Watchman Willie Martin Archive



                                                                                   Preface

The very foundations of America, the New Jerusalem and New Zion as spoken of in the Scriptures. The apostle wrote that "it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." [1]

We are still in His hands and the lash of correction will continue to be felt until it accomplishes its end. The day will come when the people will give voice to the words spoken through the Prophet Hosea: "Come, and let us return unto the Lord; for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up." [2] Our God, the Holy One in the midst of Israel, will yet have the salute of our banners and the allegiance of all the people. Great voices in heaven have already proclaimed what will become an actual reality. [3]

The Inheritance of Israel

Our forefathers came to the shores of the North American Continent to lay the foundation of a Christian society. The church was to be the central influence in our lives; the administration of the affairs of state was to conform with the requirements of the Law of the Lord. It is a matter of grave concern today that our nation has departed so far afield from the faith and trust in God manifested by the Founding Fathers of our country. We have forgotten what the Pilgrims fully recognized, that unless God prospers our undertakings, we labor in vain.

The Psalmist stated it all too well: "Except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it: [The marginal rendering is: 'they labor in vain that are builders of it.'] Except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain." [4]

Now that our nation is rich in lands and houses and possessions, having an abundance of the things which provide for physical well‑ being, the people have turned aside from heeding Moses' warning: "Beware that thou forget not the Lord thy God, in not keeping his commandments, and his judgments, and his statutes, which I command thee this day: lest when thou hast eaten and art full, and hast built goodly houses, and dwelt therein; and when thy herds and thy flocks multiply, and thy silver and thy gold is multiplied, and all that thou hast is multiplied; then thine heart be lifted up, and thou forget the Lord thy God...and thou say in thine heart, My power and the might of mine hand hath gotten me this wealth. But thou shalt remember the Lord thy God: for it is he that giveth thee power to get wealth, that he may establish his covenant which he sware unto thy fathers, as it is this day." [5]

While sojourning in Egypt, Joseph's father Jacob (whose name was changed to Israel) performed a special ceremony with Joseph's two sons. Ephraim and Manasseh, in his presence, having to do with their inheritance. Joseph's boys were placed before him and Jacob crossed his hands so that the younger son (Ephraim) might receive the blessing reserved for the elder (Manasseh). Joseph remonstrated with his father, but Jacob said to him: "I know it, my son, I know it: he [Manasseh] also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother [Ephraim] shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations." [6]

Today the United States of America is that Great People. We do not refer to ourselves as a great nation so much as we use the very Biblical appellation foretold to designate our national status, a Great People. The Preamble to the Constitution of the United States confirms this: "We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

The Prophet Isaiah directed a message to the people of God, warning them of a time to come when many among them would face extreme tribulation. The reason is given: "Because thou hast forgotten the God of thy salvation, and hast not been mindful of the rock of thy strength, therefore shalt thou plant pleasant plants, and shalt set it with strange slips: In the day shalt thou make thy plant to grow, and in the morning shalt thou make thy seed to flourish: but the harvest shall be a heap in the day of grief and of desperate sorrow." [7]

The history of God's people is replete with instances when they were gratefully aware of the Lord's actions in their behalf, only to quickly turn aside into paths of disobedience.

When our Pilgrim fathers set sail to go to the New World, no doubt the Psalms of David fortified them daily and perhaps they often repeated this affirmation: "Thou art my rock and my fortress; therefore for thy name's sake lead me, and guide me." [8]

The Lord did lead them and, as further stated by the Psalmist, "They remembered that God was their rock, and the high God their redeemer." [9] They had every reason to be thankful to God who was, as the prophet expressed it, the Rock of their strength.

Therefore, at the outset they planted pleasant plants; that is, desirable plants, in laying a foundation of righteousness in the new land to which they had come. In the morning of our nationhood our good seed did flourish; in the daytime of our development into a Great People our planting grew with a vigor.

However, expanding the graphic analogy, Isaiah stated that when the people were no longer mindful of God, the Rock of their strength, they began to set "strange slips" among their pleasant plains. The Hebrew word translated "strange" means "foreign or profane" ("godless"); it has the significance of "to turn aside."

This implies that, forgetting the God of our salvation, we would turn away from our Divinely‑directed way of life and we would cultivate strange and foreign ideologies, doctrines in opposition to the Law of the Lord and diametrically opposed to the terms of the National Covenant the Lord made with our forefathers at Mount Sinai [10].

Among the strange slips we selected from the foreign soil of atheism were those which bred Higher Criticism, Modernism and Judaism. This fostered disbelief in the veracity of the Scriptures and ripened into the Great Apostasy that has settled from the goodly spiritual plant our forefathers nurtured when they came to these shores. Our nation has fared no better in the realm of politics. We have departed far afield from the kind of government our forefathers who were present at Mount Sinai were instructed to put into operation. It was to be a representative form of government, with spiritually qualified men selected to speak for the people [11].

The Law of the Lord was to be the basis of its constitution and was to be administered as the law of the land. Our government was never, under any circumstances, to degenerate into a godless democracy. The only time the people of Israel lapsed into a democracy was when Aaron, in the absence of Moses, listened to the voice of the majority and gave them the golden calf to worship. [12] The mob ruled and the people sinned. God never intended His people to succumb to mob rule. The Founding Fathers of this nation recognized that danger and wrote a constitution for the United States that provided for a representative form of government, a Republic, not a democracy.

Now, however, the strange slips of democracy have been deliberately set out and they are being raised to full flower. Our governmental leaders have even adopted many of the tenets of Marxism and Fabian Socialism, grafting them into the body politic, with the result that our Republic has died. How tragic it is that the Prophet Isaiah found himself impelled to prophesy: "But the harvest shall be a heap in the day of grief and of desperate sorrow." [13]

The marginal rendering is very explicit: "But the harvest shall be removed in the day of inheritance, and there shall be deadly sorrow."

All signs point to the fact that our nation should now be preparing to enjoy what the phrase "day of inheritance" foreshows, experiencing the fullness of the covenant blessings bestowed upon us. Instead, there will indeed be deadly sorrow as the time of trouble deepens, which is described by the Prophet Daniel to be "such as never was since there was a nation." [14] At the present time our society is in a state of degeneration and decay and our nation is undergoing the throes of judgment. We flounder as a people on the edge of a pit of destruction.

Addressing Himself specifically to the United States of America, as recorded in the 18th chapter of Isaiah, the Lord communicated a message through the prophet that He would rest in His dwelling place during a specially fixed period and refrain from intervening in behalf of His people. This will occur prior to the fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah 26:21 where God's "place" is also mentioned: "For, behold, the Lord cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood [or bloods; the origin of her races], and shall no more cover her slain." [15] The foundations of America, Christ's Kingdom, on earth is being shaken. Who is to blame? Slick propaganda machines bamboozle us with accusations and counter-accusations with such rapidity that it seems impossible to think things through calmly and rationally, well alone discern the truth!

Crime is soaring. Armed robbers, in police uniforms, steal vast sums of money daily, under color of law; Federal Agents are killing people indiscriminately in scenes reminiscent of the worst gangster days of Chicago. Elderly people are murdered in their homes and farms in order to steal their land and possessions.

Do we have a hope and a sure guide amid the bloodshed, the propaganda barrage, the near-anarchy, the moral disintegration, the uncertainty, the fears and the doubts? Most certainly we have! Peter talks of "a more sure word of prophecy" which we would do well to note, as a light that shines in a dark place [16]. In the midst of such bad news Paul could joyfully commend the Ephesian elders "to God and the Word of His grace" [17]. The writer to the Hebrews speaks of our "sure and steadfast" anchor of the soul [18].

The Scriptures relate: "O Lord God of our fathers, art not thou God in heaven? and rulest not thou over all the kingdoms of the heathen? and in thine hand is there not power and might, so that none is able to withstand thee? Art not thou our God, who didst drive out the inhabitants of this land [America] before thy people Israel, and gavest it to the seed of Abraham thy friend for ever? And they dwelt therein and have built thee a sanctuary therein for thy name, saying, If, when evil cometh upon us, as the sword, judgment, or pestilence, or famine, we stand before this house, and in thy presence, (for thy name is in this house), and cry unto thee in our affliction, then thou wilt hear and help. And now, behold, the children of Ammon and Moab and mount Seir [The Jews], whom thou wouldest not let Israel invade, when they came out of the land of Egypt, but they turned from them, and destroyed them not; Behold, I say, how they reward us, to come to cast us out of thy possession, which thou hast given us to inherit. O our God, wilt thou not judge them? for we have no might against this great company that cometh against us; neither know we what to do: but our eyes are upon thee." [19]

Before the harvest is gathered that is mentioned in the 17th chapter of Isaiah, the Lord states: "For afore the harvest, when the bud is perfect, and the sour grape is ripening in the flower, he shall both cut off the sprigs with pruning hooks, and take away and cut down the branches." [20] Through the pruning and purging fires of tribulation, the Lord will lop off the growth of the strange slips in order that the plant itself may again bear righteous fruit.

Our desperate need today, as individual Christians and as a nation, is to experience a great spiritual renaissance, a return to Jehovah, the God of Israel, an awakening to the necessity to obey His commandments, statutes and judgements. When we do this as a people, we will be able to join in the affirmation voiced by the Psalmist: "He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings, and he hath put a new song in my mouth, even praise unto our God." [21]

In the face of unavoidable catastrophe, the moment of confrontation with the Lord God Almighty will come when the citizenry and all governmental office‑holders in our nation will earnestly desire to embrace the fruits of repentance as His people.

Following this we will renew the pledges of our Pilgrim forefathers in order that it may be well with us and with our children. Then, and only then, the enemy within will be destroyed, the foe without will be vanquished and the Great People of the United States of America, The White Race, will be delivered from all workers of iniquity.

Introduction

We are presenting the following, in the introduction, about the "Identity Movement" because it is essential to understand: The True Tribes of Israel are all represented in the United States; of that there can no longer be any doubt to serious Bible students; and because no one will understand the truth of the statement "In The Beginning America Was A Christian Nation."

We are sure you have heard of the "Identity Christians" on the  mass media and they call it a cult. This introduction is being presented in two parts. The first one is called "The Identity Movement" and the second is called "The Elect Race." Well if one looks up the word cult in the dictionary they will find that any form of religion can be called a cult. So I have put this together in an attempt to identify just what the Identity Movement is.

The Attorney General of the United States, who was appointed by the President Bill Clinton, in 1994 stated in a speech on national television stated: "A cultist is one who has a strong belief in the Bible and the Second Coming of Christ; who frequently attends Bible studies; who has a high level of financial giving to a Christian cause; who home schools his/her children; who has accumulated survival foods and has a strong belief in the 2nd Amendment, and who distrusts big government." [22]

The Identity movement is called a cult, because it fits the description of Attorney Reno to a "T" and it is called "Identity," "Kingdom Movement" and others mainly because no one has thought of a better name yet, for almost anything else one can think of has been used by other churches or denominations.

Some call it the Kingdom Movement, but whatever one cares to call it; the message is basically the same. That the Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and Kindred peoples of the world are the True Descendants of the Tribes of Israel as related in the Holy Scriptures.

It appears that a great number of the Judeo-Christian Teachers of today; the mass media send out the same message concerning those people whom the Lord God Almighty has opened their eyes so they can see, and their ears so they can understand the message, that they are anti-Semites, neo-Nazis, White Supremists and etc.

However, we would point out that this is still the United States of America and people should still have a belief in whatever religion or beliefs they wish to have and if that is the case then what is the matter with a family who don't wish to associate with Niggers, Mexicans, Jews and other aliens races, and moving to a remote part of America where he and his family can live without coming into contact with them except occasionally?

Oh the wording is a little different but it amounts to the same message. Men such as Jerry Falwell, Billy Graham, Mike Evans, C.V. Grant, Jack Van Impe, Jimmy Swaggert, Oral Roberts and many more; and it would appear that most of them know nothing at all about the Kingdom Identity message, yet they obey their Jewish masters and denounce it every time they get the chance.

Billy Graham has to be put in a special category, because in the late 1940s and early 1950s he preached the Kingdom Identity message, but he found out that because of the animosity of the church world and the Jewish organizations, there was no money or fame in it.

Or at least he didn't think so; therefore, he changed his message from the "Kingdom Identity" message to the popular and accepted message of Judeo-Christianity.

Christianity is under attack from all sides today in America. An example would be "The New Holy War" [23] by Bill Moyers a television production about Amendment Two, the anti-homosexual privilege bill that the people of Colorado passed but was later declared unconstitutional by Judge Jeffrey Bayless of the Denver District Court.

We believe the case has been appealed. Moyers went to Colorado Springs and interviewed homosexuals, evangelical Christians, and liberal "Christians." The last category included Jim White, Judeo-Christian Pastor of First Congregational Church. [24]

Pastor White has declared his intention to marry two lesbians in his church, and has lost many members as a result. He told Moyers this so-called "humorous" story: "Coach Bill McCartney of the University of Colorado, a prominent Christian who supported Amendment Two, says that the Old Testament states that homosexuality is an abomination to God. But, says Pastor White smugly, the Bible also says it is an abomination to touch a dead pig. Therefore, when the coach touches a football he is an abomination to God. Get it? Pigskin."

That sounds real clever, don't you think? A reliable source at the Gazette Telegraph in Colorado Springs reported that minister White has been telling this story frequently.

But, liberal Judeo-Christian minister White is a liar! Leviticus 18:22 states: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." The word "abomination" means "disgusting, abhorrent" in the Hebrew language in which Leviticus was written.

     abomination...

     Hebrew #8441: tow'ebah, to-ay-baw'; or to'ebah, to-ay-haw'; fem. act. part of 8581, (mor.), i.e. (as noun) 'an abhorrence; especially idolatry or (corner.) an idol:-abominable (custom, thing), abomination.

     Hebrew #8581: ta'ab, taw-ab'; a prim. root; to loathe, i.e. (mor.) detest:-(make to be) abhor (-red), (be, commit more, do) abominable (-y), X utterly.

Now notice the verses that deal with "touching" a dead pig. Leviticus 11:7-8 states: "And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be cloven footed, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean. Of their flesh [referring to certain other  animals as well] shall ye not eat, and their carcass shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you." The word "unclean" means "contaminated" because a dead animal is full of bacteria, parasites, etc.

     unclean...

     Hebrew #2931: tame', taw-may'; from 2930; foul in a relig. sense:-DEFILED, + infamous, POLLUTED (-tion), unclean.

     Hebrew #2930: tame', taw-may'; a prim. root; to be foul, espec. in a cerem. or mor. sense (contaminated):-defile (self), POLLUTE (self), be (make, make self, pronounce) unclean, X utterly.

One would expect much more from Bill Moyers who graduated from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary at Fort Worth, Texas. But, apparently, his instruction was either inadequate or it didn't "take."

During the interview Pastor Jim White admitted that he didn't believe the Bible literally. For liberals that means they reserve the right to exclude and change parts of it that don't suit their "enlightened" views.

If anyone thinks that the wording of the Hebrew language might be particularly harsh on homosexuality, we refer them to the Septuagint where the Greek is virtually the  same as the Hebrew.

The word translated "abomination" means "a detestable thing." The New Testament is crystal clear about homosexuality: practicing homosexuals are worthy of death [25] and will not inherit the kingdom of God [26].

In a telephone interview Pastor White in Colorado, who was informed of the difference between the two Mosaic prohibitions (the "abomination" of homosexuality and the "uncleanness" of touching a dead swine).

It was obvious that he had not done his homework, nevertheless his message reached all those who watched the Moyers presentation on PBS TV, most of whom don't know the difference. This is just another example of the brain washing the American people are getting via the boob tube. Now back to our original presentation.

Although the phrase "the right hand of fellowship" is used only once on the entire Bible [27], it is of utmost importance. It is our intention, in this study, to answer the question to whom the right hand of fellowship is to be extended and under what circumstances.

In the circles of Christian Israel {i.e., Christian Identity, Kingdom Identity or Anglo-Israelism; as it is sometimes called} there are many areas of belief which we share in common. Following are just a few: We believe:

* Salvation is in and only through Yahshua {Jesus} the Christ.

* Salvation is by grace not by works.

* The Scriptures are the inspired Word of God.

* Today's Jews are not the descendants of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob; consequently they are not Israelites.

* The Israelites today are found in the Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and kindred peoples of the earth.

* God's Laws, as found codified by Moses, are in effect under the New Covenant {New Testament}.

* Government should be ruled by God's Laws rather than man's laws.

* Our goal is the restoration of God's Kingdom here on earth.

These are areas in which we are all in agreement, however, there are just as many we find ourselves in disagreement. Following are just a few:

* The seedline issue.

* The identity of the beasts of the field.

* Whether Genesis 1 and 2 are describing one or two creations.

* Whether the flood of Noah's time was only local or worldwide.

* Whether the kingdom has already begun or is yet to begin.

* The use of the sacred names of God.

* Whether the feast days are to be kept under the New Covenant.

The doctrines upon which we agree, in essence, are those which make us what we are; they are the tenants which make us unique. However, what about the doctrines upon which we disagree; what do they say about us? Is there anything good to be said about our disagreements, especially in light of the Bible having so much to say about unity? Our disagreement are what proves conclusively that we are NOT a cult. One of the characteristics of a cult is that it has one recognized leader or hierarchy and that it requires all of its members to be in agreement with everything the hierarchy teaches. In a cult, divergence of doctrine or opinion is simply not allowed.

Take the Jehovah's Witnesses for example: Simply ask the next two JW's who show up at your door if they have any differences with the Watchtower Society, and you will find that they are in complete agreement with all that they teach.

They must agree or they will quickly find themselves on the outside looking in. What is interesting about this cult characteristic is that it is not much different in most Christian denominations today as well.

Certain groups within society have lately been labeling Identity as a cult. However, does this characteristic of a cult fit the Christian Israel movement? If we are honest with ourselves, we actually have more disagreements than agreement. So our differences prove there is no validity to the accusations of those who have personal interests in labeling Christian Identity as a cult. Furthermore, there is not one mark by which cults are identified which fits Christian Identity. Another benefit derived from our disagreements is that they prove a tremendous opportunity for growth. Solomon wrote: "Iron sharpeneth iron, so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend." [28]

Two identical swords, equally sharp, cannot sharpen each other. In order for a saber to be sharpened it must be brought in contact with another object with a rough surface. The same is true with human beings; there can be no sharpening if we all agree. As the saying goes: "If you and I agree upon everything, one of us isn't necessary." We are thrilled that we in Christian Identity do not agree upon everything we believe and teach. That is not to say that there are not some places where the line of fellowship should not be drawn.

The very fact that in Galatians 2 it states that James, Cephas and John extended Paul and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship is indicative of the fact that some people did not receive it. We individually have no qualms about making clear where we believe the lines should be drawn. There are four areas at which we believe God would have us withhold the right hand of fellowship:

1). From  those who deny the deity of Yahshua the Christ.

2). From those who claim salvation as being possible through any other means besides the atoning sacrifice of Yahshua.

3). From those who reject the Biblical plan of salvation.

4). From those who are knowingly unrepentant of willful sin.

There can be no compromise on these areas. Let us provide the Scriptural reasons why the line of fellowship should be drawn on these four areas. The apostle John provides us several characteristics of Antichrists in his epistles. One of them is as follows: "For many deceivers have gone into the world, those who do not acknowledge Yahshua (the) Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the Antichrist." [29] Take note that one of the characteristics is that these deceivers (the Antichrists) would refuse to "acknowledge Yahshua the Christ as coming in the flesh." If Yahshua was only a man then there would be no reason for someone to deny that He came in the flesh. Only if Yahshua was or at some time had been God would there be any purpose in someone denying that He (YHWH) came in the flesh. So the deity of Christ is here demonstrated by John.

Not only does John describe such people who deny the deity of Christ as being the Antichrists, but he further instructs us as to what kind of relationship we are to have with such people: "Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of (the) Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds." [30] In other words, when it comes to those who deny the deity of Yahshua, draw the line! The Scriptures are crystal clear regarding our means of atonement: "Yahshua said...'I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me.'" [31] "And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved." [32]

What does the Apostle Paul tell us to do with such people who either reject or who teach another means of salvation? "Now I urge you, brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them. For such men are slaves, not of our Lord (the) Christ...and by their smooth and flattering speech they deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting." [33] "There are some who are disturbing you, and want to distort the gospel {the atoning death, burial, resurrection, and appearance of Yahshua, [34]} of (the) Christ. But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you, let him be accursed." [35] In other words, with such people who tach another method of atonement, or teach that there is another way to God and heaven other than the Lord Jesus Christ, draw the line! Just as there is only one means of atonement, there is also only one plan of salvation:

* Faith - John 3:16; 8:24; Romans 10:9-10; Hebrews 11;

* Repentance - Luke 13:3; 2 Corinthians 7:9-10; 2 Peter 3:9-20;

* Confession - Matthew 10:32-33; Romans 10:9-10; 1 John 4:15;

* Baptism - Mark 16:15-16; Acts 2:36-42; 1 Peter 3:21.

The line of fellowship must be drawn here as well. Consider the limitations which Yahshua Himself puts upon those who would desire fellowship with Him: "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name cast out demons, and in your name perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you, depart from me, you who practice lawlessness.'" [36]

Take note, there was more required for fellowship with Yahshua than simply acknowledgment of Him as Lord or even the performance of miracles in His name. Even the devils, demons and Antichrists know Him: "...they {the devils} cried out saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God?..." [37]; "...Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy one of God." [38]; "And UNCLEAN SPIRITS, when they saw him {Christ}, fell down before Him, and cried, saying, thou art the Son of God." [39]; "And cried with a loud voice, and said, what have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the Most High God?..." [40]; "And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, thou art Christ the Son of God..." [41]; "And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know..." [42] and "Thou believest that there is one God; thou does well: The devils also believe, and tremble." [43]

Christ also requires that we do the "will of (His) Father who is in heaven." How does one determine the will of the Heavenly Father? The only infallible means of doing so is through what He inspired the authors of the Holy Bible to write.

In other words, what should be done with those who will neither accept nor obey the inspired Biblical plan of salvation? Draw The Line! Do not extend the hand of fellowship. To do otherwise with such people who either reject the deity of Yahshua, the atonement of Yahshua or the Biblical plan of salvation would do them a disservice because it would further their false sense of security in a salvation they do not yet have.

The following passage is very specific in its instructions on how we are to deal with Christians who are unwilling to repent of deliberate sin: "And if your brother sins, go and reprove him in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, LET HIM BE TO YOU AS A GENTILE AND A TAX GATHERER." [44]

In other words, with willfully unrepentant people who claim to be Christians, Draw The Line! Those are four areas where the right hand of fellowship cannot be extended, because those are the four areas by which it is either determined whether a person is a brother or sister in the body of Christ or a brother or sister in good standing in the body of Christ.

In some areas compromise is fine. However, there are other areas you just do not compromise. It is like the hunter who took careful aim at a huge bear. About to pull the trigger, he heard the soothing, beguiling voice of his prey, "Isn't it better to talk than to shoot? What do you want? Let's negotiate."

Cradling his weapon, the hunter said, "I want a fur coat." "Good," said the bear, "That's negotiable. I only want a full stomach. Let's compromise." So the two sat down and negotiated. After a time, the bear walked away alone. He had his full stomach, and the hunter hand his fir coat.

No more than it was wise for the hunter to negotiate with the bear, so it would be unscriptural for us to extend the right hand of fellowship to the four categories of people previously described. Nevertheless, with the exception of the disfellowshipped Christian,

it does not mean that we should not at times still have limited fellowship with such people. Without some fellowship we would never have the opportunity to teach them out of the error of their ways. At the same time, we will not compromise those areas for the sake of fellowship, harmony, peace, unity or anything. However, those are the only areas where we draw the line.

Now don't misunderstand us, we will not compromise what we believe to be truth in lesser areas of importance either. If it is what we believe the Scriptures teach, we are not going to teach something different simply so we can agree. Nonetheless, we will not use the nonessential areas of doctrine as tests of fellowship. We refuse to use as a test of fellowship; the Satan issue, the seedline issue, the beast of the field issue, the one or two creations issue, the flood issue, the kingdom issue, the sacred name issue, the feast day issue or any other secondary issue! Do we preach what we believe to be the truth in these areas?

You bet we do, but we do not demand that you see it exactly the same way we do! Who knows? Your position may be the correct position and, by keeping open the lines of communication with you, we may eventually see the error of my position. The divisiveness of some of our people over some of these secondary issues is incredible! Let's be honest with ourselves; Unity is not our strong suit. We are better described by the saying that goes: "To dwell above with saints we love, oh that will be glory. But to dwell below with saints we know, well that's another story."

What would you expect when you get a bunch of independent, stiff-necked Israelites together? However, that does not give us an excuse for our sins; that is our sin, especially in light of God's Word being chocked full of passages promoting unity. Let us consider just a few of these unity passages: "Now may the God who gives perseverance and encouragement of the Scriptures grant you to be of the same mind with one another according to (the) Christ Yahshua, that with one accord you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Yahshua (the) Christ. Wherefore, accept one another, just as (the) Christ also accepted us to the glory of God." [45]

The Apostle Paul is not here promoting unity in every doctrine, but rather unity in spite of our differences, so that we can at least, if nothing else, have harmony to glorify God with one voice. In verse 7, we are urged to "accept one another, just as (the) Christ also accepted us."

How did Yahshua accept us? With all our weaknesses misinterpretations, wrong opinions, and sins which we had no knowledge of at the time of conversion to repent of. Consequently, we are to accept our brethren under the same conditions. "Now I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Yahshua (the Christ, that you all agree-and there be no divisions among you, but you be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment." [46]

This passage is often used to promote the idea that we are to have perfect harmony on all doctrines. However, keep in mind that the people who would do so, do not promote unity based on your perspective of the Scriptures, but only on their own. We know what kind of unity they have in mind. it is like a cat and a canary, and we know who we are in their sight. The context (verses 11-13) of these verses is teaching the same as the previous passage, i.e., our agreement is on Yahshua, not necessarily one, very particular doctrine. "...being diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all." [47]

Part of the job description for evangelists, pastors and teachers is to teach toward this end: "And He gave some as...evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the word of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ." [48]

Unity should at least be a part of the desired end of these offices, and yet leaders are often most guilty for division in the body of Christ. Verse 3 exhorts us to be "diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit."  Now honestly, how many of us can say that we have been putting any effort at all into an attempt to secure and preserve unity, let alone being zealously diligent to do so? If we are to ever have such unity, there are prerequisites to doing so. Paul lists some of them in verses 1 and 2: "I, therefore...entreat you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, showing forbearance to one another in love..." [49]

To put it another way, only the lowly minded can be like minded. There are two extremes when it comes to unity:

1). Those who will compromise anything for "the sake of unity," and,

2). Those who will compromise nothing for the sake of unity.

Those who find themselves in either extreme needs to take lessons from Romans 14. "Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but no for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions." [50]

Here is how the same verse reads in the Amplified Version: "As for the man who is a weak believer, welcome him {into your fellowship}, but not to criticize his opinions or pass judgment on his scruples or perplex him with discussions."

In this passage, Paul is not dealing with areas of essential, but rather with secondary issues; what he identifies as matters of opinion. Although in this passage it is not Paul's purpose to do so, he did state the correct position on these issues in other epistles. "One man has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. Let not him who eats regard with contempt him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and stand he will, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One man regards one day above another, regards every day alike. Let each man be fully convinced in his own mind." [51]

Note, there is a right and wrong to these issues, which Paul is simply using as examples for what he is really striving to teach. Here is Paul's teaching: Even if a brother is teaching error (in your mind) on a secondary issue, you are not to pass final judgment on him, nor are you to hold him in contempt. The reason for this is because on these kinds of issues God accepts him and makes him stand even when he is wrong.

We had all better be thankful that God does not require perfect doctrine in order to stand in His presence because there has not been a mortal man yet who has ever had perfect doctrine. And if God does not require perfect doctrine, then what gives any of us the right to do so? Keep in mind, as you judge, you will be judged, and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. If you require perfect doctrine in order to fellowship with you, then the same will be required of you from God. At the same time, this attitude of acceptance found promoted by Paul does have a prerequisite: Lordship. "He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thinks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God. For not one of us lives for himself; for if we live, we live for the Lord, or if we die, we die for the Lord; therefore whether we live or die, we are the Lord's." [52]

In other words, if my brother sincerely believes in something which we consider error, but does so as a result of his study of the Scriptures, and he is practicing what he believes not from selfish motives but because it is what he believes pleases his Lord, then we are obligated to accept him with open arms. On the other hand, if what he believes, teaches and practices is from self-serving motives, then that is a different matter.

In the remainder of this chapter, Paul details what our obligations are toward a brother whose motives are pure and unselfish: "But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you again, why do your regard your brother with contempt? For we shall all stand before the Judgement seat of God." [53]; "Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather determine this, not to put an obstacle or a stumbling block in a brother's way." [54]; "So then let us pursue the things which make for peace and the building up of one another." [55]; "It is good not to eat meat or to drink wine, or to do anything by which your brother stumbles." [56].

Unity is not the state of brothers fellow shipping with no disagreements, but rather the state of having disagreements while maintaining peaceful fellowship. Romans 14 summed up is: "In essentials, unity; in opinion, liberty; and in all things, love."

Now tell me where, if you are a Christian, we differ in our beliefs? I don't think there is all that much difference. The difference is what the national media has imbedded in peoples minds about those who believe in the so-called Identity Movement. In it they are portrayed as everything and worse than was is presented in the flyer you sent. One other difference, is who are the "Chosen of God." I suspect from the tone of your newsletter that you know the people known as Jews in the world today are not the Chosen People of God! That they are wolves in sheep' clothing. Am I wrong?

Now the "Identity Christians" are portrayed as being Supremists by the media, but that is not true, as true believers in the Identity Movement believe that the Israelites, the White Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Celtic, Scandinavian, and kindred people of the earth, are priests, ministers, servants of the Most High God. Not as being superior, but as servants of God to show by demonstration that to live as God has commanded us, will lead to a much better life than by disobeying His commandments, statutes and laws. Then they will point to the "Identity" Christians belief about blacks. Well I have enclosed a book that I have written to demonstrate why many believe that the black people of the world are "the beasts of the field," as spoken of in the Scriptures.

The People Called By My Name

The prophets of old foretell of a day when the heritage of Israel would be assumed by another people, a heathen people, a very wicked people. These people would claim to be Israel, when in fact they really are not. They would assume all rights to Israel's heritage and even lay claim to the land of Palestine, the Ancient homeland of True Israelites. Indeed, these impostors would deceive the whole world by establishing a nation in that land and calling it Israel.

In so doing they would fulfill those prophecies little known or publicized by any Bible scholars, prophecies that indicate impostors would one day lay claim to the land of Palestine when True Israel was in dispersion and they would call themselves by the name of Israel. The key to unlocking this prophetic mystery is one particular idiom, a figure of speech found quite frequently in the Bible when referring to God's people.

This idiom was used frequently in history to identify the people called Israel, a name first given to Jacob after he wrestled with the angel. It means a prince ruling with God and was assumed by his descendants throughout history.

But now here near the end of history, another people have assumed that name, a people that are not descendants of Jacob. A people who's father was the devil. [57] Indeed, the prophets foretold that this day would come. The understanding of a particular idiom is the key to unlocking the prophetic mystery of latter day impostors. This particular idiom is found in one of the most commonly quoted scriptures of our day, a scripture most often used in a call for national repentance.

We read: "If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." [58]

Notice the phrase, "which are called by my name." At face value this may appear to refer to God's actual name, that is Yahweh. But the people were never called by His name. No, they were never called Yahweh. Instead, this particular phrase is a common idiom which simply means "Israel," the name God gave Jacob. The scripture says: "The Lord commanded the children of Jacob, whom he named Israel." [59]

Indeed, the people were named Israel, and this particular idiom relates back to that unique experience when God called Jacob by a new name. Other prophetic passages confirm this. Consider this passage from Isaiah: "But now thus saith the Lord that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called they by thy name; thou art mine." [60]

Notice in this passage that the name has the connotation of ownership in the same way a wife's name is changed to indicate her husband's ownership. This explains the significance of Jacob's name change and God's people continuing to use it. The same prophet further states: "Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel." [61]

It is clear from this passage that the people were called by the name of Israel, that new name God had given to Jacob. Clearly this was the historic meaning of the idiom in question. The people called by God's name were the people called Israel.

With this understanding in mind the scriptures can now be explored which reveal another people would lay claim to the land of Israel and they would be called by God's name. These impostors would lay claim to the very inheritance of True Israel. This passage from Isaiah reveals the beginnings of this great switch: "O Lord, why hast thou made us to err from thy ways and hardened our heart from thy fear? Return for thy servants' sake, the tribes of thine inheritance. The people of thy holiness have possessed it but a little while: our adversaries have trodden down thy sanctuary. We are thine: thou never barest rule over them; they were not called by thy name." [62]

This passage indicates that True Israel has been exiled from the land and that their adversaries now occupy it. The prophetic call is to return the inheritance to the tribes, indicating another people now occupy it. We are also told that God's people have possessed the land but a short while and that its present occupants were never called by God's name, meaning things have changed! Indeed, things have changed!

Another people now lay claim to Israel's inheritance. The prophets foretold this would happen during the time of Israel's dispersion among the nations.

In the prophet Ezekiel, we read: "Again the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, thy brethren, even thy brethren, the men of thy kindred, and all the house of Israel wholly, are they unto the inhabitants of Jerusalem have said, Get ye far from the Lord: unto us is this land given in possession. Therefore say Thus saith the Lord God; Although I have cast them far off among the heathen, and although I have scattered them among the countries, yet will I be to them as a little sanctuary in the countries where they shall come." [63]

Notice during the time of Israel's dispersion among the nations other would lay claim to their land. These very people would even claim the land had been given to them for a possession. Christ even spoke of that time when Israel would be in dispersion and says the land would be taken by the Gentiles. We read: "And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the time of the Gentiles be fulfilled." [64]

Clearly the scriptures teach that during the time of Israel's dispersion among the nations the heathen would occupy their land. The prophets give us some indication who the impostors would be that would lay claim to Israel's inheritance during the time of their dispersion.

There is clear evidence that they would be of the Esau-Canaanite families. The Edomites or Idumeans represent a significant branch of those attempting to stake out Israel's inheritance during their exile from the land. The Edomites are addressed in this prophecy from the prophet Obadiah. We read: "In the day that thou stoodest on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried away captive his forces, and foreigners entered into his gates, and cast lots upon Jerusalem, even thou wast as one of them." [65]

The prophet Ezekiel also identifies the Idumeans as those claiming the land of Israel. We read: "Therefore thus saith the Lord God: Surely in the fire of my jealousy have I spoken against the residue of the heathen, and against all Idumea, which have appointed my land into their possession, with the joy of all their heart, with despiteful minds, to cast it out for a prey." [66]

Yes, the Idumeans (which is another name for the Edomites) had appointed Israel's land as their own possession. The descendants of these Edomite-Canaanites have laid claim to the land ever since Israel was first exiled. In fact, the Canaanite was in the land from the beginning, since the days of Abraham.

The declaration of 1948 was only a continuation of an age old attempt to steal the heritage of Israel and lay claim to their land. But, rest assured, the prophets have foretold it all. The clearest indictment of these heathen impostors comes from those scriptures that speak of the time when Israel would be restored to their land and reclaim their inheritance.

The prophets give us clear indication that the Israelites would repossess their land from an heathen people, which would be called by God's name! Yes, these people would call themselves Israel. This passage from the prophet Amos addresses the reestablishment of the Davidic monarchy and the people's repossession of the land.

We read: "In that day I will raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old: That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen which are called by my name, saith the Lord that doeth this ...And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land." [67]

This is a clear reference to the fact that the remnant of Edom would be in the land and that they would be called by God's name, that is Israel! Moreover, the True Israelites would repossess the land from these heathen people. The other prophets confirm the identity of those from whom Israel would repossess the land. In Obadiah: "The house of Jacob shall possess their possession. And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau...And the captivity of this host of the children of Israel shall possess that of the Canaanites, even unto Zarephath." [68]

Again, we have reference to the Edomites and the Canaanites. The scriptures clearly tell us these heathen peoples would be in the land when Israel returned to possess it. This prophecy from Zechariah also confirms the presence the Canaanite in the land. "In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses, holiness unto the Lord; and the pots of the Lord's house shall be like the bows before the altar. Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the Lord of hosts: and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein: and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the Lord of hosts." [69]

Yes, in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in Jerusalem, nor in all the land. These heathen impostors who now call themselves Israel will be cast out for evermore, never again to return and lay claim to the heritage of Israel. Truly, they are the heathen called by God's name, as foretold by the prophet Amos. [70]

There is written in the prophets a number of passages foretelling that a heathen people would lay claim  to the land and inheritance of Israel during the time of their dispersion among the nations. The scriptures identify these impostors specifically as descendants of the Edomite-Canaanite families. These heathen people would even claim to be Israel [71]

The prophets say they would called by God's name, indicating they would be called Israel. Only with an historic understanding of that idiom can it be known that a heathen people would assume Israel's heritage and claim that name once given to Jacob. Looking at world events today, we have confirmation of all that has been written.

Surely the words of the prophets have come to pass as there is in the land today another people called by My name. It is a battle between Christianity and Judeo-Christianity. It has only been in recent times that after the people we know, today, as Jews, became familiar with Christian literature, they began to name their religion Judaism.

Rabbi Stephen Wise, one of the main Jewish leaders in the United States a few years ago, stated that when the Jews returned to Jerusalem from Babylon (with the True Israelites), about 536 B.C., they brought with them the teachings which became known as the Babylonian Talmud. "This was the end of Hebraism, and the beginning of Judaism," the learned Rabbi stated.

As Christians it has become of vital interest that we know what kind of a religion Judaism actually is. We know it has been accepted by most of the evangelical and fundamental Christians as the religion of Ancient Israel and the Bible.

But is it really the religion of the Biblical prophets who over and over again foretold that Jesus and His disciples practiced when He was in His earthly body on this earth? It is the religion we read about in the pages of the Old Testament?

Or is it a cleverly conceived, Satanic religion which is so clever, that in the words of Jesus: "...if it were possible, they would deceive the very elect." These "elect" are not Jews, since the Jews are never referred to in the pages of the Holy Writ as "the elect."

This term is used only in connection with "True Israel." It would be difficult to get a better answer for this thorny question, than by going directly to Jewish sources. Rabbi Bakker writes: "This is not an uncommon impression and one finds it sometimes among the Jews as well as Christians, that Judaism is the religion of the Hebrew Bible. It is of course a fallacious impression."

                                                                  The Jews Come To America

The first 23 Jews to settle in what is now the United States landed as a group in 1654 at a small trading village at the tip of Manhattan Island. It is fitting that from the outset the destinies of American Jewry and of the little town that grew to be New York, America’s largest city, should be linked, for it was through the portals of New York harbor that the great majority of the later Jewish immigrants to America would pass, and it was in New York that their children and grandchildren would amass the power which has made them the most influential minority in 20th-century America.

No subsequent brand of Jewish immigrants had a rougher journey, or a more difficult time in being admitted, than that first group of 23, who were refugees from Brazil. They were chiefly Sephardim, the Biblically derived name for the Jews of the Iberian Peninsula, descendants of those Jews of the eighth century who had stealthily thrown open the gates of the Visigothic cities to the Moorish invaders and then, over the course of nearly eight centuries, battened on the glittering Islamic civilization of Toledo and Granada, Cordoba and Valencia.

The recrudescence of Spanish and Portuguese power on the peninsula, spearheaded by the crusading descendants of the Germanic Visigoths and Suebians who had fallen before the Moorish storm in the 700's, placed the Jews of Iberia in a precarious position. As city after Moorish city, redoubt after redoubt, capitulated to the Christian onslaught, the worldly and wealthy Sephardim were forced to throw themselves on the mercies of their Christian conquerors.

At first they enjoyed no small favor with the Spanish and Portuguese kings, who esteemed the Jews’ financial acumen and their uncanny ability to sweat money from their Christian subjects. Yet their power, and increasingly their very presence, grew ever more odious to the ordinary Spaniards and Portuguese. The people chafed under the onerous regime of Jewish tax collector and Jewish usurer. Fro a century before 1492 the tide of popular discontent swelled to full flood: mobs sacked the opulent Jewish districts, Jews were beaten, Jews were killed.

In 1492 Ferdinand and Isabella, who had joined their realms of Aragon and Castile to form the first unified Spanish Kingdom since the days of the Visigoths, acceded to the heartfelt demands of their subjects and decreed that the Jews of the land must depart. Five years later the king of Portugal followed suit. A great swarm of Jews departed Iberia forever, most of them fleeing to the African domains of the Muslims who had been their patrons in the Spain of the Moors.

Ominously for the West, not all the Jews who fled from Iberia went to Africa. A substantial minority headed north, where they found a ready reception in the Netherlands. Over the course of the 16th century, as the Reformation made progress in the land as the Dutch embarked on their epic 80-year struggle for freedom from Spain, the Sephardic Jews of Amsterdam and other Dutch cities became increasingly influential.

Spain and Portugal, to their later regret, failed to drive all Jews from their territory. The Achilles heel of the anti-Semitism of the time was the notion that the Jews might be cleansed of their ancestral vices by the regenerating flow of baptismal water. Upwards of 50,000 Jews in the two countries were allowed to feign conversion to Christianity. Not a few of these converted Jews (the polite usage for them was conversos or new Christians; their opponents called them Marranos, i.e., pigs) made their way to the Spanish and Portuguese colonies in the New World, as soon as the commercial possibilities of these territories became evident. It was in Brazil that the ancestors of the immigrants to New York found a center for profitably activity.

In Recife, in the province of Pernambuco, on the northwest coast of Brazil, a large number of new Christians established themselves as merchants and businessmen. There were only two industries of note: the raising of sugar on large plantations and the importation and sale of Black African and White Slaves from Europe. The Jewish converts to Christianity played a large part in each of these businesses and were prominent as tax farmers as well. For over a century they plied their various trades in Recife, unvexed by the Inquisition which had been instituted in Spain and Portugal to ferret out secret Jews in the ranks of the conversos.

The rise of the Netherlands as a maritime power at the start of the 17th century soon brought a change in the affairs of Brazil. During the course of their war with the Spanish, the Dutch had begun to resort to piracy on the high seas. Their successes encouraged the doughty burghers of Amsterdam and Rotterdam to embark on a more ambitious policy by which they would displace the Spanish and Portuguese as merchants to the Indies and to the Americas.

They made little headway against Spain’s overseas possessions, but Portugal, exhausted by its heroic efforts of the preceding two centuries, visited by an influx of Negro genes, and overrun by Spain, was an easy prey. One by one Portugal’s overseas possessions and trading factories fell to the Dutch: Java, Mauritius, the South African Cape, India’s Malabar and Coromandel coasts.

