivializing the Holocaust.” So I may be subject to arrest for the paragraph above.

In Germany, if you deny that a full six million Jews died in the Holocaust, you face an automatic prison term which is not a minimum of two years. But I read an official French Government publication which states that only 5.3 million Jews “disappeared” under Hitler. That includes Madelein Albright.

This is pretty serious business. If you are to feel safe traveling in Europe, just how many Jews must you say died in the Holocaust?

4 Comments

A Methodist Doctor of Theology

Posted by Bob in How Things Work on 11/18/2005

Not only do I consider myself a Christian, I cannot take the insults of people who call themselves Christian seriously.

I have a correspondence with a Methodist minister.

A Doctor of Theology, no less.

He said that Jesus and all the Disciples were colored men. He stated categorically that the first white Christian was Luke the Physician.

I blew that away, so he said “Well, they certainly weren’t your white Christian gentiles.”

He said they were COLORED MEN. That is the fad in theology school today. Wheni blew that away with reference with representations in Rome he had seen long since, he said, “Well, they weren’t blond.”

If Peter had been a COLORED man, the early Christians would have noticed it. There are pictures of Peter from the first century. This ThD has SEEN them.

So he told an intentional untruth.

But it wasn’t a lie because it was a FASHIONABLE untruth.

He was wrong but he wasn’t wrong in an IMPORTANT way.

Nobody admits they were wrong to an Evil Racist.

He has never admitted to me that he was wrong about anything. A Christian has to explain himself to liberals, but never to me.

I criticized his Holy Middle East and he listed five things the Middle East had invented. I took care of every one of them. He was wrong on every one.

He never denied it.

He never admitted it.

Which is exactly what I expect of a professional Christian.

All Pontius Pilate ever had to say to Christ was, “What is truth?”

This is not a new experience for me. As I have said, someone at the University of Virginia in 1964 first heard of me when he was a new student and he wondered who the guy was people kept coming up to and went away from like somebody in a reception line.

He was told, “Whitaker is knocking them down again.”

So the Reverend Doctor set ‘em up and got knocked down.

But he never admitted he was simply wrong about anything.

It never occurred to me that he would.

Admitting that you are just plain wrong is what Christ demanded.

Never admitting that you are wrong is called Christianity.

10 Comments

Your Word

Posted by Bob in History on 11/18/2005

William the Conqueror took England at the Battle of Hastings in 1066. I believe each army consisted of about 1500 men.

Some, no one knows how many, Saxons did not support Harold because he had given his word to William that William was the rightful heir to England.

Here comes the part we have trouble with. The reason Harold gave his word was that many years before he had been a captive of William and he would have been killed if he hadn’t given his word.

So he gave his word under duress.

So it wasn’t obligatory, right?

Well, the people back in Harold’s day weren’t modern enough to understand that. When you gave your word it was binding, no matter what. Your word was precious, and death was no excuse. If you had to die not to give your word, then you died.

It’s like giving information under torture, once they’ve got it, they’ve got it. Back then, those barbarians figured that once you started excusing people for giving their word, the time would come when “your word” meant nothing.

If you’ve ever studied contract law, you will realize they were right.

I Don’t Trust Christians or Jews

Posted by Bob in History, How Things Work on 11/18/2005

No non-Moslem really trusts a vocal Moslem. So why do they trust people who make such a point that their whole world is based on their version of Christianity or Judaism?

Jews in general feel that everybody who is not a Jew is their enemy. So eachof the three major conventions of Jews in the United States, Reformed, Conservative, and Orthodox, annually adopt a resolution that there are too damned many white gentiles in America and we need to open up our borders and bring in more NON-white gentiles.

I don’t think I need to describe what would happen if a major non-Jewish convention annually passed a resolution saying there are too damned many Jews inthe United States and they feel threatened by it.

David Lawrence was a Jew who founded US News and World Report. He was not only conservative, he was hardcore pro-white. To the day he died he demanded that congress declare the fourteenth amendment invalid.

But when Lawrence died US News and World Report was taken over by other Jews, standard and packaged Jews who made it just one more liberal rag.

A person is not just himself, he is also part of his community. So rich conservative gentiles leave their money to hard-core leftist churches which give it to support Communist guerrillas in the third world.

I am very nervous about anybody who calls himself a Jew or anybody who makes a point of how Christian he is. You never quite know when he will suddenly decide you have insulted Jehovah and turn on you.

I am regularly told I am a non-Christian because I don’t swallow the Old Testament the way the whale took in Jonah. I never know when a person who seems devoted tothe survivial of the white race will suddenly have a Revelation and declare me his enemy and my race unimportant as compared to Jehovah.

These things don’t bother me as insults. Fifty years of politics makes you more or less immune to those. But what a person says tells you who he really is.

If you’re in hardball politics, you better listen CLOSELY.

5 Comments

Icthysaurs

Posted by Bob in History, How Things Work on 11/18/2005

The reason I entitled the last article “Icthysauri” instead of Icthysaurs was because they lived a hundred million years ago. I am an educated man so I know they spoke Latin and Greek back then.

Like so much I say that sounds like a joke, this is taken seriously in academia. “Dinosaur” means giant lizard, but a Norwegian who called himself Linaeus — not a typical Norwegian name — developed a way of naming species based on Latin and Greek, which was the language of scholars in his day, hence his own name.

It is every bit as reasonable to say that Lastin and Greek are the international languages today as to say that the Icthysaurs spoke Greek.

Yes, but the word “dinosaur” is international. So everybody knows what it means so you can use it in any language.

Nice try, but what about the REST of the article you are writing? It won’t be in ancient Greek, so what’s the point?

I remember when I was embarrassed out of my wits by a multilingual German asking me why, if Americans were going to use untranslated French quotes, they didn’t just go ahead and write the book in French?

It was emabarrassing for me to explain that the author COULDN’T write the book in French and even if he could the readers who were bursting with pride that they had taken high school French and owned a dictionary couldn’t read the book if he did.

I don’t think he ever really believed that any adult, much less a scholar, could be that silly.

In German there are no big words. Since my subject back then was brick, I know the German word for “refractory,” a material that can withstand huge and rapid temperature changes, is Temperaturwechselbestandigkeit, which looks huge.

But Temperatur means temperature, wechself means “change,” bestandig means the ability to stand against, and keit is a the ending to such a combination, which indicates that if you put it all together you get what the stuff is. Temperaturwechselbestandigkeit can be understood by any adult German. He doesn’t have to go to a dictionary.

So why do doctors have to speak Latin? Why do they spend so much precious time learning words they have to go to a dictionary to look up?

Because it SOUNDS good. It ups their fees.

An icthysaur was an ancient reptile fish.

That wasn’t hard, was it?

6 Comments

Icthysauri

Posted by Bob in History on 11/18/2005

The dolphins you see at Seaworld are mammals.

Tens of millions of years ago the dolphines were small, furry, four-footed animals I had one as a pet.

So dolphins are mammals who adapted, spectacularly, to live in the sea whence all our ancestors came.

Exactly the same thing happened in the dinosaur era. The icthysaur was a land dinosaurs that evolved to go back into the sea for its entire life. Like the dolphin, it could no longer live on land.

Here is the problem: the icthysaurus became extinct at the same time the dinosaur did. This blows ALL of the theories about dinosaur extinction out of the water, so to speak.

One thing you always hear when the extinction of dinosaurs is discussed is that they died and mammals survived because mammals were little and dinosaurs were big.

‘Fraid not. There were many tiny dinosaurs and one does not see them around any more either.

Other theories run up against the icthysaur. They explain what happened to the dinosaurs on land, but they don’t explain what happened to the ones in the sea. If all the land plants dinosaurs ate died, it would not affect the ones in the sea.

A lot of documentaries have glib explanations like size or why the land dinosaurs died out. I am tired of the ones that would obviously be absurd if little dinosaurs and sea dinosaurs.

It’s like he constant repetition in the 1970s when a new older human ancestor was found. Even the scientific publications would say, “The earliest ancestor of man was in … ” and then a whole new set of theories would pour out based on that find. A few months later another earliest ancestor would be found and another whole set of theories would pour forth.

Every set was wrong, but that didn’t matter. Each set got a lot of professors quoted and published, so they got their promotions and their list pf publications went up. Professors just look at the publications list, not whether what was written made any sense or not.