The Dutch followed up their conquests with a vigorous trade conducted by the Dutch East India and West India Companies. A good number of Sephardic Jews who had come from Spain and Portugal participated in these joint-stock companies. The Jews of Amersterdam and the other Dutch commercial centers brought more than capital to their ventures: through their ties to their Marrano kinsmen scattered around the world in Spanish and Portuguese colonies, they had access to commercial and military intelligence as well.

In 1630 the forces of the Dutch West India Company launched an invasion against Pernambuco. The Jewish new Christians promptly sided with the invaders, acting as a fifth column to frustrate the Portuguese defenders. During the subsequent 25 years of Dutch rule Recife’s Marranos returned openly to Judaism, practicing in public what they had hitherto practiced in private. The Jews of Recife maintained their activity in the slave trade, buying slaves imported by Dutch carriers and reselling them, at exorbitant profits, to the sugar planters. They also continued as tax farmers, collecting 63 per cent of Dutch-ruled Pernambuco’s revenues, and pursued their various other commercial interests. A synagogue was built, and the Jewish community flourished.

The Portuguese were not easily reconciled to the loss of Pernambuco and its capital city, Recife. They waged a bitter guerrilla war against the Dutch invaders and their Jewish allies which culminated in the Portuguese reconquest of Pernambuco in 1654.

While one might have expected a resigned and merciless settling of accounts with the Jewish false Christians of Recife, the Portuguese viceroy was most mild. Although he decreed that the Jews must depart Pernambuco, he allowed them to sell their property at good prices and to leave with their liquid assets. The Jews of Pernambuco disposed of their sugar plantations and slave pens, and set sail for the Netherlands, where their coreligionists would assure them a friendly reception.

All but one of more than 20 boatloads of Jews to sail form Brazil reached Holland. The Jews aboard one ship, however, were plundered by pirates in the caribbean and then rescued by a French privateer, the S.t. Catherine, whose captain was bound for New Amsterdam. When the St. Catherine, with its 23 Jewish passengers, reached Manhattan Island sometime in early September 1654, the Jews applied for permanent residency in the little trading village. Although the bourgeois Dutch were in general favorably disposed to the Jews, the governor of New Amsterdam, Pieter Stuyvesant, was an exception. Hardkop-pige Piet (Hard-headed Pete), as he was known, had opposed Jews settling on the Caribbean island of Curacao when he was the Dutch West India Company’s governor there several years before. He was no less opposed to Jewish settlers in New Amsterdam.

In a long communication to his superiors in Amsterdam, Stuyvesant wrote: The Jews who have arrived would nearly all like to remain here, but learning that they (with their customary usury and deceitful trading with the Christians) were very repugnant to the inferior magistrates, as also to the people having the most affection for you; the Deaconry also fearing that owing to their present indulgence they might become a charge in the coming winter, we have, for the benefit of this weak and newly developing place and the land in general, deemed it useful to require them in a friendly way to depart.

The little company of Jews was not so easily gotten rid of however. While Stuyvesant awaited the director’s permission to send the Jews on their way, the leaders of the would-be immigrants drafted their own letter to the directors of the West India Company, vaunting their sympathy for the Dutch in Pernambuco (It is well known to your honors that the Jewish nation in Brazil has at all times been faithful and has striven to guard and maintain that place, risking for that purpose their possessions and their blood.) A more potent talking point, however, was the position of some of their fellow Jews in the company: You should also please consider that many of the Jewish nation are principal shareholders in the Company.

The response from the directors of the Dutch East India Company arrived at New Amsterdam the next spring. It is a classic of cowardice and equivocation, first conceding the threat posed by the Jewish presence to the colony, but then going on to justify that presence on the basis of the Jewish financial power in Amsterdam: We would have liked to effectuate and fulfill your wishes and request that the new territory should be no more allowed to be infected by people of the Jewish nation, for we foresee therefrom the same difficulties which you fear, but after having further weighted and considered the matter, we observe that this would be somewhat unreasonable and unfair, especially because of the considerable loss suffered by the nation, with others, in the taking of Brazil, as also because of the large amount of shares which they (the wealthy Jews of Amsterdam) still have invested in the Company.

For two years thereafter Stuygvesant fought a rearguard action against the alien interlopes, attempting to deny them citizenship as well as the privilege of plying their various trades in the colony. In a letter to the Company directors dated October 25, 1655, Stuyvesant pointed out that to give liberty to the Jews will be very detrimental here, because the Christians here will not be able at the same time to do business a misgiving that has been borne out in so many fields of endeavor in America over the subsequent three centuries.

Stuyvesant’s efforts were all in vain. The directors of the Dutch East India Company granted the Jews of New Amsterdam one liberty after another, until by 1660 they were on an equal footing, in every respect, with the colony’s Dutch citizens. One of the number, Asser Levy, soon became one of New Amsterdam’s wealthiest traders and landowners. The Jews of what was to become, a few years later with the British conquest, New York, were on their way.

The Rabbis of Judaism understand this deceptin of the Christians by the Jews just as do the leaders in the Christian movement. Rabbi Moshe Maggal of the National Jewish Information Service said in 1961 when the term Judeo‑Christian was relatively new, "There is no such thing as a Judeo-Christian Religion. We consider the two religions so different that one excludes the other." [72]

Judeo-Christian Heritage A Hoax: It appears there is no need to belabor the absurdity and fallacy of the "Judeo-Christian heritage" fiction, which certainly is clear to all honest theologians. That "Judeo-Christian dialogue" in this context is also absurd was well stated in the author-initiative religious journal, Judaism, Winter 1966, by Rabbi Eliezar Berkowitz, chairman of the department of Jewish philosophy, at the Hebrew Theological College when he wrote: "As to dialogue in the purely theological sense, nothing could be more fruitless or pointless. Judaism is Judaism because it rejects Christianity; and Christianity is Christianity because it rejects Judaism. What is usually referred to as the Jewish-Christian traditions exists only in Christian or Secularist Fantasy."

We need to note here, that the Babylonian Talmud is the textbook of modern Rabbinism and is the "heart blood" of the Jewish religion. According to their own leaders, it supersedes any other religious writing. Rabbi Louis Finkelstein, one of the leading authorities on Judaism asserted: "Phariseeism became Talmudism, Talmudism became Medieval Rabbinism, and Medieval Rabbinism became Modern Rabbinism. But throughout these changes of name...The Spirit of the Ancient Pharisee survives unaltered."

We would also remind you that it was to these Pharisees Jesus Christ, the Son of God, directed His sternest denunciations. In John 10:26, speaking directly to these religious frauds of His day, He said: "But ye (Pharisees) believe not, because ye are not of my sheep..."

That should be clear to anyone who is a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ. In a serially produced installment of a best-seller by Jewish author Herman Wouk, we find the heading "The Talmudic Heart's Blood of the Jewish Faith." He says: "The Talmud is to this day the circulating heart's blood of the Jewish religion. Whatever laws, customs, or ceremonies we observe, whether we are Orthodox, Conservative, Reformed or merely spasmodic sentimentalists, we follow the Talmud. It is our Common Law!"

The beginning of Talmudic literature dates back to the time of the Babylonian exile in the 6th Century B.C...a thousand years later, in Alexandria, Egypt, these traditions of men were finally set down in codified form. When all the frills and mystery is removed from the Talmud, it boils down to the "traditions of the elders," which Jesus so venomously denounced in His ministry. [73]

In Matthew 15:2, Christ asks the scribes (lawyers) and the Pharisees: "Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?" In verse 9 He enlarged on this evil by saying: "But in vain do they (scribes and Pharisees) worship me (God), teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."

A full and complete story about these scribes and Pharisees is related in the chapter 29 of the Book of Isaiah. "Woe to Ariel (#740 Strong's Concordance - name for Jerusalem), to Ariel, the city where David dwelt! add ye year to year; let them kill sacrifices. Yet I will distress Ariel, and there shall be heaviness and sorrow: and it shall be unto me as Ariel. And I will camp against thee round about, and will lay siege against thee with a mount, and I will raise forts against thee. And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the dust. Moreover the multitude of thy strangers shall be like small dust, and the multitude of the terrible ones shall be as chaff that passeth away: yea, it shall be at an instant suddenly. Thou shalt be visited of the Lord of hosts with thunder, and with earthquake, and great noise, with storm and tempest, and the flame of devouring fire. And the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel, even all that fight against her and her monition , and that distress her, shall be as a dream of a night vision. It shall be as when an hungry man dreameth, and behold, he eateth; but he awaketh, and his soul is empty; or as when a thirsty man dreameth, and, behold, he drinketh; but he awaketh, and behold, he is faint, and his soul hath appetite: so shall the multitude of all the nations be that fight against mount Zion. Stay yourselves, and wonder; cry ye out, and cry: they are drunken, but not with wine; they stagger, but not with strong drink. For the Lord hath poured out upon you (scribes, Pharisees - Jews) the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers the seers hath he covered. And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed: And the book is delivered to him that is not learned and saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned. Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people (scribes, Pharisees - Jews) draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honor Me, but have removed their heart far from Me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men (Traditions of Men - The Talmud): Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvelous work among this people, even a marvelous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid. Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord, and their works are in the dark, and they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us? Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?" [74]

In Mark 7:7 we find this same accusation followed by another in verse 9: "...Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition." And in verse 13, He said that these religious and political leaders "Made the word of God of none effect through their tradition."

The Talmud, did not appear in writing form until centuries after the Christian world came into existence. The Talmud comes from Mishaic Hebrew and means "learning, teaching, instruction." It was at first passed on by word of mouth.

By the time it appeared in written form about 500 A.D. it contained much which was viciously anti-Christ and anti-Christian. This has resulted in what today is known erroneously as "anti-Semitism." We say "erroneous," since the vast majority of those people who call themselves Jews, are of Turco-Mongolian (Khazars), rather than Semitic in origin.

Nothing is more thrilling to a genuine Christian than to hear the name of Jesus Christ uplifted and exalted and to listen to the marvelous promises made by their King to those who will remain faithful to Him. So, when they hear His wonderful name blasphemed, degraded and associated with filth, their reaction is anger against those who promote such beliefs.

Doesn't it seem strange that only one religion in the world attacks the teachings and person of Jesus Christ? The Muhammadans honor Him as a great prophet and other religions recognize Him as a great spiritual leader; only in Judaism is Jesus, the Son of God, degraded and called the "son of a whore."

The Talmud tale is told that, because of talking to a Christian Disciple of Jesus, a rabbi is suspected of being pro-Christian, which makes him deeply ashamed. He tells the lie that Jesus taught that the hire of a harlot may be used to build a privy for the high priest. [75] This last pleased the rabbi very much. This filthy and false story to defame Christ is used in a typical Pharisee lie by Rabbi Louis Finklestein in his publication "The Pharisees." [76]

Rodkinson (M. Levi Frumkin), who made the first English translation of the Babylonian Talmud, asks, in the section on the History of the Talmud: "Is the literature that Jesus was familiar with in his early years yet in existence in the world? Is it possible for us to get at it?...To such inquiries the learned class of Jewish rabbis answer by holding up the Talmud...The Talmud then, is the written form of that which, in the time of Jesus, was called the Traditions of the Elders, and to which he makes frequent allusions."

The Talmud and Mary, Mother of Jesus, is called, "Miriam, a dresser of women's hair." She "committed adultery." [77] "She played the harlot with carpenters." [78] All the rabbinical sources ascribe to Jesus, "illegitimate birth...the seducer was a soldier by the name of Panthera [also called Pandira, and stada]." "Pappus [husband of Mary] has nothing to do with the story of Jesus, and was only connected with it because his wife happened to be called 'Miriam' [Mary] and was known to be an adulteress." All the life of Jesus (Toledot Yeshu); "editions contain a similar story of a dispute which Jesus carried on with the scribes who on the ground of that dispute declared him to be a bastard." [79]

Christ is referred to as "Balaam" in the most lewd Talmud passages concerning Him. Proof that Jesus is called "Balaam" is found in the Jewish Encyclopedia (under "Balaam") which, after enumerating His alleged loathsome qualities, states: "Hence...the pseudonym 'Balaam' given to Jesus in Sanhedrin 106a and Gittin 57a."

In the same article, we are told that the Talmud likens the Gospel Christians and Christ to Baal sex-worshipers because of whose abominations 24,000 Israelites died of plague at the time of Balaam. [80] Because Balaam had been asked to curse the Israelites but instead did not foretold the coming Messiah [81], the flimsy pretext is made that Jesus was a curse like Balaam. "He (Christ) is pictured as blind in one eye and lame in one foot and his disciples distinguished by three morally corrupt qualities..." He is called "one that ruined a people," and His churches are likened to nudist Baal worship. And, "this hostility against his memory finds it climax in the dictum that whenever one discovers a feature of wickedness or disgrace in his life, one should preach about it." [82]

Jesus, as stated in both the Talmud and Jewish Encyclopedia, gets "four legal methods of execution" and is Crucified as well, as a blasphemer of Pharisee Judaism. Jesus stoned, then "hanged" or crucified, [83]; where under another phony name (Ben Stada). [84] Jesus crucified as a "blasphemer," [85] Jesus burned [86]; manner of burning [87], verified by Jewish Encyclopedia under "Balaam." He is, according to the Talmud as being: "lowered into dung up to his armpits then a hard cloth was placed within a soft one, wound round his neck and the two loose ends pulled in opposite directions forcing him to open his mouth. A wick was then lit, and thrown into his mouth so that it descended into his body and burnt his bowels... his mouth was forced open with pincers against his wishes." [88] And: "The death penalty of 'burning' was executed by pouring molten lead through the condemned man's mouth into his body, burning his internal organs." [89]; Jesus strangled: "He was lowered into dung up to his armpits then a hard cloth was placed within a soft one, wound round his neck, and the two ends pulled in opposite directions until he was dead." [90]; Jesus in hell where His punishment is "boiling in hot semen." [91] The subject is identified as Jesus in a footnote, also in the Jewish Encyclopedia under "Balaam." Jesus "committed bestiality," "corrupted the people," is "turned into hell." [92] Jesus "limped on one foot' and 'was blind in one eye.'" "he practiced enchantment by means of his membrum," "he committed bestiality with his ass," he was a fool who "did not even know his beats's mind." [93]

The ridiculous and foul misuse of Judges 5:27 about Sisera's dying convulsions meaning sexual intercourse is here applied to Jesus, with a footnote "explanation" of Judges 5:27: "This is taken to mean sexual intercourse..."

Jesus attempts to seduce women, is excommunicated by a rabbi and then worships a brick, was a seducer of Israel, and practiced magic. [94] Jesus is cited in the index of the Sanhedrin portion of the Talmud, "chief repository of the criminal law of the Talmud," which shows the page numbers where he is denounced.

Jesus' resurrection is cured: "Woe unto him who maketh himself alive by the name of God." [95] The trial of Jesus: "It was the action of the priests that Jesus was sent before Pontius Pilate." The Sanhedrin priests, "had the most reason to be offended with Jesus' action in cleansing the Temple," the probable place of His trial, according to the Talmud.

His cry: "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?...was in all its implications itself a disproof of the exaggerated claims made for him. The very form of his punishment would disprove these claims in Jewish eyes. No Messiah that Jews could recognize could suffer such a death; for 'He that is hanged is accursed of God' [96]. This refers to an 'evil son' and Talmudist Rashi adds 'an insult to God.'" [97]

Other foul charges against Jesus and His mother, His being a "bastard," and the like, follow. Of course the Talmud does not mention Jesus by name, but the footnotes and context clearly show He is the one they are referring to. The Jewish Encyclopedia states that Jewish legends regarding Jesus are found in three sources [98] and all these sources tend to belittle Him by ascribing to Him illegitimate birth, the use of magic and the shameful death of a common criminal. It goes on to say that His mother, the Virgin Mary, was seduced by a Roman soldier from the garrison at Nazareth, named Panthera; and Jesus was the result of that union.

After referring to a Talmudic source regarding a dispute between Jesus and the scribes (lawyers), the Jewish Encyclopedia states: "All the Toledon editions contain a similar story of a dispute which Jesus carried on with the scribes on the grounds that they declared Him to be a bastard." [99] They said, "We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God." And Jesus rebutted them in verse. 42-43 by saying: "If God were your Father, ye would love me; for I proceeded forth and came form God: neither came I of myself but He sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word."

Again, according to the Talmud, Jesus was supposed to have, as we have shown in a footnote, learned magic while He was in Egypt and the Jewish leaders accused Him of performing His miracles by these means and through the power of Satan. It goes on to say that His disciples healed the sick in the "name of Jesus Pandera."

In Matthew 12:24 we read where the Pharisees on seeing His miracles said: "...This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub, the prince of devils." Jesus refuted their claim, by saying, verse. 26: "If Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then shall his Kingdom stand?" And they could not answer Him. The Talmudic story of the trial, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus is completely at odds with the Biblical account. The Jewish account denies His resurrection, just as Matthew 28:11-15 explains.

When the Jewish authorities heard about His resurrection, they paid large amounts of bribe money to the Roman soldiers who had been guarding the grave, and told them to tell the governor, Pontius Pilate, that while they slept, the disciples came and stole His body. It is interesting to note that verse. 15 says: "...and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day."

The Jewish report stinks to high heaven for the simple reason that the Romans were very strict about a soldier going to sleep while on guard duty. The penalty was death. Yet the Jewish leaders were said to have bribed Pilate to overlook the dereliction of his soldiers. This was extremely unlikely. Which proves that the guards were the Temple guards of the Jews, and not the Romans after all.

According to Talmudic teachings, Jesus is now in hell. It says: "...son of Titus' sister desired to embrace Judaism and called up from hell by magic, first Titus (a Roman General), then Baalam, and finally Jesus, who were taken together to be the worse enemies of Judaism." [100]

When Jesus was asked, "Who is esteemed in the world?" According to the Talmud He was supposed to have replied: "'The Jews. Further, their well-being; do nothing to their detriment; whoever touches them, touches the apple of God's eye.'"

This is the same story televangelists like the so-called Baptist Jack Van Impe, Jerry Falwell, and Pentecostalist Jimmy Swaggart preach. Why do the well-know televangelists of the fundamental and charismatic crowds support the State of the Israeli, no matter what they do? The answer is that they have swallowed Jewish propaganda "hook, line, and sinker," and do look on the Jews as the "apple of God's eye."

Jerry Falwell has said: "The reason God has been good to America and blessed her, is because she has been good to the Jews." This is an observable lie, for the facts prove differently. The time of America's greatest debacle in every way, economic, political, moral, militarily and spiritually, has been since 1948, when we recognized that "little bastard state in Palestine called the Israeli." It has been "down-hill" for us ever since. We often wonder if these Judeo-Christian preachers have ever bothered to read 2 Chronicles 19:2 which states: "...shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the Lord."

The Bible does speak about the "apple of God's eye," in Deuteronomy 12:10 and Psalm 17:8, but neither of these Scriptures refer to the Jews, but to Israel, who is a completely different race of people. The Talmudic Jew who is dragged out of hell to parrot the Talmudic line that the Jews are the "apple of God's eye," may be the false Christ worshiped by the Judeo-Christians, but he is not the Christ of the Bible. In 1 John 2:18 we read: "Little children, it is the last time; and ye have heard that Christ shall come, even now there are many antichrists: whereby ye shall know it is the last time."

Many of these anti-Christs, false prophets, and false teachers are standing behind the pulpits of Judeo-Christian churches, leading their Israel people away from the truth of God's Word. The time has indeed come, when professing Christians have departed from the faith and are giving heed to "seducing spirits and doctrines of devils." [101] The same Talmudic passage which refers to Jesus being raised from hell states that His punishment is to be "with boiling hot excrement, since a master of the Jews has said: 'whoever mocks at the words of the Sages (Jewish religious leaders) is punished with boiling hot excretement.'"

Anyone with the slightest degree of perception can see how our moral values have degenerated in the past fifty years. Over a hundred years ago, a French political philosopher named Alexis de Tocqueville, visited the United States. He came to find out how we had such a phenomenal rise to power in such a short time.

On returning to France, he wrote a letter to an American friend in which he said, among other things: "America is great because she is good; when she ceases to be good, she will cease to be great."

We have seen this debacle take place in the past fifty years as moral and spiritual standards have been destroyed by enemy action; in fact by many of these churchmen who call God's enemies, His Chosen People.

In this period, we have degenerated from the greatest Republic the world has ever seen, into a Socialist Democracy which is now tottering on the verge of totalitarian dictatorship. The "thought police" of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League (ADL) have conditioned most of our people to accept the "immoral" as "moral," and "bad" for "good." They have "called evil good, and good evil; have put darkness for light, and light for darkness; have put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter," just as the prophet Isaiah predicted [102].

He further clarifies these evil men in verse. 23 when he says: "Which justify the wicked for rewards (bribes), and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him." This is a perfect example of our present, Jewish controlled justice system. Our morals have been changed as religious leaders, hiding behind the sanctuary of their pulpits, and in God's name, have cooperated with, and supported an ancient religion whose corruption came from the occult practices of ancient Babylon, this was the same religion Jesus Christ fought so vigorously when He was on this earth and which mysteriously and evil, has become united with the Christian faith under the name of Judeo-Christianity.

Historically, the Christian faith has had a high regard for women and little children and has sought to protect them. Jesus warned that anyone who did anything to harm little children who believed on Him, was in danger of "extreme, eternal punishment."

In Matthew 18:6, we read where He said: "But those who offend (Greek - 'skandalizo' meaning: entrap; entice to sin; offend) one of these little one's which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about this neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea."

Apparently, according to our Lord, a terrible punishment is reserved for those who deliberately harm little children. Yet in our society today, "kiddie pornography" is on the upswing and "men-boy" clubs have been formed where grown men have sex with underage boys. In almost every case, these programs are sponsored and led by Jews, those people the Judeo-Christian crowd supports. Why?

A look at the Jewish religious book the Talmud, will give you an answer as to the Jewish proclivity towards "illegal, or unnatural sex." Listen to the sages of Judaism, as they state in the Talmud: "When a grown man has had intercourse with a little girl, it is nothing, for when the girl is less than three years old, it is as if one puts the finger into the eye. Tears come to the eye, again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years."

Ask yourself why any decent man would want to have sex with a little girl under the age of three? Yet this is instruction to Jewish men, from their holy book. It's nothing short of sickness! No other major religion in the world teaches that women outside of their faith are "like a piece of raw meat," to be treated as the Jewish man desires. The Talmud abounds with such sickening references.

In Canada, they are having big problems with the Judeo-Christian concept. A Kitchner, Ontario welfare worker was reinstated recently, after being fired for having for lunch sex with a mentally retarded boy who was his client. This government worker had twice been convicted of gross indecency under Canadian Criminal law. His punishment was a one year suspension, but the Grievance Board, ordered that he be paid retro-active pay for the time he had missed. This sort of betrayal of justice and decency is an insult to the people of Canada, who for the most part are decent, God fearing people. Yet the same scenario is played over and over again in the United States, with the same results.

The Tradition of the Elders (Talmud) says this about sex between grown men and under-aged boys: "Pederasty (sex between men and boys) with a child below the age of nine years is not deemed as pederasty...if it is committed with a child of lesser age (than 9 years old), no guilt is incurred."

Another gem of moral turpitude: "It is necessary to teach concerning one who commits pederasty with a 'terefah,' [103] I think that he is as one who abuses a dead person, hence exempt from guilt." [104]

In regards to non-Jews, whom the Christian world often erroneously calls "Gentiles," the Talmud teaches: "Only Jews are men...Gentiles are not classified as men, but as barbarians. The Gentile nations have few rights since He (God) withdrew His shining, legal protection from them, and transferred their property rights to the Jews."

Non-Jews find themselves in a legal quagmire no-win situation when they come before a Jewish judge, who is probably backed by a Jewish Prosecuting Attorney, and very possibly defended by a Jewish court appointed Defense Counsel. The Talmud says: "If a Gentile (non-Jew) sue a Jew, the verdict is for the defendant; if a Jew is the plaintiff, he must obtain full damages."

With a high percentage of judges and lawyers being Jews, the non-Jew, particularly if he is a Christian, has little protection from the law since the Talmud, which is the legal law for the Jewish judge, states that he has no property rights and that his possessions are "like unclaimed land in the desert."

The Talmud teaches that "the Torah (which are supposed to be the laws of Moses, but when a Jew reads the word 'Torah' he knows that it means the Talmud, not any books of the Bible, [105] outlaw the issue of Gentiles as that of a beast." Maybe this explains why the majority of the abortion murder mills in Canada and the United States, and the other White Christian Nations are owned and operated by Jewish doctors. In fact a Jewish Rabbi in the Talmud is quoted as saying: "The best among the Gentiles deserves to be killed." [106].

When an orthodox Jew prays, he says: "Blessed be Thou (God)...who has not made me a goi (non-Jewish animal)." The Talmud infers that Jews are their own Messiah, to be treated like God and that, "He who smites a Jew on the jaw is worthy of death...it is as though he had assaulted the Divine Presence."

You wonder why Jews are arrogant people? Read their holy book and you need not wonder why! The Talmud admits that Judaism will only come into power by inflicting much suffering on the Gentiles and they glory in it. They are perfectly willing to use the hordes of "brainwashed" Christians to accomplish their purpose of world control. One of the ultra-religious sects of Judaism is the Hasidim, who are devotees of mysticism and the occult. They are followers of the Cabala (an esoteric secret doctrine known only to an elite few. It is very similar to the teachings of the higher degrees of Freemasonry, in fact the Freemasons get much of their symbolism from Judaism).

The Jewish Encyclopedia goes into detail in its explanation of Cabalism, sometimes called Kabbalism. It includes magic, sorcery, astrology, the conjuring of demons, transmigration of souls (reincarnation), a non-personal God, and the use of amulets to ward off evil [107]. Many of the Jewish superstitions have found their way into our Judeo-Christian [108] society, including much of our teachings on heaven, hell, Satan, demons, etc. According to the Cabalistic doctrine "evil is non-existent." The cross of Jesus Christ, which is a symbol of His sacrificial death to Christians [109] is an insult to the god of the Talmud.

During the 500th Anniversary celebration of the birth of Martin Luther, the Great Reformer in 1983, many Judeo-Christian theologians, including many from his own Lutheran church, criticized him for his anti-Jewish stance. Today, in Canada, for instance, Luther would be hauled before a court for writing his "The Jews and Their Lies." It would be considered as "hate literature." The same thing will take place in the United States in the near future, unless Christians wake up to what the Zionists are trying to accomplish.

Martin Luther understood the Jews. He began by supporting them, just as I did before I had my eyes opened by their anti-God acts. Then from sad experience he was constrained to write: "...I see in their writings how they curse us goyim and wish us all evil in their schools and prayers. They rob us of our money thorough usury...they play us all manner of tricks; what is worst of all they...teach that such things should be done. No heathen has done such things and none would do so, except the devil himself, and those he possesses, like he does the Jews. They openly blaspheme God the Father, when they blaspheme and curse Jesus ...If God would say to us now, or on the day of judgment: Do you hear, you are a Christian, and know that the Jews openly blaspheme and curse Me and my Son, and you gave them a place to do so, also protected and guarded them so they could do so unhindered and unpunished in your country, city, or houses. Tell me! What shall be your answer?"

A lot of Judeo-Christians will probably say: "But we thought they were your people. That's what preachers like Falwell and Swaggart told us. They said we must support them no matter what they do, because they are your Chosen People, and if we don't you will curse us!" And the King will turn to them and say, in His own words: "...I profess unto them, I never knew you; depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

I would not wish to be in the shoes of preachers such as Falwell and a host of others, no matter how popular they may now be on television. Maybe God will say to these foolish preachers who have benefitted from their "love affair" with Judaism: "You had my Word. You knew what my Son said about these anti-Christ's. 'He that despiseth me, hateth my Father also...For the Father hath committed all judgment unto the Son: That all men should honor the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father which sent Him..." This seems pretty clear! [110]

Maybe God will say to these men honoring, popularity seeking preachers: "The prophets warned you... 'shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the Lord.'" [111]

The Psalmist said: "Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate Thee? and am not I grieved with those who rise up against Thee? I hate them with a perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies." [112]

Jesus said: "Why call ye me Lord, Lord and do not the things that I say?" [113]

When our King spoke to the Pharisees, the forerunners of Modern Judaism, He said: "You generation of vipers (poisonous snakes)! how can ye being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh." [114]; "But ye (Jews) believe not because ye (Jews) are not of My sheep..." [115]; "If ye were Abraham's children [116], ye would do the works of Abraham. But now ye (Jews) seek to kill me, a man that  told you the truth: this did not Abraham." [117].

This was followed by Christ's most scathing denunciation of the Jews when He said: "Ye are of your father the devil, and the deeds of your father ye will do..." [118]; "If God were your Father ye would love me: for I proceeded forth, and come from God." [119] Then speaking to the churches in the End of the Age, the risen and ascended Son said: "I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews (Judeans) and are not, but are of the synagogue of Satan." [120]

These are the people the Judeo-Christian churches defend as God's Chosen, in spite of all Jesus said about them. The Apostle Paul knew who they were when he said in 1 Thessalonians 2:15: "Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us (Christians); and they please not God, but are contrary to all men."

In Titus 1:10, Paul warns us against them again: "...many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision (Jews). Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's (money) sake."

The Jews are not a race, as they are made up of many races, Black, Japanese, Indian, Italian, etc., and have many Gentile converts such as Marilyn Monroe and Sammy Davis, Jr. The majority of them are not Semites, but come from a Turco-Mongolian background, as is admitted by many of their own leaders.

Does a person become a member of these so-called "chosen people" by denying Jesus Christ and accepting the filthy teachings of their Talmud? How much real Jewish blood is necessary to qualify as a Jew, in the minds of the "brainwashed" Judeo-Christian?

There are two main branches of modern Jewry. In Western Europe we find the Sephardic Jews, some of whose ancestors probably fled from Jerusalem when it was destroyed in 70 A.D. These spread across North Africa and Spain. They intermarried with the people of the Mediterranean area, and would include the Edomite Jews sometimes called Idumeans.

The Ashkenazi Jews, on the other hand, which make up at least 95% of Jewry, come from the steppes of Russia where their ancestors were known as Khazars. These people were converted to Judaism in the 8th Century A.D. Alfred Lilienthal, the renowned Jewish writer says: "Perhaps the most significant mass conversion to the Jewish faith occurred in Europe in the 8th Century A.D., and that the story of the Khazars (Turco-Finnish people) is quite pertinent to the establishment of the modern state of Israeli."  Again he writes: "That the Khazars are the real ancestors of Eastern European Jewry is a historical fact. Jewish historians and religious textbooks acknowledge this, though the propagandists of Jewish nationalism (Zionism) belittle it as pro-Arab propaganda." [121]

The Thirteenth Tribe, a book written by the Jewish author Arthur Koestler, blows the lid from this well-kept secret. He states: "In the 1960s the number of Sepharidim were about 500,000, while the Ashkenazim of the same period numbered about 11-million. Thus, in common parlance, Jew is synonymous with Ashkenazi Jew." Hence the majority of those we know as Jews, never had ancestors who set foot in Palestine. It is interesting to note that the same "Ashkenaz" is found in Genesis 10:3 and 1 Chronicles 1:6, and in both instances is connected with the sons of Gomer, a nephew of Magog.

They are mentioned as adversaries of "true Israel" in Ezekiel 38, 39. A Westphalian monk named Christian Druthmar of Acquitanta, wrote somewhere about 864 A.D., that there "existed in a region where no Christians dwelt, the name of whose people is Gog and Magog, and who are Huns; among them is one called Gazari (Khazar) who are circumcised and observe Judaism in its entirety."

When one reads in Revelation about Babylon the Great "drunk with the blood of the saints," [122], it might be well for us to remember the 140-million people, including millions of Christians, who have been slaughtered by Jewish-led and financed communism in the past 100 years, and who today are persecuting Christians in communist lands. Amnesty International, estimated that as many as 350,000 Christians each year die under communist persecution.

For all intents and purposes, this means Jewish persecution. If there is indeed an International Conspiracy between Communism and Talmudic Judaism, and much evidence points in this direction, then men like James Keegstra, Malcolm Ross, and Ernst Zundel of Canada, who have been persecuted by government edict, should be commended as heroes of Christianity. Instead, on many occasions, they have been reproved by Canadian Christian prelates. We can turn to Jewish sources to hear what they say about communism.

Rabbi Stephen Wise an American Jewish leader of a few years ago, when asked to comment on communism, was reported by Jewish publications to have said: "Some call it communism; I call it Judaism."

Oscar Levy, a well known Jewish author, in the introduction to his book "The World Significance of the Communist Revolution," said: "We Jews have erred...we have most grievously erred: and if there was truth in our error 3,000, nay 100 years ago, there is nothing now but falseness and madness, a madness that will produce an even greater misery and an even wider anarchy. I confess it to you openly and sincerely, and with a sorrow whose depth and pain, as the ancient Psalmist and only he could moan into this burning universe of ours. We who have boasted and posted as the saviors of this world, we have been nothing but it's seducers, it's destroyers, it's incendiaries, it's executioners. We who have promised to lead the world into heaven have only succeeded in leading you into a new hell. There has been no progress, least of all moral progress. And it is just our (Jewish) morality which has prohibited all real progress, and, what is worse, which even stands in the way of all future and natural reconstruction in this ruined world of ours. I look at this world, and I shudder at its ghastliness; I shudder all the more as I know the Spiritual Authors of this Ghastliness."

The Jewish author Samuel Roth, in his book "Jews Must Live," page 12, says: "The scroll of my life spread before me, and reading it in the glare of a new, savage light, it became a terrible testimony against my people (Jews). The hostility of my parents...my father's fraudulent piety and his impatience with my mother which virtually killed her. The ease with which my Jewish friends sold me out to my detractors. The Jewish machinations which three times sent me to prison. The conscienceless lying of that clique of Jewish journalists who built up libel about my name. The thousand incidents, too minor to be even mentioned. I had never entrusted a Jew with a secret which he did not instantly sell cheap to my enemies. What was wrong with these people who accepted help from me? Was it only an accident, that they were Jews? Please believe me, I tried to put aside this terrible vision of mine. But the Jews themselves would not let me. Day by day, with cruel, merciless claws, they dug into my flesh and tore aside the last veils of allusion. With subtle scheming and heartless seizing which is the whole of the Jews fearful leverage of trade, they drove me from law office to law office, and from court to court, until I found myself in the court of bankruptcy. It became so that I could not see a Jew approaching me without my heart rising up within me to mutter. 'There goes another Jew, stalking his prey!' Disraeli set the Jewish fashion of saying that every country has the sort of Jews it deserves. It may also be that the Jews have only the sort of enemies they deserve too."

On page 20 he continues his observation of his own people: "If it is true, as the Jews claim, that the Gentiles lay violent hands on them purely out of prejudice against their religion, out of envy for their superior commercial genius, how would they ever have gotten into that country in the first place. Read for yourself the story of the progress of Jewry throughout Europe and America. Wherever they come, they are welcomed, permitted to settle down, and join in the general business of the community. But one by one, the industries of the country close to them because of their unfair business practices, it being impossible to longer hold in check the wrath of a betrayed people, there is violence, and inevitably, an ignominious rejection of the whole race from the land! There is not a single instance where the Jews have not fully deserved the bitter fruit of the fury of their persecutors...Even in America, the most patient of the Western nations, things are coming to a head...The civil population is chafing under the abuses of Jewish doctors and lawyers."

He continues on page 54: "Many articles and books have been written on the subject of how much the Jews have enriched America culturally. Needless to add, Jews have authored them. (Or Jewish prostitutes like Jack Van Impe in his book 'Israel's Final Holocaust,'). And while it is undoubtedly true that Jews have given themselves over infinitely to the vain show and inglorious barter which everywhere accompanies the development of the arts and sciences, I cannot find anything of value they have themselves created in their over two hundred and fifty years in residence on the American continent. This is true in science, as well as art...If being in America meant anything to Jews like Jacques Loeb and Albert Einstein, it certainly did not crop up in their work."

Roths sums up what we have been trying to say on page 63: "It is my honest belief that nothing the Jew does in America is essential to its welfare. On the contrary, a great of what American Jewry does is subversive of America's best interests...the Jew in America is forever engaged in the fascinating pursuit of creating everything he needs out of nothing, his modest opinion of the Gentile world about him...We come to the nations pretending to escape persecution, and we are the most deadly persecutors in the wretched annals of man."

Contrast this with what the Judeo-Christian Zionist Jew, Baptist evangelist Jack Van Impe says on page 50 of his "Israel's Final Holocaust": "We who live in the memory of the Nazi nightmare, when six million Jews died in Europe [123] might conclude that Hitler's hatred of this people was a phenomenon of the twentieth century. Not so, for Jewish blood had been spilled across Europe and in other parts of the world for centuries. In taking the long look at history, one sees that the Jews had been steadily marching towards Hitler's ovens ever since the fall of their beloved city in A.D. 70."

At the end of World War II one of America’s top military leaders accurately assess the shift in the balance of world power which that war had produced and foresaw the enormous danger of communist aggression against the West.

Alone among U.S. leaders he warned that America should act immediately, while her supremacy was unchallengeable, to end that danger. Unfortunately, his warning went unheeded, and he was quickly silenced by a convenient accident which placed him in the hospital where he was assassinated.

Fifty-one years ago (at the time of this writing, 1996), in the terrible summer of 1945, the U.S. Army had just completed the destruction of Europe and had set up a government of military occupation amid the ruins to rule the starving Germans and deal out victors’ justice to the vanquished. General George S. Patton, commander of the U.S. Third Army, became military governor of the greater portion of the American occupation zone of Germany.

Patton was regarded as the fightingest general in all the Allied forces. He was considerably more audacious and aggressive than most commanders, and his martial ferocity may very well have been the deciding factor which led to the Allied victory. He personally commanded his forces in many of the toughest and most decisive battles of the war; in Tunisia, in Sicily, in the cracking of the Siegried Line, in holding back the German advance during the Battle of the Bulge, in the exceptionally bloody fighting around Bastongne in December 1944 and January 1945.

During the war Patton had respected the courage and the fighting qualities of the Germans; especially when he compared them with those of some of America’s allies, but he had also swallowed whole the hate-inspired wartime propaganda generated by America’s alien media masters. He believed Germany was a menace to America’s freedom and that Germany’s National Socialist government was an especially evil institution. Acting on these beliefs he talked incessantly of his desire to kill as many Germans as possible, and he exhorted his troops to have the same goal. These bloodthirsty exhortations led to the nickname Blood and Guts Patton

It was only in the final days of the war and during his tenure as military governor of Germany; after he had gotten to know both the Germans and America’s gallant Soviet allies; that Patton’s understanding of the true situation grew and his opinions changed. In his diary and in many letters to his family, friends, and various military colleagues and government officials, he expressed his new understanding and his apprehensions for the future. His diary and his letters were published in 1974 by the Houghton Mifflin Company under the title The Patton Papers.

Several months before the end of the war, General Patton had recognized the fearful damage to the West posed by the Soviet Union, and he had disagreed bitterly with the orders which he had been given to hold back his army and wait for the Red Army to occupy vast stretches of German, Czech, Rumanian, Hungarian, and Yugoslav territory which the Americans could have easily taken instead.

On May 7, 1945, just before the German capitulation, Patton had a conference in Austria with U.S. Secretary of War Robert Patterson. Patton was gravely concerned over the Soviet failure to respect the demarcation lines separating the Soviet and American occupation zones. He was also alarmed by plans in Washington for the immediate partial demobilization of the U.S. Army.

Patton said to Patterson: Lets keep our boots polished, bayonets sharpened, and present a picture of force and strength to the Red Army. This is the only language they understand and respect. Patterson replied, Oh, George, you have been so close to this thing so long, you have lost sight of the big picture.

Patton rejoined: I understand the situation. Their (the Soviet) supply system is inadequate to maintain them in a serious Action such as I could put to them. They have chickens in the coop and cattle on the hoof; thats their supply system. They could probably maintain themselves in the type of fighting I could give them for five days. After that it would make no difference how many million men they have, and if you wanted Moscow I could give it to you. They lived on the land coming down. There is insufficient left for them to maintain themselves going back. Lets not give them time to build up their supplies. If we do, then...we have had a victory over the Germans and disarmed them, but we have failed in the liberation of Europe; we have lost the war!

Pattons’ urgent and prophetic advice went unheeded by Patterson and the other politicians and only served to give warning about Patton’s feelings to the alien conspirators behind the scenes in New York, Washington and Moscow.

General George Smith Patton, the toughest and most successful commander in the U.S. Army during World War II, learned the truth about that war and tried to warn America. He was the sort of honest, straightforward, fearless man who has always been hated and feared by the devious conspirators (who have no courage of their own) behind the scenes of power politics. Patton was killed before he could publicly arouse American opposition to the conspirators, and then they began weeding other leaders of his quality from the U.S. armed forces and replacing them with shabbos goyim, ambition-motivated careerists without honor or scruple who would do whatever they were told and keep their mouths shut.

The more he saw of the Soviets, the stronger Patton’s conviction grew that the proper course of action would be to stifle communism then and there, while the chance existed. Later in May 1945 he attended several meetings and social affairs with top Red Army officers, and he evaluated them carefully. He noted in his diary on May 14: I have never seen in my army at any time, including the German Imperial Army of 1912, as severe discipline as exists in the Russian army. The officers, with few exceptions, give the appearance of recently civilized Mongolian bandits.

Patton’s aide, General Hobart Gay, noted in his own journal for May 14: Everything they (the Russians) did impressed one with the idea of virility and cruelty.

Nevertheless, Patton knew that the Americans could whip the Reds then; but perhaps not later. On May 18 he noted in his diary: In my opinion, the American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest of ease, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these. If it should be necessary to fight the Russians, the sooner we do it the better.  Two days later he repeated his concern when he wrote his wife: If we have to fight them, now is the time. From now on we will get weaker and they stronger.

Having immediately recognized the Soviet danger and urged a course of action which would have freed all of eastern Europe from the communist yoke with the expenditure of far less American blood than was spilled in Korea and Vietnam and would have obviated both those later wars; not to mention World War III (which appears to be just over the horizon), Patton next came to appreciate the true nature of the people from whom World War II was fought: The Jews.

Most of the Jews swarming over Germany immediately after the war came from Poland and Russia, and Patton found their personal habits shockingly uncivilized. He was disgusted by their behavior int he camps for Displaced Persons (DP’s) which the Americans built for them and even more disgusted by the way they behaved when they were housed in German hospitals and private homes. He observed with horror that these people do not understand toilets and refuse to use them except as repositories for tin cans, garbage, and refuse...They decline, where practicable, to use latrines, preferring to relieve themselves on the floor.

He described in his diary one DP camp, where, although room existed, the Jews were crowded together to an appalling extent, and in practically every room there was a pile of garbage in one corner which was also used as a latrine. The Jews were only forced to desist from their nastiness and clean up the mess by the threat of the butt ends of rifles. Of course, I know the expression lost tribes of Israel applied to the tribes which disappeared; not to the tribe of Judah from which the current sons of bitches are descended. However, it is my personal opinion that this too is a lost tribe: Lost to All Decency.

Patton’s initial impressions of the Jews were not improved when he attended a Jewish religious service at Eisenhower’s insistence. His diary entry for September 17, 1945, reads in part: This happened to be the feast of Yom Kippur, so they were all collected in a large, wooden building, which they called a synagogue. It behooved General Eisnehower to make a speech to them. We entered the synagogue, which was packed with the greatest stinking bunch of humanity I have ever seen. When we got about halfway up, the head rabbi, who was dressed in a fur hat similar to that worn by Henry VIII of England and in a surplice heavily embroidered and very filthy, came down and met the General...The smell was so terrible that I almost fainted and actually about three hours later lost my lunch as the result of remembering it.

These experiences and a great many others firmly convinced Patton that the Jews were an especially unsavory variety of create and hardly deserving of all the official concern the American government was bestowing on them. Another September diary entry, following a demand from Washington that more German housing be turned over to Jews, summed up his feelings:Evidently the virus started by Morgenthau and Baruch of a Semitic revenge against all Germans is still working. Harrison (a U.S. State Department official) and his associates indicate that they feel German civilians should be removed from houses for the purpose of housing Displaced Persons. There are two errors in this assumption. First, when we remove an individual German we punish an individual German, while the punishment is not intended for the individual but for the race. Furthermore, it is against my Anglo-Saxon conscience to remove a person from a house, which is a punishment, without due process of law. In the second place, Harrison and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to the Jews, who are lower than animals.

One of the strongest factors in straightening out General Patton’s thinking on the conquered Germans was the behavior of America’s controlled news media toward them. At a press conference in Regensburg, Germany, on May 8, 1945, immediately after Germany’s surrender, Patton was asked whether he planned to treat captured SS troops differently from other German POW’s. His answer was: No. SS means no more in Germany than being a Democrat in America; that is not to be quoted. I mean by that that initially the SS people were special sons of bitches, but as the war progressed they ran out of sons of bitches and then they put anybody in there. Some of the top SS men will be treated as criminals, but there is no reason for trying someone who was drafted into this outfit...

Despite Patton’s request that his remark not be quoted, the press eagerly seized on it, and Jews and their front men in America screamed in outrage over Patton’s comparison of the SS and the Democratic Party as well as over his announced intention of treating most SS prisoners humanely. Patton refused to take hints from the press, however, and his disagreement with the American occupation policy formulated in Washington grew. Later in May he said to his brother-in-law: I think that this non-fraternization is very stupid. If we are going to keep American soldiers in a country, they have to have some civilians to talk to. Furthermore, I think we could do a lot for the German civilians by letting our soldiers talk to their young people.

Various men of Patton’s colleagues tried to make it perfectly clear what was expected of him. One politically ambitious officer Brig. General Philip S. Gage, anxious to please the powers that be, wrote to Patton: Of course, I know that even your extensive powers are limited, but I do hope that wherever and whenever you can you will do what you can to make the German populace suffer. For Gods sake, please dont ever go soft in regard to them. Nothing could ever be too bad for them.

But Patton continued to do what he thought was right, whenever he could. With great reluctance, and only after repeated promptings form Eisenhower, he had thrown German families out of their homes to make room for more than a million Jewish DP’s; part of the famous six million who had supposedly been gassed, bu the balked when ordered to begin blowing up German factories, in accord with the infamous Morgenthau Plan to destroy Germany’s economic basis forever. IN his diary he wrote: I doubted the expediency of blowing up factories, because the ends for which the factories are being blown up; that is, preventing Germany from preparing for war, can be equally well attained through the destruction of their machinery, while the buildings can be used to house thousands of homeless persons.

Similarly, he expressed his doubts to his military colleagues about the overwhelming emphasis being placed on the persecution of every German who had formerly been a member of the National Socialist party. In a letter to his wife of September 14, 1945, he said: I am frankly opposed to this criminal stuff. It is not cricke t and is Semitic (Jewish). I am also opposed to sending POWs to work as slaves in foreign lands, where many will be starved to death.

Despite his disagreement with official policy, Patton followed the rules laid down by Morgenthau and others back in Washington as closely as his conscience would allow, but he tried to moderate the effect, and this brought him into increasing conflict with the (Jewish) General Eisenhower an the other politically ambitious generals.

In another letter to his wife he commented: I have been at Frankfurt for a civil government conference. If what we are doing (to the Germans) is Liberty, then give me death. I cant see how Americans can sink so low. It is Semitic (Jewish), and I am sure of it.

And in his diary he noted: Today we received orders...in which we were told to give the Jews special accommodations. If for Jews, why not Catholics, Mormons, etc? We are also turning over to the French several hundred thousand prisoners of war to be used as slave labor in France. It is amusing to recall that we fought the Revolution in defense of the rights of man and the Civil War to abolish slavery and have now gone back on both principles.

His duties as military governor took Patton to all parts of Germany and intimately acquainted him with the German people and their condition. He could not help but compare them with the French, the Italians, the Belgians, and even the British. This comparison gradually forced him to the conclusion that World War II had been fought against the wrong people.

After a visit to ruined Berlin, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945: Berlin gave me the blues. We have destroyed what could have been a good race, and we are about to replace them with Mongolian savages. And all Europe will be communist. Its said that for the first week after they took it (Berlin) all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped. I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.

This conviction, that the politicians had used him and the United States Army for a criminal purpose, grew in the following weeks. During a diner with French General Alphonse Juin in August, Patton was surprised to find the Frenchman in agreement with him.

His diary entry for August 18 quotes General Juin:“‘It is indeed unfortunate, mon General, that the English and the American have destroyed in Europe the only sound country; and I do not mean France. Therefore, the road is now open for the advent of Russian communism.’”

Later diary entries and letters to his wife reiterate this same conclusion. On August 31 he wrote: Actually, the Germans are the only decent people left in Europe. Its a choice between them and the Russians. I prefer the Germans. And on September 2: What we are doing is to destroy the only semi-modern state in Europe, so that Russia can swallow the whole.

By this time the Morgenthauists and media monopolists had decided that Patton was incorrigible and must be discredited. So they began a non-stop hounding of him in the press, a la Watergate, accusing him of being soft on Nazis and continually recalling an incident in which he had slapped a (Jewish) shirker two years previously, during the Sicily campaign. A New York newspaper printed the completely false claim that when Patton had slapped the soldier, who was Jewish, he had called him a yellow-bellied Jew.

Then, in a press conference on September 22, reporters hatched a scheme to needle Patton into losing his temper and making statements which could be used against him. The scheme worked. The press interpreted one of Patton’s answers to their insistent  questioned as to why he was not pressing the Nazi-hunt hard enough as: The Nasi thing is just like a Democrat-Republican fight. The New York Times headlined this quote, and other papers all across America picked it up.

Henry Morgenthau, Secretary of the Treasury (1934-1945) and a top adviser to President Roosevelt, formulated the notorious Morgenthau Plan for the postwar destruction of Germany. Inspired by a Talmudic hatred for the Germans, who had dared to life their hands against the Jews, Morgenthau’s scheme called for the total destruction of Germany’s industry and natural resources and for starving 30,000,000 Germans to death. Thus, Morgenthau hoped for a Jewish revenge against the Germans and the simultaneous deliver of Europe to his Marxist brethren in Moscow. Fortunately, Patton’s 1945 warnings finally took hold, and in 1947 the Morgenthau Plan was scraped.

The unmistakable hatred which had been directed at him during this press conference finally opened Patton’s eyes fully as to what was afoot. In his diary that night he wrote: There is a very apparent Semitic (Jewish) influence in the press. They are trying to do two things: first, implement communism, and second, see that all businessmen of German ancestry and non-Jewish antecedents are thrown out of their jobs. They have utterly lost the Anglo-Saxon conception of justice and feel that a man can be kicked out because somebody else says he is a Nazi. They were evidently quite shocked when I told them I would kick nobody out without the successful proof of guilt before a court of law...Another point which the press harped on was the fact that we were doing too much for the Germans to the detriment of the DPs, most of whom are Jews. I could not give the answer to that one, because the answer is that, in my opinion and that of most non-political officers, it is virtually necessary for us to build Germany up now as a buffer state against Russia. In fact, I am afraid we have waited too long.

And in a letter of the same date to his Wife: I will probably be in the headlines before you get this, as the press is trying to quote me as being more interested in restoring order in Germany than in catching Nazis. I cant tell them the truth that unless we restore Germany we will insure that communism takes America.

Eisenhower responded immediately to the press outcry against Patton and made the decision to relieve him of his duties as military governor and kick him upstairs as the commander of the Fifteenth Army. In a letter to his wife on September 29, Patton indicated that he was, in a way, not unhappy with his new assignment, because I would like it much better than being a sort of executioner to the best race in Europe.

But even his change of duties did not shut Patton up. In his diary entry of October 1 we find the observation: In thinking over the situation, I could not but be impressed with the belief that at the present moment the unblemished record of the American Army for non-political activities is about to be lost. Everyone seems to be more interested in the effects which his actions will have on his political future than in carrying out the motto of the Untied States Military Academy, Duty, Honor, Country. I hope that after the current crop of political aspirants has been gathered our former tradition will be restored.

Patton continued to express these sentiments to his friends: and those he thought were his friends. On October 22 he wrote a long letter to Maj. General James G. Harbord, who was back in the States. In the letter Patton bitterly condemned the Morgenthau Policy; Eisenhower’s pusillanimous behavior in the face of Jewish demands; the strong pro-Soviet bias in the press; and the politiziation, corruption, degradation, and demoralization of the U.S. Army which these things were causing.

He was the demoralization of the Army as a deliberate goal of America’s enemies: I have been just as furious as you at the compilation of lies which the communist and Semitic (Jewish) elements of our government have leveled against me and practically every other commander. In my opinion it is a deliberate attempt to alienate the soldier vote form the commanders, because the communists know that soldiers are not communistic, and they   fear what eleven million votes (of veterans) would do. His denunciation of the politicization of the Army was scathing: All the general officers in the higher brackets receive each morning from the War Department a set of American (newspaper) headlines, and, with the sole exception of myself, they guide themselves during the ensuing day by what they have read in the papers...

In his letter to Harbord, Patton also revealed his own plan to fight those who were destroying the morale and integrity of the Army and endangering America’s future by not opposing the growing Soviet might: It is my present thought...that when I finish this job, which will be around the first of the year, I shall resign, not retire, because if I retire I will still have a gag in my mouth...I should not start a limited counterattack, which wold be contrary to my military theories, but should wait until I can start an all-out offensive... Two months later, ON December 23, 1945, General George S. Patton was silenced forever.

Since 1945 there have been many conflicting claims concerning the numbers of Jewish people (and others) who died at Auschwitz‑ Birkeneu (Oswiecim, concentration camp). However, it is only recent research and access to hitherto unavailable documents, that these numbers have drastically lowered, possibly indicating that more of our people survive. Perhaps the 6 million often publicized (though our best figure is 4.3 million) may also need to be revised lower, we hope so.

                                                            Cracks In The Holocaust Myth

Having seen the success of the British propaganda about the Germans using the skins of dead babies as lamp shades in World War I [which the British later apologized for after the end of the war and admitted it was only propaganda to get the troops to fight harder]. They conceived of the "Six Million Jew Lie" and spared no amount of expense to forward this program [They even executed several thousand of the so-called lesser Jews ‑ so as to further their diabolical plans; after all what was a few thousand lesser Jews compared to the master plan of world control!]. The Zionists who are always far sighted saw in it a chance to accomplish three things:

(a) As a cover to conceal the millions of Christians murdered by the Jews, after they took control of Russia; and other millions in the Ukraine and the other Eastern European nations under their control.

(b) To destroy Nationalism by claiming that the Germans killed "Six Million Jews" in an effort at exterminating them, and the Germans were extremely nationalistic, then it must follow, that Nationalism must be very evil if millions of people can be murdered in its name! [In other words do not be too Patriotic because if you do you will have Six Million or more Dead Jews. And if you don't believe it they will show you another holocaust movie, then another, then another until you do]. Do you see what we are saying?

(c) Their claim to Palestine which came soon after the end of the War has enabled them [the Jews] to replace God and the Lord Jesus Christ and become the Chosen People: a triple counterfeit, to most of the Christian World!

Thus it is clear for all to see if they will look with any honesty at all America fought World War II so that World Jewry could dominate the Financial Money Markets of the world; Expose any existing opposition to their designs for world conquest and destroy such opposition; destroy Nationalism, Patriotism, in the major countries of the world.

                                                              Facts About The Holocaust!

1). What proof exists that the Nazis practiced genocide or deliberately killed six million Jews?

Answer: None. The only evidence is the testimony of alleged individual "survivors." This testimony is contradictory, and no "survivor" claims to have actually witnessed any gassing. There is no hard evidence whatsoever; no mounds of ashes, no crematoria capable of doing the job, no piles of clothes, no human soap, no lamp shades made of human skin, no records, no demographic statistics.

2). What proof exists six million Jews were not killed by the Nazis?

Answer: Extensive evidence, including that of a forensic, demographic, analytical and comparative nature, exists proving the impossibility of such a figure, an exaggeration of, perhaps, 100%

3). Did Simon Wiesenthal once state in writing that "there were no gassing camps on German soil?"

Answer: Yes. In "Books and Bookmen," April, 1975 issue. He claims the "gassing" of Jews took place in Poland, Not in Germany.

4). If Dachau was in Germany and given Simon Wiesenthal says that it was not an extermination camp, why do thousands of veterans in America say that it was an extermination camp?

Answer: Because after the Allies captured Dachau, thousands of G.I.s were led through Dachau and shown buildings alleged to be gas chambers; the mass media widely, but falsely, stated that Dachau was a "gassing" camp.

5). Auschwitz was in Poland, not Germany. Is there any proof that gas chambers for the purpose of killing human beings existed at or in Auschwitz?

Answer: No! A reward of $50,000 was offered for such proof, the money being held in trust by a bank, but no one came up with any credible evidence.

6). If Auschwitz wasn't a "death camp," what was its true purpose?

Answer: It was a large-scale manufacturing complex. Synthetic rubber (Buna) was made there, and its inmates were used as a workforce. The Buna process was used in the U.S. during WW II.

7). How did German concentration camps differ from American relocation camps which interned Japanese and German Americans during WWII?

Answer: Except for the name, the only significant difference was that the Germans interned persons on the basis of being a threat or suspected security threat to the German war effort whereas the Americans interned persons on the basis of race alone.

8). Why did Germans intern Jews in concentration camps?

Answer: Because the Germans considered Jews a direct threat to their national sovereignty and survival. Jews were overwhelmingly represented in Germany in communist subversion. On a per-capita basis, Jews were over represented in key government and commercial positions and professions. However, all suspected security risks, not only Jews, were in danger of internment.

9). What extensive measure did world Jewry undertake against Germany as early as 1933?

Answer: On March 24, 1933, International Jewry declared war against Germany and ordered a world-wide boycott of German goods simply because the German government had removed Jews from influential positions and transferred power back to the German people. The boycott order and the Jewish "war" against Germany were reported in world media and broadcast everywhere. Phony stories of German "death camps" circulated before WW II. The Germans, as a result, had every right to lock up Jews, as prisoners of war, wherever and whenever they were found between 1933 and 1945!

10). How many gas chambers to kill people were at Auschwitz?

Answer: NONE!

11). How many Jews were in areas that came to be controlled by the Germans before World War II?

Answer: Less than four million.

12). If the Jews of Europe were not exterminated by the Nazis, what happened to them?

Answer: After the war the Jews of Europe were still in Europe except for perhaps 300,000 of them who had died of all causes during the war, and those who had emigrated to Israel, the United  States, Argentina, Canada, etc. Most Jews who left Europe did so after, not during the war. They are all accounted for.

13). How many Jews fled to deep within the Soviet Union?

Answer: Over two million. The Germans did not have access to this Jewish population.

14). How many Jews emigrated prior to the war, thus being out side of German reach?

Answer: Over a million (not including those absorbed by the USSR).

15). If Auschwitz was not an extermination camp, why did the commandant, Rudolf Hoess, confess it was?

Answer: Time honored methods were used to get him to tell his captors what they wanted to hear.

16). Is there any proof that torture was used by American, British and Soviet captors to force confessions of German officials after the war?

Answer: There is extensive evidence of torture having been used both before and during the famous Nuremberg trials and after in the case of other war crimes trials.

17). How does the "Holocaust" story benefit the Jews today?

Answer: It removes them from any criticism as a group. It provides a "common bond" with which the leaders can control them. It is instrumental in money-raising campaigns and to justify aid to Israel, totaling about $10-billion per year. The "big-H" story is designed to shame the Gentile: "Poor Jews! How they do suffer!"

18). How does it benefit the State of Israel?

Answer: It justifies the more than $65-billion dollars in "reparation" the State of Israel has received from Germany. it is used by the Zionist-Israeli lobby to control American foreign policy toward Israel and to force American taxpayers to put up all the money Israel wants. The annual ante is growing each year.

19). What kind of gas was used by the Germans in concentration camps?

Answer: Zyklon-B, a hydrocyanic gas.

20). For what purpose was, and is, this gas manufactured?

Answer: For the extermination of the typhus-bearing louse. It is used to fumigate clothing and quarters. It is readily available today.

21). Why did they use this instead of a gas more suitable for mass extermination?

Answer: If the Germans had intended to use gas to exterminate people, far more efficient gases were available. Zyklon-B is very inefficient except when used as a fumigation agent.

22). How long does it take to fully ventilate an area by Zyklon-B?

Answer: About 20-hours. The whole procedure is extremely involved and technical. Gas masks have to be used and well-trained technicians only are employed.

23). Auschwitz commandant Hoess said that his men would enter the gas chamber ten minutes after the Jews had died and remove them. How do you explain this?

Answer: It can't be explained because if they had done this they would have suffered the same fate as the previous occupant.

24). Hoess said in his confession his men would smoke cigarettes as they pulled the dead Jews out of the gas chambers ten minutes after gassing. Isn't Zyklon-B explosive?

Answer: Highly so. The Hoess confession is obviously false.

25). What was the exact procedure the Germans allegedly used to exterminate Jews?

Answer: The stories range from dropping the gas canisters into a crowded room from a hole in the ceiling, to piping it through shower heads.

26). How could such a mass program have been kept secret from Jews who were scheduled for extermination? How would the Pope and Vatican and the Red Cross not know?

Answer: It couldn't have been kept secret. The fact is that there was no such mass-gassings anywhere. The rumors of such came from strictly Jewish, Holocaust sources.

27). If Jews scheduled for execution knew the fate in store for them, why did they go to their death without fighting or protest?

Answer: They didn't fight or protest simply because there was no intention to kill them. They were simply interned and forced to work.

28). About how many Jews died in the concentration camps?

Answer: About 300,000.

29). How did they die?

Answer: Mainly from recurring typhus epidemics that ravaged war-torn Europe during the period. Also from starvation and lack of medical attention toward the end of the war when virtually all road and rail transportation had been bombed out by the Allies.

30). What is typhus?

Answer: The disease always appears when many people are jammed together for long periods without bathing. It is carried by lice which infect hair and clothes. Ironically, if the Germans had used more Zyklon-B, more Jews might have survived life in the concentration camps.

31). What is the difference if six million or 300,000 Jews died during the awesome period?

Answer: 5,700,000. Besides and contrary to "Holocaust" propaganda there was no Deliberate attempt to exterminate anyone. There is no record of Hitler or his generals ordering the death of Jews!

32). Many Jewish survivors of the "death camps" say they saw bodies being piled up in pits and burned. How much gasoline would have to be used to perform this?

Answer: A great deal more than the Germans had access to as there was a substantial fuel shortage at that time.

33). Can bodies be burned in pits?

Answer: No! It is impossible for human bodies to be totally consumed by flames in this manner as not enough heat can be generated in open pits.

34). "Holocaust" authors claim that the Nazis were able to cremate bodies in about 10 minutes. How long does it take to incinerate a body according to professional cremator operators?

Answer: About 2 hours.

35). Why did the concentration camps have crematory ovens?

Answer: To dispose efficiently and sanitarily of the corpses created by the typhus epidemics.

36). Given a 100% duty cycle of all the crematoria in all the camps in German-controlled territory, what is the maximum number of corpses it would have been possible to incinerate during the entire period such cremators were in operation?

Answer: About 430,000.

37). Can a crematory oven be operated 100% of the time?

Answer: No! 50% of the time is a generous estimate (12 hours per day). Cremator ovens have to be cleaned thoroughly and regularly when in heavy operation.

38). How much ash is left from a cremated corpse?

Answer: After the bone is ground down to powder, about a shoe boxfull.

39). If six million people had been incinerated by the Nazis, what happened to the ashes?

Answer: THAT remains to be "explained." Six million bodies would produce literally tons upon tons of ashes. Yet there is no evidence of any large depositories of such ash.

40). Do Allied wartime photos of Auschwitz (during the period when the "gas chambers" and crematoria were supposed to be in full operation) reveal gas chambers?

Answer: No! In fact, these photographs do not even reveal a trace of the enormous amounts of smoke which supposedly hung constantly over the camps. Nor do they show evidence the "open pits" in which bodies were allegedly burned.

41). What did the International Red Cross have to report with regard to the "Holocaust" question?

Answer: A report on the visit of an IRC delegate to Auschwitz in September 1944, pointed out that internees were permitted to receive packages and that rumors of gas chambers could not be verified.

42). What was the role of the Vatican during the time the six million Jews were alleged to have been exterminated?

Answer: If there had been an extermination plan, the Vatican would most certainly have been in a position to know. But since there was none, the Vatican had no reason to speak out against it.

43). What evidence is there that Hitler knew of an ongoing Jewish extermination?

Answer: NONE!

44). Did the Germans and the Zionists collaborate?

Answer: Yes! Both groups were interested in removing the Jews from Europe (the Zionists wanted Jews shipped to Palestine) and both maintained friendly relations throughout the war.

45). What caused Anne Frank's death; just several weeks before the end of the war?

Answer: Typhus.

46). Is the Anne Frank Diary genuine?

Answer: No! The evidence compiled by Ditieb Felderer of Sweden and Dr. Robert Faurisson of France proves conclusively that the famous dairy is a literary hoax.

47). What about the numerous photographs and footage taken in the German concentration camps showing piles of emaciated corpses? Are these faked?

Answer: Photographs can be faked, yes. But it is far easier merely to add a caption or comment to a photo showing the bones of men, women and children killed in Allied Bombing raids and have them passed off as dead Jews.

48). Were films like "Holocaust" and "The Winds of War" documentary films?

Answer: Hollywood films do not claim to be history; rather, they are fictional dramatizations, or better: "creative history."

49). About how many books have been published which refute some aspect of the standard Jewish claims made about the "Holocaust?"

Answer: At least 60 with more in the process at the present time.

50). What about the claim that those who question the "Holocaust" are anti-Semitic or neo-Nazi?

Answer: This is a smear designed to draw attention away from facts and honest arguments. As a matter of fact, Jews have been challenged time after time to debate the Holocaust on major networks, during prime time. They say: "No!" Even some Jewish scholars state that evidence for the "Holocaust" is severely lacking.

New Investigations Shredding Jewish Six Million Dead Swindle: One afternoon in 1979 President  Carter and many Congressmen and Senators crowded into the Capitol rotunda for an unusual ceremony. Elie Wiesel, chairman of the Presidents Commission on the Holocaust, told the country’s political leaders that American, along with the entire non-Jewish world, was guilty of permitting Jews to die in the so-called holocaust.

During the Second World War, the prominent Jewish writer declared, the United States gave help to many people, but not to the Jews. They were forgotten. The world knew; and kept silent. When his turn came to speak, Carter dutifully agreed. The world permitted the holocaust to proceed, he said. Fifty-one years have passed since the end of the Second World War; but instead of diminishing, the Jewish propaganda about their losses in that war grows ever more intense. Television announcements tell viewers to contribute generously to the Holocaust Memorial Fund. The President officially proclaims two days of remembrance for thevictims of the holocaust.

Jewish groups demand that their television drama Holocaust be shown throughout the world, and then they gloat over the resulting self-abasement and professions of guilt by millions of non-Jewish viewers. School children are barraged with holocaust readers, audio-visual presentations, and home work assignments.

But while the propaganda campaign becomes ever more exaggerated and strident, a growing number of historians, civic leaders, writers, and other thoughtful individuals have been working quietly to expose as an enormous fraud the claim that during the Second World War the German government deliberately exterminated six million Jews in gas chambers.

Dr. Hellmut Diwald, a senior professor of history at the University of Erlangen in West Germany, unfleshed a storm of controversy with the publication of his Geschichte der Deutschen (History of the Germans).

Unlike the flood of liberal history books offered to West German readers, Diwald’s master-work stresses the fundamental historical unity of the German people, who today live divided in three countries.  More importantly, he states categorically that not a single death camp as contrasted with ordinary concentration camps, existed in Germany during the Second World War. The campaign of distortions and wild charges about gas chambers and ovens, he writes, has been carried out since 1945 for the sole purpose of morally degrading the German people.

Jewish deaths in the concentration camps, Diwald writes, were not the result of extermination policy, but were the consequence of chaotic and understandable wartime conditions. Furthermore, the claimed figure of six million deaths is a gross exaggeration.

Diwald’s book was published by Propylaen, a prestigious publishing house owned by philo-Semitic Western German media mogul Axel Springer. The book became an immediate best seller, an unusual feat for a heavy, 760-page work of history.

Jewish protests over the book moved Springer to promise that History of the Germans would be rewritten. Sales of the first printing of 100,000 copies were immediately stopped, and a new, revised edition acceptable to the Jews was substituted: Without Dr. Diwald’s approval. Thus, Jewish Marxist pressure has successfully censored another important book. But the entire affair has moved many Germans to ask themselves why a respected historian would denounce the holocaust as a fraud in the first place, if there were no reason for doing so.

In France an associate professor at the University of Lyon has spent four years investigating the gas chamber legend. Dr. Robert Faurisson analyzed thousands of documents, tirelessly interviewed dozens of historians and other specialists, examined the concentration camps at Stutthof and Majdanek, in Poland, and visited the Auschqitz-Birkenau complex twice.

In a number of recently published articles, he conclusively exposes the entire gas chamber fraud. Writing in the prestigious Paris daily Le Monde, Professor Faurisson notes, for example, that despite thousands of detailed documents on the crematoria built to dispose of the bodies of typhus epidemic victims, not a single piece of documentary evidence has ever been produced to substantiate the existence of even one gas chamber: not an order for construction, a plan, an invoice, or a photograph. During the hundreds of war crimestrials nothing could be produced.

Furthermore, Faurisson notes that almost all the original gas chamber claims have been quietly abandoned during the last 30 years. Several years after the war, a number of concentration camp officials were put on trial and confessed (under brutal torture) to the existence of gas chambers at Ravensbrueck (Germany), Mauthausen (Austria), and Natzweiler (Alsace). Today, Faurisson points out, the only gas chambers which Jewish writers will claim existed are those which were located in communist-ruled Poland. And those claims rest essentially upon discredited affidavits and memoirs extracted from Germans since executed, and not upon substantive evidence.

Professor Faurisson and a colleague recently debated the facts of the holocaust with two former concentration camp inmates and two historians for three hours on Swiss television. This is the first time that the legend of six million gassed Jews has been publicly debated anywhere in Europe since the end of the Second World War. The moderator noted that the event was a complete victory for Faurisson and his colleague.

Faurisson’s main conclusions about the holocaust legend are that:

* The German gas chambers never existed.

* The genocide (or attempted genocide) of the Jews never took place. In other words, Hitler never gave an order or authorization for the mass liquidation of the Jews.

*The lie of the holocaust, which is largely of Zionist origin, has made an enormous political and financial fraud possible whose principal beneficiary is the state of Israel.

* The principle victims of this fraud are the German and Palestinian peoples.

* The enormous power of the controlled mass media has, thus far, had the effect of ensuring the success of the lie and of stifling those who have denounced it.

* The participants in this lie know that its days are numbered. They impugn the motives of those engaged in revisionist historical research and label as a resurgence of Nazism or as a falsification of historywhat is only a thoughtful and justified concern for historical truth.

In Australia a leading official of the liberal Victoria Council for Civil Liberties started a major controversy when he questioned the Jewish holocaust claims. John Bennett, secretary of the Council, an Australian version of the American Civil Liberties Union, sent a memo to several Melbourne Academics, along with copies of The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, the definitive expose of the holocaust hoax by Northwestern University Professor Arthur Butz.

In his memo Bennett noted that no one has ever been charged with murder by gassing. That is, no one has ever been charged with actually operating the alleged gas chambers, although millions of gassings are supposed to have occurred. Bennett pointed out that the affidavits which were offered at Nuremberg as the main evidence for the gassings are as unreliable as the confessions made at the Moscow purge trials of 1936.

A West German jurist, Dr. Wilhelm Steglich, has written a solid and compelling new work entitled Der Auschwitz, Mythos: Legende order Wirklichkeit? (The Auschwitz Myth: Legend or Reality?). Taking the example of Auschwitz, the largest of the alleged death camps, the former Hamburg judge thoroughly exposes the holocaust claims as a massive fraud.

Several years ago Dr. Staeglich wrote a few magazine articles on the Auschwitz legend. The West German Government responded by forcing him into early retirement and ordering a 20-per-cent cut in his pension. Instead of causing him to meekly shut up, as the authorities expected, the brazen act of intimidation only made Dr. Staeglich more determined to speak the truth.

His massive word (489 pages, 25 photos) is especially relevant at this time. Its appearance coincides with the recent West German broadcast of the Holocaustdocudrama, a part of the relentless Jewish campaign to instill a guilt complex in the German people. The effort is meant to facilitate the massive political dn financial blackmail of Wester Germany by world Jewry. Israeli politicians are now demanding reparation s of up to 90 billion marks from the German people, to be paid until the year 2000.

These new developments are important contributions to a trend which has been growing quietly in recent years. They add significantly to the conclusions reached earlier in the other important works.

Professor Paul Rassinier, a French Marxist who was interned at the Buchenwald and Dora concentration camps during the war as a result of his resistance activities, wrote five books between 1948 and 1965 debunking the six million myth. His works appeared in French, German, Spanish, and Italian.

A convincing 26-page booklet, Did Six Million Really Die? First came out in England in 1974. It has been reprinted many times and translated into all the major European languages.

In 1976 the aforementioned book by Professor Arthur Butz of Northwestern University was published. The Hoax of the Twentieth Century unleashed a storm of controversy and was vehemently denounced by Jews, who told students to boycott the author’s classes. Nevertheless, not a single conscientious effort has been made to refute the definitive work. Several editions of The Hoax have appeared, including one in German. Professor Butz is currently working on an important sequel to his book.

The U.S. Central Intelligence agency released a paper entitled, The Holocaust Revisited: A retrospective Analysis of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Extermination Complex. The paper claims that recently released aerial photographs of Auschwitz taken by Allied reconnaissance plans in 1944 and 1945 prove that the extensive complex was a death camp.

Actually, the photographs revealed nothing of the kind. In fact, the labels added to the original photos by the CIA so identify alleged gas chambers,prisoners on way to gas chambers, and possible cremation pit were not based upon careful analysis of the photos themselves, but entirely on speculation. Nothing in any of the photos justifies either the labels or the conclusion that Auschwitz was a death camp with gas chambers.

This writer spent many hours at the National Archives carefully examining the dozens of original aerial photographs taken of the Auschwitz-Birkenau complex. He also studied the detailed blowups given in the CIA report. The striking contrast between what the photographs actually show and what Jewish writers and eyewitnesses have claimed about Auschwitz further undermines the Jewish six million legend.

For example, not a single photograph shows the billowing clouds of smoke which were supposed to have resulted from the alleged cremation of 12,000 corpses daily. Although survivors recalled that smoke and flame emanated continually from the cremation chimneys and was visible for miles, the CIA paper dryly admits, the photography we examined gave no positive prove of this.

None of the photos shows any trace of the piles of ashes which were the supposed remains of an alleged two million cremated bodies. One photo blowup in the CIA paper does identify an outdoor area about twelve feet square as a possible cremation pit.

The Holocaust Revisited is not an unbiased academic report. This official government paper was published to coincide with and contribute to the recent intensification of the International Jewish Propaganda campaign. The authors admit that they prepared the paper for the CIA because their interest in the subject of Nazi concentration camps was rekindled by the television presentation holocaust.

The articles which appeared in numerous newspapers and magazines nationwide about the Auschwitz photos suggested that the Allies could have curtailed the alleged mass killings of Jews if they had really wanted to do so.

A widely reprinted Washington Post story, for example, began with an untruthful and highly misleading sentence: Allied aerial reconnaissance photographs revealed the existence of the Nazi death camp at Auschwitz more than a year before the end of World War II, which raises anew the question of why the Allies never bombed the camp or the rail line that took victims to the camp.

David Wyman, a Jewish professor at the University of Massachusetts, has seized upon the aerial photographs to prove U.S. government complicity in the holocaust. Writing in The New York Times, Wyman implies that American non-Jews, like all other non-Jews in the world, are guilty of genocide against the Jewish people. How could it be, Wyman asks, that government officials knew that a place existed where 2,000 helpless human beings could be killed in less than an hour, knew that this occurred over and over again and yet did not feel driven to search for some way to wipe out such a scourge from the earth?

The answer is that U.S. officials could not know what did not happen. The dike of distortions and lies about the holocaust is beginning to break. Ever larger numbers of thoughtful and conscientious individuals are carefully examining the Jewish claims, and some are showing the courage to speak out. Even liberals who have been uncritically sympathetic to the Jews as a persecuted people in the past are starting to take another, more objective look.

In the face of this questioning, the Jews have simply intensified their own propaganda campaign. This campaign has taken on a life and meaning of its own. It no longer bears any relationship to historical truth. The word Auschwitz, for example, has become s emotionally loaded that an objective look at what actually happened there is all but impossible. Sober discussion and intelligent debate about the facts of the holocaust are stifled and denounced as insensitivity and disrespect for the memory of the dead.

An elaborate propaganda apparatus incessantly hammers a single theme into the consciousness of the Western world: Killing Jews is the greatest of all possible crimes. The suffering of the Jews is a monstrous evil for which all non-Jews share blame and for which they must atone forever.

"Whenever an American or a Filipino fell at Bataan or Corregidor or at any other of the now historic spots where MacArthur's men put up their remarkable fight, their survivors could have said with truth: 'The real reason that boy went to his death, was because Hitler's anti‑Semitic movement succeeded in Germany.'" (The American Hebrew, July 24, 1942).

It is not enough that hundreds of thousands of Americans died in the Second World War for Jewish interests. It is not enough that the American people have sacrificed billions of dollars for the Jewish state of Israel.

It is not enough that a Zionist U.S. foreign policy has squandered American goodwill around the world and threatens to involve our country in a Mideast war to guarantee the state of Israel. It’s not enough that the United States tolerated the deliberate murder of 34 U.S. sailors aboard the U.S.S. Liberty by the Israeli government in 1967.

No, the Jews now claim at the American people have still not atoned for their guilt in permitting millions of Jews to die in the holocaust. The Jews want both sympathy and support as a persecuted minority and continued influence and privilege as a powerful elite. They cannot have it both ways forever.

Over the long run, the entire holocaust campaign is creating enormous reserves of hatred and bitter resentment, which will one day erupt against the Jew. Not knowing moderation, the Jews cannot and will not stop their campaign of moral intimidation until the inevitable reaction comes.

Perhaps William Anderson in his Afterword in a book "War War War!" by Cincinnatus describes it best:

                                           How The Jews Forced America Into World War II

In the years before World War II, the American public had no desire to go to war in either Europe or Asia. We, as Americans, had no interest in warring with Germany, Italy or Japan. Yet America was forced to battle the Axis Powers for four long years at the sole behest of International Jewry. In fact, World Jewry commenced its war against Germany in 1933, the year Hitler came to power, even before he had time to begin implementing a program for pulling Germany out of its own economic depression.

Jewry's declaration of a 'holy war' against Germany was issued by Samuel Untermeyer of the World Jewish Federation, who said in the New York 'Times' August 7, 1933, that it would be means of an 'economic boycott that will undermine the Hitler regime and bring the German people to their senses by destroying their export trade on which their very existence depends.'

The Toronto Evening Telegram, February 26, 1940, quotes Rabbi Maurice Perlzweig of the World Jewish Congress as telling a Canadian audience that 'the World Jewish Congress has been at war with Germany for seven years' [i.e. 1933]. Jews were obviously willing to back up their threats, for the London 'Sunday Chronicle' of January 2, 1938, reported that 'leaders of International Jewry' had met in Geneva, Switzerland to set up a $2.5 BILLION fund to undermine the economic stability of Germany.

However, Jewish boycotts against Germany failed to bring that nation to its knees as [because] Hitler had already freed Germany from dependence on Jewish usury. Since economic pressure by World Jewry could not break the back of Germany, it was determined that an actual war would be necessary to destroy Hitler [the German People for they had thrown off the control of the International Banks]. This desire to decimate Germany is understandable when one recognizes that Jews are a parasitic race and as parasites will fight to the death when the host attempts to expel them. The Jewish desire for war was admitted by Rabbi Felix Mendelsohn in the Chicago "Sentinel" of October 8, 1942, where he states: "The second World War is being fought for the defense of the fundamentals of Judaism."

Thus, Rabbi Mendelsohn flatly expresses the view that WW II was a Jewish War. This Jewish scheme came to fruitation in 1939, Germany invaded Poland. Britain and France, under Jewish domination, then declared war on Germany, conveniently ignoring the fact that The Soviet Union [Under Jewish rule] also invaded Poland.

Think about it damn it; use your head, if England and France declared war on Germany just because they invaded Poland then why did they not also declare war against Russia. Russia also invaded Poland when Germany did?

­­      James Forestall, later to become Secretary of Defense in his diary of December 27, 1945, notes that he played golf with Joseph Kennedy FDR's Ambassador to Britain, who told him that ex‑Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain 'stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into war.' For his candor and later opposition to the bandit state of Israel, Forestall was murdered in 1949 [ruled a 'suicide']. Jews throughout the world screamed that Germany was intent on ruling the world, but General George C. Marshall admitted after the war, in testimony before Congress [it is recorded in the Congressional Record], that no proof could be found that Hitler planned any conquest of the World.

In fact, Hitler's actions against Czechoslovakia over the Sudentenland and Poland over Danzig were just part of Hitler's long stated desire to re‑acquire the territory taken from Germany after WW I in the Treaty of Versailles [is that not what the Jews claim to be doing in Palestine at the present time?].

While stones are being cast, it should be recalled that after Germany took back the Sudentenland from Czechoslovakia, Poland seized the territory of Treschen from the Czechs which it had no claims toward it.

So, after the Jews had ignited a war in Europe, it was found to be necessary to draw America into that war as France had fallen and Britain tottered on the brink of defeat. To bring the U.S. into this Jewish war, International Jewry had the services of a master at corrupt politics, the one and only Franklin Delano Roosevelt [Who will without doubt, someday go down as the greatestTraitor America has ever known].

Dr. Nathan Nussbaum, Honorary Director,

Center for Jewish Holocaust Studies.

According to official documents in the French Republic (institute for the Examination of War‑criminals) the number that died in Auschwitz was: 8,000,000

According to the French daily newspaper "Le Monde" (20 April, 1978): 5,000,000

According to the memorial plaque on the gas‑chamber monument at Auschwitz‑Birkenau (later removed in 1990 by the Polish Government): 4,000,000

According to the "confession" of Rudolf Hoess, the last commandant of Auschwitz. G.V. interrogation record and written statement before his "suicide"3,000,000

According to a statement by Yeduha Bauer, Director of the Institute for Contemporary Jewry at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem: 1,600,000

According to "La Monde" (1 September 1989): 1,433,000

According to Prof. Raul Hilberg (Professor for Holocaust Research, and author of the book, "The Annihilation of European Jewry," 2nd. ed. 1988: 1,250,000

According to Polish historians, G.V. DPA ‑ Report of July 1990 and corresponding public announcements: 1,100,000

According to Gerald Reitlinger, author of "Die Endlbsun": 850,000

In the autumn of 1989 the Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev opened Soviet archives, and the public saw for the first time, the complete register of deaths at Auschwitz ‑ which speaks as a key document of: 74,000 dead

He then goes on to tell how Jews were accepted in Spain where they  worked, studied, and engaged in commerce alongside their neighbors ...This era was relatively calm and is known as "The Golden Age of Spanish Jewry." He then blames the waves of fanatical Muslims, and Berbers from North Africa, who disturbed the Jewish life style.

Indeed they did, for it was the Jews, who had been befriended by the Spanish, that turned traitor against their benefactors and opened the city gates to the Moslem hordes. This was what caused the intense Spanish persecution of the Jews.

In every country where the Jews have settled, they were evicted; not because they were "God's Chosen People whom Satan hated," as Van Impe states, but because of their immoral lifestyle and their crooked business practices. He then disclosed either his stupidity or his pro-Jewish prejudice, when on page 52 he states: "Everywhere the Jews were blamed for the ills of their day. Some still foolishly follow that practice. The Jews are accused of controlling all the money, causing depressions, influencing spiraling inflation, and plotting the conquest of the world."

But isn't it interesting to note that all ten banks that make up the Federal Reserve System are Jew owned and that the Federal Reserve controls America's economy? Isn't it interesting to note that at least 70 our of 100 U.S. Senators are in the Zionist camp and that at least half of the House of Representatives votes as Christian Zionists?

Isn't it interesting that Jewish authors for centuries have bragged of their plans for world control. They have even been bold enough to lay down the "blueprint for this control," yet men like Van Impe will tell you he believes the Bible. I could go on and on with more quotations from the Jew apologist and many others of his ilk, but I believe this will suffice to show you the control that Judaism exerts over those who claim Christ as their King.

A recent report from the American Jewish Committee will show you how deeply Jews have infiltrated the Christian Publishing Houses of America. 85% of all Protestant textbooks are now free of any true, but disparaging references to Jews. Arrangements have been completed between the National Council of Churches (NCC), the American Jewish Congress and the Anti-Defamation League of the Jewish B'nai B'rith, whereby Jews will aid in the preparation of all religious lesson materials used in Protestant churches. There is hardly a Christian seminary in any denomination, that is today free of Jewish influence.

What we are actually seeing, is the infiltration of Talmudism into the Christian church, the very thing the Apostle Paul warned about in Titus 1:10, when he told about "Vain talkers and deceivers, specially those of the circumcision (Jews)...who subvert whole houses (and church congregations) teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's (money's) sake."

Could it be possible that the Babylonian inspired Judeo-Christian religious system might turn out to be the counterfeit "Bride of Christ," and instead be BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS? It is clear that religious persecution is just around the corner in all of Christendom, and especially in the United States and Canada. When it comes, the worst of it will be conducted by the Judeo-Christian churches, who will believe they are doing God a favor by killing and persecuting those of us who believe and follow His Word.