I stopped that by writing in Science News, to my own astonishment. But Science News reaches millions, so this won’t do it.

Cars Off the Shelf

Posted by Bob in How Things Work on 11/17/2005

It was one the rare occasions when I was in a bar, imbibing with my usual moderation. I forget exactly who I was with. All I remember is that I was somewhat embarrassed at how she was hitting the liquor.

She was so drunk she looked blurred.

There were some guys in coats and ties at one table and one of them bought a round of “free” drinks for everybody, including me and my blurry girlfriend. He was celebrating the fact that he had just “won” a car dealership.

By “won” I mean that he had bid highest among a group of people bidding big money for that dealership.

That’s why I put the quotes around the “free” drink I got from him.

Guess who paid for the high bid he was able to make? Well, I have bought a number of new cars in my life, and the people who buy new cars are the ones who paid for his bid, plus the profit he made on it.

I figure, very conservatively, that that drink cost me twenty or thirty thousand dollars.

I also had to pay for the guy who works for him. You know how it is when you buy a new car. The dealer sits down with you and gives you such a deal on the car, such a deal as you never saw before in your life.

It’s less than the factory cost. The dealership will lose money on it. He is giving up his commission. His family will just have to go hungry this week.

Then he goes to “clear” this money-losing deal with his supervisor. You can see through the glass as he breaks the awful news to his boss.

The boss’s reaction for your benefit depends on the price of the car you are buying. If it is a luxury model, he looks stunned and sorrowful. For a super-luxury car he turns pale and has to sit down.

When it comes to cars that sell for over a hundred grand they have a special ambulance that comes in, red lights flashing, into which he gets carried, clutching his chest.

For the cars I bought, he just nodded.

So you pay for the dealership, the salesman who is standing around most of the day and clears his shirt-losing deals with the manager, overhead, the works.

Plus profits on all that.

One company is experimenting with a technique that takes all the drama out of this. They are selling cars just like you buy anythig else, off the shelf.

You would find it hard to have a life if you haggled over everything you bought in a store. The entire personnel of WalMart would have to take acting lessons and you would have to pay for them.

If this experiment is succcessful, the price of cars will drop like a rock.

7 Comments

But, Bob, Is It MACHO?

Posted by Bob in Bob, Coaching Session on 11/17/2005

In my piece “Loneliness” below Bob Whitaker, big-time hard-ball politico, ex-spy, ex-combat merc, the guy who knows no fear, sat down and wrote for help.

I immediately got that help from Peter (next article below).

But, Bob is it MACHO to just plain ask for HELP?

Let me give you several answers:

1)
Let me begin by posing another question. Here is a guy who has spent a lifetime being an expert on how the human mind works. If he can’t tell you what HIS mind needs, why the hell does he think he’s an expert?

2)
A young man has every right to be touchy about his manliness. He may not BE right, but HAS the right.

But if you reach my age and you are still trying to prove you are a man, you are pathetic.

When I turned 40 an older buddy of mine on Capitol Hll sat me down and gave me some advice. He said,

“Bob, you are now forty years old. Everybody respects you as a fighter. But from now on ALWAYS keep in mind that while everybody respcts an Angry Young Man, NOBODY has any use for an angry OLD man.”

When I get good advice, I handle it like gold. My demeanor changed subtley but importantly from that day on. I have carefully mellowed.

This is me mellowed, gang. You should have seen me before.

3) I woud not bother you with my personal stuff in the blog if I didn’t think it was part of the advice I am giving you. Nobody wants to read endlessly about somebody else’s psych therapy.

The first thing anybody in my professions, from politics to psych warfare to professional writing must learn is that there is a PERSON on the other end. You must interest him, you must keep in mind that HE doesn’t like being put down either. If what you say masks bad ideas about HIM, go back and get them OUT.

The world is crowded with information and you are just one more person trying to get his word out. Get the packaging that attracts HIM, not the one that looks good to YOU. And when he opens the package, what’s in there will have to get him back to your store because there’s plenty of competition out there.

A giant tome that tells the truth do good if nobody READS it. You will be an old man decades from now saying, “I told the truth and nobody LISTENED. It’s all hopeless and it’s not my fault!”

It IS your fault.

My circuit rider grandfather lived by the words, “The mind can only absorb what the seat can bear.”

If you can’t work and work and work in your mind until you’ve got your message in bite-sized chunks, you will preaching to empty seats.

This is WORK, gang.

4) Know thyself.

Know what you need and know how to say it.

Screw macho.

Great Job, Peter!

Posted by Bob in Comment Responses on 11/17/2005

In my last piece, “Loneliness,” I sort of begged a commenter to sit down and give me something ***I*** could chew on a bit.

So Peter sat down and did it.

I welcome and enjoy comments in general. Don’t get all worried about criticism on this end. Comments make me feel alive. When I see that “Comments (0)” at the end of a piece, it lets me down a bit.

I am here to do the lead thinking. This is my life’s work, not yours. I’m SUPPOSED to be ahead of you. But it’s kind of nice when I’m not.

Peter presents a vision of the world we are fighting FOR, not just the one we are fighting AGAINST. Even I, as in the piece below, tend to accentuate the negative and how lonely I am and so forth. So Peter patted me on the back and gave me a bit of a vision of what I am doing all this FOR.

I am the one who always said that the enemy’s best asset is not the soldier in his own lines but the defeatist in YOURS. I am the one who repeatedly (I do tend to repeat) condemns and despises the “Oh, they’re so powerful, it’s all hopelss and it’s not my fault!” who poison or movement.

So right after I write a piece that is depressing, Peter sits down and comes up with a piece on what we’re fighting FOR.

Good job, Peter. You caught me with my pants down.

I’ll get you for that.

Peter says,

A reader rants on: “the difference between practical politics and revolutionary politics.”

I think of them you call “practical politicians” as “arm-wavers.” They look for the latest fad, jump on the bandwagon, then wave their arms, shouting “look at ME.”

You were very useful, Bob, in bringing down Communism although I imagine you would deny that. The arm-wavers who took your ideas never expected them to be so effective. But they were happy that the ideas revitalized the GOP.

But really, Bob, these arm-wavers are no good. They were happy that your ideas revamped their little old party and once they got what they wanted they ignored you.

A revolutionary government, on the other hand, would be full of Bobs like you. They wouldn’t have to put their ideas in a blog and wait. They wouldn’t have to take a post approving clearances. Each would be doing the job that suits him best.

But we aren’t ready for a revolution. There aren’t enough ideas out there. None knows what to do.

Did you see Fight Club? At the end they blow up the credit card companies (after evacuating the night-time security staff). A White revolution will change EVERYTHING; will we blow up the credit card companies, too?

In a white future, we would rebuild American cities. More than a hundred years ago, they were beautiful and their modest beauty was the talk of the world. Rebuilding them would at last give preservationists something significant to do, and it would give architects something more rewarding than designing parking garages and fast-food stops. If rebuilt downtowns and small town replaced centrally-controlled Walmarts, communities would have not only something to be proud of for generations, but the new stor-space would give American employees a chance to leave their employers and become real entrepreneurs as of old — independent.

Independence: working for oneself, unhindered by an employer; what about the family farm? Yes, that old-fashioned picture that was once the symbol of America. Now 98% of the land is owned by centrally-planned corporations that are legal fictions and accountable to none. A new White America would create the greatest land rush in our history (and we could still expand our great wilderness, too!).

But without thinking ahead the transition to the dream could be a nightmare. People are right now used to living a certain way, OBEDIENT to an employer, so change to self-determination would be hard. But more than a hundred years ago, when men struck out on the Oregon Trail, they made use of guidebooks. These self-starters were men taking the risks, selling all, putting what they could in a covered wagon, and heading west on foot. They thought ahead but the move west was not centrally planned.

So why aren’t our people putting up pictures of old historical buildings online? In the new world, we could rebuild them.

Why doesn’t the White movement avail itself of the back-to-the land-literature? In the new world, we need to be self-sufficient and independent.

That way, the communities would become places where great art and music are created, just like in Germany two and three hundred years ago.

Planning ahead doesn’t mean a star chamber of commissars and aparachiks ordering everyone about. But if we have no idea where we are headed and the choices we will face, how could the Revolution possibly succeed?