It has been my experience, that when anyone goes into a community to speak out against Talmudic Communism, they get more "flack" from the Ministerial Alliances, who are simply "pimps" for Judaism, than from the enemy themselves. When a brother went to Canada in 1984, for the Canadian League of Rights, $5,000 worth of tapes and literature were seized by Canadian Customs, under the urging of Canadian Jewry. This was not "hate literature" per se, but merely told the truth regarding International Jewry.

The Judeo-Christians of the Church of Canada, even went so far as to have their pastors read a letter from church officials condemning the "Fascist from the States," even though none of them had ever heard him speak. At a meeting in Kelowna, British Columbia, four ministers from this church attended a meeting and told how they had tried to pressure the motel into canceling the meeting. When they were asked what part of the speech they objected to, the spokesman said: "None of it. We agreed with everything you said."

When asked why the church was so set against this person from speaking, he wrathfully said: "Because you are sponsored by the Canadian League of Rights and they will not accept political Zionism."  The cat was "finally out of the bag."

How's that for a brainwashing job? In America, prayer and Bible reading has been removed from our public schools, through pressure brought by less than 3% of our population and a strong drive is underway to saddle us with the "hate laws" which have become unbearable in Canada.

These laws do not stop Jews from downgrading Christianity and Jesus Christ, but works only against Christians. Now we see a determined drive by Jews in the United States, led by men such as the Jewish Senator from Ohio, Metzenbaum, as they are determined to disarm the American people and set the stage for a Talmudic-Communist One World Government.

If the Christian people of America, including the "brainwashed" stooges of Judeo-Christianity, allow the 2nd Amendment to be destroyed, you will see first hand what International Judaism is all about and what they have in store for you and your children. Take a good look at Waco and the Branch Davidians and you will see America's Christians in the future.

In the Communist textbook on Psycho politics, taught at the Lenin School of Psychological Warfare, University of Moscow, and the "blueprint" for the takeover of the United States, we read on page 52: "We have battled in America since the century's turn to bring to nothing any and all Christian influences and we are succeeding. While we today seem to be kind to the Christian world, we have yet to influence them to our ends. When that is done, we will have an end to them everywhere.

So, you must work until religion is synonymous with insanity. You must work until officials of city, country and state government will not think twice before they pounce on Christian groups as public enemies...We must strike from our path any opposition...and then, at last, the decades sped, we can dispense with all authority save our own and triumph in the greater glory of the State."

That is Talmudic Judaism in its very essence! Their complete philosophy of control can be found on page 30 of Psycho politics: "The most barbaric, unrestrained, brutal use of force, if carried far enough invokes obedience. Savage force, sufficiently long displayed will bring about concurrence with any principle or order. If you would have obedience, you must have no compromise with humanity. If you would have obedience you must make it clearly understood that you will show no mercy. Man is an animal. He understands, in the first analysis. Only those things which a brute understands."

Why is it that Christians such as those of the so-called Moral Majority, make such little headway against evil men? Could it be because for the most part the root of the problem is a Jewish root and they are afraid to attack it? Could many of these Christians be fulfilling the words of Isaiah 29:13: "...this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but they have removed their hearts far from me, and their fear towards me is taught by the precepts of men." Men like Falwell and Swaggart, Mike Evans, Jacj van Impe, Billy Graham, and etc., who tell their people: "America must support the Jews in order to obtain God's blessing." The Christian Faith is standing at the cross roads of history. The divine, sacred message of Christianity is in jeopardy today, as never before in its 2,000 years of turbulent history.

Christianity is on the defensive world-wide. But nowhere in scripture, are Christians given the option to "hide in a fort," or in a comfortable "spiritual foxhole." We are not to be on the "defensive" against the forces of evil, but on the "offensive," and the King has promised that the "gates of hell will not prevail (hold out) against us."

Today, as never before, we need a Paul Revere to ride across the United States, in fact all the nations of Christendom, with a warning message that our enemies are attempting to destroy us. The confusion in Christianity today, especially among the clergy, would not exist if the clergy were doing their duty to; "preach the word; be instant in season out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." [124]

Countless Christians are standing on the side lines of this struggle, watching in despair, as their faith withers on the vine, and freedom dies, because their spiritual leaders refuse to take a stand for the King. And because they don't want to fight the fight, but wish to sit back and let others do the fighting and dying for them. As more and more intelligent Christians begin to study the Bible for themselves, we will see a spirit of deep resentment over the indifference shown by most of the clergy.

We predict a day will come, in the not too distant future, when the clergy will be held accountable by their people, for their treason to God, Christ, their race, and this country. As this condition expands, the clergy will learn to their sorrow that "ignorance is not bliss, neither is folly wisdom." There was a song sung in the churches a few years ago which went something like this: "Give me some men, Who are stout-hearted men, Who will fight for the right they adore. Start me with ten, who are stout-hearted men, And I'll soon give you ten thousand more."

If we could find ten men in every community in America, who would be willing to take a stand for God and Christ, we could turn this nation of ours around in six months; kick the "money changers" out of the National temple and get America headed on the path to greatness where she belongs.

The Elect Race

Since the early 1940s the Jews have gone to great lengths to agitate and stir up between the black race in America against the White Adamic Race. The Los Angeles Riots of 1965 and the 1990s were an outcome of their Satanic efforts against our people.

In this part of the study we will be quoting from Pope Paul VI, the man who was Pope in 1966 and not John Paul II. However, the name of John Paul II could be put in the article in place of Pope Paul VI, and the message would be the same. Many who will read this can remember the days when the major churches in America preached White "racism" and "separatism" and the Baptists published books written by members of the Ku Klux Klan and the Methodists, Presbyterians and others who published books against the immigration of non-Whites into the United States.

The position of the non-Catholic Christian churches in America in the 1920s and the 1930s regarding the Jews and race is explained in the book "Anti-Semitism in America," by Dinnerstein, where he said: "In one regard, Denver typified the Klan nationally. It utilized Protestant churches and their ministers to advance organizational dogma. Just as ministers of the Baptist, Presbyterian, Dutch Reformed, Evangelical, Pillar of Fire, and Methodist Churches in New Jersey supported Klan doctrines so, too, did their counterparts...One reason Protestant ministers generally refused to oppose anti-immigration laws what that they shared their congregants' views that the United States needed immigration laws was that the United States needed protection from foreigners and foreign ideologies. Some ministers were even more specific in their targets. In Illinois for example, one preacher called a Sunday meeting to discuss 'The problem of the Jew, or how Shall We Get Rid of Him?...Parochial school materials oversimplified the Crucifixion, emphasized Jewish culpability for the suffering and death of Christ, and included suggestions in manuals that teachers substitute the phrase, wicked Jews, wherever the words, wicked soldiers appeared...Bishop Gillmore's Bible History, first used in 1870, describes Jews as 'barbarous,' 'blood thirsty' wanderers without homes,' 'strangers among strangers' - hated yet feared...bearing with them the visible signs of God's curse. Like Cain marked with a mysterious sign, they shall continue to wander until the end of the world..."

Going through old books and papers one can find that as early as 1867 the Archbishop Jean-Marie Odin of New Orleans locking up the Catholic Churches in New Orleans rather than admitting blacks into them. Before that we can find Bishop England who was the director of the Catholic Bishops of America writing a volume of letters to the United States Government in Defense of Slavery. [125]

To help prove his point on slavery he said: "Thus St. Augustine, bishop of Hippo, A.D. 425 in his book 'The City of God,' Informs us that slavery is the consequence of sin. The condition of slavery is justly regarded as imposed on the sinner..."

Later Bishop Augustin Verot of St. Augustine, said: "As for the United States it is plain, that the Constitution framed after the War of Independence, recognizes the relation of master and slave, and that the law of the United States gives a right to a master to reclaim a fugitive slave, wherever he may be found in the United States. These statements are undeniable, and there is no point for me to dwell on a point known to everybody. Those states which have enacted laws against the constitution and the legislation of the United States have sapped the very foundations of the social order, and are the true and responsible causes and agents of the misfortunes which have already befallen the nation..." [126]

After the Civil War Vatican Council I was called in Rome and one of the issues debated was whether blacks were human or not. Bishop Verot by that time had become somewhat of a "liberal" on the race issue but he said: "...Now the Negroes are not generated from the whites nor the whites from the Negroes. Perhaps there are some here who think that when men live in a hot climate they become Negroes, and that Negroes in a cold climate become white. That is an error, most eminent Fathers..."

Mark Twain (S. L. Clemens). 19th century American writer. "In the U.S. cotton states, after the war... the Jew came down in force, set up shop on the plantation, supplied all the Negroes' wants on credit, and at the end of the season was the proprietor of the Negro's share of the present crop and part of the next one. Before long, the whites detested the Jew. The Jew is being legislated out of Russia. The reason is not concealed. The movement was instituted because the Christian peasant stood no chance against his commercial abilities. The Jew was always ready to lend on a crop. When settlement day came, he owned the crop; the next year he owned the farm; like Joseph.

In the England of John's time everybody got into debt to the Jew. He gathered all lucrative enterprises into his hands. He was the King of Commerce. He had to be banished from the realm. For like reasons, Spain had to banish him 400 years ago, and Austria a couple of centuries later.

In all ages Christian Europe has been obliged to curtail his activities. If he entered upon a trade, the Christian had to retire from it. If he set up as a doctor, he took the business. If he exploited agriculture, the other farmers had to get at something else. The law had to step in to save the Christian from the poor‑house. Still, almost bereft of employments, he found ways to make money. Even to get rich. This history has a most sordid and practical commercial look. Religious prejudices may account for one part of it, bit not for the other nine.

Protestants have persecuted Catholics ‑ but they did not take their livelihoods away from them. Catholics have persecuted Protestants ‑ bit they never closed agriculture and the handicrafts against them. I feel convinced that the Crucifixion has not much to do with the world's attitude toward the Jew; that the reasons for it are much older than that event ...

I am convinced that the persecution of the Jew is not in any large degree due to religious prejudice. No, the Jew is a money‑getter. He made it the end and aim of his life. He was at it in Rome. He has been at it ever since. His success has made the whole human race his enemy.

You will say that the Jew is everywhere numerically feeble. When I read in the Cyclopedia Britannica that the Jewish population in the United States was 250,000 I wrote the editor and explained to him that I was personally acquainted with more Jews than that, and that his figures were without doubt a misprint for 25,000,000. People told me that they had reasons to suspect that for business reasons, many Jews did not report themselves as Jews. It looks plausible. I am strongly of the opinion that we have an immense Jewish population in America. I am assured by men competent to speak that the Jews are exceedingly active in politics. [127]

Bishop Verot then admits that the doctrine of Identity was being preached in the United States at that time in 1869. As he said: "...And so, I want to say that in America (there are some books) in which it is stated there was a two fold creation of man in the beginning; one creation of white humanity in Adam, and the other creation of Negro humanity (and the Asians), the latter being, according to these writers, a grade of animal between beast and the Whiteman...Furthermore in my diocese there is a certain Methodist preacher, a Protestant minister, who teaches ex professor - and many come to hear him - teaches that Negroes do not have rational souls..." [128]

Some of the German bishops argued, in Rome, that blacks were NOT human beings. The only argument they could come up with trying to find a basis that blacks were "human" was the fact that they could speak and animals could not! However, they evidently had never owned parrots. [129]

Our object here, however, is not to defend slavery, which has always been a disaster for the Adamic race. In the earliest times the Jews were major slave owners of pre-Adamites and Popes had to hold councils to make church laws against Jews owning Christian slaves.

Slavery has always been the luxury of the richest, most degenerate element of society, who for their own greedy purposes have used slaves to gain more wealth for themselves. Slaves were never a part of the society of the working Adamites, as they could not own or support them, and did not mind doing hard labor for themselves.

The object of the Jew Jews throughout the 20th Century, in America, has been to turn the black race against the White Adamic race. The Jews have felt that through conflict and eventual racial war, it would result in the destruction of "White Power" in America and the eventual mongrelization of the White Adamic race with the non-Whites here, making the Jew the "Master Race" in America. In fact, Professor Michael Higger wrote the book: "The Jewish Utopia" in 1933, and in his book he advocated and promoted Jewish up breeding with "blond blue eyed" Aryans to produce an "Aryan" Jewish race.

In the early 1950s the late Major Robert H. Williams wrote the book the "Ultimate World Order" based on Higger's book, explaining the efforts of the Jews to mongrelize the White Adamic race and up breed their own "Master Race."

Major Williams was right. We can see from the Sabra Jews [those born in the outlaw state of Israel] that they have been up breeding with Aryans or Jews with "desirable" Aryan genes and many of them are blond and blue eyed.

Throughout history the Jews have risen to the pinnacles of power only to be cast down from their exhaulted positions by those of the Adamic Race, because they never knew when to stop. The Jews have systematically worked towards destroying what may have been called "White Supremacy" in America.

They have used the Whiteman's inventions, radio and television to instill a guilt complex in the White Adamites in America, to make them feel guilty and ashamed for being White and for having been the "rulers of America" for the past 300 years. At the same time they have deliberately promoted pride and a feeling of persecution among the blacks and other non-European races living in America. All things considered "White" have been abolished and things black have been established as being "correct."

Just check every Jew controlled bookstore in America and you will find a so-called "black studies" or "black history" section, extolling the virtues and the persecution of the blacks in America attacking White non-Jewish culture. However, efforts to find a "White" studies section in any bookstore will prove to be a fruitless endeavor.

In this article Pastor Swift quotes from a past Pope Paul IV who came out openly for racial mixture, even though it was condemned by the Catholics throughout the history. In fact in Spain during and after the Inquisition, the Jew Cecil Roth in his books "The Inquisition" and the "Marranos" points out that the Jews who had pretended to "convert" to Christianity in Spain but still remained practicing Jews, of course in secret, were destroying the Christian Church and White Race in Spain to the point where the Catholic Church had to set up a system where those becoming priests or officials in the Church had to prove that their racial lineage was not contaminated by Jewish blood and this was known as the "limpeza" laws. And yes, they were "racist."

The present Pope, John Paul II has done more since he has been Pope to destroy the Catholic Church than any other Pope. Early in his "reign" through Cardinal Ratzinger he notified the world that the main thrust of his reign would be an effort to de-Aryanize the Catholic Church by bringing more Africans into it as Cardinals and Bishops.

This he has done, he has also compromised with the anti-Christ Jews to the point where the Catholic priest the Rev. Brown from Oklahoma has attacked him and has claimed that his mother was a Jew by the name of Katz.

Also early in his reign the present Pope went out of his way to elevate a racist Jew, Jean-Marie Lustiger to the position of being the Cardinal of Paris. Lustiger makes no apologies and is proud of being a Jew and a "fighter against anti-Semitism."

Another Jew by the name of DeCourtnay has been made a Cardinal in France and the new so-called Catholic Catechism was written and supervised by these two Jews and their co-racialists. Of course, the main thrust of the new Catechism is that the Jews are "forgiven" and "should be loved" and that anyone challenging them should be "condemned,"  a typical Jewish racist defense of the accursed religion.

However, the "New Catechism" has become a "big hit" among many non-traditionalist Catholics who have read it because is supports celibacy and is anti-abortion. Many Americans, Catholic and non-Catholic can agree with the Catechism on the abortion issue and most "conservative" Catholics including the well known Wanderer Newspaper support the new Catechism because, of it's anti-abortion anti-deviant sex stances. Well and good, but the new Catechism if allowed to influence Catholics will end up completely Judaizing, not only the Catholic Church, but also Europe and America as well.

The Jews have planned well and Pope John Paul II has carried out their program against the White Adamic Race. Even the brave Cardinal Glemp of Poland who stood up to the Jews has been silenced and forced to work with the Jews to destroy Christianity, because of the anti-Christ devils who now run the Vatican. The Pope has assigned a "censor" [priest Commissar] to "guide" Cardinal Glemp and collaborate with the anti-Christ Jews.

According to a report published in the CDL Report over two years ago, Pope John Paul II has incurrable cancer and is dying. They warned their readers of the CDL Report in 1980 when the anti-Christ Jew, Lustiger was elevated to Cardinal that he was being primed to be the next Pope. If Lustiger or one of his cohorts is elevated to the next Pope, we can expect an all out onslaught on the White European people worldwide and a major Jewish push to destroy us.

Some may say that because we say these things we are anti-Catholic. Far from it,  we are only acting on our commission of Watchman. And, having studied the history of Christianity and the Catholic Church a little, we know that Pope John Paul II and the Vatican are now supporting every program and project the major Catholic Saints and leaders of Christianity fought against for over 1994 years - from John calling the Jews the Children of the Devil [130] to the fight of Father Coughlin and Father Feeney to bring sanity back to the Christian Religion over 50 years ago.

It is with pleasure that we can see that the efforts of the Jews to turn the blacks against the White Adamic Race has backfired on them! Praise God! Of all those in America the blacks have become aware of the fact that the Jews are responsible for the murder of over 300 million of their race over the past 500 years and the average black has more education and "savvy" on the Jews than the average Adamite who now seems to be completely bewildered because of the televangelists who support the anti-Christ Jews and now the "modern" Catholic Church has not only surrendered to them but has joined their crusade against Christianity.

The Jews have pushed for the destruction of the United States by promoting the idea of racial mixture between the White and Black races to produce a race which will not be able to oppose them. The Black Muslims are worshipers of a religious belief which fits their race and we can find no fault in that.

As a White Adamite we preach and promote a religion which is of my race, Adamic Identity Christianity. The Black Muslims are for the preservation and advancement of their race, and I am for the preservation and advancement of my race. They hypocritical Jews ARE for their Jew race and for the destruction of the other races and it is now time that all men of goodwill, White and Black, who are aware of the Jews, work in their own ways to stop them and preserve sanity in America.

The Blacks under Marcus Garvey wanted to receive funds to return to Africa in the 1930s and even purchased a fleet of ships to do so. White Adamites of goodwill worked with the Blacks and had 6-million of them sign a petition to the U.S. Congress to return them to Africa. The Jews stopped it, with their political power, and imprisoned Marcus Garvey.

On the subject of race and especially "The Elect Race" which is an especially important subject today. The Pope made comments recently (Paul IV) in his Easter message and he said, "I am praying for the world...and I am praying that we will see the end of the different races and nations, for Nationalism is a deadly danger and race is a misnomer."

This came from the Pope, the head of the Catholic Church, and he further said: "...all men have emerged from one racial stock and they can merge into one again, and this will end racism in the world."

Regarding religion he said: "All men have various ways of worshiping God, we believe that we have the highest form of worshiping God in the Catholic Church, but we are broad minded enough to see that all men worship God, and that all men are brothers and we shall act as a Father unto all men and to all Churches and bring all men together under one Universal Church."

The Pope talked on putting his foot in his mouth; in fact, when he kept talking about the belief that all men came from one race and that one race is what we all should merge into because there is only one race anyhow, and then that all religions are the same, and the only difference between religions is in the way men express themselves as they worship God.

To him it doesn't make any difference whether a man's a Hindu or he's a Buddhist or whether he's a Voodoo Witch doctor. After all, all of them come and kill the ring right now and get the Papal blessing from the Pope.

If you think that's bad, then just stop and think what the National Council and the World Council of Churches had to say in their Easter message. They said, that they were going to launch the greatest campaign in history against racism, and that racism must be totally abolished.

To carry out their point they said, that all men have evolved into the cultures and civilizations of which they are now a part and that race is actually a misnomer. Race depends on what part of the world you live in and what your environment is and that effects your color and that is responsible for racial changes in people according to how they adapt to their way of life and surroundings. [131]

They said, also, all thoughts have thus emerged, and as those thoughts emerged man became somehow part of a religious being wanting something higher to worship and, therefore, some of them have developed into the principles called Christianity or Buddhism or Hinduism or Brahmanism, but actually that they were all brothers and that the modern clergy that was well educated [indoctrinated] and understood these situations and was willing to recognize that since all races emerged out of the common slime and all thoughts and all religions emerged out of the imagination, the fuller imagination now of men, that we can all get together and have peace.

The World Council of Churches (WCC) made these statements. Perhaps some of those are the products of evolution, however, they don't act like they have evolved very far. They have used the radio and television to put these false ideas out all over our nation and also spread this false message to people all over the world. The National Council of Churches (NCC) in each and every one of their branch churches in America said, we are going to end all racism. The Los Angeles Times said all Protestant Churches are planning a drive against White Racism.

They said that they would provide "religious" literature and the Methodist Church would be prompt in sending out this "religious" literature everywhere and scattering it among all people in an effort to fight racism.

They said they planned to provide ten solid weeks of instruction for Methodists on how to combat racism. More than this, the Southern California Council of Churches provided study material which aimed at destroying White Prejudices and rewriting back history to see that they have their racial pride restored.

The first religious group to announce the availability of study packets to combat White Racism was the National Council of Churches and they said that mail order for the 29 piece package will be quickly filled.

The President of the National Council of Churches and former U.S. Secretary for Health, Education and Welfare said, they hoped that this study program would evolve into a tremendous new "anti-racist" crusade.

The Evangelistic elements of the crusade showed up in a couple instances in Los Angeles. Door to door distribution of magazine articles and reprints showed black plight and told others of the commitments to social justice were also carried out.

A meeting was held by the Methodist clergy on how to combat "racism." One of the main objectives of the Methodist Church is to make sure; "all children should be given black dolls to love, so that loving blacks will become natural to them as children."

Give them black dolls to love so that they'll grow up loving blacks and so forth. Also, they asked all their members to go to their local merchants and if they do not hire any blacks to remind them that there are no blacks hired in their businesses and to tell them that they will not trade in with them until they hire some blacks.

They say that Whites should hire blacks in all businesses in Southern California. This is just the local program of the National Council of Churches as they seek to integrate and produce one race.

In another instance, we have an Episcopal Rector in Washington in one of the great Episcopal Churches who said that the death of Martin Luther King has brought a great guilt complex upon him as he realizes what he has had to do with the blacks and the black race and how he has been prejudiced and he said: "I withdraw my prejudice. He said, if my lovely daughters want to marry blacks, they will do it with my blessing and my approval, I believe we must start this at home."

If this man wants to resign from the White Race, he can, but we wish to point out that all this is the program being pushed by the National and World Council of Churches. Of course, we recognize that the World Council of Churches promotes the program of the anti-Christ and has no semblance of original Christianity as preached by the four apostles left in it.

We personally don't believe that any Christian minister should remain in any denomination that remains a member of the National and World Council of Churches; we believe they should get out immediately.

White Adamic people are saying, what's one to do? Well, there's only one thing for one to do; when on the subject of race or of religion, especially religion, one needs to turn to the Bible because it's the only authority that we can depend upon.

We must depend on the Bible and we must depend on the Scriptures that were inspired by the Spirit of God. As one turns to the Bible, they discover His question on the Race question is quickly answered.

The Pope says that all "Men" came from one race and they can all merge back into one race and intermingle and intermarry and so forth, and this will be all right. He wants to see an end of "Racism" and Nationalism and everybody united under the Mother Church. The fact remains  that Nations have existed before the White Race existed.

Nations existed before Adam and they continue to exist today, and it doesn't make any difference whether he like it or not. All the different races pass down their racial (genetic) characteristics unless they have been contaminated thorough racial mixture.

Race is a very specific stream of life carrying forward the identity, the background, the color, the concepts of the progenitors of a society and he cannot destroy race and he can't say that only one race exists and be truthful. In the Bible, in the Book of Genesis, in the fifth chapter one will find something unique.

If everybody came from one race, it's a very unimportant thing that we should have the fifth chapter of the Book of Genesis, but the fifth chapter of the Book of Genesis is the story of the generations of the "White Race." The fifth chapter of the Book of Genesis says: "This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him. Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created." [132]

It then tells about how Adam lived 130 years and begat a son in his own likeness after his own image and he called his name Seth. Please Note: There isn't even any recognition of the seduction of Eve or any of the children that were born before Seth. They weren't even counted. "And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth." [133]

The books of the generation of the White Race or of Adam starts with the purity of Seth and of the acceptance and of the cleansing of the womb and starts with the birth of Seth in the image of Adam. "Adam, Seth, (there is no mention of either Abel or Cain) Enoch, Kenan, Mahalaleel, Jered." [134]

Don't make the mistake of thinking that Seth was the first "Man" because there were men on the face of the earth and they were here and God looked down on the earth and said: "And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed." [135]

Do you understand what you are reading here? God was resting on the Seventh Day when He said these things, and then he Formed Man (Adam) on the Seventh Day!

In the Book of Ezekiel God talked to the Egyptians about how they were a great and mighty Empire over the earth and how the Assyrians with their racial streams were a great Empire than they were and existed over all the earth before the days of Eden because God is talking about Eden when He planted Adam in the garden of Eden and the Assyrian Empire was over all the earth and the Egyptian Empire was over all the earth and nobody, by any stretch of the imagination could imagine that Adam had begotten them all on his arrival. However, millions of people of every type, race and kindred existed under the Assyrian Empire according to the Word of God. "And they committed whoredoms in Egypt; they committed whoredoms in their youth: there were their breasts pressed, and there they bruised the teats of their virginity. And the names of them were Aholah the elder, and Aholibah her sister: and they were mine, and they bare sons and daughters. Thus were their names; Samaria is Aholah, and Jerusalem Aholibah. And Aholah played the harlot when she was mine; and she doted on her lovers, on the Assyrians her neighbors, Which were clothed with blue, captains and rulers, all of them desirable young men, horsemen riding upon horses. Thus she committed her whoredoms with them, with all them that were the chosen men of Assyria, and with all on whom she doted: with all their idols she defiled herself. Neither left she her whoredoms brought from Egypt: for in her youth they lay with her, and they bruised the breasts of her virginity, and poured their whoredom upon her. Wherefore I have delivered her into the hand of her lovers, into the hand of the Assyrians, upon whom she doted. These discovered her nakedness: they took her sons and her daughters, and slew her with the sword: and she became famous among women; for they had executed judgment upon her. And when her sister Aholibah saw this, she was more corrupt in her inordinate love than she, and in her whoredoms more than her sister in her whoredoms. She doted upon the Assyrians her neighbors, captains and rulers clothed most gorgeously, horsemen riding upon horses, all of them desirable young men. Then I saw that she was defiled, that they took both one way, And that she increased her whoredoms: for when she saw men portrayed upon the wall, the images of the Chaldeans portrayed with vermilion, Girded with girdles upon their loins, exceeding in dyed attire upon their heads, all of them princes to look to, after the manner of the Babylonians of Chaldea, the land of their nativity." [136]

The Bible is dealing with the White Race and it's what God has had to say to it; for it and about it. God came down and inspired Moses to record that the Bible is the book of the generations of Adam and Adam begat Seth in his own image and in his own likeness and, therefore, the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were 800 years and he begat sons and daughters, and all the days that Adam lived were 930 years and he died. So, we can see, it traces our race through the genealogy of Seth to Noah. Then we find that the record shows that Noah had three sons and then from the three sons of Noah, we continue down through the genealogy of the Adamites to Abraham. Though the Sethites were scattered out over the earth and they lived in places where they didn't have the flood, the sons of Seth had lived in the upper Tarim Basin as well.

From Noah we move on to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Israel and Jacob's twelve sons. These twelve sons went out to form nations, this is the descent that the Scripture records. What about these facts? We discover that the sons of Noah began to multiply and they spread out and they divided up into separate nations and they set the boundaries of these nations according to their number.

We wish to point out here, when Abram was born, Nimrod had been advised by his astrologers that Abram would grow up as a young man and be a great leader and that eventually Abram would be the Father of Great Nations and companies of Nations.

They advised Nimrod to kill Abram when he was born and that's why Terah, his Father sent Abram away and he went to the caves where Noah was living and he was raised by Noah and taught by Noah till he was ten years old. We find a continuity of the Adamic White Race here in the Scriptures and God talks about this White Race. He not only speaks concerning this, but He talked to Seth, and Seth recorded what God said in the Book of Seth he records to his children; and that God said, "Thou art my Israel, my issue ruling with me" [137]; and He also told Enoch in the volumes of Enoch and the Pillars of Wisdom that were given to Enoch, "Thou art my Israel and thy offspring art my Israel" and He further told Enoch that the members of the White Race whose countenance is fair and who can blush like the Rose are His Israel.

It is here we discover the confirmation of the Scriptures that Adam was a White Man and could blush, which is identifying a race, identifying a people that were God's offspring. Not only did He reveal to Enoch the mysteries of His children, but he said that they had been begotten before they came to earth and the Apostle Peter understood this when he spoke of the incorruptible seed that abides forever, as well as the natural seed, after the seed of Adam and that there is a difference in your Race and the other Races on the face of the Earth. "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." [138]

If you are a White man or woman you are the Children of God; you are the household of God; and because of this you think the thoughts of God and the Spirit of God works in you. Therefore, as a Race, the Adamic Race is above and beyond any race on the face of the earth. "And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe and to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that the Lord thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth" [139]

God makes a statement in the Book of Deuteronomy, and said: "Now these are the commandments, the statutes, and the judgments, which the Lord your God commanded to teach you, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go to possess it: That thou mightest fear the Lord thy God, to keep all his statutes and his commandments, which I command thee, thou, and thy son, and thy son's son, all the days of thy life; and that thy days may be prolonged. Hear therefore, O Israel, and observe to do it; that it may be well with thee..." [140]

He also said: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might...Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the Lord be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly." [141]

God gave His commandments and His ordinances and said: "I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God..." [142]

This is what God says about other religions. Listen to what He says concerning Race.

                                                              God Was/Is A Segregationist

"When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated {segregated} the sons of Adam {man}, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the Children of Israel." [143]

All the prophets and almost every book of the Old Testament discusses the subject of segregation. They spoke for God Who is a "segregationist." The Old Testament is not the only Scripture where segregation is taught. It is emphasized in the New Testament, also. In fact, it is one of the major subjects of the Bible. Jesus asked, "...Have ye understood all these things?"

His listeners said "Yes." Then He said to them, "...every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old." [144]

In other words, since the advent of Christ, if one is instructed by God, that person must use both the New Testament as well as the Old Testament. Which is simply another name for the "old covenant" and the "new covenant."

Luke wrote: "God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshiped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood [145] all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation." [146]

Thus it is clear for all to see. God created all mankind, all the different races, and set the boundaries of their habitation. History also shows that none of the races, except the White Man, has ever moved out of their assigned place on earth, except in times of war or natural disasters - such as flood, famine and etc. Even then, they would immediately return, unless hindered or kept from it by some external force.

There are no scriptures which annul this statement, or that God ever intended for those boundaries to be set aside. No! God intended for every race to stay within their allotted boundaries, they were never to mix with the other races.

God intended for the races to be segregated! 2 Corinthians 6:17 further verifies it: "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord..."

Paul wrote: "For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope." [147]

Let us, therefore, reflect upon God's directives for our well being. On one occasion, Christ cried out and told His adversaries, the Jews: "I am come in my Father's name, and ye [Jews] receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only? Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye [say you] trust. [But you lie] For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" [148]

So Moses has accused, in his writings, of those who would refuse to accept and believe what he had written to direct us on the road of peace and salvation. "The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken." [149] Then for a second witness let us turn to the Book of Acts, where Peter stated: "For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall he hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you." [150]

Stephen, in what was apparently his one and only sermon, stated: "This that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear." [151]

Segregation of the races is proven to be the everlasting Law of Almighty God. "And he said, Behold, I make a covenant: before all thy people I will do marvels, such as have not been done in all the earth, nor in any na­tion...Observe thou that which I command thee this day: behold, I drive out before thee the Amorite, and the Canaanite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, and the Hivite, and the Jebusite. Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest it be for a snare in the midst of thee...Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land... And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters..." [152]

Here we see that God "commanded" our forefathers not to mix with the Amorites, Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites and the Jebusites. In other words God commanded our White Race to not mix with the other races!

There are those who will falsely state that the Laws of God, as contained in the Old Testament, have been done away with. But Jesus shows them to be liars and false teachers. For He said: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the [words of the] prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven." [153]

Christ came to abide by the law; to carry it out; to make it active; to accomplish all of God's Holy plan and purpose with regard to man. Already, we can clearly see segregation was, and is, the Law of Almighty God! "All the ways of a man are clean in his own eyes; but the Lord weigheth the spirits. Commit thy works unto the Lord, and thy thoughts shall be established. The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil. Every one that is proud in heart is an abomination to the Lord: though hand join in hand, he shall not be unpunished. By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of the Lord men depart from evil." [154] And God also said: "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live." [155]

Thank God, along with me, that He sent Christ to this earth the future home of His Kingdom, in the flesh to die; be buried; raised again; and now sits at the right hand of Almighty God, and is our only Savior and Redeemer, who led our ancestors, the White Race, the Anglo‑Saxon, Germanic, Celtic, Scandinavian, and kindred people of the earth, out of bondage.

For making His Word available to us for study and instruction. That: If, at any time, we can find knowledge and answers for our troubled minds, souls and country; we should always remember: It is God, who left His Words as directives. We should also be thankful that God will hear our cry, if we will repent and seek His face. His words are to segregate. With the warning: "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God..." [156] If they do, Christ has given a further warning: "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." [157]

The Bible is a testimony that it is God's law to be separate, to be segregated. If those who advocate or participate in integration when segregation was written into the blood covenant of the Law of God; if they would seek the Scriptures, they would read what a punishment they will receive if they do not repent. "Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast [Negro] to like down thereto: it is confusion." [158]; "And if a man lie with a beast [Negro woman], he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast. And if a woman approach unto any beast [Negro], and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." [159]

The story of Phinehas, and how he slew an Israelite who went in to a black woman, and God giving him an everlasting honor is proof of the above. "And Moses said unto the judges of Israel, Slay ye every one his men that were joined unto Ba'al-pe'or. And, behold, one of the children of Israel came and brought unto his brethren a Midianitish woman in the sight of Moses, and in the sight of all the congregation of the children of Israel, who were weeping before the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose up from among the congregation, and took a javelin in his hand; and he went into the tent, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly...And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, hath turned my wrath away from the children of Israel, while he was zealous for my sake among them, that I consumed not the children of Israel in my jealousy. Wherefore say, Behold, I give unto him my covenant of peace: and he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an everlasting Priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made an atonement for the children of Israel." [160]

God Does Not Recognize Mixed Seeds

"A bastard [161] shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord. An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the Lord for ever." [162]

Any person born from a mixed union, such as Ishmael was not recognized as a Hebrew, nor was he recognized by God as Abraham's lawful son, even though he was Abraham's first born. We read in Genesis: "...now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou has not withheld thy son, thine only son from me." [163] Isaac was seventeen years old when this happened, and Ishmael, Abraham's first born was living and was about thirty‑four years old at that time. [164] This, clearly shows, that God does not and did not recognize mixed seeds [mixed breeds]. The reason Abraham was not put to death, when he made the union with the Egyptian woman, was because at that time in history the Egyptians were White people and not Negroes. We must remember, we the White Race are Israelites, if we are pure white. If one could not prove that they were an Israelite (pure white man/woman) they were cast out of the priesthood and not allowed to serve God at the altar. "And he that is the high priest among his brethren, upon whose head the anointing oil was poured, and that is consecrated to put on the gar­ments...shall take a virgin of his own people to wife. Neither shall he profane his seed [mix his seed with other races] among his people..." [165]

Here again is the distinction of our seed. We see references to various mixtures. Remember that the White Race is now called Caucasians, but were known before by nationality and even earlier as Israelites. But when Israel sinned against God and He divorced her, they were not allowed to be called Israelites [meaning ruling with God], so their name of Israel was lost to them and they became known by other names; i.e., Germans, Englishmen, Frenchmen, Dutch, Americans, Canadians and etc.

God Forbids Mixing Of The Races

Many people have been led to think that the tree of knowledge was just some sort of fruit tree. It was not. Adam and Eve already had knowledge and were on verbal speaking terms with God.

Therefore, by eating of the tree, they could only gain a knowledge of evil. It was called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and not just a tree of knowledge. It is a documented fact that when God created the earth He made all green herbs and trees with seed according to their own kind. As God says in Genesis 1:11‑12: "And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good."

Therefore, it is well established that all things created by God were pure unmixed and good. If two unlike trees are grafted, the fruit produced is not according to either of the two good trees and is mixed, impure and therefore evil because God forbids it. God further clarifies this in His Law which never changes: "Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled [mixed] seed(s)..." [166]

This clearly shows that God forbids the mixing of anything, even cattle. God never breaks His own Law, therefore Satan, not God, was the creator of the integrated tree of mixed races and species of all kinds.

God said again: "And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil." [167]

This may sound repetitious, but God said He brought forth all manner of trees to be eaten. If He, God, made the integrated tree, He would have broken His own Law. God does neither. Remember it took two good trees made by God, to be grafted by Satan to make it good and evil. It was good because in its original creation it was made in purity by God. But when Satan grafted them, it became evil, because God forbids any mixing of seeds, be it tree, animal or man. As Jesus said in Matthew 7:18: "A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt [mixed] tree bring forth good fruit."

The fruit of the integrated tree was evil and likewise the tree itself was evil. It was not created by God because God created only pure trees, animals and men. This evil tree created by Satan was impure and mixed. What happens when a tree is integrated, or mixed? You die. Jesus Christ came and suffered the most horrible, unmerciful type of death, known at the hand of the Jews, as He suffered as a result of the Sin of Adam and Eve.

Herod Was On The Throne In Palestine

In the days of Christ, Herod, an Edomite/Shelah/Judah Jew, was on the throne in Palestine. He was not an Israelite. The Pharisees and Sadducees were in absolute control of the temple and the Sanhedrin. They were not the lawful descendants of the Tribe of Levi. They did not follow the law of Moses, although they claimed to do so.

Instead they set up their own Babylonian traditions, Traditions of the Elders, later to become known as the Jewish Talmud. Following is how the Pharisees came to be in "Moses' Seat" when Christ was born.

They had many enemies at the beginning and the Sadducees were the first of these enemies. They were the constant opponents of the Pharisees and their imported Babylonian paganism, misrepresented by the Pharisees as the Tradition of the Pharisees as the Tradition of the Elders, the "Oral Law" ostensibly transmitted privately to Moses and on down, superseding anything written in the Bible.

In the six years of civil war between the Pharisees and Alexander Jannaeus, King and High Priest of Jerusalem, 50,000 were killed on both sides before this Sadducean ruler succumbed, and his widow Salome turned affairs over to the Pharisees in 79 B.C. Her brother, Simon ben Shetah, had been waiting for such an opportunity. The continued civil war resulted in the sons of Alexander Jannaeus, Hyrcanus and Aristobulus, in 63 B.C., going hat in hand to Pompey, Caesar's Roman General in Syria, asking him to invade Palestine and slaughter their respective opponents. This is how Rome happened to be in power when Christ was born. The full story can be found in the Jewish Encyclopedia under "Pharisees."

The Ark of the Covenant and the Shekinah glory had long since disappeared from the Holiest of Holies. There was no supernatural cloud to guide them by day nor a pillar of fire to guide them by night. God's presence had left the temple and Jerusalem in Ezekiel's day. "Moreover the spirit lifted me up, and brought me unto the east gate of the Lord's house [The Temple in Jerusalem], which looketh eastward: and behold at the door of the gate five and twenty men... Then said he [God] unto me, Son of man, these are the men that devise mischief, and give wicked counsel in this city...Son of man, thy brethren, even thy brethren, the men of thy kindred, and all the house of Israel wholly, are they unto whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem have said, Get you far from the Lord: unto us is this land given in possession... Then did the Cherubims lift up their wings, and the wheels beside them; and the glory of the God of Israel was over them above, and the glory of the Lord went up from the midst of the city, and stood upon the mountain which is on the east side of the city. Afterwards the spirit took me up, and brought me in a vision by the Spirit of God into Chaldee, to them of the captivity. So the vision that I had seen went up from me. Then I spake unto them of the captivity [168] all the things that the Lord had shewed me." [169]

There were seven in succession in that Herodian dynasty. This false and spurious Herodian Kingdom also controlled the Temple and the High Priesthood which had been turned into a political office. As a result, there was a constant political battle for the high priesthood.

When Christ came into the world, he did not recognize that false kingdom and would have nothing to do with that spurious priesthood and so‑called "Jews' religion." He did not join the Pharisees, the Scribes, the Sadducees, nor any so‑called Jewish sect or political party. He lived and taught entirely outside the establishment. Herod the Great was determined to kill Christ during the first two years of his life, and all of the kings who succeeded Herod wanted to kill Him also. With few exceptions, the high priests, the Sanhedrin and council also want to kill Him.

One exception was Zacharias the priest who was the father of John the Baptist. He was a true priest and a descendant of Aaron and was murdered also by the Jews. [170]

It would appear there were only a few thousand people in Jerusalem and all of Palestine in the days of Christ who were of the Tribe of Judah along with remnants of the other twelve tribes, but they were outside of the false kingdom and did not belong to the so‑called "Jews' religion." God never gave the true kingdom to the Jews.

He kept His true kingly line in exile, or hidden from them as it were. If the true kingdom, had been, in Palestine at the time of Christ, Joseph the husband of Mary, Jesus' step‑father would have been the king on the throne. It is a pity that most Protestant ministers, preachers, evangelists and catholic priests are under, "... strong delusion, that they should believe a lie."  [171]

They believe, falsely, that the so‑called Jews are Hebrews, or Israelites and of the Bible Tribe of Judah, which is a lie and a terrible deception. Again, because of the false teachings of the past decades about the Jews: We must repeat and repeat that 90 ‑ 95 percent of the people known to the world today as Jews are descendants of the Khazars of Russia. They are "false Jews." They are like the false Jews that crucified the Lord Jesus Christ.