Look at the Russians. They did not think ahead. They simply realized that Reagan’s rhetoric was right and they tore down that wall. But they are still in a mess.

What revolutionaries need to do is think ahead about ways to move from a controlled economy to independence without causing anyone to starve during the transition. Much of the guidebooks should be written NOW by those with an understanding of economics, like you Bob.

Where are our guidebooks? Where a VISION?

Forget the arm-wavers. Hire them when you need publicity. But remember that they are thinking first about promoting themselves. So never cede control to them. Left alone, the arm-wavers will accomplish nothing.

We need you, Bob.

Comment by Peter — 11/16/2005 @ 9:08 pm

T.G.I.F.

Posted by Bob in Coaching Session on 11/16/2005

If you go to whitakeronline.org and hit on Audio Archives you will see the shows listed below and you can hear them.

Each set of ideas connects with the others. Connected together the programs give you a world view and a practical way to plan to achieve it.

In order to understand what I really have to say, you would have to listen to each several times and THINK about them.

The first one listed here, called DICTA, means Don’t Interfer Call the Authorities. It explains how we have become so helpless since the Obedient Generation, the one that calls itself The Greatest Generation, took over.

My program called The Weakest Generaton doesn’t seem to be here yet. But the world before and after them was and will be utterly unrecognizable right now. I see things in younger people that they think are new, but were taken for granted in the 1930s.

Temporal Provincialism discusses the fact that what cripples our ability to predict, and this was what I made my living at, is the fact that we reside in NOW. This program could give you a lot of pointers on how to PREDICT accurately the tide of history.

And The Tide of History is related to Temporal Provincialism. It explains, from a practical political point of view — again, I made my living this way — the difference between practical politics and revolutionary politics. If your big thing in life is that you want the budget deficit to go up or down a few billion, practical politics is the way to go. And you can have a great time talking politics at a party.

But you better do it fast, because nothing you say will mean a thing a month from now. People remember only the tide of history.

NOBODY would remember the entire Weimar Republic if it hadn’t been Hitler that overthrew it.

NOBODY would remember Kerensky if it weren’t for Lenin.

Practical politics has NOTHING to do with changing the system or changing basics. To do anything important, you must position yourself in a way that nobody who deals in “real politics” will understand.

Few do understand, which is why there are so few revolutionaries. But if you are a temporal provincial, “There is a tide in the affairs of men which, when taken at the crest,” is not the way you want to live to live.

The tide didn’t come to the party, so who cares about it?

One of the first sacrifices a revolutionary makes is being alone and knowing that the tide may not come in his lifetime.

The people at the party will remind you that all your effort may be wasted. You will not remind them that ALL their effort is wasted. When the tide of history comes, nothing they do will mean a thing. If you don’t believe this, try talking the political strategy of the last gubernatorial election.

So I deal with people who know nothing about the tide of history, temporal provincialism, the Experts they are quoting, why they are just trying to be Shrewd again.

Even if they do grasp the concepts, they can apply it to ancient history but not to the society in which they just obsessed over the latest headlines, The Holy World of Now.

They are being Shrewd and they quote Experts. I have a program on each of these subjects.

So I sit down and try to talk with somebody and they tell me “They have discovered that…” which means that particular old fad is a popular fad again. They say that “That’s been tried, meaning history has not come there yet, or “Republicans are going to GET the black vote this time” or “AIDS is becoming a heterosexual disease”.

And I am supposed to TALK with them?

I’d rather drink alone.

I wish some people would do what Joe is doing. You could THINK about the chain of ideas I discuss and how it affects the tide of history and why I say YOU are part of my chain of ideas.

At VERY rare intervals I find that someone has not only gotten my point, but they have see a line of logic or reality I had not seen. They are not trying to shoehorn the universe into the Old Testament or yesterday’s headlines.

In other words, at rare intervals I have the kind of actual discussion other people take for granted.

In my lonely world when that happens I feel exactly the way Robinson Crosoe must have felt when he saw the footprints of another human being for the first time in twenty years:

“THANK GOD FOR FRIDAY!”