Following is a brief outline of what the Bible and Christ said to and about them:

1. "Ye [Jews] are not my sheep." (John 10:26)

2. "Ye [Jews] are of your father the devil." (John 8:44)

3. "Ye [Jews are] serpents, ye [Jews are a] generation of vipers..." (Matthew 23:33)

4. "...the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus..." (1 Thessalonians 2:14‑15)

5. "...they please not God." (1 Thessalonians 2:15)

6. "...are contrary to all men." (1 Thessalonians 2:15)

7. "Are the Synagogue of Satan." (Revelation 2:9; 3:9)

8. "Hypocrites." (Matthew 23:14)

"Blind guides." (Matthew 23:16)

10. "Full of extortion and excess." (Matthew 23:16)

11. "White washed sepulchers." (Matthew 23:23)

12. "Full of dead mens' bones." (Matthew 23:27)

13. "Degenerate plant of a strong vine." (Jeremiah 2:21)

14. "Evil figs." (Jeremiah 24:2‑8)

15. "Broken cisterns." (Jeremiah 2:13)

16. "Broken bottle." (Jeremiah 19:10)

17. "Spots in your feast of love." (Jude 12)

18. "Cannot blush." (Jeremiah 6:15; 8:12)

19. "An astonishment and hissing." (Jeremiah 25:9‑18; 51:37)

20. "The show of their countenance doth witness against them." (Isaiah 3:9)

21. "Pray not for this people [The Jews]." (Jeremiah 7:16; 11:14; 14:11)

22. The present day, so‑called and false Jewish State of Israel is  a sister of Sodom and Gomorrah, and called Hittites, Amarites the descendants of Cain. (Ezekiel 16:1‑3; 16:53‑57)

Yet in spite of these and hundreds more Bible revelations America's evangelists, preachers, ministers, pastors and priests continue teaching The Big Lie; that the Jews are Israel. While our Government keeps right on giving that false Murderous Jewish‑Zionist State, billions of dollars a year. And of the 530 members of our Congress and Senate, few have the courage to oppose anything the Jews say and vote for anything the Jews want. The Scriptures tell us: "And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him [Christ] to be condemned to death, and have crucified him." [172]; "Therefore let all the house of Israel know, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye [Jews] have crucified, both Lord and Christ." [173]; "Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel...Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye [Jews] crucified, whom God raised from the dead..." [174]; "Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said...The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye [Jews] slew and hanged on a tree." [175]; "And we are witnesses of all things which he [Christ] did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they [Jews] slew and hanged on a tree." [176]; "For they [Jews] that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him [Christ] not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every Sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him." [177]; "For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they [Jews] please not God, and are contrary to all men." [178]

Now, just so you will understand why we call the Scribes and Pharisees Jews, we will present the following in the Jews' own words. Michael Rodkinson, in The History of the Talmud, the Jews' Bible, in collaboration with Rabbi Isaac M. Wise, stated: "With the conclusion of the first volume of this work at the beginning of the twentieth century, we would invite the reader to take a glance over the past of the Talmud, in which he will see...that not only was the Talmud not destroyed, but was so saved that not a single letter of it is missing; and now it is flourishing to such a degree as cannot be found in its past history...The Talmud is one of the wonders of the World. During the twenty centuries of its existence...it survived in its entirety, and not only has the power of its foes failed to destroy even a single line, but it has not been able materially to weaken its influence for any length of time. It still dominates the minds of a whole people [the Jews], who venerate its contents as divine truth ...The colleges for the study of the Talmud are increasing almost in every place...especially in this country where millions are gathered for the funds of the two colleges, the Hebrew Union College of Cincinnati and the Jewish Theological Seminary of America in New York, in which, the chief study is the Talmud..."

Then on page 70 Michael Rodkinson stated: "Is the literature that Jesus was familiar with in his early years yet in existence in the world? Is it possible for us to get at it? Can we ourselves review the ideas, the statements, the modes of reasoning and thinking, on moral and religious subjects, which were current in his time, and must have been evolved [studied] by Him during those thirty silent years when He was pondering His future mission? To such inquires the learned class of Jewish rabbis answer by holding up the Talmud. Here, say they...is the written form of that which, in the time of Jesus was called the Traditions of the Elders and to which He makes frequent allusions."

Mongrelization

With careful study, it will be seen that the sin which brought about the destruction of the flood had nothing whatever to do with the worship of idols; for no idols are mentioned before the flood.

It is common knowledge that many Biblical scholars today falsely assume God ordered the segregation of the races because of idol or pagan worship. "When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel." [179]

The Catholic Bible in the Book of Wisdom 12:3‑15 we find the following: "For those ancient inhabitants of thy holy land, whom thou didst abhor, because they did works hateful to thee by their sorceries, and wicked sacrifices, and those merciless murderers of their own children, and eaters of men's bowels, and devourers of blood from the midst of thy consecration, and those parents sacrificing with their own hands helpless souls, it was thy will to destroy by the hands of our parents (Israelite ‑ Canaanite wars), that the land which of all is most dear to thee might receive a worthy colony of the children of God. Yet even those thou sparedst as men, and didst send wasps, fore‑runners of thy host, to destroy them by little and little. Not that thou wast unable to bring the wicked under the just by war, or by cruel beasts, or with one rough word to destroy them at once, but executing thy judgments by degrees thou gavest them place of repentance, not being ignorant that they were a wicked generation (mixed races), and their malice natural, and that the though could never be changed. For it was a cursed seed from the beginning: neither did thou for fear of any one give pardon to their sins."

The people of Noah's time were charged with only one sin, according to the Bible, and that was the sin of Not Keeping Their Race Pure, for misusing the seed. The sons of God marrying the daughters of men, and breaking the rule "Each after his kind." And after that men began to be multiplied upon the earth, and daughters were born to them. The sons of God seeing the daughters of men, that they were fair, took to themselves wives of all which they chose. And God said: My spirit shall not remain in the man forever, because he is flesh, and his days shall be a hundred and twenty years. Giants were upon the earth in those days. For after the sons of God went in to the daughters of men, and they brought forth children, these are the mighty men of old, men of renown. "And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them. That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. And God saw the wickedness of man (the mixing of the races) was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." [180]

In Baruch 3:26‑27 we find: "There were the giants, those renown men that were from the beginning, of great stature, expert in war. The Lord chose not them, neither did they find the way of knowledge: therefore did they perish."

Here Baruch is telling us that the giants of Genesis 6, after the flood, were of mixed seed of the sons of God and the daughters of the black race. The mixing of seed through marriage of Seth's children (White Race) with the Black Race was the sin that was responsible for the sentence of God which destroyed the earth by flood.

The mingling of the Holy seed with the black (unholy) seed was catastrophic. God saw that the mixing of the races had filled the earth with iniquity. "All flesh had corrupted its ways on the earth." [181] So God was forced to destroy them with the flood. But He saved Noah. And why did God save Noah? It was because Noah was: "Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations..." [182] In other words, Noah's family had not corrupted itself, and mixed with the other races.

Fornication Is The Mixing

Of The Races Through Sexual Relations

Fornication may have more than one meaning, however Paul and Numbers 25:1 tell us that fornication is mixing the races through sexual relations. We must remember that Thamar [183] was never accused of fornication. Neither was Bethsheba [184] when David went into her. Mary Magdalene is never called a fornicator. So we read when the different races mix their seeds, that it is called fornication.

In 1 Corinthians 10:1‑11, Paul said this was written for our instruction and that they were idolaters; and they committed fornication with the non‑whites about whim he spoke in Exodus 32 and 33. Their names were scratched out of the Book of Life for that terrible sin. We are commanded by God to be separate from the other races [185].

White Christians must come to realize just how serious intermarriage or the mixing of the seeds of different races is? To eat is not a sin, God gave us food to eat. To play is not a sin, because the Bible says there is a time for joy. To drink (without getting drunk) is not a sin, Jesus drank wine and blessed it. To dance is not a sin, because the men of God, such as David, danced before the ark of the covenant which was holy [186].

When the sinful ones, however, sat down to eat, dance and play in an integrated society, this was a sin! In Numbers 11:4, a mixed multitude came out of Egypt with the Israelites. The mixed ones burned with desire and caused the Israelites to follow them and fornication occurred. They were integrated and were not worthy of God's covenant.

In Numbers 25:1, it says: "And Israel at the time abode in Settim and the people committed fornication with the daughters of Moab."

In spite of the fact that idols are mentioned, the Israelites first committed fornication with the Moabites whom God forbade the Israelites to go into (marry or mix with). After Israel committed fornication they ate of the sacrifice and were there initiated to Baal. God created purity, Satan corrupts it.

God created the White Race, who are Israelites and called them His holy seed because they are from the image of Him. When Satan influences people to mix, he causes their seeds to be changed from God's creation to his idea of what creation should be. Remember, God did not recognize Ishmael, the half‑breed Egyptian, because He said, "Now I know that thou fesrest God and has not spared thy only begotten son for my sake," this shows only Isaac was recognized by God, as Abraham's true seed. In the Catholic Book 2 Par. 21:23, Ahab's house is accused of fornication. Did he not marry Jezebel? Wasn't she a Sidonian? A mixed breed.

In Malachi 2:11, Juda married the daughter of a strange god. The Lord cuts off the man (or woman) that does that. In Hosea 5:3‑7, Ephraim committed fornication and Israel was defiled. "I know Ephraim, and Israel is not hid from me: for now, O Ephraim, thou committest whoredom (fornication), and Israel is deviled...They have dealt treacherously against the Lord: for they have begotten strange (mixed) children..."

Certainly people who are of the pure White Race have children because God ordered that, but their children are not strangers. They are called God's holy people. However, when Tamar had Judah's twins, they were not called strange children. A mixed breed was called "strange." Matthew tells us, "Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon. And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil." [187]

Christ answered her not a word. Then His disciples came up and besought Him, saying, "...his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away, for she crieth after us." But He answered and said, "...I am not sent but unto the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel."

But she came and worshiped Him, saying, "Lord help me!" He said in answer, "...It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs." She said, "Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table." Jesus then answered and said: "O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour."

Notice (1) that Christ did not heal her daughter, He simply told her that her faith was strong enough to heal the daughter; (2) Jesus first ignored and then walked away from the Negro Woman.

However, this Negro woman knew Jesus was the Master, and Son of David, from whom she would accept "any" help He would bestow (give) her. She spoke to Jesus as the "Seed of David." Which demonstrated that her faith in Jesus was strong because she said she would take even a crumb. She believed her daughter could be cured by Him. Strangely Jesus did not ask her to believe in Him, nor did He talk salvation to her, as He did to the Israelite woman who lived in Samaria.

Integration Is A Curse

Joshua warns us also what will happen if we integrate. "Else if ye do in any wise go back, and cleave unto the remnant of these nations, even these that remain among you, and shall make marriages with them, and go in unto them, and they to you: Know for a certainty that the Lord your God will no more drive out any of these nations from before you; but they shall be snares and traps unto you, and scourges in your sides, and thorns in your eyes, until ye perish from off this good land which the Lord your God hath given you." [188]

Therefore, it is very clear we, the White Race, are not to mix with the other races! And if we do God will curse us and destroy us from the face of the earth, leaving only those who are pure in their races, as was Noah. Make no mistake about it!

Moses First Wife Was A Negro Woman

But He Never Had Sexual Relations With Her

As you begin to study God's Word and He begins to open your eyes to His wonderful truths, deceivers will come in and try to tell you that integration is all right because Moses was married to a Negro Woman. Well he was. His first wife was a Negro, but he did not marry her of his own accord, she was appointed by the people of Cush to be his wife.

And Moses never went into unto her, nor did he ever have sexual relations with her. He obeyed God and kept himself pure of the sin of Miscegenation (Race Mixing). The entire story is related in the Book of Jasher. One of the books, purposely left out of the Bible because the Jews did not wish for Christians to learn many truths, which are contained therein: "And when Moses was eighteen years old, he desired to see his father and mother and he went to them to Goshen, and when Moses had come near Goshen, he came to the place where the Children of Israel were engaged in work, and he observed their burdens, and he saw an Egyptian smiting one of his Hebrew brethren. And when the man who was beaten saw Moses he ran to him for help, for the man Moses was greatly respected in the house of Pharaoh, and he said to him, My lord attend to me, this Egyptian came to my house in the night, bound me, and came to my wife in my presence, and now he seeks to take my life away. And when Moses heard this wicked thing, his anger was kindled against the Egyptian, and he turned this way and the other, and when he saw there was no man there he smote the Egyptian and hid him in the sand, and delivered the Hebrew from the hand of him that smote him. And the Hebrew went to his house, and Moses returned to his home, and went forth and came back to the king's house. And when the man had returned home, he thought of repudiating his wife, for it was not right in the house of Jacob, for any man to come to his wife after she had been defiled (had sex with another race). And the woman went and told her brothers, and the woman's brothers sought to slay him, and he fled to his house and escaped. And on the second day Moses went forth to his brethren, and saw, and behold two men were quarreling, and he said to the wicked one, Why dost thou smite thy neighbor? And he answered him and said to him. Who has set thee for a prince and judge over us? didst thou think to slay me as thou didst slay the Egyptian? and Moses was afraid and he said, Surely the thing is known? And Pharaoh heard of this affair, and he ordered Moses to be slain, so God sent his angel, and he appeared unto Pharaoh in the likeness of a captain of the guard. And angel of the Lord took the sword from the hand of the captain of the guard, ant took his head off with it, for the likeness of the captain of the guard was turned into the likeness of Moses. And the angel of the Lord took hold of the right hand of Moses, and brought him forth from Egypt, and placed him from without the borders of Egypt, a distance of forty days' journey." [189]

Our King James version of the Bible relates the story this way: "And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren. And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Wherefore smitest thou thy fellow? And he said, Who made thee a prince and a judge over us? intendest thou to kill me, as thou killedst the Egyptian? And Moses feared, and said, Surely this thing is known. Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled form the face of Pharaoh, and dwelt in the land of Midian and he sat down by a well." [190]

There was a lot happened between the time that Moses left Egypt and when he came to the well at Midian. Following is what transpired in the intervening forty nine years: "And Moses was eighteen years old when he fled from Egypt from the presence of Pharaoh, and he fled and escaped to the camp of Kikianus, which at that time was besieging Cush. And Moses was nine years in the camp of Kikianus king of Cush, all the time that they were besieging Cush, and Moses went out and came in with them. And the king and princes and all the fighting men loved Moses, for he was great and worthy, his stature was like a noble lion, his face was like the sun, and his strength was like that of a lion, and he was counsellor to the king. And at the end of nine years, Kikianus was seized with a mortal disease, and his illness prevailed over him, and he died on the seventh day. So his servants embalmed him and carried him and buried him opposite the city gate to the north of the land of Egypt...And they wished to choose on that day a man for king from the army of Kikianus, and they found no object of their choice like Moses to reign over them. And they hastened and stripped off each man his garments and cast them upon the ground, and they made a great heap and placed Moses thereon. And they rose up and blew with trumpets and called out before him, and said, May the king live, may the king live! And all the people and nobles swore unto him to give him for a wife Adoniah the Queen, the Cushite, wife of Kikianus, and they made Moses King over them on that day...Moses reigned over the children of Cush on that day, in the place of Kikianus king of Cush...Moses was twenty‑seven years old when he began to reign over Cush, and forty years did he reign...And they placed the royal crown upon his head, and they gave him for a wife Adoniah the Cushite queen, and wife of Kikianus. And Moses feared The Lord God of his fathers, so that he came not to her, nor did he turn his eyes to her. For Moses remembered how Abraham had made his servant Eliezer swear, saying unto him, Thou shalt not take a woman from the daughters of Canaan for my son Isaac. Also what Isaac did when Jacob had fled from his brother, when he commanded him, saying, thou shalt not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan, nor more alliance with any of the Children of Ham. For the Lord our God gave Ham the son of Noah, and his children and all his seed, as slaves to the children of Shem and to the children of Japheth, and unto their seed after them for slaves, forever. Therefore Moses turned not his heart nor his eyes to the wife of Kikianus all the days that he reigned over Cush. And Moses feared the Lord his God all his life, and Moses walked before the Lord in truth (did not mix his seed with that of the Negro Woman), and with all his heart and soul, he turned not from the right way (did not mix with another race) all the days of his life; he declined not from the way either to the right or to the left, in which Abraham, Isaac and Jacob had walked...And in the fortieth year of the reign of Moses over Cush, Moses was sitting on the royal throne whilst Adoniah the queen was before him, and all the nobles were sitting around him. And Adoniah the queen said before the king and the princes. What is this thing which you, the children of Cush, have done for this long time? Surely you know that for Forty Years that this man has reigned over Cush he has not approached me, nor has he served the gods of the children of Cush. Now therefore hear, O ye children of Cush, and let this man no more reign over you as he is not of our flesh (Moses was a White Man). Behold Menacrus my son is grown up, let him reign over you, for it is better for you to sever the son of your lord, than to serve a stranger, a slave of the king of Egypt. And all the people and nobles of the children of Cush heard the words which Adoniah the queen had spoken in their ears. And all the people were preparing until the evening, and in the morning they rose up early and made Menacrus, son of Kikianus, king over them. And all the children of Cush were afraid to stretch forth their hand against Moses, for the Lord was with Moses, and the children of Cush remembered the oath which they swore unto Moses, therefore they did no harm to him. But the children of Cush gave many presents to Moses, and sent him from them with great honor. So Moses went forth from the land of Cush, and went home and ceased to reign over Cush, and Moses was sixty‑six years old when he went out of the land of Cush, for the thing was from the Lord, for the period had arrived which he had appointed in the day of old, to bring forth Israel from the affliction of the children of Ham. So Moses went to Midian..." [191]

Thus, it is clear to see, fornication, as described in chapter twenty-five of Numbers, is interracial marriage. So, the one thing that Balak and Balaam were successful in doing was in getting Israel to sacrifice unto idols and to commit fornication. Integration, when looked at honestly, not through the slant of false teachings by the anti-Christs, is nothing less than the destruction of any society; it is also the destruction of the two different races which are combined. Integration will destroy the White Race if God were to allow it to continue unabated. Which is the ultimate goal of the anti-Christs, because they believe that with the destruction of the White Race they will be able to once again claim the birthright their father, Esau, sold.

God says, therefore, there are many nations and God calls them nations; but the Pope says that there wasn't any nation until Adam came along, or any race and everybody came out of the race of Adam and all the races can go back into the race of Adam. However, the Pope doesn't know what he's talking about because the Assyrians were a race, the Egyptians were a race, the Africans were a race, the Chinese were a race, and the Children of Adam were an entirely different Race. The Scriptures say that there are also nations that God will cast out from before Israel because of their abominations. "When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the Lord: and because of these abominations the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee." [192]

He said that the Hittities and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites (Jews) and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites (the "Kikes") all of them, all these Nations are greater and more powerful than the Israelites and He would drive them out because of their abominations. Then He goes on to say that He does not want His Israel people to have anything to do with them: "When the Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. For they will turn away thy sons from following me, that they may serve other gods..." [193]

We can see that God is saying, "I don't want you to marry them, I don't want your children to marry with them; you are to utterly destroy them and all their idol groves and all their pagan temples; you are to tear them down and burn them up."; "But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves: For thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a-whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice; And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a-whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a-whoring after their gods." [194]

God further says: "For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth." [195] This is Nationalism, this is Racism: This is what the World and National Council of Churches have said we've got to do away with. So it is clear for all to see, they are doing away with God's truth so that Satan's lie can be implemented. Scripture after Scripture describes the above and even more: "Happy art thou, O Israel: who is like unto thee, O people saved by the Lord, the shield of thy help, and who is the sword of thy excellency! and thine enemies shall be found liars unto thee; and thou shalt tread upon their high places." [196]

In the 33rd Psalm God said: "Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance. The Lord looketh from heaven; he beholdeth all the sons of men. From the place of his habitation he looketh upon all the inhabitants of the earth. He fashioneth their hearts alike; he considereth all their works. There is no king saved by the multitude of an host: a mighty man is not delivered by much strength. An horse is a vain thing for safety: neither shall he deliver any by his great strength. Behold, the eye of the Lord is upon them that fear him, upon them that hope in his mercy; To deliver their soul from death, and to keep them alive in famine. Our soul waiteth for the Lord: he is our help and our shield. For our heart shall rejoice in him, because we have trusted in his holy name." [197]

This does not sound like we are to end Nationalities or that we are to do away with the different races and mongrelize them all into one gigantic race. The reason why God said that they were not to intermingle or to mongrelize with these other nations is that the Spirit of God will not cohabit with another race. If a person cohabits with another race, the Spirit of God has no part in that union and the mulatto or the offspring has no spiritual capacities. He has only the conscious patterns of his own soul consciousness and the Spirit of God will not "Pro-generate" any connection with another race. That is what God has ordained and He has declared it from the very beginning. The starting of a godless society can be seen in the United States in the last 30 years as the mixing of the races has grown, and that society is bending towards paganism and is in the process of disruption and the abominations which God hates, because the Spirit of God will not cohabit with a mixture of the races.

As we watch these situations develop, we cry out to all our White brothers and sisters: "Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles." [198]

For God has said: "For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me. I am the Lord, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me." [199] God is talking about a race of people that were begotten in His image, that were His household, that are His children, that are His offspring. No wonder God then speaks in the 45th chapter of Isaiah: "Thus saith the Lord, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded." [200]

Therefore, we can see that God has said about His Israel people: Israel shall be saved with an everlasting salvation, they will not be ashamed nor confounded, a world without end and the other races are going to look at them and say; behold, God is in you, you are the offspring of God and God is in you. This is what God says concerning the House of Israel.

Let's point out a few more Scriptures, which have said in effect, that the White Race is God's inheritance, and would: "But now thus saith the Lord that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine. When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee: when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon thee. For I am the Lord thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee. Since thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast been honourable, and I have loved thee: therefore will I give men for thee, and people for thy life. And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains: and mine elect shall inherit it, and my servants shall dwell there." [201]

It is an easy thing for the Judeo-Christian preachers and churches to say all races are the same, as they have already proven themselves to be traitors to Almighty God and the Lord Jesus Christ. But God says that they are not only not the same, but forbids any integration whatsoever, any intermarriage whatsoever, because it's against the Word of God and His Law of Kind after Kind.

As far as the Pope and the clergy of the National or World Council of Churches we will take the Bible over them every time. These men are obviously educated beyond their mental capacity to understand that the truth cannot be done away with.

In the days when the apostle Paul was doing his preaching, he went to Greece; and told them that his objective was "to win them." He said that he knew all about them and their history; he knew the ancient Greeks were of the Pure White Race and were of the Tribes of Israel and the descendants of Adam who had migrated from their original areas of habitation and "become blind" or lost the knowledge they had of their original racial origins and also of their spiritual powers. For he told them: "Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ." [202]

In other words, he is telling the Greeks; their forefathers were all of Israel, there is no difference between us. And because of lack of understanding many so-called Bible scholars have misinterpreted Paul when he went to the Greeks and talked about there being no difference between the races. What he was talking about was that there was no difference in them because they had all been of the Adamic race.

The Adamites (forefathers of the Israelites) who were practicing the correct religion of their race went out unto the Greeks who were of the SAME race but were not practicing the religion of their race. So, when Paul was talking about "Nations" he was talking about those of the same race in different geographical areas, and not those of different races. God talks about the fact that the lost Adamites who are unaware of their racial and spiritual Identity must be "saved." The majority of our White Adamic brothers and sisters are "lost" because they are unaware of their origin and have no memory of their sojourn with God.

The Jews (Jews) have worked since their father Lucifer revolted against our God and his armies were defeated in the heavens by the forces of Michael and his Angels and those rebellious Angels were cast down onto the Earth.

Since Lucifer (or one of his agents) seduced Eve in the Garden of Eden and produced the first physical Jew who could breed with the Adamites and pre-Adamic races of the Earth, the forces of Lucifer have been carrying on a relentless battle to seduce and mongrealize those of the Adamic race and instill in them the spirit of Satan, and thus destroy them and their mission to redeem the Earth from the legions of Satan.

The battle between the Adamites and the Jews has been going on since the Garden of Eden and continues today. It was about the year 110 A.D. that one of our Adamic kinsmen and heroes, Marcion of Sinope tried to destroy the forces of Lucifer and free the "Catholic Church" from it's mental bondage of believing that those who were known as "Jews" of their day, were the True Israel of the Bible and Israelites.

Bishop Marcion was from Sinope and his father was one of the followers of the original disciples as well as an early Christian bishop. He had read the early manuscripts of the Four Gospels of the Kingdom (John, Mark, Luke and Matthew) as well as certain parts of the writings of Paul. The father of Marcion told him that the Jews had "mis-translated" and doctored the original four Gospels and that he had read copies of the originals before they had desecrated them for their own evil purposes.

The manuscripts that Marcion's father showed him "disappeared" and he had to edit the Jew forgeries and try to restor them to their original state. At that time the evil of the Jews was so strong on the Earth that Bishop Marcion felt that it would be better to leave the Earth in the hands of the Jews and for the Adamites to "die out" and for their spirits to return to heaven., rather than to produce children on this Luciferian controlled earth.

The two main doctrines of the Marcionite Catholic Church were to fight the Jews (Jews, known at that time as scribes and Pharisees) and to urge all Adamites not to reproduce and so their spirits could return to be with God whence they had originally came, thus saving future generations of our Adamic race from having to come and suffer through the fruitless effort of trying to fight a Jew controlled system which had already destroyed the mental ability of many White Israelites to think and judge for themselves.

He believed that the Jews had so distorted all knowledge and so destroyed our Earth that if the Jews could not be physically destroyed, the Adamites should abandon the Earth to them so they would be forced to live here on Earth forever and never be able to leave it or be forgiven by God for their evil and rebellion. The number of Jews confined to the earth comes from the Talmud wherein the Jew rabbis claim that the number of Fallen Angels in their spiritual form were cast down onto this Earth.

Since they would not ask forgiveness of God and continued their rebellion, regardless of how hard our Adamic race urged them to do so, and they were in a permanent satanic spiritual form, they could only enjoy the "pleasures of life and living" when they could take over and control the physical bodies of the Israelites. Lucifer was the only fallen Angel who could take on the physical body and appearance of a "man" and thus breed with the Adamites and pre-Adamites on the Earthly plane.

With his seduction of Eve and the birth of the first physical Jew, Cain, Lucifer then could move out from the Garden of Eden and mate with the White pre-Adamites and non-White pre-Adamites who were living outside of the Garden of Eden "on this earth." Each of these bodiless evil Luciferian spirits who were cast down onto this Earth wanted to assume physical bodies so they could enjoy the sexual and sensual pleasures that the Adamites and pre-Adamites could "enjoy."

This meant that they could only take over demonic possession of the bodies of those on the Earth who they could intermarry with and during ancient times there were not enough physical bodies for them all to take over and occupy.

As they could only temporarily take over and occupy bodies of Adamites and pre-Adamites who could be won over to their pattern of rebellion (having their thinking process taken over, much as we see today in America).

However, in these cases they had not mingled their genes with those they only mentally occupied and controlled, and when the host they controlled died, they also "died" and became bodiless spirits wandering the earth, in some cases for thousands of years until they could take over and control another body or be born into the body of one who was contaminated with the Jew blood.

The story of "Dracula" written by Bram Stoker in the 1800s is the story of the Jew who he calls Vampires. Bram Stoker and members of the Order of the Golden Dawn were well aware of the ancient writings or the Adamic race. Thus, Bram Stoker received a message from God about Lucifer and the Jews which he wrote about, knowingly or un-knowingly because God wanted him to do so.

The story of the Vampires that Bram Stoker wrote about, but could not have known about from his own meager knowledge, came from the now hidden history of Christianity as it was from the beginning. In Dracula the Vampire "Dracula" is forced to return to his coffin with his soil in it before the dawn, or he is destroyed by the Sun.

From the earliest times of Christianity the Jews was considered so evil and Satanic by the Israelites and Adamites among whom they lived that they were forced by law to return to their walled ghettoes every evening before the Sun went down and were not allowed to leave their ghettoes before the sun came up at dawn, or they were arrested and in many cases imprisoned or killed. This played right into the rabbis hands because they were, because of this, able to keep the Jews under tight control and united against their enemies.

In the story of Dracula the "Vampire" could only do harm to those of the White race, who by their own will admitted him to their homes. Those Christians who try to "convert" Jews to Christianity are like those in Dracula have invited the Jews into their homes. The Jews once invited to become "converted" to Christianity use their feigned "conversion" and new "acceptance" to rise to powerful positions where they can undermine, change and destroy Christianity from within, as they have been invited "in" by whose who are ignorant of their evil natures.

Again, in Dracula we see him making every attempt to hypnotize White women so they can seduce them, and by going after the blood, he mingles his blood with theirs. This is symbolic of the Jews seducing and having intercourse with White women, who then produce baby "Vampires" who carry the Jew, Luciferian seed in them and provide receptacles for bodiless Jewish spirits to occupy.

By contaminating the blood line (genetics) of the White Race they thus "kill off" a White soldier of Christ by denying another White spirit from coming to occupy a body to "take back the earth from the Jews" a "soldier" of God and thus reduce our ranks while augmenting their own.

When Bram Stoker was writing Dracula he also noted that there were individuals who were hypnotized by the Vampire with whom he did not mix his blood; we can assume that those he did not mix his blood with were of the pre-Adamic, non-White Races who were brought into Europe or migrated there and for some reason they did not wish to mingle their blood with them. In Dracula we see that Dracula always has servants to do his every bidding and that he did not mix their blood with his, in many cases.

In the New Testament we find numerous cases of "Demon Possession" of individuals. Remember when Jesus Christ met a man by the sea who was possessed by "evil spirits" and drove them out into pigs who went wild and ran into the sea and died. "And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way. And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding. So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine. And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters." [203]; "And in that same hour he cured many of their infirmities and plagues, and of evil spirits; and unto many that were blind he gave sight. And certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils, So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them." [204]

The Bible also tells us that Judas Iscariot was possessed by an evil spirit. "Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. Philip answered him, Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one of them may take a little." [205]

By using their crafty methods to "seduce" the minds of numerous Christians they can control their minds and thus take away their own will power and make them receptive to Luciferian ideas and prepare their bodies for temporary occupation by not only one but by many evil spirits who wish an outlet for their sensual desires.

This would further explain Christ's saying: "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" [206]

Most who watch television have seen instances of individuals who have as many as fifty different personalities; and many believe that these individuals have been mentally seduced by evil spirits and have become the temporary habitation for not only one but for many Luciferian spirits to occupy.

When these occupied individuals die, the spirits must depart from the body and seek another host. Many, further, believe that throughout history the Jews have been able to "seduce" many so-called Christian scholars and church fathers and took over their mental facilities and used these facilities to change and fabricate Christian writings so they can be used for their own purposes. "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of." [207]

Jesus Christ tells us that a proselyte (a White Israelite or Christian who has been "converted" to Jewish thoughts) is twofold the child of hell than the Jew. "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves." [208]

We have all seen this among many of our so-called White ministers and priests. The Talmud goes into detail about the Jewish ability to take over and occupy the bodies of not only non-Jews but also of animals, trees and flowers. Further proof of this is found in the fact that until recent times the Catholic Church and also the Episcopal had special rituals for exorcizing individuals who they said were possessed by "evil spirits." It would appear these Jewish Luciferian spirits are able to take over the bodies of non-Jews in order to occupy and use them for their own evil purposes.

The Jews also find a good source for their occupation of the bodies of White men and women who have never inter-bred with White Israelites who have the three things needed from God to make them whole: Body, Soul and most important Spirit. The Spirit is the Spirit of God placed in the White man making him whole in the three parts.

It is apparent, from a study of history, that Blacks and the other races have bodies and souls but no Spirit of God in them. There are also Whites who have body and soul but no Spirit. These are the men before Adam mentioned in Genesis.

The way these pre-Adamic Whites become a part of the Adamic (Israelite) family is breeding with those Adamites who have the Spirit from God and through this inter-breeding their offspring become receptacles for the Adamic spirits sent to combat the Jew Jews in the struggle for the Universe.

Returning to Marcion, we note that he correctly told his followers that the Jews were the Masters of the Earth and Lucifer controlled the Earth. The New Testament tells us that "Satan is Prince of this World." "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me. Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged. Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. " [209]

We must remember that the Old Testament was doctored from it's original oral and written manuscripts by Jews (scribes); and since the White race had lost the power to read the original Aramaic and many early doctrines had been translated into Babylonian Flame Writing. Those who were in Babylon and knew Hebrew were latter to be known as the scribes and Pharisees, and they pretended to be "converted" to Christianity relishing in the fact that they were called on by Christian scholars to "re-translate" the Old Testament.

In getting their hands on the Old Testament, which they could only read after it had been translated into Babylonian Flame Writing, they interjected their Jewish history into the history of the White Adamic people in an effort to further confuse us and gain control of our religion.

Keep in mind that until about 1600 A.D. the Catholic Church kept the Old Testament under "house arrest" only letting it be seen by those making special requests. The Church fathers considered that it was so corrupted and so Jewaized that those reading it would be misled and corrupted by the "fables of the Jews." Marcion after seeing that the original four gospels had been "re-translated" by the scribes to fit their evil purposes, was even more alarmed by the fact that these anti-Christ, Anti-Israel Jews had been called on to "translate" the Old Testament. He found most of the Old Testament a total confusing and in the majority of places a contradiction and rejection of true White Adamic history.

An instance of the fraudulent Book of Esther which gloats on and celebrates the slaughter of 75,000 Aryan Adamites by the Jews in ancient Persia. This holocaust is still celebrated by the Jews today (Purim) and so-called "Christians" find nothing wrong with it, while giving the Jews billions of dollars for the fake holocaust of WWII, and even building a memorial to this horrendous lie in Washington, using White Israelites money. The Jews celebrate the murder of Adamites thousands of years ago and this is not considered hate by our demonically controlled priests, ministers and public officials.

Rather than try to correct the lies the Jews had "translated" into the Old Testament, Marcion rejected it completely and stated that the God who committed evil acts and genocide against others in the mis-translated Old Testament, was not the God of the Adamic race but rather the Lucifer the god of the Jews and Marcion called for the complete rejection and eradication of what he called all "Jewish fables" put into the Old and New Testaments by the Jews.

He went through the New Testament and, using his memory of what he had read in his father's original transcripts of the New Testament, reconstructed it taking out what he said were the doctrines of the Jews.

Evil men who became the leaders in the Catholic Church in early times went to great lengths to destroy all the Bibles re-edited by Marcion, however, a number of Catholic "Saints" who sided with the Jews (Tertullian and Eusebias) against their own people revealed much of what Marcion had edited when they used his manuscripts (before destroying them) to attack him.

Thus, we can reconstruct much of Marcion's work today. In his book "The Religion of the Occident" the late Dr. Martin Larson devotes a large portion to Marcion. He reconstructed much of the writings of Marcion from the attacks made on him by so-called Christian church officials who were demonically controlled by satanic spirits.

Please keep in mind that at the same time evil "saints" in the Catholic Church were destroying Marcion in behalf of Lucifer and the Jews, there were many good White Israelite Catholic Saints who continued attacking the Jews and rejecting their efforts to control their minds. Many of the sayings of these great warriors of God are quoted in "The Jews and the Catholic Church," by Rev. James K. Warner, available from the New Christian Crusade Church, Box 449, Arabia, La 70032 for a contribution of $25 or more.

In the Book of Corinthians the Apostle Paul said; "But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ." [210]

Peter writing in First Peter says; "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers (Israelites who had lost the knowledge of their racial origins) scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied." [211] Those he was speaking to were the "Elect People" according to the foreknowledge of God and he was an apostle to them, and the apostle Paul further related that he was forbidden to go over to Asia, He didn't have anything for Asia, he had a message for Israel first and so went to Britain, Germany and he went throughout the Roman Empire.

We have come, therefore, to the Second chapter of 1 Peter where it says: "If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious. To whom (the Messiah) coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men (Jews), but chosen of God, and precious, Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner" [212]

So then Peter is saying, you (Israelites) are a; Chosen Generation (race), you (Israelites) are a royal priesthood, you (Israelites) are a holy nation that'll show forth the praises of Him who called you into His marvelous light and so, again we wish to point that from one of the Scriptures to the other.

God preserves the nations and the Nations of Israel; from one end to the other. God talks about our race and He says you have got to keep the race line pure, you don't want to integrate it, you don't want to mongrelize it, you don't want to lose your spirituality and so, God has marked the same message for America today that He gave Ezra when Ezra warned the people against confusing of face, against mongrelization.

If the social engineers can put black dolls into all the children's hands and get them to loving these black dolls, they'll love blacks later and marry them like the Episcopalian preacher says, You'll be a people without spirit and without insight, you'll become a people whose eyes will become listless and who will be as emotionally unsound as those blacks they want to mongrelize you with. This is the devil's program and he knows that he cannot compete with the greatness and the initiative and the spiritual concepts of the White Race.

He knows that the minds of the societies of Asia and of Africa and so forth are unable to cope with them and even the Luciferian children known as the "Jews" are unable to compete with the true wisdom and the true knowledge of our race, but if they can mongrelize us, if they can absorb it, they could, therefore, destroy the spiritual qualities of vision and inspiration that the White Race has and they want to destroy the White Race and they want to grind it down and this, my friends, is the reason why they are pushing all of these projects today.

Chapter One

                                              America Is New Jer<->USA<->Lem and New Zion

                                            The White Race Of The Christian Nations Of The

                                         West Are The Descendants Of The Tribes Of Israel

The significance of race is gravely under‑­evaluated today, yet the Bible stresses the importance of maintaining purity of racial descent among all the dif­ferent races. Intermarriages between the people of God (The White Race) and other races were/is strictly forbidden. The Scriptural tabulation of pedigrees exhibits meticu­lous de­tail as the care­fully recorded genealog­ical tables disclose.

Ev­ery race and peo­ple upon the face of the globe today must of necessity have ancestors, their very existence proves this to be so. Yet how many of those can name their own ancestors of a few generations ago? As with the individuals, so with people, the knowledge of the past becomes lost while its record is neglected and forgotten as the needs of the present leave little time to contemplate what has now become history.

In the life of nations, with the passing of centuries, ancient names have been lost and new names acquired as people migrated from one geographical location to another. In these movements, to escape conditions of the past, all knowledge of that past was obliterated by time and the very names, activities and nationalities of ancestors were not only lost but former locations, and even the years consumed in migratory movements, were remembered no more.

To all intents and purposes, in so far as modern scholarship is concerned, modern peoples and nations sprang from nothing and when the history of ancient races, peoples and nations is studied it is without any thought that it can possibly be the history of the ancestors of those who are thus reading those ancient records.

Because this is so, and because men have taken an attitude which disassociates ancient races from modern peoples, few have undertaken to trace their origin and study the identification marks that indicate who they are, from whence they came and the identification of their ancestors in former times.

Now the past is important and if we identify the ancestors of modern nations it will lead to an understanding of many things which at present puzzle men, bringing only confusion when they try to fathom the reason for things as they are.

Why are certain races distrustful of each other today? Can it be that there are race antagonisms which have persisted throughout the centuries, the result of ancient injustices and animosities?

While the reason for the origin of this distrust and antagonism has been lost in antiquity, yet in the subconscious soul of races there is a recognition, in this spirit of distrust, of potential enemy in the descendants of those who were enemies in former times. It is an intuitive distrust although the reason for that distrust has long been forgotten.

Because all this is so and because God made certain promises to a certain race ‑ which promises were to be fulfilled in the descendants of this race, even in modern times ‑ the identification of this race will bring a more clear understanding of many events that are now taking place. There are two ways to approach this subject.

One is to begin with modern nations and trace their history backward and thus discover their origin. Another method is to begin with ancient races and as we follow the course of history identify peoples in movements and migrations of the past and note the different names assumed by them in the course of centuries; and when we finally come to the study of the history of modern times, the identification will have been completed. This latter course is the one often followed by those who have in the past undertaken to set forth the Anglo‑Saxon, Celtic identity and responsibility. First, however, it became evident to them that this people resembled, through the marks given by the prophets, the Race of the Book to whom the prophets were addressing a message for these days in which we live.

Before taking up the matter of identification it is important to settle a controversial question, often raised when the identity of the Anglo‑Saxon, Celtic peoples with Israel of old is mentioned. Are the Anglo‑Saxon, Germanic, Celtic peoples a distinct race, or are they but a mixture of many races? Now we recognize in individuals certain family characteristics that persist as family traits and are inherited from generation to generation. Races have the same characteristics for there are inherent, in every race, racial traits peculiar to that race and so recognized by all men familiar with racial types.

This is well illustrated in the fact that two distinct races will not respond alike under a given set of circumstances. A nation facing a sudden crisis, regardless of its present culture or modern training, will immediately revert to type. This in itself is a distinguishing feature by which a racial stock may be known and identified.

One who knows these facts to be so will mentally classify the peoples according to race characteristics. He will not expect an Italian to act like a Prussian when faced with a sudden emergency. Also, he would not judge the action of an Anglo‑Saxon as though he were dealing with a Frenchman. He knows there are dominating racial characteristics which he would expect to find manifested in the activities of the people of their respective races. Thus there are racial boundaries which are far more accurately drawn than national geographical boundaries. Political pressure and war can change these national boundaries, but no amount of persecution or pressure will change racial characteristics or traits.

Thus, apart even from the evidence of history, the origin of a race can be traced through race characteristics. We find that modern nations and races show characteristics manifested by their ancestors in ancient times. Such racial traits constitute one of the strongest marks of identification with the peoples of the past, which racial types demonstrate that the Anglo‑Saxon, Germanic, Celtic peoples are not a mixed multitude, though residing in their midst are people of many races.

One of the outstanding characteristics of the Anglo‑Saxon, Germanic, Celtic peoples, and a trait particularly marked in a strong degree among them, is their love of freedom. History has proven again and again their willingness to fight and die for freedom rather than to be enslaved or even to pay tribute.

The White Races' desire for freedom has produced such documents as the Magna Charta, the Scottish Declaration of Independence, The American Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution of the United States.

No other people on the face of the earth have given to posterity such lofty ideals of freedom. Other races have lacked the essential motivating power that would urge them on to such attainments. But the White Race, even in the face of almost insurmountable obstacles, have pressed on, led by a destiny not of their making, with freedom their goal as they strive for peace, and in attainment of this purpose they never admit defeat.

Perhaps one of the greatest evidences that a people desire freedom is their reaction to taxation. The White Race have stood many types of abuse, having seen their leaders become faithless to their trust, causing them to endure hardships of maladministration. They have even willingly submitted to excess taxation when it has been of their own levying, but they have certainly refused to submit to any form of taxation without representation.

The modern history of our race shows a people ever moving westward to escape the oppression and tyranny of rulers who endeavored to enslave them. The coming of the Pilgrims and others to our shores was merely a continuation of the ever westward movement of a people who originally moved from Asia into Europe as they migrated westward in a desire to escape oppression.

The hardships of the trail meant little in comparison to the blessings of freedom. The records of the Scythians, Goths and Visgoths show this predominating desire for independence. Whence came this people, possessing such a spirit that amounts almost to fanaticism? No race other than the White Race possess it to such a marked degree.

A History Of The Travels Of Israel

The Bible story begins: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." [213] In the rest of Chapter One we are told about the creation of the animals and all the living creatures on the earth and under the sea. It also relates to us of the "creating" of the first men and women.

Chapter Two tells of the "forming" of Adam [The First White Man], and of him being in the garden of Eden, of Eve, their disobedience, and their removal from the Garden.

In the next few pages we read of the flood, the saving of Noah and his household, the spreading of their descendants across the land. Next, we learn of the building of the tower of Babel, its destruction; God's confounding of the people's language, and their dispersion across the earth.

In just a few chapters, God covers many centuries, including awesome and terrifying calamities; Then God speaks to just ONE MAN, a man whose name was changed, by Almighty God, from Abram to Abraham, and from that time on, the Bible is about this man and his descendants.

In Genesis Twelve, God told Abraham: "...I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee...And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed." [214]

Then follows a number of meetings between God and Abraham. God later meets with Abraham's son, Isaac, and later with Jacob, the son of Isaac, repeats the promises [Covenants] made with and to Abraham. All of these promises and covenants have to do with the future of Jacob's children. The rest of the Bible deals almost exclusively with these heirs of the covenants and the promises, called in the Bible, "The Children of Israel."

The law, the doctrines, the warnings and admonishments are addressed to Israel. All of the Prophets were Israelites and all of the writers of both the Old and New Testaments, with the possible exception of the Book of Esther [Which appears to have been of Jewish authorship as it is read at the Feast of Purim which is a solely Jewish holiday and was/is most certainly not an Israelitish Holiday! The Feast of Purim commemorates the deliverance from Haman, the "Jew's" enemy.].

The evidence to support such a supposition is found in the fact that no reference is made to Almighty God or the Holy One of Israel, the Lord Jesus Christ, in the Book of Esther. This is made even more remarkable, since, in this book of only 167 verses, the Median King is mentioned 192 times, his kingdom is referred to 26 times and his name "Ahasuerus" is given 29 times and reference is made to the "Jews(s)" 52 times], were Israelites.

For God told Israel: "You only have I known of all the families of the earth." [215] Paul confirms this by stating: "Who are Israelites: to whom pertaineth the adoption...the glory, and the covenants...the giving of the law...the service of God, and the promises." [216]

Abraham, though dead for 2000 years by the time of Christ, is mentioned 69 times in the New Testament. When Jesus was born, Zacharias said in Luke that Jesus had come to remember God's covenant and the oath which God had sworn to Abraham. [217]

Therefore, it is obvious to any "thinking" student of the Bible; it is a book about Almighty God, the Holy One of Israel and of Abraham's children: the White Anglo‑Saxon, Germanic, Celtic, Scandinavian, and Kindred People [Which does not include the Jews, for they are of Mongolian descent], who are one man's family. The things written aforetime were written for our learning and hope: "For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope." [218]

Now let's turn to the covenants God made with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob/Israel and with the Children of Israel. God appeared to Abraham in a vision and said: "Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. And he believed in the Lord: and he counted it to him for righteousness." [219]

This promise of great numbers for their descendants is repeated several times. [220] Then Abraham had a son, whom he named Ishmael, by his wife Sarah's Egyptian handmaid Hagar. But this great covenant was not to be made with Ishmael. However, at first Abraham believed that Ishmael was the son of promise when he prayed: "O that Ishmael might live before thee." [221]

However, God made it abundantly clear to Abraham that Ishmael was not the child of promise but that his wife Sarah would bear him when He said: "Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly: twelve princes shall he beget...I will make him a great nation. But my covenant will I establish with Isaac." [222]

Thus Isaac, the son of Promise, was born according to God's Word. He later married Rebekah, and she was given a blessing: "And they blessed Rebekah, and said unto her, Thou art our sister, be thou the mother of thousands of millions...let thy seed possess the gate of those which hate them." [223]

To Isaac and Rebekah were born twin sons, Esau and Jacob, then Esau, the elder, sold his birthright to Jacob, who then became the rightful inheritor of these covenants. God appeared to Jacob to confirm these covenants. [224]

These and other verses make it abundantly clear that All the covenants pertaining to Abraham's blessings were passed to Jacob, whose name later was changed to Israel. [225] We see this same thing being repeated over and over again, that these descendants of the patriarch of Israel would be a great number of people and would become a multitude of nations.

While Jacob was yet alive, Joseph was sold into bondage in Egypt. A few years later the other eleven sons and their families moved to Egypt, where Joseph saved them from a famine which was in the land of Palestine and Egypt at that time. While in Egypt, Jacob‑Israel adopted the two sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, as his firstborn, in place of Reuben and Simeon. "The Angel [Jesus - the only one who can redeem men from their sins] which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name [Israel] be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac [Saxons]; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth." [226] This adoption as Israel's firstborn is verified in: "Now the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel, (he was the firstborn; but, forasmuch as he defiled his father's bed, his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of Israel; and the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the birthright." [227]

In verse 19, Jacob/Israel prophesied that Ephraim would become greater than Manasseh and that his seed would become a Multitude [Many] of Nations. After Joseph's death, Israel [The nation] continued to multiply, but a new Pharaoh [King] rose up over Egypt, who put the children of Israel in bondage. Because of their increase in numbers: "Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph. And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we." [228]

He attempted to reduce Israel by ordering all the male Israelite babies killed. Moses was saved by his mother: he was then raised in Pharaoh's household, but eventually fled from Egypt. "And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown...he spied [Saw] an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren. And he [Moses] looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand...Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelt in the land of Midian." [229]

During Moses' absence the king [Pharaoh] of Egypt died: "And it came to pass in (the) process of time, that the king of Egypt died: and the children of Israel sighed by reason of the bondage, and they cried... their cry came up unto God by reason of the bondage. And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob." [230]

God had said to Abraham, "I will be a God to you and to your seed after you." That covenant was formalized with Abraham's seed in what we recognize as a marriage ceremony, with the bride groom saying in effect, "Will you obey?" and the bride [Israel] in effect answering, "I will."

Thus, Israel became God's wife. That the wife‑husband relationship is correct, is verified in several passages, such as the following one in Isaiah: "For thy Maker is thine husband; the Lord of hosts is his name...thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called." [231]

God gave Israel the Ten Commandments in stone and several hundred other statutes and judgments, usually called God's Law. The First Commandment began: "I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me." [232]

While Israel was in the wilderness learning the statutes and judgments, God gave further promise of future greatness. In Deuteronomy 33 He gave a separate blessing to each of the tribes, and a greater blessing for Joseph. [233] This blessing can only mean the descendants of Joseph were to have a land blessed with great agricultural harvests, wealth from the seas, and ores and minerals from the earth.

The greatest portion of the Israel blessings would be fulfilled in the two sons of Joseph, who had been made the inheritors of the Abrahamic Covenants and the birthright as we read in Genesis 48. After 40 years in the wilderness, Moses died, and Joshua brought the Children of Israel into Canaan land and established them there as a nation. They had been commanded to observe God's statutes and judgments and to destroy the Canaanites out of the land, so they would not be tempted to follow their false gods and participate in their abominations. This Israel did not do, and as a consequence, they suffered a series of captivities during the 400 years prior to the time of David, as recorded in the Book of Judges.

David came to the throne of Israel in approximately 1050 B.C., and in 40 years of war enlarged and secured Israel as one nation in Canaan land, ruling them from Zion and Jerusalem.

At one point, according to 1 Chronicles 21, David had over one million, five hundred thousand men under arms [Men who drew sword], which would indicate that God's promise of increasing the seed of Abraham was being fulfilled [This number did not include those Israelites who left Egypt prior to the Exodus, nor would it include those who never went into Egypt to begin with], with 10 to 15 million people living in Palestine at that time.

Then when David died his son Solomon [it was through him that Joseph the step‑father of Jesus came] ruled for another forty years, during which time he established an era of peace and prosperity and built the Great Temple to Jehovah. The Israelite Kingdom was so blessed it became the marvel of that part of the world. "And when the queen of Sheba heard of the fame of Solomon concerning the name of the Lord...And she said...It was a true report that I heard in mine own land...Howbeit I believed not the words, until I came, and mine eyes had seen it: and, behold, the half was not told me: thy wisdom and prosperity exceedeth the fame which I heard. Happy are thy men... Blessed be the Lord thy God...because the Lord loved Israel forever." [234]

Once again it becomes obvious that God's promises and prophecies of great increase and material blessings were being fulfilled. But after Solomon's death came a terrible blow. The nation was then divided. The Ten Northern Tribes established their capital in Samaria. Jerusalem [Judah] now ruled only the Southern half of Israel.

The rivalry between the two kingdoms, Judah and Israel, brought wars, corruption and sin; even worship of Baal and the other gods of the wicked Canaanites who still lived among them. Gods sent prophets to them, warning them He would send alien nations against them, who would take them away captive into other lands. God called Israel's sin adultery [The worship of other gods] and told her through Jeremiah and Hosea that He was divorcing her: "...for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away...given her a bill of divorce." [235]

Thus, the Northern House of Israel, was divorced and no longer the wife of Jehovah. God, to punish the rebellious house, sent Assyria to conquer the Northern Israel Kingdom. The wars and deportations recorded in 2 Kings Chapters 16, 17 and 18.

And if that were not bad enough, the Israelites in the Judah Kingdom were also following the corrupted way of the Edomites and Canaanites, so seven years later the fenced cities of Judah were delivered into captivity and is recorded in 2 Kings Chapter 18. Which would have left only a small remnant of Israelites in the fortified city of Jerusalem by 700 B.C.

According to both the Bible and ancient historic accounts, these pagan empires used forcible evacuation as a means of preventing a rebellion at a later date. They moved non‑Israelites into the vacated land of the Northern Kingdom: "And the king of Assyria brought men from Babylon, and from Cutbah, and from Ava, and from Hamath, and from Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the children of Israel." [236]

Thus, the two conquests of Assyria would have removed the vast majority of the Israelites into Assyria and out of the Land of Palestine. The number removed would have been in the millions.

Let us pause here to present one of the attacks and captivities of part of the Children of Israel. It is recorded both in the Scriptures and on an ancient stone which is called "The Moabite Stone." It was discovered by Rev. F. Klein in 1868 at Dibda [The Dibon of the Old Testament] in Moab [The Children of Lot, which is recorded in Genesis Chapter 19].

The inscription consists of thirty‑four lines [The last two being undecipherable], and was written by Mesha the king of Moab to commemorate his successful revolt from the yoke of Israel, as recorded in 2 Kings 1:1 and Chapters 3; and to honor his god Chemosh, to whom he ascribed his successes.

The writing is in the ancient Hebrew characters which continued to be in use down to (about) 140‑139 B.C., but were gradually replaced by the modern square Hebrew characters which are in use today. The inscription is (Confirmed) in the Bible, there are two different accounts throwing light upon one another.

The following translation, by Dr. Neubauer, is taken from Records of the Past (New Series), Vol. II, p. 200 and following: "I, Mesha son of Chemash‑Melech king of Moab, the Dibonite. My father reigned over Moab thirty years and I reigned after my father. I made this monument to Chemash at Korkhah. A monument of salvation, for he saved me from all invaders, and let me see my desire upon all my enemies. Omri [was] king of Israel, and he oppressed Moab many days, for Chemosh was angry with his land. His son followed him, and he also said: 'I will oppress Moah.' In my days Chemash has said: I will see my desire on him and his house. And Israel surely perished for ever. Omri took the land of Medeba [237] and [Israel] dwelt in it during his days and half the days of his son [successor], altogether forty years. But there dwelt in it Chemash in my days. I built Baal‑Mean [Now Tel Main] [238] and made therein the ditches; I built Kirjathaim. [239]

The men of Gad dwelt in the land of Atarath [240] from of old, and built there the king of Israel Atarath; and I made war against the town and seized it. And I slew all the [People of] the town, for the pleasure of Chemash and Moab: I captured from thence the Ariel [The lion; probably a sacred emblem] of Dodah and tore him before Chemash in Kerioth [Not Khanel Kureitin [241]]: And I placed therein the men of Sharon, and the men of Mekherth. And Chemash said to me: Go, seize Nebo [242] upon Israel; and I went in the night and fought against it from the break of dawn till noon: and I took it, and slew all, 7000 men, women, and female slaves, for to Ashtar‑Chemash I devoted them. 

And I took from it the Arels of Yahveh, and tore them before Chemash. And the king of Israel built Jahaz [243], and dwelt in it, while he waged war against me; Chemash drave him out before me. And I took from Moab 200 men, all chiefs, and transported them to Jehaz, which I took, to add to it Dibon. I built Harkhah, the wall of the forests and the wall of the citadel: I built its gates, and I built its towers. And I built the house of Moloch, and I made sluices of the water ditches in the middle of the town. And there was no cistern in the middle of the town of Karkhah, and I said to all the people, make for yourselves every man a cistern in his house. And I dug the canals for Karkhah by means of the prisoners of Israel. I built Aroer [Now Arair, [244]], and I made the road in [The province of] the Arnon. [And] I built Beth‑Bamath [245]; A.V. 'high places'; [246] for it was destroyed. I built Bezer [247], for in ruins [It was. And all the chiefs] of Dibon were 50, for all Dibon is subject; and I placed one hundred [Chiefs] in the towns which I added to the land: I built Beth‑Medeba and Bethdiblalhaim [248] and Beth‑Baal‑Mean, [249] and transported thereto the [Shepherds]?...and the pastors of the flocks of the land. And at Horonaim [250] dwelt there...And Chemash said to me, Go down, make war upon Horonaim. I went down [And made war]...And Chemash dwelt in it during my days. I went up from thence..." [251]

Now let's return to where we left off. The prophet Jeremiah continued to prophecy to the tiny remnant in Jerusalem; and in the seventh chapter of Jeremiah, he told these Judaihites that because of their many sins, God would abandon Jerusalem: "Therefore will I do unto this house [Temple], which is called by my name, wherein ye trust, and unto the place [Jerusalem and Palestine] which I gave to you and to your fathers, as I have done to Shiloh." [252]

In the Books of Kings and Chronicles we have another 100 years of the history of the Judah Kingdom, a history of continuance of sin, some revivals, but always turning away from their God. During that time, Assyria's power declined, and lost control over much of its empire, while Babylon grew in power.

The few Judahites remaining at Jerusalem made a peace treaty with the King of Babylon, but they continued to sin against the God of Israel. They also attempted to enlist the help of Egypt. At which time God sent Jeremiah to tell Judah that Babylon would conquer them. They planned to resist, but Jeremiah told them that even if the Chaldean army consisted of only wounded men, they would still rise up and conquer them: "And the Chaldeans shall come again, and fight against this city, and take it, and burn it with fire. Thus saith the Lord; Deceive not yourselves, saying, The Chaldeans shall surely depart from us: for they shall not depart. For though ye had smitten the whole army of the Chaldeans that fight against you, and there remained but wounded men among them, yet should they rise up every man in his tent, and burn this city with fire." [253]

Perhaps, while reading this passage of scripture, you might wonder; just how many times has Jerusalem been besieged over the years. We will let the Companion Bible by Zondervan Bible Publishers of the Zondervan Corporation, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49506 answer this interesting question. The first occurrence of the name 'Jerusalem,' as a city [The king of Jerusalem had been mentioned in Joshua 10:1, but not the city as such], is in Judges 1:8, and confirms the fact that the first occurrence contains an epitome of its subsequent history.

The history of the city has been a record of its sieges. No fewer than twenty‑seven go to complete the list [This does not include those in the nineteenth or twentieth centuries]. This number is striking in the light of...being composed of 3 x 9, the factors being those of Divine completeness (3), and judgement (9) respectively (= 3 x 3 x 3). A cycle of original completeness is marked by the 10th and 20th (2 x 10) sieges. These were the two characterized by the destruction of the Temple by fire, which is in accord with the number 10, being that of ordinal perfection.

Both also were foretold: the former by Jeremiah and Ezekiel The latter by our Lord. Seven is the number of spiritual perfection, and it is worthy of note that the 7th, 14th (2 x 7), and 21st (3 x 7) sieges were each the subject of Divine prophecy. Further, a 28th (4 x 7) siege, yet future, is foretold in (Zechariah 14). While 14 (2 x 7) of the sieges are recorded in Holy Scripture, 13 are recorded in profane history. And it came to pass. Jerusalem was captured and the Judahites were taken into Babylon for the 70‑year captivity as prophesied by Jeremiah. "In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolation of Jerusalem." [254]

Daniel was speaking of the passages in the Book of Jeremiah. [255] When Daniel made his study, in Babylon, all seemed lost. What had happened to the covenants? What had become of the great promises of God?

Then just as Jeremiah had prophesied; 70‑years later, Ezra did bring back from Babylon, to Jerusalem, a handful of Israelites to rebuild the city and the temple. Ezra gave the number to be less than 50,000. [256]

This remnant of Israel provided the small Israelite community that existed in Jerusalem at the time Christ was born, some 500 years later. But what happened to the other millions of Israelites who never returned to Jerusalem? Have their descendants lost the covenant promises of God? Paul relates that God had not cast them away for ever: "Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hast not cast away his people which he foreknew." [257]

So, the question boils down to this: What happened to the millions, yes, millions of Israelites who were driven out of Palestine more than 700 years before Christ; and where were they; if they existed at all; at the time Paul uttered his statement of confidence in God's keeping of His promises to Israel? James confirms what Paul said in the following: "James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes...scattered abroad, greeting." [258]

Is it possible to find out what happened to them, so that their descendants can be identified in the world today? For an answer to that question, we are going to call upon E. Raymond Capt, Bible student and Biblical Archaeologist from California. Mr. Capt has traveled extensively in Europe and the Middle East. He lectures on the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Pyramids of Egypt and other archaeological subjects. Mr. Capt is the author of "The Great Pyramid Decoded," "The Glory of the Star," "Stonehedge and Druidism," "King Solomon's Temple," "Jacob's Ladder" and the "Abrahamic Covenant." His books may be purchased from the Lord's Covenant Church, P.O. Box 157, Sandpoint, Idaho. Mr. Capt begins: "I know there is an abundance of prophecy concerning the destiny of Israel. But there is no Bible history of that portion of Israel referred to in 2 Kings: 'In the ninth year of Hosea the king of Assyria took Samaria, and carried Israel away into Assyria, and placed them in Helah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes.' [259] So the Bible history of this major part of Israel ends here. And yet the prophets and the New Testament promise an increase in numbers, great blessings, and an eventual restoration. With the passing of 2500 years since this Assyrian captivity, one might think that all hope of tracing these Israelites is lost. Can Archeology answer this question?

Yes, it can, and it has. For during the last hundred years a number of archaeological teams have been working in the Middle East. They have unearthed and published the original contemporary accounts of the Assyrians, who took Israel captive. It is from these records that vital clues have come to light. In fact these records are found in the form of cuneiform tablets. These tablets were found at Nineveh in 1900 and published in 1930. However, their relevance to Israel was overlooked then, because they were found in complete disorder among about 1400 texts. The tablets were Assyrian frontier post reports, dated about 707 B.C. They describe the activities of the people called 'Gimira,' who lived in the land of 'Gamir.' The descriptions of Gamir described the area in which Israel had been placed just a few years earlier. One tablet stated when the king of Urartu came into the land of Gamir, his army was routed, as the Gamira counter attacked, entered the land of Urartu, and killed their commanders.."

Let's pause here for reflection before going on. The first archaeological evidence to establish a chronological link in the contacts between Assyria and Israel are found in inscriptions on the side of a limestone stele found at Nimrud, known as the "Black Obelisk." The stone was inscribed with the records of Shalmaneser III with illustrations of the Israelite king Jehu bringing tribute to the Assyrian king.

A further inscription which is located above the illustration states: "This is Jehu [Jaua], the son of Khumri [Omri]."

Omri in Hebrew, begins with the consonant, "agin," formerly called "Gayin" which was pronounced with a guttural "H," that is as "Ghomri" which became "Khumri" in Assyrian.

As this inscription was executed nearly a century before the captivity of Israel, we now know the reason secular historians found no mention of the exiled Israelites in the ancient records.

The Assyrians Who Took The Israelites Captive

Did Not Call Them By That Name!

Now back to our tracing of the Israelites, by Mr. Capt. "Historians are now aware of the fact that the Gamira were the same people, about 30 years later, during the reign of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, were called Gimumira [Notice the slight changes in spelling].

We find in another and later Assyrian tablet that in the second year of the reign of this same king, which would be about 679 B.C., the Gimira, under a leader named 'Teuspa,' sought freedom by moving north; but the Assyrian army pursued and defeated them in the upper Euphrates district. Nevertheless, they reported a large number­ of the Israelites escaped to the shores of the Black Sea. The Greeks also recorded the same activity; including an invasion of Sardis, the capital of Lydia, in 645 B.C. In their records, they refer to the Gamira as 'Kimmerioi,' which is translated into English as 'Cimmerian.'

About 600 B.C., the Ludians drove the Gamira, or Cimmerians, of Asia Minor, where they settled in the Carpathian regions west of the Black Sea. We find them called in the second Book of Esdras, the people of Ar‑Sareth. [260]

We now know what happened to the larger body of Gamira or Israelites, that did not escape the Assyrians. They formed an alliance with Esarhaddon, the king, when he came under attack by the Medes and the Persians. This treaty allowed the Israelites to establish colonies in Sacasene in the north and Bactria in the east. With no help from the Israelites, Assyria fell in 612 B.C. Soon the Israelites themselves came under attack by the Medes. Those that had settled in Sacasene moved north through the Dariel Pass into the steppe regions of South Russia. There they became known by the Greek name, 'Scythians.' The Israelites that had settled­ in Bactria were forced north and east, and in the records of the Persians, they were called Massagetae and Sakka.

Archeology has solved two of the greatest archaeological problems: What happened to the thousands of Israelites who disappeared south of the Caucasus; and second, what was the origin of the Cimmerians and the mysterious nomadic tribes, known as Scythians, who suddenly appeared north of the Caucasus; both at the same time in history. They were one and the same people. They were Israelites!"

Concerning these Israelites, the Bible relates: "For, lo, I will command ...I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth." [261]

Our contemporary history books pick up the story at this point, recording the westward migrations of the Scythians, as they came into collision with the Cimmerians, who had earlier settled west of the Black Sea. Their kinship, lost over the centuries, the ensuing battles forced the Cimmerians west and north to eventually become known as the Celts, Gauls and Cimbri.

By the end of the fourth century B.C., the Scythians had established themselves as the great and prosperous Kingdom of Scythia. Later, the Samatians [These were a mixed, non‑Israelitish people of Iranian origin] drove the Scythians northwest to the shores of the Baltic Sea. It was at this time in history, we find the Romans introducing the name "Germans" in place of the name Scythians, in order not to confuse them with the Samaratians, who now occupied Scythia. This is because of their use of "Bermanus," the Latin word for "genuine," which indicated that the "Germans" were the "genuine" Scythians.

During this time the Celts were expanding in all directions from Central Europe. Some of the Celts invaded Italy and sacked Rome in 390 B.C. Another group moved back into Asia Minor, in 280 B.C., and the Greeks called them "Galatians," as they did another group of Celts that had settled in Gaul, or what later become known as France.

This is further proof that Paul's letters to the Galatians were written to his kinsmen Israelites, or at least the descendants of the earlier Galatians. Others of the Celts moved into Spain and became known as Iberes, the Gaelic word for "Hebrews." And more into Britain where they became the bedrock of the British people. Then later, the Iberes moved into Ireland as Scots, and later into northern Britain to develop into the nation of Scotland.

History books also record the Germanic tribes breaking up into many divisions; the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Danes and Vikings, to name just a few. Other Germanic tribes later moved into the lands vacated by the Celts and established the Gothic nations of the vandals, Lombards, Franks, Burgundians and others. Thus, the so‑called "lost tribes of Israel" really were never lost. They merely lost their identity as Israel as they migrated westward during the centuries from the land of their captivity. This is in fulfillment of a prophecy concerning the changing of Israel's name to a new one: "...for the Lord God shall ...call His servants by ANOTHER NAME." [262]

There you have it, the answer to our question: What happened to the millions of Israelites who were dispersed out of old Canaan land seven centuries before Christ, who never returned? They simply migrated into the Continent of Europe and were the ancestors of the White European Race. And in answering this one question about Israel's disappearance, we have the key to several other mysteries of world history.

Mr. Capt and contemporary history has revealed to us why it was these people of Europe who became the Great White Nations, who were blessed by God above all the other nations; not only with fertile lands and abundance from the seas, but with arts, science, literature, inventions and discovery.

God has bestowed upon that one "Race" almost every invention and discovery that has improved man's condition and lot upon the earth. Certainly, God made these offspring of Abraham, the Anglo‑Saxon and kindred people, a "blessing to all the families of the earth." With all this, an answer has been provided to another question often asked of our "Ministers," but seldom answered: "Why? Of all the people on earth has it been only the White Caucasian Race. The so-called 'Gentiles,' who have claimed, and followed Jesus Christ, as their savor and have accepted the Bible, the Word of God, as the foundation of their religion, to the exclusion of all others?"

The answer ‑‑ the Truth which is avoided, like a plague, and denied by the Prostitute Clergy of Organized Religion that being; these people, the White Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian Celtic and Kindred people, are the so-called Lost Ten Tribes, the Israelites! The Children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Israel, God's Chosen People. This also explains why every "True" Gospel Minister for Jesus Christ for over 1900 years has been of this one race [Notwithstanding the cries to the contrary]. They are dispersed Israel, fulfilling Bible Prophecy, even while blindness in part is upon them, blindness to their identity as the Chosen of God.

Biblical promises, through them, have become historical facts. For in the Old Testament had promised to regather divorced Israel unto Himself: "My sheep [Israel] wandered through all the mountains [nations], and upon every high hill: yea, my flock was scattered upon all the face of the earth, and none did search or seek after them...For this saith the Lord God; Behold, I, even I, will both search my sheep, and seek them out. As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are scattered; so will I seek out my sheep, and will deliver them out of all places where they have been scattered in the cloudy and dark day. And I will bring them out from the people and gather them from the countries, and will bring them to their own land, and feed them upon the mountains [nations ‑‑ Where are the Nation(s) of the Jews?] of Israel by the rivers [Where are the river(s) in Palestine?], and all the inhabited places of the country." [263]

Jesus made it plain that He was the instrument of Israel's return to God: "But he answered and said. I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel." [264]

Again He said: "...the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost [The Jews have never been lost, for they have never allowed the world to lose them]." [265]

The word "lost" appears 13 times in the New Testament in relation to Israel. The Greek word means "put away and punished." So Jesus was saying, in effect; "I am not sent but unto (the put away and punished house of Israel)." Further Jesus instructed His disciples to go to: "...go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." [266]

In Luke, Zacharias the priest, who was John the Baptist's father, said that Jesus came to redeem His people: "To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember His holy covenant; The oath which He sware to our father Abraham." [267]

Paul, an Israelite from the Tribe of Benjamin, wrote to other Israelites in the dispersion in Galatia: "But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons." [268] For only the Israelites had been under the law: "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law." [269]

These promises, as we have seen were of great national development, a great increase in numbers, blessings of the earth and of the sea, that God would be their God, and they would be His people.

After the death and resurrection of Christ, His disciples carried the good news of the Gospel to dispersed Israel in Europe, beginning, what was later to become known as "the Christian era." For 1500 years Israel remained in Europe, continuing to grow in numbers as God had promised their fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob‑Israel. Then God began to give them inventions, one of which was the printing press and movable type, which made the Bible available to all people. Bringing with it the Age of Enlightenment, the Reformation and the Age of Discovery.

Then a new continent to the west, a New World, was discovered. Persecution of Christians in Europe began a migration to the New World, that began as a trickle and later became a flood. However, 2500 years before that, while Israel was still in Palestine, God told King David: "Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in A place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as before them." [270]

The prophet Isaiah and others who had written of Israel's regathering, made it plain Israel would be regathered into a new land as Christian believers, "And He shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth." [271]

Verses one through four identify that Ensign as Jesus Christ, "And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots: And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord. And shall make Him of quick understanding in the fear of the Lord: and He shall not judge after the sight of His eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of His ears: But with righteousness shall He judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and He shall smite the earth with the rod of His mouth, and with the breath of His lips shall He slay the wicked." [272]

Verse 14 indicates that their regathering would be toward the west, "But they [Israel] shall fly upon the shoulders of the Philistines toward the west; they shall spoil them of the east together: they shall spoil them of the east together: they shall lay their hand upon Edom and Moab; and the children of Ammon shall obey them." [273]

Psalms 72 and Zechariah 9 describe that land of Israel's regathering as a land between two seas, and one river that would run to the ends of the earth. "He shall have dominion also from Sea to Sea, And from the River unto the ends of the earth." [274]

Zechariah states: "His dominion shall be from Sea even to Sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth." [275] In Hosea, God prophesied to cast‑off Israel: "Therefore, behold, I will allure her [Israel], and bring her into the wilderness, and speak comfortable unto her." [276]

Our pilgrim fathers, who were Christian Israelites from Europe, knew God's promises and called this North American Continent "The Wilderness" and "New Canaan land." They said, they had come to establish the Kingdom of God. God turned our Israel people from the Antichrists and Antichrist Churches [Such as the Roman Catholic Church or The Church of England] in Europe, and God took them one of a city and two of a family, and He brought them to Zion [America]. [277]

In fulfillment of this verse, God gave them Christian Pastors [Real men of God, not the puffed up priests of Baal that occupies the pulpits of Organized Religion today] who fed them with the Word of God; thus teaching them with knowledge and understanding.

It was during these early years of American history, they called themselves, "this wondering race of Jacobites," "a vine out of Egypt," and "the seed of Abraham." They named their children with Israelite names, and God blessed them above their forefathers in Europe. America is that land, New Israel. America is the nation born in a day, on July 4, 1776, exactly as prophesied 2520 years after Israel had gone into the Assyrian Captivity. In America God made a little one a thousand, and a small a strong nation: "A little one shall become a thousand, and a small one a strong nation." [278]

Therefore, it is obvious to any thinking Christian; It is here in America, that God has fulfilled the promise made to Joseph: "And of Joseph he said, Blessed of the Lord be his land." [279]

It is Here in America, that the wilderness and the solitary place was glad for them, and the desert has rejoiced and blossomed as the rose; "The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose." [280]

It is in the west and the southwest, that the waters have broken out, and streams in the desert; "...for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert." [281]

There can be no doubt in the minds of reasonable men, America is Hepzibah and Beulah land; America truly is God's Country: "Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken; neither shall thy land any more be termed Desolate: but thou shalt be called Hephzibah [A prophecy, given at the time of Hezekiah, foretelling a happier time], and thy land Beulah [In Bunyans's Pilgrim's Progress, a country of peace and rest]: for the Lord delighteth in thee, and thy land shall be married [Could this mean anything other than the JOINING of the States together to make 'out of many one.' A marriage, which is what God is talking about here; 'For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain (more than one) shall be one flesh?' [282]]." [283]

The heathen look at America and say that the Lord has blessed: "And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the people: all that see them shall acknowledge them, that THEY [Israelites] are the seed which the Lord hath blessed." [284]

America is a nation, from which, the light of God's Word has gone out to the ends of the earth: "And He said, It is a light thing that Thou [Jesus] shouldest be my [Almighty God] servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles [Nations], that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth." [285] We, the White Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and Kindred People are the descendants of the people we have already traced, are Israelites; Heirs According To The Promise; and the Bible is about you and your race.

Do not take what you have read and will read lightly, because, true to His promise to our fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Israel, The God of Israel has redeemed us with His own Blood, His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.

He has kept His Word to our fathers, and He will keep His Word, His promise to us, their children, Citizens of the Kingdom of Christ upon the earth. The time has come when God is beginning to expose, cast down and expose the false "Ministers" of Organized Religion, and is revealing the Truth to His Israel People. The Key to understanding the Bible is The Truth; we are the Israelites [Not the Jews], redeemed by Jesus Christ, Heirs to the Promise, Abraham's Children. "...if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." [286]

Today, the Great Israel Nation of America, is surrounded and invaded by the Red Communist Antichrist forces of Gog and Magog of Ezekiel 38 and 39 [The invasion foretold, is already well under way: Those invaders are the so‑called illegal aliens and hundreds of them are terrorists trained to destroy strategic targets on command], as God gathers the nations of the earth for the battle of the Lord. "And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon." [287]

The wicked of the earth, the enemies of Christ, have grown strong and arrogant in our land. They have infiltrated our schools, news media, churches and government in their attempts to keep you in ignorance of your identity as Israelites. They are attempting to steal your heritage. The heritage their father Esau despised and sold; that they might conquer America and take rule over the whole earth, and destroy, if they can, the very name of Christ, Christians and Christianity. But God Almighty has decreed the destruction of those who hate Jesus Christ and His True Israel People [Obadiah 18].

In a last battle shall be defeated, we shall be delivered for God Himself has promised it! And the earth will be prepared for the return of our Lord Jesus Christ.  We read the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States and think of it as a modern expression of our race in the reasons there set forth for perfecting the Union and to "establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

But let us turn back the pages of history and in ancient times we find a people possessing this same spirit. They were gathered in a great natural amphitheater to hear the promulgation of laws that would establish the very things called for in the Preamble to our Constitu­tion. These people assembled were none other than the ancestors of the White Race.

The original and perfect laws received by them had so indelibly stamped the perfection of their blessings upon the minds and hearts of the people that the race has ever been seeking to gain again the privileges that were theirs when those laws were in operation. Intuitively they know there is a way of peace and happiness. Our forefathers moved from Egypt into the wilderness to escape tyranny and secure the blessings of freedom. Since then they have ever desired to leave the land of their oppressors in a westward trek to freedom. From Asia they moved into Europe with this purpose in mind.

Then from Europe they passed over to the Isles of the sea in the restless urge of a people seeking to escape oppressors, and to find what their father Abraham was seeking ‑ a city not made with human hands.

To the shores of the North American continent they came seeking freedom of worship and the right to be free. Other peoples have moved west from time to time but their object in so doing has not been that of the Israel people. The defeat of ancient Assyria sent her sons westward to seek a place where they could regain their military strength and again go forth on conquest. "Ephraim feedeth on wind, and followeth after the east wind..." [288]

Thus the military pomp of Prussia, and the past policy of aggression under Hitler, was but a manifestation of the characteristics of their forefathers in the desire for military domination. "The portion of Jacob is not like them; for he is the former of all things: and Israel is the rod of his inheritance: the Lord of hosts is his name. Thou art my battle ax and weapons of war: for with thee will I break in pieces the nations, and with thee will I destroy kingdoms." [289] But it is the consistent characteristic of the White Race, the desire for freedom, which stamps them as being apart from all the other races; for not only do they seek for themselves these blessings but they work so that all peoples everywhere may partake with them of that freedom and secure the blessings of the administration of justice and peace.

In the light of Anglo‑Saxon, Germanic and Celtic activities, of their history and accomplishments, it is folly to designate them as a mongrel people for whether they go under the name of Welch, Scotch, English, American, Dutch, German, Huguenot or Scandinavian they are of the same racial stock and have a common ancestry.

Numerous prophetical, historical and biological facts substantiated by chronology contribute to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that the White Race is modern Israel today. Also, by virtue of certain covenants and promises, the responsibilities assumed by our ancestors have been inherited by us; as a nation we have a responsibility in the sight of God to fulfill those obligations.

In fact, our failure today to carry out in our national life the obligations our forefathers assumed for us has resulted in certain national penalties coming upon us under which, as a nation, we suffer today.

In order that we may become acquainted with our ancestors and understand our responsibility as a race, let us turn back the pages of history and follow the life and activities of our Israelitish forefathers. This presentation is wholly concerned with the identity of the Race of the Book and its westward trek to the Appointed Place, the Isles north and west of Palestine and the Desolate Heritages (The United States of America and Canada).

The climax of its fascinating story is the final arrival of the House of Israel upon the shores of the North American continent. Herein will be found a clear answer to the question: Is there a chosen people? Scriptural truths and the findings of historical research are presented which confirm the fact that God did, indeed, select a people to be His servants and His Witnesses, through whom He has determined to work to accomplish His foreordained purpose.

As a nation we must rediscover the sense of Divine guidance that led our forefathers to face every hardship with a courage born of the assurance that God would prosper their undertakings. Today a spirit of fear and Antichrist prevails as our enemies rattle the sword and make other threatening gestures in our direction. This state of perturbation will continue to dominate our national planning until we awaken to a realization of the national purpose in the plan of God that brought the Great People of the United States of America into being.

Is there any way out of the present impasse? What will change prevailing conditions and bring to the forefront leaders of spiritual stature and righteous convictions, joined by a people who are willing and ready to face every contingency that may suddenly confront us?

The answer lies in the acknowledgment of our origin and destiny and, as a consequence, our responsibility as God's people. When we grasp this truth, we will be struck with the awe‑inspiring fact that Divine Providence has intimately overshadowed our nation from its inception. We will find reason to be proud of our race, even though all the world curses them at the present time. From China to the ends of the earth.

This presentation, The White Race, tells the story of the origin of the Anglo‑Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and kindred peoples, whose forefathers gathered at Mount Sinai and there were organized into a kingdom.

The account of God's dealings with that kingdom, which was to become the Kingdom of God upon the earth, comprises the theme that threads its way throughout the entire Scriptures, if one will only look. It began as a rivulet in the days of Moses, swelling into a mighty stream as it coursed through centuries of history. Following a period of decline, it became a many‑branched river flowing into modern times under names which make no display of the continuation of its Divinely‑appointed purpose.

Nevertheless, the destiny of the nations which are to be the nucleus of the Kingdom of God upon the earth is still Divinely‑controlled and, under righteous rulers administering the affairs of state, the prophecy of Daniel will come to pass: "And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him." [290]

When, we the White People of the United States of America, accept the fact of our origin, responsibility and destiny as the Israel people of God in the world today, the way out of our present predicament will be according to the directions given through the Prophet Isaiah: "In righteousness shalt thou be established: thou shalt be far from oppression; for thou shalt not fear: and from terror; for it shall not come near thee." [291] National righteousness, however, is a way of life based upon obedience to the commandments, statutes and judgments of the Law of the Lord. Therefore, the prophet's admonition expresses an urgent need: "Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins." [292]

What is the great transgression of the sinful House of Jacob? Our forefathers stood before Mount Sinai and took an oath in the presence of the Lord at the time He constituted them His Kingdom people and called upon them to administer His laws: "And all the people answered together, and said, All that the Lord hath spoken we will do." [293]

Our national transgression today is our failure to keep this vow to administer the Law of the Lord and enforce it as the law of our land. Consequently, our sins have separated us from our God. Isaiah declared; "Behold, the Lord's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear. For your hands are defiled with blood [Think about the millions of unborn babies murdered in the last few years. To name just one instance] and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue hath muttered perverseness." [294]

Unless we heed the call to return to national righteousness, now that our identity as God's people has been proclaimed, we shall perish. From Ezekiel, a message is addressed to us of the House of Israel: "Therefore, O thou son of man, speak unto the house of Israel; thus ye speak, saying, If our transgressions and our sins be upon us, and we pine away in them, how should we then live? Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?" [295]

The people of our nation will be driven to their knees by coming events and if they are to pray the prayer the Prophet Joel lined out for them, word for word, they must first acknowledge that they are God's servant people. Joel's instructions are: "Let them say, Spare thy people, O Lord, and given not thine heritage to reproach, that the heathen should rule over them: wherefore should they say among the people, Where is their God?" [296]

The Prophet Malachi adds emphasis to the gravity of the crisis facing God's people through the prophecy with which he closed his book: "For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch." [297] Following this, the one way out is proclaimed: "Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments. Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse." [298]

The Elijah message was to go out before the onset of the Great and Terrible Day of the Lord. The significance of its association with Elijah the Prophet is that the people are to be called to repent and restore the administration of the Law of the Lord. As an integral part of this, Malachi made the statement that the sending of Elijah the Prophet would be implemented by the dissemination of a message that would turn the hearts of the fathers (ancient Israel) to the children (modern Israel) and the hearts of the children (modern Israel) to their fathers (ancient Israel).

This would be accomplished through the promulgation of the knowledge of their identity, stressing the responsibility of the children to keep the oath of their fathers who swore they would honor the terms of the covenant God made with them at Mount Sinai. Another call is therefore issued through Isaiah: "Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek the Lord: look unto the rock whence ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged. Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you." [299]

May the facts of the modern identity of the Israel of God, as set forth hereafter, bring home to all the necessity to awaken to spiritual values, inspiring a desire for an immediate return to the righteousness of the Law of the Lord so that our God may come and deliver us from our enemies so that it may be well with us and with our posterity.

Now that there is no longer any reason why The White Race, the Anglo‑Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and kindred peoples should not recognize their identity as the covenant people of God, severe pressure is being brought upon them according to the statement made by the Lord through Ezekiel, which is addressed to the House of Israel: "I will cause you to pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant: And I will purge out from among you the rebels, and them that transgress against me...And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have wrought with you for my name's sake." [300]

Is There A Chosen People?

The textbook of this presentation is our oldest racial document, a library of 66 think pamphlets to which is given the name of Bible. The thread which binds these five and a half dozen works in one is the story of a race and its special place and work in the world.

In presenting this Bible, it is not required that you approach it with any theory as to its character as an inspired book. Inspiration is not an idea we bring to the Bible to give it an impressive supernatural standing; inspiration is an idea we fetch away from the Bible after we have somewhat sensed its unique essence.

So let's look at the formation of our ancestors, the White Race, the Israel people into a nation. The original Hebrew Israelite nation, formed at Mount Siani, was the first Monotheistic Republican governmental system. The second was the United States of America with its "Theocratic Constitutional Republic." The Hebrew system of government began with one man as the personal and direct administrator of the Divine God himself making all decisions concerning civil law and religious practices. "And when Moses' father in law saw all that he did to the people, he said, What is this thing that thou doest to the people? why sittest thou thyself alone, and all the people stand by thee from morning unto even? And Moses said unto his father in law, Because the people come unto me to enquire of God: When they have a matter they come unto me; and I judge between one and another, and I do make them know the statutes of God, and his laws." [301]

This power was later delegated to the heads of the families, heads of the various tribes, and a parliament of 70 elders with all unresolvable problems decided upon by Moses himself as the direct administrator of God. "How can I [Moses] myself alone bear your cumbrance, and your burden, and your strife? Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes [elect Senators and Representa­tives], and I will make them rulers over you...So I [Moses] took the chief of your tribes, wise men, and known, and made them heads over you, captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, and captains over fifties, and captains over tens, and officers among your tribes. And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. Ye shall not respect persons to judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's; and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it. And I commanded you at that time all the things which ye should do." [302]

The Christian concept derived directly from the Hebrew Holy Writ was the next ingredient added to the monotheistic governing process and this is where the Theocratic Constitutional Republic form of limited government of the people, by the people, and for the people originated from., Creating the United States of America.

The original charters, compacts, contracts, and constitutions, all had their origin in the Bible. All the laws, rules, and regulations concerning civil, religious, and hygiene were taken from the Bible and patterned after the Christian Faith. All of the Common Law of the United States of America came directly out of the Old Testament books of the Holy Bible, namely, the original source of our Common Law was the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

The Christian system of government as established in the United States of America had its origin predominantly as follows:

1). The Old Testament of the Bible,

2). The New Testament of the Bible,

3). Magna Carta of 1215,

4). Petition of Rights of 1628,

5). Habeas Corpus of 1679,

6). Bill of Rights of 1689,

7). Articles of Confederation of 1643‑1684,

8). Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776,

9). Articles of Confederation of 1781,

10). Constitution of the United States 1789,

11). Bill of Rights 1791.

                                                                 Magna Charta of 1215 A.D.