October 29, 2005 – D.I.C.T.A.
October 22, 2005 – Temporal Provincialism
October 15, 2005 – Truthseekers
October 8, 2005 – The Thread of History
October 1, 2005 – Shrewd
September 24, 2005 – I Support The United Nations
September 17, 2005 – White Survivalism
September 10, 2005 – Experts
September 3, 2005 – Wordism Revisited
August 27, 2005 – Criticism Is Not Hate
August 20, 2005 – The Silly Ideas We Live By
August 13, 2005 – Our Established Religion
August 6, 2005 – What is Truth?
July 30, 2005 – Experts
July 23, 2005 – Annotated Constitution – Preamble
July 16, 2005 – Sobsister History
July 9, 2005 – Not Bias, Silliness
July 2, 2005 – Re-Play: Bob and James Edwards:
The Political Cesspool – MAKE IT PERSONAL
June 25, 2005 – Idiocracy
June 18, 2005 – Arguments
June 11, 2005 – Routine Racism
June 4, 2005 – The Tide of History
May 28, 2005 – WORDISM: The Alternative to RACISM
May 14, 2005 – A “Living” Constitution = DICTATORSHIP
May 7, 2005 – Debut – What’s the Untrained Eye

Loneliness

Posted by Bob in Bob on 11/15/2005

A friend of mine said that my special talent was that,

“Things jump out at you that other people don’t even notice.”

That is a formula for loneliness.

I ended the article below called “Idealists” with these sentences:

“The further down the chain of ideas you go, the less you matter.”

“The farther down the chain of ideas you get, the more important you are, the more you get paid.”

“And that last sentence is the key to my whole world view.”

“That sentence, the one before last, is the one I have devoted my entire life to. ”

You could not write a formula that is more guaranteed to make you a lonely man than that.

One of the funniest lines in movie, “Analyze This” was when the Mafia boss was walking with a psychiatrist and said, “There are some guys watching us. We have to get over there behind cover.”

The psychiatrist asked him, “How do you know that?”

The Mafia boss answered, “I’m a criminal. It’s my JOB to know that.”

A lot of people are repeatedly astounded at how I predict things or how I know somebody is lying or how I know where somebody is REALLY coming from. I appreciate their marvelling at it, and REMEMBERING it.

But when they ask me how I did it, what I really want to do is sigh and say, “Where in the HELL do you think I spent the last fifty years?”

By the way, even people who have know me for decades and who REMEMBER that I was right when they and everybody else said I was talking nonsense, STILL tell me I am talking nonsense.

This, again, is a formula for loneliness.

They are living in a world in which the Real Somebodys who were always wrong before are the onoy topic of conversation.

If you have spent fifty years learning things and you are at the Calculus stage, explaining arithmetic to people, over and over, is a good thing to do as a teacher. But you are still lonely. You would like to talk Calculus with somebody besides yourself.

I worked out a formula that no race-mixer can break.

“Every respectable cosnervative has to agree that ther is this RACE problem. But this RACE problem only exists in white countries. Every respectable conservative insists on third world immigration into ALL white countries and ONLY into white countries. The Netherlands is more crowded than Japan or Taiwan, but no on insists Japan or Taiwan has this RACE problem needs to be solved by massive third world immigration and assimiliation.”

“If said that there is this RACE problem exists, and it can be solved by massive non-black immigration into ALL black countries and ONLY into black countries, it would take you about half a second to realize that what I call anti-racist is actually anti-black.”

“And you wouldn’t aska black man why he is against this. Every sane black man would be against a genocide program against blacks”

If every commentator knew he would run into THAT brick wall very time he did an interview, the whole discussion of race would change overnight.

BUT only I know how to do this. One of our public figures SORT of uses it. But he wants it to sound like he is Up With Things. So he refers to “the ethnic cleansing of the white race.”

Boy, that sounds so up-to-date, so newsy.

And OLD.

You have to make your message sound NEW, not make yourself look like somebody who is Up To Date.

When you throw in terms like “ethnic cleansing” it turns off a very important switch. It is part of hte usual debate.

I had to write several paragraphs to explain this. I have to write several paragraphs to explain EVERYTHING.

I can talk about Wordism until there is blood on my typewriter, but people are going to KEEP going back to their own forms of Wordism.