     "John, by the grace of God, King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy, Aquitaine, and Count of Anjou, to his Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earls, Barons, Justiciaries, Foresters...and his faithful subjects, greeting. Know ye, that we, in the presence of God, and for the salvation of our soul, and the souls of all our ancestors and heirs, and unto the honor of God and the advancement of Holy Church, and amendment of our Realm... have, in the first place, granted to God, and by this our present Charter confirmed, for us and our heirs for ever:

     'That the Church of England shall be free, and have her whole rights, and her liberties...We also have granted to all the freemen of our kingdom for us and our heirs for ever, all the underwritten liberties to be hand and holden by them and their heirs, of us and our heirs for ever...No scutage or aid shall be imposed in our kingdom, unless by the general council of our kingdom; except for ransoming our person, making our eldest son a knight, and once for marrying our eldest daughter; and for these there shall be paid no more than a reasonable aid. In like manner it shall be concerning the aids of the City of London.

     And the City of London shall have its ancient liberties and free customs, as well by land as by water: furthermore, we will and grant that all other cities and boroughs, and towns and ports, shall have all their liberties and free customs. And for holding the general council of the kingdom concerning the assessment of aids, except in the three cases aforesaid, and for the assessing of scutages we shall cause to be summoned the archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, and greater barons of the realm, singly by our letters.

     And furthermore, we shall cause to be summoned generally, by our sheriffs and bailiffs, all others who hold us in chief, for a certain day. That is to say, forty days before their meeting at least, and to a certain place; and in all letters of such summons we will declare the cause of such summons. And summons being thus made, the business shall proceed on the day appointed, according to the advice of such as shall be present, although all that were summoned came not...

     A freeman shall not be amerced for a small offense, but only according to the degree of the offense; and for a great crime according to the heinousness of it, saving to him his contentment; and after the same manner a merchant, saving to him his merchandise.

     And a villain shall be amerced after the same manner, saving to him his wainage, if he falls under our mercy; and none of the aforesaid americaments shall be assessed but by the oath of honest men in the neighborhood.

     Earls and barons shall not be amerced but by their peers, after the degree of the offense...No constable or bailiff of ours shall take corn or other chattels of any man unless he presently give him money for it, or hath respite of payment by the good-will of the seller.

     No constable shall distrain any knight to give money for castle-guard, if he himself will do it in his person, or by another able man, in case he cannot do it through any reasonable cause...No sheriff or bailiff of ours, or any other,­ shall take horses or carts of any freeman for carriage, without the assent of the said freeman.

     Neither shall we nor our bailiffs take any man's timber for our castles or other uses, unless by the consent of the owner of the timber...If one who has borrowed from the Jews any sum, great or small, die before that loan be repaid, the debt shall not bear interest while the heir is under age, of whomsoever he may hold; and if the debt falls into our hands, we will not take anything except the principal sum contained in the bond.

     And if anyone die, indebted to the Jews, his wife shall have her dower and pay nothing of that debt; and if any children of the deceased are left under age, necessaries shall be provided for them in keeping with holding of the deceased; and out of the residue the debt shall be paid, reserving, however, service due to feudal lords; in like manner let it be done touching debts due to others than Jews.   

     Nothing from henceforth shall be given or taken for a writ of inquisition of life or limb, but it shall be grated freely, and not denied...No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or banished, or any ways destroyed, nor will we pass upon him, nor will we send upon him, unless by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny to any man, either justice or right...

     If any one has been dispossessed or deprived by us, without the lawful judgment of his peers, of his lands, castles, liberties, or right, we will forthwith restore them to him; and if any dispute arise upon his head, let the matter be decided by the five-and-twenty barons hereafter mentioned, for the preservation of the peace...All unjust and illegal fines made by us, and all americaments imposed unjustly and contrary to the law of the land, shall be entirely given up, or else be left to the decision of the five-and-twenty barons hereafter mentioned for the preservation of the peace, or of the major part of the, together with the aforesaid Stephen, Archbishop of Canterbury, if he can be present, and others whom we shall think fit to invite...All the aforesaid customs and liberties, which we have grated to be holden in our kingdom, as much as it belongs to us, all people in our kingdom, as well clergy as laity, shall observe, as far as they are concerned, towards their dependents.

     And whereas, for the honor of God and the amendment of our kingdom, and for the better quieting the discord that has arisen between us and our barons, we have granted all these things aforesaid; willing to render them firm and lasting, we do give and grant our subjects the underwritten security, namely that the barons may choose five-and-twenty barons of the kingdom whom they think convenient, and cause to be observed, the peace and liberties we have granted them, and by this our present Charter confirmed in this manner...Given under our hand, in the presence of the witnesses above named, and many others, in the meadow called Riningmede, between Windsor and Staines, the 15th day of June, in the 17th year of our reign."

                                                              The Petition of Right of 1628

On June 5, 1628, the House of Commons presented the most extraordinary spectacle, perhaps in all of history. The famous Petition of Right had been passed by both Houses, and the royal answer had just been received. Its tone was that of gracious assent, but it omitted the necessary legal formalities, and the Commons well knew what that meant.

They were to be tricked with sweet words, and the petition was not to acquire the force of a statute. How was it possible to deal with such a slippery creature? There was but one way of saving the dignity of the throne without sacrificing the liberty of the people, and that was to hold the king's ministers responsible to Parliament, in anticipation of modern methods. It was accordingly proposed to impeach the Duke of Buckingham before the House of Lords. "The Speaker now 'brought an imperious message from the king... warning them that he would not tolerate any aspersion upon his ministers.' Nothing daunted by this, Sir John Eliot arose to lead the debate, when the Speaker called him to order in view of the king's message. 'Amid a deadly stillness' Eliot sat down and burst into tears. For a moment the House was overcome with despair.

    Deprived of all constitutional methods of redress, they suddenly saw yawning before them the direful alternative - slavery or civil war. Since the day of Bosworth a hundred and fifty years had passed without fighting worthy of mention on English soil, such an era of peace as had hardly ever before been seen on the earth; now half the Nation was to be pitied against the other half, families were to be divided against themselves, as in the dreadful days of the Roses, and with what consequences no one could foresee. 'Let us sit in silence,' quoth Sir Dudley Digges, 'we are miserable, we know not what to do!' Nay, cried Sir Nathaniel Rich, 'we must now speak, or forever hold our peace.'

     Then did grim Mr. Prynne and Sir Edward Coke mingle their words with sobs, while there were few dry eyes in the House. Presently they found their voices, and used them in a way that rung from the startled king his formal assent to the Petition of Right. [303]

     Humbly show unto our Sovereign Lord the King, the Lords, Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons in Parliament assembled, that whereas it is declared and enacted by a statute made in the time of the reign of King Edward the First, commonly called Statutum de tallagio non concedendo, that no tallage or aid shall be laid or levied by the King of his heirs in this realm, without the good will and assent of the Archbishops, Bishops, Earls, Barons, Knight, Burgesses, and other freemen of the commonalty of this realm: and by authority of Parliament holden in the five and twentieth year of the reign of King Edward the Third, it is declared and enacted, that from thenceforth no person shall be compelled to make any loans to the King against his will, because such loans were against reason  and the franchise of the land; and by other laws of this realm it is provided, that none should be charged by any charge or imposition, called a Benevolence, nor by such like charge: by which, the statutes before-mentioned, and other the good laws and statutes of this realm, your subjects have inherited this freedom, that they should not be compelled to contribute to any tax, tallage, aid, or other like charge, not set by common consent in Parliament...

     And where also by the statute called, 'The Great Charter of the Liberties of England,' it is declared and enacted, that no freeman may be taken or imprisoned or be disseised of his freehold or liberties, or his free customs, or be outlawed or exiled, or in any manner destroyed, but by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land.

     And in the eight and twentieth year of the reign or King Edward the Third, it was declared and enacted by authority of Parliament, that no man or what estate or condition that he be, should be put out of his lands or tenements, nor taken, nor imprisoned, nor disherited, nor put to death, without being brought to answer by due process of law...

     And whereas of large great companies of soldiers and mariners have been dispersed into divers countries of the realm, and the inhabitants against their wills have been compelled to receive them into their houses, and there to suffer them to sojourn, against the laws and customs of this realm, and to the great grievance and vexation of the people.

     And whereas also by authority of Parliament, in the 25th year of the reign of King Edward the Third, it is declared and enacted, that no man shall be forejudged or life or limb against the form of the Great Charter, and the law of the land; and by the said Great Charter and other the laws and statutes of this your realm, no man ought to be adjudged to death, but by the laws established in this your realm, either by the customs of the same realm or by Acts of Parliament... They do therefore humbly pray your Most Excellent Majesty, that no man hereafter be compelled to make or yield any gift, loan, benevolence, tax, or such like charge, without common consent by Act of Parliament; and that none be called to make answer, or take such oath, or to give attendance, or be confined, or otherwise molested or disquieted concerning the same, or for refusal thereof; and that no freeman, in any such manner as is before-mentioned, be imprisoned or detained; and that your Majesty will be pleased to remove the said soldiers and mariners, and that your people may not be so burdened in time to come; and that the aforesaid commissions for proceeding by martial law, may be revoked and annulled; and that hereafter no commissions of like nature may issue forth to any person or persons whatsoever, to be executed as aforesaid, lest by color of them any of your Majesty's subjects be destroyed or put to death, contrary to the laws and franchise of the land.

     All which they most humbly pray of your Most Excellent Majesty, as their rights and liberties according to the laws and statutes of this realm: and that your Majesty would also vouchsafe to declare, that the awards, doings, and proceedings to the prejudice of your people, in any of the premises, shall not be drawn hereafter into consequence or example: and that your Majesty would be also graciously pleased, for the further comfort and safety of your people, to declare your royal will and pleasure, that in the things aforesaid all your officers and ministers shall serve you, according to the laws and statutes of this realm, as they tender the honor of your Majesty, and the prosperity of this kingdom."

                                                                     Bill of Rights of 1689

Whereas the lords spiritual and temporal and commons assembled at Westminster lawfully, fully and freely representing all the estates of the people of this realm, did upon the thirteenth day of February in the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred eighty-eight, present unto Their Majesties, then called and known by the names and style of William and Mary, prince and princess of Orange, being present in their proper persons, a certain declaration in writing made by the said lords and commons in the words following: Whereas the late king James the Second by the assistance of divers evil counsellors, judges and ministers employed by him did endeavor to subvert and extirpate the Protestant religion and the laws and liberties of this kingdom. By assuming and exercising a power of dispensing with and suspending of laws, and the execution of laws, without consent of parliament. By committing and prosecuting divers worthy prelates for humbly petitioning to be excused from concurring to the said assumed power. By issuing and causing to be executed a commission under the great seal for erecting a court, called the court of commissioners for ecclesiastical causes. By levying money for and to the use of the crown, by pretence of prerogative, for other time and in other manner than the same was granted by parliament. By raising and keeping a standing army within this kingdom in time of peace, without consent of parliament, and quartering of soldiers contrary to law. By causing several good subjects being Protestants to be disarmed at the same time when papists were both armed and employed, contrary to law. By violating the freedom of election of members to serve in parliament. By prosecutions in the court of King's bench for matters and causes cognizable only in parliament, and by divers other arbitrary and illegal courses.

     And whereas of late years partial, corrupt and unqualified persons have been returned and served on juries in trials, and particularly divers jurors in trials for high treason, which were not freeholders. And excessive bail hath been required of persons committed in criminal cases, to elude the benefit of the laws made for the liberty of the subjects. And excessive fines have been imposed And illegal and cruel punishments have been inflicted. And several grants and promises made of fines and forfeitures before any conviction or judgment against the persons upon whom the same were to be levied. All which are utterly and directly contrary to the known laws and statutes and freedom of this realm...And thereupon the said lords spiritual and temporal and commons pursuant to their respective letters and elections being now assembled in a full and free representative of this nation, taking into their most serious consideration the best means for attaining the ends aforesaid, do in the first place (as their ancestors in like case have usually done) for the vindicating and asserting their ancient rights and liberties, declare:

     That the pretended power of suspending of laws or the execution of laws by regal authority without consent of parliament is illegal. That the pretended power of dispensing with laws or the execution of laws by regal authority as it hath been assumed and exercised of late is illegal. That the commission for erecting the late court of commissioners for ecclesiastical causes and all other commissions and courts of like nature are illegal and pernicious. That the levying money for or to the use of the crown by pretence of prerogative without grant of parliament for a longer time or in other manner than the same is or shall be granted is illegal. That it is the right of the subjects to petition the king and all commitments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal. That the raising or keeping a standing army within the kingdom in time of peace unless it be with consent of parliament is against law. That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defense suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law. That elec­tion of members of parliament ought to be free. That the freedom of speech and de­bates or pro­ceedings in parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of parliament. That excessive bail ought not to be required nor exces­sive fines imposed nor cruel and unusual punishments in­flicted. That jurors ought to be duly impanelled and returned and jurors which pass upon men in trials for high treason ought to be freehold­ers. That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void. And that for redress of all grievances and for the amending, strengthening and preserving of the laws parliaments ought to be held frequently. And they do claim, demand and insist upon all and singular the premises as their undoubted rights and liberties and that no declarations, judgments, doings or proceedings to the prejudice of the people in any of the said premises ought in any wise to be drawn hereafter into consequence or example."

Sir William Blackstone (1723‑1780), the famous English authority on jurisprudence, gives the following definition of Divine Law as it applies to human or man‑made laws: "Disobedience to any one of the Divine Commandments throws the whole structure of national life out of harmony with universal law."

He also said: "On account of the blindness and imperfection of human reasoning, God has given a Divine and direct revelation of His natural laws...to be found in the Scriptures these laws are superior in obligation and no human laws have any validity if contrary to God's Laws."

Let's take a look at part of the original grants and charters, more of which will be presented later:

1). To Christopher Columbus, 1492:

Ferdinand and Isabella, By The Grace of God, King and Queen of Castile, of Aragon, of Sicily...For as much as you, Christopher Columbus [The real motives for the expeditions of Columbus were vastly different than what we have been led to believe by the controllers of the contents of the history books.

It is true that those who came to the Caribbean and then into Mexico did so under the banner of Christ, just as the Pilgrims did. But there were deep, underlying motives that our establishment history books have failed to mention. Which we believe to be deliberate deceptions. The history books have failed to tell us of the real motives for the exploration of the Americas by Spain and have been very quick to tell the world that the great eviction of the Jews from all of the countries of Europe was started in England by King Edward I in the year 1290 and that he was a "Racist, Extremist and Anti-Semitic."

Actually he was coerced into signing the great eviction notice by the people of England. The other countries of Europe followed his lead in 1492, Spain was the last to drive the Jews out of their country. In every case, it was the Christian Church that started the action. In Europe the predominant belief was that of the Catholic Church. In Catholic Spain the Jews were treated very kindly, just as they are now in the United States, and, for that matter, in all of the other Celto-Saxon countries [The Christian Nations of the West].

From the Jews' point of view, the 1000 year millennium before 1492 was considered the golden age of Spain and Portugal. These people were protected by the kings and utilized as treasurers, tax collectors (they were called tax farmers - and serve the same purpose in America), lawyers and of course, money lenders.

But they were under increasing pressure from the Church because of the heresies that they were intentionally planting into the Church, as well as their excesses as tax collectors and money lenders. The Pope finally initiated what has become known as the Inquisition. It was within the Inquisition that the Catholic Church made its most terrible strategic blunder. In doing what they did, they failed the admonition: "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? and what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?"

And again: "And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." [304]

The final results have been that the entire Christian Kingdom of God has suffered in general and the Catholic Church has suffered in particular. What did the Catholic Church do? It gave the Jews the option of being baptized and converting to Catholicism. The Jews of Spain and Portugal took them up on it and were baptized in wholesale numbers and joined the Church.

As a result of this horrible blunder on the part of the Catholic Church, the Jews were now within the church like the Trojan horse, with some of them rising to the higher ranks within the Church, until 1866, when they took absolute control, and now rule the Catholic Church through the "Black Pope."

They could now even more efficiently implant their heresies. All the while that they pretended to be Christian, they still practiced their Jewish faith. The name converso, or converted, was given to the multitude of Jews who were baptized and claimed to be Christian. Within that group of conversos were the Marranos.

They were the Jews who supposedly converted but actually remained Jews in thought and action. The problem was that nearly all, if not all, of the conversos still remained loyal to the Jewish religion and cause. As we shall see, that situation has plagued all of us to this very day.

When the Catholic Church finally realized its blunder, it sought out the Marrano Jews and systematically executed them by burning them at the stake. The undercover investigations to find them would have made the KGB, CIA and the FBI look like school boys.

They found them within the nobility and even they weren't spared. These were the circumstances in Spain when Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand finally, on the 30th of March, 1492, gave the known Jews four months to leave the country. Some went to Sicily were they formed the organization we know today as the Mafia, and some went to Holland.

The conversos, of course, did not leave because they were not Christians, weren't they? But the Marranos who had not yet been found out were living from day to day, knowing that they had to leave or face the stake. In reality, all of the conversos knew that they would one day need to find a new home because of their true sympathies. Many of them were within the household of the royal family.

The king and queen's advisors were conversos and later found out to be Marranos. The kings treasurer was a Marrano. It was this group of very powerful men who found the money to finance the voyages of Columbus. They had very personal reasons to find a way to get the thousands upon thousands of Jews out of Spain before they were executed.

It is not our purpose here to prove, one way or the other, the genealogy of Columbus. For several hundred years now that argument has flourished. The Italians claim him to be Italian. The Spanish researchers claim that he was born in Spain of a Jewish family.

Pastor Earl Jones of the Christian Crusade for Truth, Star Route 2, Box 39, Deming, New Mexico 88030, who furnished this information has read the research that has been done, some of it by Jewish historians, some of it by Catholic Church historians and some by Plain Spanish historians. Perhaps, strangely, the Catholic Church historians lean towards Columbus being a Jew.

In our opinion, for whatever it is worth, he was a Spanish converso, born of Jewish parents and named Cristobal Colombo. He simply borrowed the name of Christopher Columbus from a Christian Italian young man of about the same age but in no way related. Either way, it doesn't make any difference. What counts is what he knowingly did. His first and foremost mission was to get the finances for his voyages. Spanish historians know that the Marranos, who were the immediate advisors of the king and queen, advised them to grant the money for the voyages of Columbus.

They told the king that they would find a way to obtain the money to pay for the voyages. The Marrano advisers had already obtained the promise of the required money from the other wealthy Jews of Spain but the king and queen did not know that. Of course, these advisors were trying desperately to find a way to get the Marranos out of the country before they were found and executed. The king and queen accepted the proposals. Foremost among the Marrano advisors to the king was Luis de Santangel. He played such an important part in providing the money for Columbus' voyage that his statue occupies a place on the great Columbus monument in Barcelona. The Santangel family was among the wealthiest, the most influential, and the most powerful in all of Aragon (a part of Spain).

The Santangels came from a place called Calatayud, or Calatal-Yehud, one of the wealthiest Jewish communities in Spain. Because of their wealth, the Santangel family obtained high offices in the government. The Santangels were the Rothschilds of the time. It was because of the pressing need to get the Jews out of Spain that Luis de Santangel loaned the crown 17,000 ducats, interest free, to equip Columbus' ships for the voyage.

Columbus had reverted to his original name of Colombo while in the presence of the advisors to the king and queen. The word Colombo is of Jewish origin and it means Jonah or dove, according to the Jewish historian, Cecil Roth. The Marrano advisors knew that Columbus was "their" man.

Again, whether he was a Jew or not is not the point. He claimed to be one while around them. Columbus knew that the American continent was here and he knew exactly where they were. He knew of the maps of the Libyans, the Carthaginians, the mariners from Tarshish, the Romans and the Vikings. He deliberately said he was going to India. He even discussed such names as Kubla Khan and Cathay.

The reason for the misinformation about India is obvious. Talk among the European Jews at the time was wild with tales of the discovery of the lost ten tribes of Israel after Marco Polo returned from his overland route and said that he found Jews living on an island off the coast of India. This was an additionally powerful incentive for the funding of his voyage. Also, he knew the tales of fabulous wealth in gold and silver, particularly of the Seven Cities of Cibola in the land of the Toltecus in the New World. He demanded from the king and queen that he receive one tenth of all gold, silver and precious gems that all of the expeditions that followed would find. He also demanded to be named Admiral of the Ocean Sea.

The king and queen reluctantly agreed to these demands, of course with a little nudging from Luis de Santangel! So it appears that even Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand knew that here was the chance to find a home for the Marranos.

To tie the package all together, the date of the promulgation of the expulsion edict to the people of Spain was made on the same day that they were told that Columbus was funded to make his voyages. Was that only a coincidence? Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand were a unique combination. The Queen was very devout in her Catholic faith and consequently, whenever the Church spoke, she responded with fervor. The King, on the other hand, was more political in his nature. His concern was for the geopolitics of the matter and what would be best for his financial position. But then, King Ferdinand himself was partly Jewish on his mother's side! His mother was the grand-daughter of the wealthy Jewess Paloma of Toledo. Thus, he, too, had more than a passing interest in a safe place for the Spanish Jews. The marriage between Isabella of Castile and Ferdinand of Aragon was arranged by Rabbi Abraham Seneor, Isabella's chief tax collector!

The marriage between Isabella and Ferdinand was not popular with the Castilian grandees. They wanted her to marry either the king of England or the king of Portugal. The objections were largely from the ecclesiastics of the Catholic Church and those in favor were primarily from the powerful and wealthy Jews of both Aragon and Castile. The treasury of Aragon was depleted at the time and wealthy Marranos provided the money for young Ferdinand to visit Isabella. The bridal gift was provided by wealthy Marranos of both parts of Spain. "Confidence in an unfaithful man in time of trouble is like a broken tooth, and a foot out of joint." [305]

When Columbus first landed in the Western Hemisphere he immediately started the search for gold. He came upon the Arawak Indians who were very timid and even cowardly. These Indians were totally annihilated within a few years. He pressed on, from island to island, searching. He knew he was somewhere close to the huge quantities of gold that the stories of just a few hundred years before him had related. He found some gold on the island of Hispaniola and Jamaica.

This is what he needed in order to show the king and queen of Spain that it was time to start a significant expedition to the new world and this they did. Each successive trip of ships and men to the so-called new world found more and more gold. During the four voyages of Columbus, he had traveled to what is now Panama, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and other parts of Central America. His last voyage was in 1502, just a few years before the time of Cortez and his Conquistadors of Mexico. The Spaniards truly found a new home for the Marranos.

There is an old wives' tale that says, "When someone hands you a lemon, make lemonade." In 1502, the same year as the last voyage of Columbus, Juan Sanchez of Saragossa, Spain received permission from King Ferdinand to establish trading posts in the "New World." He brought to Cuba five shiploads of merchandise to trade with the natives. Juan Sanchez was a Marrano. He was the nephew of Ferdinand's treasurer, who also was a Marrano, of course. Other conversos, who were noblemen, followed immediately. They received large tracts of land from the king and raised their families in the new world. The king and queen knew that the Marranos were coming to the new world.

In 1509 an agreement was reached allowing any Jew to travel to the new world if they would pay the crown 20,000 ducats each. The ransom was then raised to 40,000 ducats and then, even to 80,000 ducats. It is significant that they had the money with which to pay! There is no question but that they controlled the economy and politics of Spain. Remember, this was solely because they had the "license" from the king to loan money at usury which, of course, is banking. With that money in Spain they could send their children to the finest schools, live in the finest homes, and receive ranks of nobility. With that extraordinary education, they became the lawyers, judges and statesmen. The ordinary Spanish citizen, Christian by faith, was denied the financial wherewithal to rise above the peasant class. Whatever meager earnings that he labored for was taxed by the king's "tax farmers" to the extent that he was always struggling to feed his family.

When so-called conversos arrived in the new world with adequate money to travel and set up their shops, they quickly reverted to openly practicing their Jewish faith.],

                                                North America Was Inhabited By Israelites

                                                           1000 Years Or More Before 1492

When embarking upon a study such as this, one will find that there are archeological discoveries that have been made which show a strong correlation to the Bible. For when people think of Israel in the Bible they assume that all the events which happened to Israel did so in the little country known as Palestine; today it is called Israel. And therefore the Israelites could not have been very important in the ancient world. However, Daniel told us that knowledge would increase in the latter days: "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased." [306] Also, Daniel tells us that many things will be kept secret until the latter days: "And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end." [307]

Many of these recent archeological discoveries combined with secular and Biblical history give us a shockingly different perspective of the ancient world in general and ancient Israel in particular. In this chapter we will attempt to show you evidence which will prove ancient Israel was an empire. It had a homeland in Palestine, and a far-flung empire much the same as Britain did until just a few decades ago. Britain once ruled over a far-flung empire from a small homeland, located in the British Isles.

In the years from about 1050-850 B.C. Israel was the dominant power of the world with an empire that rivaled and perhaps exceeded that of the Caesars.

The empire included areas of the world now inhabited by the Israelite people and that included portions of North America. We full well understand this is a bold statement, but the evidence will follow. In this study we will examine the real extent of Israel's power and empire in the ancient world; the Israelite presence in North America with considerable specifics.

The impact of the drought of Elijah's day on the weakening of Israel and the rise of Cartage, which we will show was an Israelite colony. Cartage continued Israel's presence in the New World, very possibly even during Christ's lifetime here on earth.

The time of Israel's greatness really began with King David and its rise to empire status. This happened in about the year 1050 B.C. 2 Samuel 8 discusses David's defeat of the Philistines, Moab, Amalek, Edom, and the Syrians for example lost more than 80,000 men in just three battles [308]. That is more men than the United States lost in the 14 years of the Vietnam War. To give you a perspective of the ferocity of the battles.

1 Chronicles 21 shows that David could mobilize over 1½ million men. With an army of that size you are not insignificant, not even in this age, this day and time. In 1 Chronicles 18:3 it states the border of his dominion went to the Euphrates River which bordered the area of Assyria and Babylon; or Mesopotamia who viewed David as an upstart rival.

The Phoenicians were the city states of Tyre and Sidon, and had a far flung empire on land and sea. They were the best sailors in the ancient world at that time, and they saw the rise of David and Israel and made an alliance with them. They were a common race of Semitic people; they also had a common language. There were only dialectic differences between Hebrew and the Phoenician tongue. 1 Kings 17:9-16 relates where Elijah met with a Phoenician or Zidonan widow, and they had immediate discourse, with no difficulty at all in communication.

King Hiram the king of Tyre made David a palace and they became very close allies as 1 King 5:1 shows. The Israelite Phoenician alliance was an ancient super power, with all twelve tribes of Israel united they sat astride the area where three continents met; they had the world's greatest navy in the Phoenicians combined with David's one and one-half million man army. And David was not the least bit reluctant to use it.

They were challenged by Assyria and Mesopotamia, which is almost totally unknown by most and yet it is related in the Bible. There was a revolt in Amon which is a pretext for war between many nations and the Israelites.

It is discussed in 1 Chronicles 19 and 20 in some detail. There were 32 thousands chariots from Mesopotamia alone [309] that came to fight David's army in this battle. There was also an unknown number of men from Mesopotamia and Syria which included a number of different people which fought with Ammon against Israel. In verse 9 we can see it was a national effort with a number of different nations to destroy Israel as it states their kings came to watch the battle. "And the children of Ammon came out, and put the battle in array before the gate of the city: and the kings that were come were by themselves in the field." [310]

So, we can clearly see, this was not just a mercenary effort, this was a matter of national commitment against Israel. Israel won the first round and also the second which left them with no one in the area to challenge them. If you will look at Psalm 83, which was likely written by David at this time where he lists many nations that come to help the children of Lot, which also included Ammon to destroy Israel from off the face of the earth. "Keep not thou silence, O God: hold not thy peace, and be not still, O God. For, lo, thine enemies make a tumult: and they that hate thee have lifted up the head. They have taken crafty counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones. They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance. For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee: The tabernacles of Edom, and the Ishmaelites; of Moab, and the Hagarenes; Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; the Philistines with the inhabitants of Tyre; Assur also is joined with them: they have holpen the children of Lot. Selah. Do unto them as unto the Midianites; as to Sisera, as to Jabin, at the brook of Kison: Which perished at Endor: they became as dung for the earth. Make their nobles like Oreb, and like Zeeb: yea, all their princes as Zebah, and as Zalmunna: Who said, Let us take to ourselves the houses of God in possession. O my God, make them like a wheel; as the stubble before the wind. As the fire burneth a wood, and as the flame setteth the mountains on fire; So persecute them with thy tempest, and make them afraid with thy storm. Fill their faces with shame; that they may seek thy name, O Lord. Let them be confounded and troubled for ever; yea, let them be put to shame, and perish: That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth." [311]

Secular history has recorded that Assyria's Empire went into eclipse or confusion, some encyclopedias call it, between 1100-900 B.C. Halley's Bible Handbook comments on it also, and states that ancient Israel was much stronger than Assyria, Babylon or Egypt. This is the same period as Israel's golden age under David and Solomon. And is glossed over in almost all historical texts, if they even cover it at all.

What happened to Assyria? It was defeated badly in a war against Israel's army, as we learn from 1 Chronicles and Psalm 83. The texts of ancient history will not tell you this nor will it give great credibility as the Bible is the Word of God. Assyria and other nations had provoked Ammon to start this war, and this will give you a little indication of how large an area that David ruled. In Psalm 83 he named the nations that became a part of this war, which included Assyria and in all likelihood became a vassal state to David. It included the Ishmaelites, which included the Arabian Peninsula and people we don't know where they lived in the east, so we really don't know how large an are David actually ruled. But he did rule from Egypt to somewhere about the middle of the modern nation of Iran. Ether directly or through vassal states as a result of that war. But Israel was the dominant super power of the ancient world at this time.

Is there evidence of an Israelite Empire? The answer is Yes! But the secular historians will rarely call it an Israelite Empire, they will call it a Phoenician Empire. Most people who do not realize the difference between Judah and Israel balk at this major role for Israel because they think the Jews were the Israelites and the Jews have always been few in number, but they don't realize that the men from Judah were only a small part of David's army at this time. It is true that David was of the tribe of Judah but he, also, had eleven other tribes to provide manpower.

The Phoenician Empire is credited by historians as being dominant in the Mediterranean Sea; as being present in substantial numbers in the British Isles, the West Coast of Europe and Africa in the period of about 1100-800 B.C. and they are not at all bashful in calling it a Phoenician Empire. This coincides with the exact time that Assyria was put down and the Bible tells us that David had defeated the Assyrians.

It coincides with Israel's greatness and the allegiance of the Phoenician city Israelites; show Phoenicia took pains to join with them because they did not wish to be their enemy. 1 Chronicles 22 relates that David accumulated for the Temple of God iron and brass beyond calculation. [312] Warrner Keller in his book "The Bible is History" states: "Israel was using the Bessemer system of smelting, which was not re-discovered until recently in the modern era...Essian Gebar was the Pittsburgh of ancient Palestine." That nowhere else in the fertile crescent which includes Mesopotamia could such a large smelting facility be found. We see by this that Israel was not just an agriculture only nation but they were also the industrial power house of the ancient world.

Dr. Berry Fells book "Bronze Age America" cites evidence that ½ billions of copper ore was taken from mines near Lake Superior in North America, in roughly 2000-1000 B.C. The dates include the time of David's reign, at the tail end of it, as the ore apparently ran out for they have no evidence that it was mined after that. It could be that the Israelites simply worked the mines to death, or to where they could not be mined economically at that point. Which Fell states that this New World copper mine output there is no evidence what became of it. There is no evidence it was used in this hemisphere at all. And they have no idea where the copper came from which was smelted in Palestine during this time.

Putting this evidence together and one comes up with the assumption that this copper was shipped from North America to Palestine by boat and was used by Israel in its huge smelting facilities in Palestine.

The Phoenician/Israelite presence in America has abundantly shown to be real. At this point, we must, in all fairness, present just one of the many stories which abound which make reference to our Israel ancestors coming to America thousands of years before Columbus. The following is taken from an article in National Geographic, December 1977:"The New World: Who, from the Old first touched its shore? Historians held for centuries that it was Christopher Columbus. By current consensus, it was Norse voyagers of a thousand years ago. But perhaps it was a group of shadowy, yet very real, Irish seafaring monks who predated even the Vikings by more than four centuries. In the great pantheon of New World explorers no name is more intriguing, or more clouded in controversy, than that of Ireland's St. Brendan. His legend, today more tantalizing than ever, has persisted through the centuries in the form of a Christians imram, an Irish saga: Navigatio Sancti Brendani Abbatis, Voyage of Saint Brendan the Abbot. With 17 fellow monks, it relates, Brendan sailed to Terra Repromissionis Sanctorum, the land promised to the saints, somewhere beyond the far reaches of the Western Atlantic. Was the Promised Land North America? Did St. Brendan actually reach it in the sixth century? Neither history nor archeology offers proof." [313]

This statement is totally untrue, and I believe the publishers of National Geographic knew it at the time of the publication. Most of us have read (from reputable history books) of the adventures of Lief Eriksson and his party in the founding of Vinland circa A.D. 800-1400 in the area of the St. Lawrence River in the North-eastern United States and Canada.

Although they predated the Columbus voyage by many centuries, were the expeditions of Lief Eriksson the first discovery of what is now known as the United States? There were Christians living in America over 100 years before Columbus arrived in the Caribbean. The official historians of this country have known this for many, many years. Yet, none of this is discussed as a national heritage. Why is this?

Those of us who are interested in finding petroglyphs, or ancient symbols and pictures engraved on stones, have wondered about the meaning of them. All we could do was wonder and speculate until the science of deciphering ancient and unknown languages was developed. The science is called Epigraphics and it has been developed into a rather sophisticated science. Symbols, for example, mean something, but what?

Epigraphics: Until a few years ago geologists told us that the numerous short and repetitive lines inscribed on rocks found in the Northeastern United States and Canada were simply scratches made from the movement of ice and rocks during the recent ice-age. Because of Epigraphics, we now know that it was a language and it has been deciphered.

The Celts: This language is that of the Celts from Ireland, Scotland, England, France and the Rhineland country of Germany. The language dates from long before Christ and was in use in Ireland and England at the time of Celtic Druids. It is called Ogam script and has been found all over America, from the West Indies to Newfoundland and west into Oregon and British Columbia. We know that Julius Caesar described the vessels that the Celts had built and used.

In Book III of his De Bello Gallico he described these vessels against which his small, puny (by comparison), ships of the Roman fleet fought. He described them as being capable of sailing "upon the vast open sea." This is exactly what they did. It appears that there were many different expeditions and migrations by the Celts during the period of many centuries before Christ until circa 400-800 A.D. They came, not only just once to colonize, but they came and returned to Europe on a repetitive basis.

The Vikings: The Vikings were here in America when King Woden-lithi sailed the Atlantic seventeen centuries before Christ and entered the St. Lawrence River. He established a trading post at a site near where Toronto now stands. It became a religious and commercial center that is now known as Petroglyph Park at Peterborough, Canada. King Woden-lithi's home was in Norway. He remained in Canada for five months, from April to September and traded his woven fabrics for copper ingots obtained from the European settlers. He called these people Wal, which is a word cognate with Wales and Welsh. He gave these Celts his religious beliefs, the ability to measure woven cloth and an astronomical observatory for measuring the Nordic calendar and for determining the dates of the pagan Yale and Ishtar festivals. Remember, this was seventeen centuries (1700-years) before Christ!

Ogam Script: The Celts were already here when King Woden-lithi arrived. What was their written language like? We have already shown that they wrote with the Ogam script which can be described simply as an alphabet, comprising fifteen consonants and five vowels, together with a few other signs representing double letters such as diphthongs. The letters are made by inscribing single parallel strokes placed in sets of one to five, in position above, across, or below a guide line.

The Languages: But what words were made from this Ogam alphabet? Here again the science of Epigraphics gives us the answer. We know that there is no language of any of the American Indians that is made up of the Greek language. And yet the ancient Celts in the area of the St. Lawrence River spoke a language that was directly derived from the Greek! As we shall see, the different Celts in America spoke yet other languages! The type of Greek that was spoken by the Celts of the area is known as Ptolemaic which means that it is a dialect of Greek that was spoken in Egypt, Palestine and the other countries in the area that Alexander conquered.

Alexander forced upon the area his idea of one-world government, one-world people, one-world religion and one-world language. It was this Ptolemaic dialect that Alexander forced upon the citizens of the area. The dialect was composed of Greek, Egyptian and Aramaic. This is why Jesus spoke Aramaic and Greek, instead of Hebrew. We will study the effect that Alexander had on Israel and Christianity in a future lesson.

The obvious question from the previous paragraph is, who were the Celts? Did the Celts from Iberia (The Spanish Peninsula) and the Rhineland go to Egypt and Palestine and learn the Greek spoken language at the time of Alexander or did the Israelites (Not Jews) learn the Greek and Aramaic when they were in Palestine and then go to the new world to escape the dictatorship of Alexander? Remember, Israel lost the knowledge of ancient Hebrew (not modern Yiddish) before and during the time of Alexander.

The language of the Celts who were already here in the St. Lawrence River Valley when King Woden-lithe arrived has since been lost. Why has the language disappeared? This is probably at least partly because through the subsequent years they intermixed with other peoples and in the process the language was lost.

It doesn't take much to lose a language. Notice the difference between American English and the English language spoken in England. But that doesn't account for the fact that a grace of people totally vanished from the continent. Some of the Ogam Script is with the Gaelic influence. The Gaelic language came from the highlands of Scotland. In the New England area, artifacts such as grave headstones have been found, all with Ogam script in Gaelic script. [314]

The Celts with the Gaelic dialect came from the highlands of Scotland. According to the Scottish Declaration of Independence written by Robert Bruce and his noblemen, the Scotland people came from ancient Israel through the Rhineland area of France and Germany and then through Iberia or Spain.

The Mariners from Tarshish: Tarshish was thy merchant by reason of the multitude of all kind of riches; with silver, iron, tin, and lead, they traded in thy fairs [315]. The Celts were well established in foreign trade.

In 1780, Ezra Stiles, who later became the president of Yale College, found and recorded a Tartessian inscription on a rock along the seashore near Mount Hope Bay, Rhode Island. The deeply cut inscription clearly shows the outline of a typical high-sterned ship from Tarshish. Under the outline of the ship are the words in Tartessian (Tarshish) Punic, "Mariners of Tarshish this rock proclaims."

Near Union, New Hampshire, another Tartessian inscription was found with a similar Tarshish ship hull and the words, "Voyagers from Tarshish this Stone Proclaims."

On Mohegan Island, off the coast of Maine, is, in Ogam script in Gaelic dialect, an inscription showing that the Celts traded with the traders from Tarshish. It is obvious that the mariners from Tarshish were not residents of the area as were the Celts. They were trading with the Celts for their furs and raw materials from the mining done by the Celts.

Thus, there was a lively trade being conducted between the Japhetic sons of Tarshish [316] and the Celtic sons of Shem. Some of the trading was done with goods in exchange for the furs and metals of the Celts. But there was also an exchange for coins. It seems that modern historians won't believe the facts of history such as the Ogam inscriptions. They only like to see the money! Well, there is that, too!

Coins: From about the fourth century B.C. the ancient mariner traders brought coins in addition to goods. In the year 1787, Pastor Thaddeus Madson Harris came upon a group of men working on a road known as the Cambridge-Malden road (now Route 16) in Massachusetts. The workers had uncovered a flat stone underneath the surface. Under the stone was a cache of ancient coins, nearly two quarts of them. The coins were square pieces made of a copper-silver alloy. Each coin was stamped on both sides with an unknown script.

Pastor Harris recorded the incident in a letter to John Quincy Adams. The inscriptions were taken to the Harvard Library for translation but with no success. The letter was then buried in the archives for nearly two hundred years until James Whittall, of the Early Sites Research Society, re-discovered the letter with the inscriptions and researched them with the American Numismatic Society and with Epigraphic scientists.

The inscriptions proved to be that of Kufic origin which is a form of Arabic. Undoubtedly, one of the trading mariners brought the coins to America to purchase the Celtic goods which were for sale. After the newly designed steel plow was invented by Charles Newbold in 1797, the earth could be turned over to a much greater depth. The furrow that the plow made opened up the soil and there, by the thousands, were found Roman coins!

In the days of early America, the extensive study of Latin and Roman history was required for a college degree. Thus, the people of America readily knew that Europeans came to America and lived in America much earlier than Christopher Columbus. But later, from American history books, our school children were taught the Columbus mystique and they were taught that the world was considered flat by all educated people until Columbus discovered America! All of those Roman coins that were discovered were ignored and it has remained that way until very recently. As we continue our studies, we will realize why the truth was buried.

In 1961, Frederick J. Pohl raised the nagging question of the Roman coins in his book Atlantic Crossings Before Columbus. He describes notable finds of Roman coins in the United States. Other scientists have carried on the task of proving the European travels to this continent long before Columbus. One of the notable men in this field is Professor Cyclone Covey of Wake Forest University. Much will be discussed about his investigations later in this lesson.

Roman coins are not the only money found in America. Carthaginian, Celto-Iberian, Greek, Libyan and Norse coins have been found in locations all over the United States. Near Castle Gardens, Wyoming a petroglyph was found, written in Celto-Gaelic, describing the location of what would be the description of a bank.

Yes, the petroglyph says that this was the first money-changing location to reach the area and that the bank operated with no usury! Undoubtedly, this was a location for exchanging the value of one coin for another for the purpose of trading and traveling. The petroglyph written in Celto-Gaelic undoubtedly means that the Celts were located in Wyoming and the fact that they operated in Wyoming and the fact that they operated with no usury is significant. We will shortly discuss the type of law the Celts exercised.

From 400 B.C. to 1100 A.D., the Western world realized six maritime powers. They all came out of the Mediterranean area except for the last one. They are, in order of their appearance, (1) the Carthaginians of Tunisia; (2) the Greeks and Libyans of North Africa; (3) the Romans; (4) the Byzantine Greeks who succeeded Rome; (5) the Islamic powers of North Africa and Asia; and (6) the Norse sea-rovers.

Although the Celts were never realized as a maritime power, since they were a people scattered over many countries, their ocean-going ships were among the best. These ships were huge in comparison to the Roman ships. They were two thousand tons in capacity as compared to about four hundred tons of the average Roman ship.

The ships that the uncle of Jesus, Joseph of Aramathea, used to haul lead and tin from the Glastonbury area of England for sale to the Romans were Celtic in design and operation. Again, Julius Caesar spoke very highly of the sea-going prowess of the Celts and their ships. Throughout this period, each of these maritime powers sent ships all over the high seas and to America.

But it was the Libyans who transcended all of the others in the span of their voyage. A Libyan, named Eratosthenes of Cyrene, accurately calculated the earth's circumference. He reasoned that the earth's oceans had to be continuous and consequently a ship could sail around the world in either direction and return to the starting point. The date was approximately 239 B.C.!

Eratosthenes developed the system of the meridian circles of the map of the globe. The meridian circles are simply the points on the globe where the USN is directly overhead at noon at the local time. He set these meridian circles in a grid in such a way that a mariner could accurately locate his position. He drew the primary meridian circle to pass through Alexandria.

The Libyans then set sail in their ocean-going vessels to prove that Eratosthenes was right. Their ships were equipped with magnetic compasses. Their compass consisted of a ceramic bowl with the compass points engraved around the edge. A lodestone (a strongly magnetic variety of the mineral magnetie) was floated on the water in the bowl.