Lonely? You betcha!

I like the idea that, while all the other talks were going on, Joe had hit on the implications of “People don’t notice.”

I live on the IMPLICATIONS of things that are obvious. I have not the slightest interst in the fact that the Deputy UnderSecretary of Something Big is secretly doing something else. But everybody around me wants to talk about him, because they know that he will be fogotten next year. You have to show you know about that right now, while people still knows what you are talking about.

Everybody else has a Homeland. That Homeland is called Now.

I always took it for granted in the 1950s that the same fanatical segregationists would be fanatical integrationists tomorrow. If I have to explain how I knew that in my teens, it makes me even more lonely.

Everybody else has a Homeland called Now. I live in a cosmopolitan world of time, of which Now is only a passing phase. I am no more a citizen of 2005 than I am citizen of 1965 where the hippies live or 1944 where the Greatest Generation lives.

I do not live where thoo who start their talks with, “Modern” or “Traditional” or The Latest News
reside.

I do not read the papers to have something to talk about. I talk to me about things the newspapers cannot imagine and don’t have any reason to think about.

I live alone.

Richard and Peter

Posted by Bob in Comment Responses on 11/15/2005

Richard, there was nothing polytheistic at all about Mazdaism.

You do not have to be worshipper of some version of Jehovah to be monotheistic.

Zoroastrians were as monotheistic as we are when Jahweh one of the tribal gids telling his own people not to worship any of the others.

Richard, you are still trying to shoehorn the world into the Old Testament.

First you say Zoroastrianism was not the problem in All-Important Judea at the time. Absolutely no one knows what Zoroastrianism meant in the place at that time. All reference has been censored, aka, “interpreted” out. You folks never mentioned it after Iran fell to the Moslems.

For many years, there was a desperate denial that Gilgamesh was written so long ago, because the Jews OWNED the Flood, you know. So naturally the titanic Persian Empire was totally unknown to a people who were closer to it than to Rome and the ancient people the Gilgamesh beloned to were just scratching their itches until Moses came along.

It’s not a theological expression, but:

Yea. Right.

Who were the enemies of the Hellenes, right back before the Battle of Marathon?

Well, gee, whiz, it was them nonexistent Persians! They were Zoroastrian then.

I’ll tell you something you can’t dig out of the OT: the Persians destroyed temples, not just because they were the enemy, but because they were PAGAN.

Sound familiar? It was a habit Christianity INVENTED centuries after the Persians did it.

In fact just shortly before Iran was conquered by the Moslems the Persians and the Jews, AGAIN, engaged in a joint attack on Byzantine Christians, aka, Hellenics. The “real” Jews, like the Philistines, found their allies against the Hellenics in Persia over and over and over.

And, yes, they did know that Persia existed.

On the Persian/Parsee/Farsi/Pharisee connection: The plan of the temple in Hieru-salem (I’ll fling that out there) is exactly that of a typical Zoroastrian fire-temple and built, according to legend, by King Cyrus of Persia.

When one perceives that the Persians predicted the coming of the Savior (Saoshyant), that the Zoroastrian priest-kings (Magi) knew where to find him, and were the first to worship him, it all begins to come together.

It also makes perfect Mazdaist sense that the Lord would choose the darkest corner of the world from which to RISE.

This means that the “Christ” hailed in the oldest Greek version of the OT was not the national hero of a kingdom of this world, but was of the kingdom of Heaven — just as in Zoroastrian scriptures. And unlike Mithras who appeared cosmically in eternity past, this Savior of the kingdom of Heaven appeared in HISTORY, and so the Magi were there following his star from the east.

A secondary consequence of this knowledge that the groundwork of Christianity (and so too of our civilization) was laid in polytheistic Mazdaism may be that respect of Woden’s lore might not be in competition with Christian revelation.

Comment by Peter — 11/12/2005 @ 5:15 pm | Edit This

Bob, The Pharisees were the “super” Jews. Zoroastrianism was not the problem in Judea at the time. Hellenism was and the Pharisees hated Hellenism with a pure hate. The Saducees were the heretics who had bought into a lot of the paganistic belief swimming about the middle east at the time.