Sometimes, a magnetized iron strip was suspended in the bowl. They also had a device for navigation that was the forerunner of the modern sextant. The Libyans traveled eastward, through the Suez Canal that King Darius had built, then sailed down the Red Sea, and then around the tip of India, through the Indonesian straits and then into the Pacific Ocean.

They arrived on the West Coast of America, disembarked and traveled inland to Nevada. These ancient Libyans settled in the arid Nevada country because it was very similar to their own home country. In various locations in Nevada are petroglyphs, written in Aramaic-Libyan and Celto-Gaelic which reflect their mariner skills.

There is a map of North America, showing the outline of both coasts from the Hudson Bay country of Canada to Panama in the South. It was obviously taken from one of their meridian circle navigation charts that Eratosthenes developed. In addition, examples of their mathematics is displayed along with oceanography. Their alphabet was written in stone for us to see. Astronomy as a science is displayed.

Remember, before the fall of the Roman Empire, the Center of Western Civilization rested along the shores of the Mediterranean Sea. The modern day epigraphic scientists are puzzled as to what happened to all of these people, from the Celts, to the Carthaginians, to the Libyans and all the other original settlers who have come to this land.

Certainly educated people in the sciences and mathematics lived here many years ago, that is now obvious. But when the American colonists arrived, the natives had no written language nor any knowledge of higher education.

For example, the Paiute and Shoshone tribesmen of Nevada were asked where all of the petroglyphs we now know to have been scribed by the Libyans came from, they could tell the archaeologists and epigraphists nothing except that neither they nor their forebears had cut them.

However, some of the methods and style of living that were taught by these ancient settlers have come down through the centuries by the indigenous peoples who were here and then remained after the mysterious disappearance. For example, in the modern, Libyan North African region there are two Distinct ecological groups.

1). The first is the modern Berber who is of lighter skin with obvious and European features with many having blond hair and blue eyes. He prefers to live in the mountainous regions where there is more water and better soil. He is an agriculturist and he builds his home pueblo style out of sun-dried mud which he calls in Arabic attobi which in America is called adobe.

Their buildings are multi-level with the floors and ceilings strengthened with wooden beams which project beyond the outer walls. His dress code calls for the women not to wear the face veil but to tattoo their chins. The mens custom was to cover their heads and faces with a scarf-like cloth, showing only their eyes to strangers. Even today, these modern Berbers still speak the Berber language which came to them from their Celto-Iberian background.

2). The second ecological group is the Arabs. They are nomadic, moving their herds from place to place in the lowlands. They live in tents. The women cover their heads with veils and are not tattooed. The men do not veil the face. Their language is Arabic.

In the Peabody Museum of Harvard University are ancient bowls made by these Libyan mariners who built their temporary colonies in the Southwestern United States. The bowls very clearly show a man and woman painted on the sides of each. The women have no veil but have their chins tattooed.

The men have the Berber type of scarf covering their faces with only the eyes showing! Beyond a doubt, these people were a part of the Libyan expeditions into the Western United States. They, too, suddenly disappeared in the 10th to 12th century A.D., after having been here from about 500 B.C. All of these people abandoned their towns and simply vanished.

The ancient Berbers were of Celto-Iberian origin. They spoke a Gaelic Celto-Iberian language. When we again return to the Scottish Declaration of Independence and read that they traveled through Iberia (The Spanish Peninsula) on their way to Scotland and Ireland, it would account for the Celto-Iberian-Gaelic dialect. It is in this language that the great majority of the petroglyphs are written. It is obvious that the Libyan Berbers associated with the Celts of the Eastern and Northern United States during the apex of their civilization here.

It is apparent that they had a flourishing trade with their home countries of Europe. Not only did they travel to and from Europe on occasion in their own ships, they conducted commerce with the traders from Tarshish and Cartage. Just as the Celts in the Glastonbury and Avalon areas of England mined for tin and lead and shipped the finished metal to Rome in Joseph of Aremathea's ships, the same Celts conducted mining operations in America and either sold or traded their metal with Europe. But it all vanished around the end of the first millennium A.D.

Christianity and the American Celts: When the first Celts arrived in America, they were as pagan as their brothers in Europe. Many of the earlier inscriptions in America depicted Baal worship and classical Phallic worship.

Then, all of sudden, there came the appearance of Christian inscriptions. In fact, whenever it was possible, the later Christian inscriptions were inscribed over the top of the earlier pagan writing.

This was obvious to the epigraphic scientists because the later inscriptions were cut deeper and partially obliterated the earlier work. In Cripple Creek, Colorado there is a memorial in Greek that states, "Herein is the last resting place of Palladis (a priest), the servant of God."

At Oak Island, Nova Scotia is found an inscription in Libyan dialect of the North African Coptic Church, which states, "To escape contagion of plague and winter hardships, he is to pray for an end or mitigation, the arif: The people will perish in misery if they forget the Lord, alas. [317]."

Wherever Christianity has gone, the Laws of God have been adapted into the legal system of the community. The Christian Celts of Iberia, Ireland, Scotland as well as the Christian Celts of America had a legal system that reflected the teachings of the Christian Bible.

The system was called the Tanistry which means the administration of law by deputies of the king. The system as it is preserved from ancient times is rather lengthy so here are just a few examples to show the influence of the Christian Bible:

1). "In the obscurity of the mists of olden time a desire would arise to replace armed combat by arbitration. [318]

2). And it would seem a desirable thing that land boundaries should be fixed without recourse to moats. [319]

3). Henceforth cases involving wrongdoing are to be made over to the wisest men. [320]

4). Any case is to be brought to judgment without delay.

5). Henceforth in any case involving false utterances let amends be paid in compensation for the harm. [321]

6). Henceforth if a complainant be merciful, let the judges also be merciful. [322]

7). If a malicious man utter lying words that another declares to be slanderous, to the measure of his tongue-loose recklessness shall he transport heavy burdens for the other man [323].

8). The common people may eat corn, together with game bird but they may not hunt bears. They may kill stags, goats and red deer." [324]

There is much more to the Tanistry but this gives you information that the early Celts became Christian and this was imparted to those Celts living in the United States long before Columbus "discovered" America.

The Norsemen: The Columbus mystique has been so impressed on the American people that we are blinded to facts. Such again is the case of the colonists from Norway. When Thormod Torfason wrote his authenticated works titled Historia Vinlandae Antiquae in 1705, very few historians and other scholars knew anything of the many trips to America by the Norse mariners and colonists. For over two more centuries, nearly everyone continued to disbelieve Torfason's studies. The American's minds were made up, don't confuse us with facts! We will understand why we have been misled by the conclusion of the next lesson in history.

On May 24, 1934, a mining prospector named James Edward Dodd was blasting in the Great Lakes region of Canada and his dynamite uncovered a sword and a shield. These artifacts were taken to the royal Ontario Museum and they were accurately dated to the first quarter of the eleventh century, about 1025 A.D.

It was at this time that Leif Eriksson began his first ventures to the land that he called Vinland. The name itself was given to the St. Lawrence River area because of the abundance of wild grapes that the Norsemen found to make a very good grade of wine. Because of the find of the sword and shield, along with much other evidence, we Americans began to believe that the Norsemen did, indeed, predate Columbus' discovery.

In the 1930's, we began to learn about the tremendous amount of European travel and commerce predating Eriksson by many centuries. Then in 1940, we were reconvinced that Eriksson didn't exist and that there was absolutely nobody who proceeded Columbus. Admiral Samuel Eliot Morison was an author who appeared to be "puffed" by the establishment. His style of writing was light and airy and he was very capable of mixing legends in with archaeological and historical facts in such a way that it became easy to question the technical analysis.

In 1940, from his Harvard position, he was adamant in his position that Columbus was the first and in 1942 he wrote Admiral of the Ocean Sea: A Life of Christopher Columbus to prove his point. By 1961 the Royal Ontario Museum was obliged to re-evaluate their analysis of the sword and shield by stating that it "was not possible to authenticate the story of the alleged discovery."

In Admiral Morison's book The European Discovery of America, he refutes the Vinland story by stating that nearly all of the seacoast towns from Newfoundland to the Virginia Capes boast in their histories that Lief Eriksson was there.

But he says that there have been no artifacts to prove his presence. He states that the Newport stone tower which is cherished as the first Christian Church in America is a fake and that it was built around 1675 by a colonial governor of Rhode Island.

Yet, in 1946 an authenticated inscription was found on one of the rocks of the tower. The inscription is in Nordic Runes and simply declares the tower to be the "cathedral church" and the "Bishop's Seat."

The Newport Tower is a part of the church that the Norsemen built in the early 1300's. To further authenticate this, the Italian explorer Giovanni de Verrazano in 1524 sailed up the East coast of the United States from Florida to Labrador.

He rediscovered Long Island Sound and the Hudson River. He drew a map, which is officially shown in the Archives, of the Narragansett coast and in his writings he described the stone' built "Norman Villa." He went ashore and found friendly Indians who knew nothing of the building of the villa.

Verrazano recognized it to be Norse because of the style of architecture and other evidence. An English document (of the period of the Pilgrims) proposed a settlement in Rhode Island. The document gave the location of the Norman Tower as the place where the settlement should be made.

In Rhode Island today, the local name for the tower is often given as "Governor Arnold's Mill," because the first governor made use of the tower as a flour mill. Here is an example of how a historian can take partial facts, along with legend, and make it fit the "politically correct thing to say."

There is evidence now being discovered that shows the Norsemen to have sailed South, along the Eastern seashore, into the Gulf of Mexico and then up the Mississippi River. Not only have Viking Battle Axes been found but more inscriptions to prove their presence.

The Heavener runestone inscription in the Oklahoma State Park on Poteau Mountain has been definitely judged to be Nordic script of the Viking Age of not later than 1350 A.D. Viking inscriptions have also been found in Colorado. No longer can we deny the presence of the Norsemen in America several hundred years before Columbus.

We have left for last what is perhaps the most striking evidence of pre-Columbus Europeans in America. In the Southwestern part of the United States the climate is generally arid or semi-arid and the soil is more alkaline. As a result of these conditions artifacts, including human remains, are left intact for a very long time.

There is mounting evidence that Europeans, in significant numbers, colonized a portion of the Southwestern United States during the period from approximately 700 A.D. until about 1300 A.D. It is very significant that all of the colonies in North America, including this one under discussion, appeared to simply vanish within an approximate 100 year time frame. We may never know the exact reasons and there could have been several. We know that the Europeans transmitted diseases that were specific to Europe to the indigenous natives who were vulnerable to them.

Conversely, the natives gave the Europeans specific diseases to which they were vulnerable, such as some of the social diseases. Or, there could have very easily been a universal uprising and this is even probable. Whatever the reasons were, we must believe that the ventures did not please God. There had to be things that were done that were seriously breaking some of His Laws.

About 700 A.D. there appeared in the area of West Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona and Nevada, a literal empire apparently made up of a city-state system. The empire was Christian and they had succeeding kings. The people came from the British Isles, Gaul (France), Germany, Rome and apparently North Africa.

Undoubtedly, the North Africans were the Berbers who had already arrived from Libya and had previously taught the natives to build the pueblo style structures and to irrigate for farming. Some of the ancient ruins that were very skillfully built of stone masonry that are dotted over the Southwest are probably associated with the empire. Some of these ancient ruins have been rebuilt with later construction over the top of the original.

The modern Amerindian knows nothing about the builders of these ancient cities. However, they have given a name to these earlier inhabitants. They call them the Hohokam, which means "Those who have gone" or "The old ones."

After the Spaniards occupied Mexico in the early 1500's, they headed north to investigate the persistent stories of the fabulously wealthy "Seven Cities of Cibola." Of course they never found them because the empire had simply vanished a couple of hundred years earlier. Even in 1300 A.D. the empire had already waned in its importance as a kingdom so there wasn't much left.

In New Mexico, south of Albuquerque and west of Los Lunas about 14 miles, is a huge Basalt (volcanic) boulder. The rock is nestled in a small draw on the side of a group of hills which overlooks the stream called Rio Puerco. The front side, protruding from the soil, is very flat and provides a perfect place for an inscription. On this boulder, inscribed in old Hebrew with a Greek influence, is the Decalog or The Ten Commandments!

As early as 1850, when New Mexico became a territory, people knew of the inscription but it was not until a century later when Professor Robert Pfeiffer of Harvard University, an authority on the Old Testament, determined it to be The Ten Commandments. The inscription was then re-authenticated as being The Ten Commandments by Dr. Barry Fell, the country's foremost epigraphic scientist.

The most revealing discoveries of this ancient kingdom came from the Tucson, Arizona area. Along the Santa Cruz River, in the vicinity of Tucson, beneath six or more feet of undisturbed cliché soil, were found many artifacts that unquestionably prove that European people lived in the area. Cliché soil is made up of crusted calcium carbonate mixed with ordinary dirt.

Through many years, water mixes with the combination and turns it into a very hard, concrete like, soil. After it is once formed, if it is then removed, the soil never returns to the original configuration. Thus, when the artifacts were found, it is certain that they are of ancient origin and not a recent fraud.

The artifacts included lead swords, spears, a patriarchal monstrance or shrine used in the religious ceremonies, and eight heavy crosses. All of the artifacts were made of molded lead which was mined in the area.

This is known because some of the molds were also found. Each of the crosses was actually two thin lead crosses which were riveted together with lead rivets. When the two halves were separated, it was found that the inner sides were protected with wax in order to preserve the inscriptions which were on the inside parts.

It became obvious that the crosses were made for the purpose of a permanent recording of events that were taking place at the time. The swords were not to be used for combat.

They were made of lead and also contained inscriptions. They were for ceremonies of some sort. The inscriptions contained words in Hebrew, Latin and Greek. Following are some of the translations: On one of the crosses, at the top are the words "In Memoriam."

On the cross arm at the left is a profile of a head with the words "Britain, Albion, Jacob." In the center is another head profile with the words "Romans, Actim, Theodore."

On the right is another head profile with the words "Gaul, Seine, Israel." On the vertical beam of the lead cross is this inscription. "Counsels of great cities together with seven hundred soldiers A.D. 800, Jan. 1." "We are borne over the sea to Calalus, an unknown land where Toltezus Silvanus ruled far and wide over a people. Theodore transferred his troops to the foot of the city Rhoda and more than seven hundred were captured. No gold is taken away. Theodore, a man of great courage, rules for fourteen years. Jacob rules for six. With the help of God, nothing has to be feared. In the name of Israel, OL."

The inscriptions on these artifacts is a sort of history of one of the city-states of the European migration to this country. The first inscription reveals that Theodore was the ruling king over the city-state of Rhoda. The Toltecs (which history shows existed in Mexico in this time frame) were under Chief Toltezus Silvanus who ruled over a very large area and people. Theodore was a Roman and he moved his troops to the foot or outskirts of the city Rhoda for defense against the Toltecs. Apparently the troops could not hold against the Toltecs and 700 troops were captured but the Toltecs did not take any gold. Theodore must have been killed in that battle.

The second cross has the following inscription which, of course, has been translated from the Latin and Greek. "Jacob renews the city. With God's help Jacob rules with mighty hand in the manner of his ancestors. Sing to the Lord. May his fame live forever. OL." Jacob a native of Britain and he succeeded Theodore for six years while counterattacking the enemy. He personally fought at the front lines and it appears that he died in battle.

The third cross yielded this inscription. "From the egg (the beginning) A.D. 700 to A.D. 900. Nothing but the cross. While the war was raging, Israel died. Pray for the soul of Israel. May the earth lie light on thee. He adds glory to ancestral glory. Israel, defender of the faith. Israel reigns sixty-seven years."

Israel I was born on the Seine River in France and must have been just a boy when he assumed the throne in 785. These dates are known because of other inscriptions but there are too many of them to include here. The year 790 under Israel I's reign was important because of his decisive victory over the Toltecs. He subjugated them to be under his rule. On January 1, 800 he presided over a council of allied city-states. Because of the present peace, he turned his attention tot he priesthood.

The next inscription. "Israel II rules for six. Israel III was twenty-six years old when he began to rule. Internecine war. To conquer or die. He flourishes in ancestral honor day by day."

The next inscription. "A.D. 880. Israel III, for liberating the Toltezus, was banished. He was first to break the custom. The earth shook. Fear overwhelmed the hearts of men in the third year after he had fled. They betook themselves into the city and kept themselves within their walls. A dead man thou shall neither bury nor burn in the city. Before the city a plain was extending. Hills rung the city. It is a hundred years since Jacob was king. Jacob stationed himself in the front line. He anticipated everything. He fought much himself. Often smote the enemy. Israel turned his attention to the appointment of priests. We have life, a people widely ruling. OL."

The next inscription. "A.D. 895. An unknown land. Would that I might accomplish my task to serve the king. It is uncertain how long life will continue. There are many things which can be said while the war rages. Three thousand were killed. The leader with his principal men are captured. Nothing but peace was sought. God ordains all things. OL."

The author of the book Calalus is a history professor at Wake Forest University. He mistakenly describes the people of Rhoda as Roman Jews. This is undoubtedly because of the names of the individuals.

But again, Dr. Berry Fell, the nation's foremost expert epigraphist shows them to be Christians from England, France, Rome and North Africa. The crosses would have been unacceptable if they were Jews. The use of the chronological term A.D., which was started by Dionesius in 532 A.D., would certainly have been unacceptable to the Jews. To this day they term the present chronological time the "Christian Era" instead of A.D.

The Toltecs went on to totally destroy these people. Why didn't these European Christians survive? Why did all of the other Europeans mysteriously vanish with the last of them having been gone since the 1300's? It was for several reasons, all of which are distasteful to God for His Celto-Saxon people. The Apostle Paul summed it all up when he said: "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you." [325]

For one thing, they had to interbreed themselves out of existence, at least in part. They also apparently came for the riches of gold and silver. In nearly all cases, there appears to be mining as a principle purpose for being here. They also apparently tried to subdue the native population. In other words, use them as slave or cheap labor. If we will look back into history, all of the great civilizations of the Celto-Saxons fell when they brought in cheap labor or slaves and then mixed with them. The process destroys both cultures. If we will but look at our own history we will see a lesson. That part of our culture that came from the Pilgrims and then moved westward as the needs required used their own labor.

They had large families and the children worked in their enterprises, be it farming or a shop in town. They remained separated from other peoples and they were told in their churches that gold would be used for street paving in the future! As long as our forefathers stayed separate, feared God, loved their neighbor as themselves and did not love mammon more than their gifts form God, they were a peculiar people to Him. Look around us in modern America and what we see speaks for itself. But it is not too late. It is not too late. Not yet. [326]

Now back to where we left off in our story, as related in National Geographics. "Early map makers and explorers gave credence to the legend. Place-names from the Navigatio appear on later charts, and early navigators sought vainly for 'St. Brendan's Isle.' Fact or fantasy, the Navigatio had incalculable impact on the great European voyages of discovery, including that of Columbus.

     According to the legend, St. Brendan and his fellow monks set sail from Ireland in a leather-hulled curragh; this same type of boat, now covered with tarred canvas, is still used by Irish fishermen. The voyage lasted seven years and introduced the monks to such wonders as demons who hurled fire at them, a floating crystal column, and a sea creature as great as an island. Scholars wonder today: Might they have been volcanic eruptions...an iceberg...a whale? Finally, Brendan and his shipmates reached the Promised Land, a huge, lush island divided by a mighty river.

     Soon afterward they sailed home to Ireland, where Brendan died. There the legend of St. Brendan ends, to be given new vitality in the 1970's by a real-life sequel. In the following article, British author and explorer Timothy Severin recounts his epic Atlantic crossing aboard a leather boat. In proving that such a long-ago voyage could have been made, Tim Severin and his crew have brought one of history's most intriguing takes a giant step closer to the realm of possibility. -- THE EDITOR." [327]

When David died as the world emperor, he was ruling over the Mediterranean Sea in conjunction with the Phoenicians; he ruled over conquered territory from Egypt somewhere in the interior of Asia. And Israelites were present in Britain and America. During the reign of King Solomon he inherited a huge domain, great power and he devoted himself to wisdom and good rule during the first part of his reign. 1 Kings 4:20-25 related that Israel dwelt safely all the days of Solomon, indeed, how could they not, there was no one left in that area to challenge them.

1 Kings 5:12 show King Hiram and the Phoenicians were allied to Israel. "And the Lord gave Solomon wisdom, as he promised him: and there was peace between Hiram and Solomon; and they two made a league together."

1 Kings 4:31-34 makes some statements which the world's historians hate. It states that Solomons' wisdom was known to all the nations of the earth. "For he was wiser than all men; than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Chalcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol: and his fame was in all nations round about. And he spake three thousand proverbs: and his songs were a thousand and five. And he spake of trees, from the cedar tree that is in Lebanon even unto the hyssop that springeth out of the wall: he spake also of beasts, and of fowl, and of creeping things, and of fishes. And there came of all people to hear the wisdom of Solomon, from all kings of the earth, which had heard of his wisdom."

2 Chronicles states all the kings of the earth sought the presence of Solomon and brought their tributes year by year and presents to hear his wisdom. "And all the drinking vessels of king Solomon were of gold, and all the vessels of the house of the forest of Lebanon were of pure gold: none were of silver; it was not any thing accounted of in the days of Solomon. For the king's ships went to Tarshish with the servants of Huram: every three years once came the ships of Tarshish bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks. And king Solomon passed all the kings of the earth in riches and wisdom. And all the kings of the earth sought the presence of Solomon, to hear his wisdom, that God had put in his heart." [328]

Is this just some imagination exaggeration of some Hebrew writer? He couldn't actually mean it could he? Well 2 Chronicles 8, 18:9-10 and 1 Kings 9 also show that Israel and Phoenicia joined their navies into one navy, and it mentions they mingled the crews on the same ship.

Berry Fells book "America B.C." has some remarkable revelations of the real extent of just how much the Israelites and the Phoenician alliance was in the area which consists of the United States today. He states in his book "America B.C." that the Phoenicians had a regular port of call of the coast of Maine. Where an old inscription was found which he translates: "Ships of Phoenicia cargo platform."

Fell states: "It is obvious that the flat topped island would not have been set aside for the loading and unloading of Phoenician ships were they not regular visitors to America, with a predictable time table of ports of arrival and departure and expected dates."

He adds: "These inscriptions suggest that international maritime commerce was well established in what he calls the late bronze age. That North American ports were listed on a sailing timetable of the overseas vessels of the principle Phoenician shipping companies. And that the same information was circulated to customers in America."

This, along with the above information, gives us an entirely different perspective on just how wide spread was international commerce in the ancient world, and just how intelligent these people were.

These people were not cavemen or neanderthals or some people evolutionary revolving from some primitive background, they were intelligent. How permanent were these settlements in the new world?

The book "America B.C." also shows the evidence that the Phoenicians had a twenty acre temple site to Baal and pagan deities in New Hampshire. This is not the evidence of people who were just coming for just a few years to trade with the Indians and go. They had very substantial settlements here.

Israel, as we know, quickly joined itself to the Baal worship of the Phoenicians, so it is not surprising that the Baal worship was dominating the old world colonies of the Israelites and the Phoenicians. There were, also, worshipers of the True God of Israel were present in the new world. In "Saga America" another book by Berry Fell in two issues of the occasional publications of the Uppergrafic Society of which he was president, showed that the Ten Commandments were written in the ancient Hebrew and they were carved into the rock in New Mexico, as we have shown above.

A tablet which contained the Ten Commandments was also found in Ohio; this was found in 1860 at the opening of the Civil War or it very likely would have gotten much more attention. So, obviously, there were Israelites who were serving the True God in America. How many is very difficult to guess, since the worshipers of the True God did not build pagan temples or leave monuments to the pagan gods, as the Phoenicians did.

Soon after Solomon became king, Egypt joined the Israelites Phoenician alliance, which is discussed in 1 Kings 3:1. "And Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh king of Egypt, and took Pharaoh's daughter, and brought her into the city of David, until he had made an end of building his own house, and the house of the Lord, and the wall of Jerusalem round about."

The Pharaoh of Egypt conquered a city it states: "For Pharaoh king of Egypt had gone up, and taken Gezer, and burnt it with fire, and slain the Canaanites that dwelt in the city, and given it for a present unto his daughter, Solomon's wife." [329]

Which was dowry for his daughter who was Solomon and was apparently his first wife. So, we can see that both King Hiram and Egypt's Pharaoh took the classic action of lesser powers toward a greater power, initiating the efforts to try to bind themselves to a superior power. Egypt's sailors were a fair skinned group of maritime people who settled in the area of ancient Lybia.

This is covered in "America B.C." and "Bronze Age America" where he goes into the classical writers, and it is not his own idea. There is evidence of ancient Egyptians found in Maine, they were known as the Knickknack Indians which Dr. McDonald states was the Algonquian or Iroquois Race.

There have also been Egyptian hieroglyphics found on Long Island. While the ancient Libyan language of their sailors has been found in Quebec, Canada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, California, Texas and New York. This may sound like a roll call for a lot of people in these areas but we highly recommend these books so that you can see for yourself.

There are other states where a person by the name of Gloria Sally has found evidence of inscriptions left by the Celts, the Libyans and the Phoenicians who ascended the Mississippi, Cimmeron and Arkansas Rivers.

The Bible does tell us that the Israelites, Phoenicians and the Egyptians were allied in the first millennium B.C. so we should not be shocked to find that these groups were the ones found in the North American Continent.

Is it any coincidence that the Archeological discoveries of America's past have shown these three groups were working together and exploring what has become the territory called the United States? There is a smoking gun to show that these groups were working together, the new world equivalent of the Rosette Stone has been sitting, largely unappreciated in a Davenport, Iowa museum. Its a trilingual parallel ancient inscription recording a pagan ceremony which looked very much like a May Pole or May Day celebration.

It had joint inscriptions of Egyptian hieroglyphics, the ancient Libyan, which was the language of their sailors and what is now called an Iberian Tunic. This is a language which was descended from the Hebrew Phoenicians.

It was found in 1874; so it was not found just yesterday, it has been here and ignored for a long time. But it proves these groups were working together in the new world and it was in inscriptions that could be understood by anyone in those three groups of people.

Another artifact found in Oklahoma refers to the Phoenician god Baal and the Egyptian god Ra, and is dated by Fells to be about 800 B.C. Comment has to be made on the closeness of the Israelite Hebrew and the Phoenician language of Tyre and Sidon to show that the Phoenician inscriptions are also Hebrew or Israelite.

George Wellington a famous British historian of the late 1800s comments in his book "Phoenicia:" "The words most commonly in use, particles, the pronoun, the forms of the verb, the principle inflections and we may add the numerals in Phoenician are identical or near identical to the pure Hebrew. Many other sources comment on the similarity as well; and many sources reflect that the English language came from the Hebrew."

In the book "Short History of the Near East" by Philip Piffy, he states: "The Phoenician trade on an international scale on textiles, metals, glass, pottery and etc., gave the country three centuries, beginning around 1000 B.C. a prosperity unmatched in its history."

Now the world recognizes the Phoenicians had an empire at that time, but they do not wish to acknowledge that in 1000 B.C. which was the time that David and Solomon rose to power and three centuries later when the Phoenician power seem to disappear was when the Israelites left the area of Palestine. The Phoenicians did not have them around to be allied to. Ecclesiastes Two mentions that Solomon collected the best that the world had to offer in architecture, music, art, etc., and there was no bounds to his wisdom.

The Bible says that God had given him a heart as big as a sea-shore. It also states that the kings when they brought their gifts to Solomon year by year, included animals, gold, silver, many types products and artwork. Which very likely occurred during the feast of tabernacles, which Israel was keeping at that time.

There were several types of the millennium that parallel the prophecies at that time. For the world was at peace during the time that Solomon was a righteous king living by God's Laws. He was a peaceful king of kings, living in Jerusalem, and the rest of the world was flowing to Israel; he was preceded by an era of great wars, just like the millennium will be, when he and David his father put down many enemies.

So we can see that Solomon ruled an area greater than the Caesars of Rome. The Mediterranean was an Israelites lake; it was ruled by Israel and its allies the Phoenicians and Egyptians; he was in charge of the Mid-East and the Mesopotamians were ruled by Israel; but we don't know how far that went into Asia; Egypt was his ally and he had extensive presence in the new world; America was extensively explored and colonized.

Historians also record that Cadez, a city in Spain that is called Cadez now, was founded by the Phoenicians about 1000 B.C., which, again, was during the reign of David and Solomon. When one looks at the historic records of the Phoenicians the period of 1000 B.C. is very common when they mark their ascension to greatness, which the Bible also identifies as the time when David and Solomon began their golden age.

Early British historians record that the Phoenicians were heavily involved in colonizing and mining in the British Isles. In Raymond Capt's book "The Traditions of Glastenbury" mentions some of the early historical accounts of the Tribe of Asher of Israel overseeing the mining operations in Britain.

Now when Israel split into Israel and Judah this alliance weakened. Wars were fought between the Israelites and the Judeans, and yes at times they were allied. But Israel went very deep into the Baal worship of Phoenicia and around 870-850 B.C. Israel was ruled by King Ahab, who was married to a Phoenician princess by the name of Jezebel from the city state of Sidon. Which shows that the Phoenician/Israelites alliance was still followed.

When God sent a prophet name Elijah in the middle of the ninth century B.C. Israel's King Ahab had gotten to a point where he was so evil that Elijah had prayed for a drought on the land of Israel.

James 5 shows that it lasted 3½ years. "Elias (Elijah) was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months." [330]

1 Kings 17 and 18 show that the drought was so severe that the creeks dried up, and there was no vegetation was left for the animals. Starvation was prevalent in both Israel and the Phoenician city states as we can see from the example of Elijah when he was sent to the home of the Sidonian widow. 1 Kings 18 states that King Ahab had searched for Elijah in all the nations. "As the Lord thy God liveth, there is no nation or kingdom, whither my lord hath not sent to seek thee: and when they said, He is not there; he took an oath of the kingdom and nation, that they found thee not." [331]

Now that we know those international maritime routes included the area now known as the United States in the new world, that takes on new meaning as it was not just in the mid-east where the search took place. For Israel was still among the great nations of the earth with a large population. During this drought, they had one choice, they could either stay and starve or they could migrate elsewhere and live.

Now Israel had a colonial empire that was quite large, and they had many places to go. However, when one has women and children you do not want to put them on a boat and cross the ocean to America, or Great Britain or even to Spain, you wanted to take them somewhere as close to home as possible, to avoid the rigors of distant travel, yet was away from the drought.

History records that Cartage was founded by the Phoenicians in the middle of the 9th century B.C. Which coincides, roughly with the same time that Israel was experiencing its drought. Alfred Church's book called "Cartage" written in 1890 shows that the name Cartage was the Roman name for the city but that is not the name the Carthagenians called themselves.

They called the city, according to Alfred Church's book, the Carthegians called themselves Cherjaf-habashaf, which Hebrew meaning "new town." A very appropriate name for a new colony, which was being started. Now several historians of Cartage records the magistrates were called the Saphetes by the Romans, but again, that is not the name they called their own magistrates.

In the Carthagenian language when looking at their artifacts, they called them the Shepheta, which is also Hebrew for the word judges. The name of one of the Books of the Bible - Judges. One of their early kings was named Marcus, a Hebrew name, still present during the time of Christ, when the High Priests servant was named Marcus. Remember, he's the one who had his ear cut off, when Peter tried to cut off his head but got his ear instead. Also they had a reference to the Hebrew El, which is depicted in Carthagian artifacts as sitting between the Cherubims.

In the book "Daily Life in Cartage" it states the priestly laws of Cartage was: "A very significant resemblance to the Book of Leviticus, and many of the sacrifices corresponded exactly to those of the Hebrews."

Many historians have noticed the similarity of the Carthagenians or as the Romans called it the Tunic tongue, to Hebrew. As late as the fourth century A.D., which was many centuries after Cartage fell, remnants of the Tunic culture were recognized by early church writers such as St. Augustine and St. Jerome as having their roots in the Hebrew language.

The Encyclopedia Judicia, when it talks about the fall of Samaria, to the Assyrians it mentions that the Africans, which was their word for the Carthagenans contested with the Jews over the rights of Arab-Israel, or the land of Israel.

Now this would make no sense at all if Cartage did not consist of the descendent of the Tribes of Israel. Who had gone into captivity, or had left that area. But they clearly recognized that the land of Palestine was a cultural heritage to the people of Cartage, since they claimed that land as their own at that time.

Cartage became very powerful in the middle of the first millennium B.C. In their early days they were much stronger than Rome and imposed a treaty on Rome, which basically forbade them from sailing in the Western Mediterranean and telling them where they could sail their ships.

They were the enemies of Greece and Rome, they kept them out of the Atlantic Ocean with the Carthagenian Navy. But the Greeks did record some information about what Cartage had found in their Atlantic voyages. And a lot of this will probably be quite new to you. The Greeks record: "In the sea outside the pillars of Hercules, that's Gibraltar, an island was found by the Carthagians, a wilderness having wood of all kinds, and navigatable rivers; remarkable for various kinds of fruit, many sailing distance day away. When the Carthagenians, who were the masters of the western ocean, observed that many traitors and other men were attracted by the fertility of the soil and the pleasant climate, they frequented it. And some resided there. They feared that knowledge of the land would reach other nations."

You can check the historical accounts and see that Cartage at that point became very protective of what was going on west of the Atlantic Ocean, and did not allow the sailors of other nations past Gibraltar.

A Greek, in the first century by the name of Diatrous, wrote: "Over against Africa, on the other side of Africa lies a very great island in the vast ocean. Many days sail westward of Libya or from Libya westward, the soil is very fruitful, a great part is mountainous and much likewise is a plane. It has several navagatable rivers, it has very large woods, fresh water and all sorts of wild beasts to hunt."

If one will take a globe of the earth and go westward from Libya to that part of the globe, you will come right into the heartland of what is now called the United States. This land was obviously America; and it stayed in the hands of the Israelite Carthageians for many many years after Cartage fell.

It was the secret of Cartage's wealth, and Cartage is acknowledged as a very wealthy city at that time. In giving America's land to the Carthagians God was passing on to them the promises to Abraham's seed.

Also they inherited the promise of possessing the gates of their enemies. And they held a lock-hold on Gibraltar during much of this time. Heroticus a Greek historian records that, "the Carthagenians sent an expedition westward from Gibraltar, which included 30,000 men and women, sixty ships, in a time frame of 500-480 B.C. that was when Cartage was much stronger. Westward through the pillars of Hercules to a destination he did not know."

Think for a moment, 30,000 men and women; that's a colonizing expedition, in 60 ships: by doing a little math that is 500 people per ship. Which will give you an idea of the size of the vessel, which even the Greeks acknowledge the Carthagenians were sailing. This also gives us an idea of the size of the ships the Phoenicians and Israelites had during the reign of David and Solomon's time.

Carthagian coins and artifacts have been found in North America, which is a story that is basically not told anywhere. It is in Berry Fells book, but the typical academic writers do not want to really deal with what he has discovered.

These coins have been found in Colorado, New York, Alabama, Connecticut and Nevada. You can even take some of the Carthagenan inscriptions which Fell discusses in his book; you can get a Hebrew Lexicon out of your Concordance and you can come to the exact same translation that Fell does by using those Hebrew Lexicons. Most people do not realize this because history has been taught from the Greco-Roman perspective but America was long known about, in ancient history. And that Cartage was Israelite in it inception.

However, in later years they became a pyelograph people, they became very degenerate. How long they had worshipers of the True God we do not know. But they became extremely evil; indulging in child sacrifice, mass sacrifices of human beings - they became extremely violent. When Rome in the second Tunic war, finally won that war it was actually God's judgment against Cartage and its Israelite people as punishment for their sins. But even in that second Tunic War Cartage came very close to exterminating Rome from off the face of the earth. When Hannibal, who was named after Baal, took an army into the Italian area and was therefore years waging war against the Romans, conquering city after city trying to start a revolt but they were not blessed with victory.

When Cartage fell in the middle of the 2nd century B.C., where did its people go? Since some of the historians talk about the population of Cartage being some 600,000, it also relates that only a few thousand stayed to fight the Romans to the bitter end. Some of them probably sought a new life in Cartage's secret territories in America. For America has been a land of refuge for a long time before the Pilgrims came.

These people which came at that time, were Baal worshipers as the remains in America shows. They had gotten degenerate also, and likely died out in wars, intermarriage with the Indians and possibly from VD from their wild sexual practices; which their monuments testify to.

The Carthagenian Israelites in their empire had Southern Spain including the area of Gibraltar, parts of West Africa, and America in their domain. They traded exclusively in the British Isles.

The book "Judah's Scepter and Joseph's Birthright," goes into the story of how Dan and Simeon arriving in Wales and Ireland. The Carthagenians traded extensively with these people, but there is no evidence that those areas were part of Cartage Empire, they were only mercantile contacts. Let's repeat, America was given to the Israelites by God in the 1600 and 1700s as the British and European Israelite settlers came again. Historians ignore this part of history because it proves their ideas of evolution as a bunch of bologna. [332]

                                                           White Slavery In Early America

In the Midrash Rabbah, a rabbinical commentary, there is a prediction one day all gentiles will be slaves of Jews. [333]

In the British West Indies much of the early capital to finance White Slavery came from Sephardic Jews from Holland. They provided credit, machinery and shipping facilities.

In the 1630s Dutch Jews had been deeply involved in the enslavement of the Irish, financing their transport to slave plantations in the tropics. By the 1660s, this combination of Zionist finance and White Slave labor made the British island colony of Barbados the richest in the empire. The island's value, in terms of trade and capital exceeded that of all other British colonies combined. [334]

Of the fact that the wealth of Barbados was founded on the backs of White Slave labor there can be no doubt. White Slave laborers from Britain and Ireland were the mainstay of the sugar colony. Until the mid‑1640s there were almost no Blacks in Barbados.

George Downing wrote to John Winthrop, the colonial governor of Massachusetts in 1645, that planters who wanted to make a fortune in the British West Indies must procure White Slave labor "out of England" if they wanted to succeed. [335] From their experience with rebellious Irish slaves, Dutch Jews would eventually be instrumental in the switch from White to Black slavery in the British West Indies.

Blacks were more docile, and more profitable. The English traffic in slaves in the first half of the seventeenth century was solely in White slaves. The English had no slave base in West Africa, as did the Dutch Sephardim who were not only bankers and shipping magnates but slave masters and plantation owners themselves. Jews were forbidden by English law to own White Protestant slaves, although in practice this was not uniformly enforced, Irish slaves were allowed to the Jewish slavers but were regarded by them as intractable.

Hence certain Jews became prime movers behind the African slave trade and the importation of Negro slaves into the New World. [336] White Slavery was the historic base upon which Negro slavery was constructed. "...the important structures, labor ideologies and social relations necessary for slavery already had been established within indentured servitude...White Servitude...in many ways came remarkably close to the 'ideal type' of chattel slavery which later became associated with the African experience." [337] And: "The practice developed and tolerated in the kidnaping of Whites laid the foundation for the kidnaping of Negroes." [338]

The official papers of the White Slave trade refer to adult White Slaves as "freight" and White Child Slaves were termed "half‑freight." Like any other commodity on the shipping inventories, white human beings were seen strictly in terms of market economics by merchants. The American colonies prospered through the use of White Slaves which Virginia planter John Pory declared in 1619 were "our principal wealth." "The White Servant, a semi‑slave, was more important in the 17th century than even the Negro slave, in respect in both numbers and economic significance." [339]

Where Establishment history books or films touch on White Slavery it is referred to with the deceptively mild‑sounding title of "indentured servitude," the implication being that the enslavement of Whites was not as terrible or all-encompassing as Negro "Slavery" But constituted instead a more benign bondage, that of "Servitude."

Yet the terms servant and slave were often used interchangeably to refer to people whose status was clearly that of permanent, lifetime enslavement. "An Account of the English Sugar Plantations" in the British Museum [340] written circa 1660‑1685 refers to Black and White Slaves as "servants... the Colonyes were plentifully supplied with Negro and Christian {White} servants which are the nerves and sinews of a plantacon...(Christian was a euphemism for White)...In the North American colonies in the 17th and 18th centuries and subsequently in the United States, servant was the usual designation for a slave." [341]

The use of the word servant to describe a slave would have been very prevalent among a Bible‑literate people like colonial Americans. In all English translations of the Bible available at the time, from Wycliffe's to the 1611 King James version, the word slave as it appeared in the original Biblical languages was translated as servant.

For example, the King James Version of Genesis 9:25 is rendered: "Cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he be."

The intended meaning here is clearly that of slave and there is little doubt that in the mind of early Americans the word servant was synonymous with slave. [342] In original documents of the White merchants who transported Negroes from Africa the Blacks were called servants: "...one notes that the Company of Royal Adventurers referred to their cargo as 'egers,' 'Negro‑Servants,' 'Servants...from Africa..." [343]

Oscar Handlin, Professor of History at Harvard University, debunks the propaganda that slavery was strictly a racist operation, part of a conspiracy of White Supremacy. Prof. Handlin points to the facts that:

1). Whites as well as Blacks were enslaved.

2). In the 17th century slaves of both races were called servants.

3). The colonial merchants of 17th century America had no qualms about enslaving their own White kindred: "Through the first three‑quarters of the 17th century, the Negroes, even in the South, were not numerous...They came into a society in which a large part of the (White) population was to some degree unfree... The Negroes lack of freedom was not unusual. These (Black) newcomers, like so many others, were accepted, bought and held, as kinds of servants...It was in this sense that Negro servants were sometimes called slaves...For that matter, it also applied to White Englishmen...in New England and New York too there had early been an intense desire for cheap unfree hands, for 'bond slavery, villeinage of Captivity,' whether it be White, Negro or Indian..." [344]

A survey of the various ad hoc codes and regulations devised in the 17th century for the governing of those in bondage reveals no special category for Black slaves. [345] "During Ligon's time in Barbados (1647‑1650), White indentured female servants worked in the field gangs alongside the small but rapidly growing number of enslaved black women. In this formative stage of the Sugar Revolution, planters did not attempt to formulate a division of labor along racial lines. White indentured servants...were not perceived by their masters as worthy of special treatment in the labor regime." [346]

The contemporary academic consensus on slavery in America represents history by retroactive fiat, decreeing that conclusions about the entire epoch fit the characterizations of its final stage, the 19th century Southern plantation system.

Prof. Handlin informs us that legislators in Virginia sought to cover‑up the record of White bondage and its equivalence to Negro servitude: "The compiler of the Virginia laws (codifying Black slavery for the first time) then takes the liberty of altering texts to bring earlier legislation into line with his own new notions." [347] For examples of alterations to insert the word slave as a reference to blacks in Virginia when it had not been used to describe them that way before, [348]. What was later lawmakers sought to cover‑up? The fact that the White ruling class of Colonial America had cast their own White People into the same condition as the Blacks, or even worse.

Richard Ligon's eyewitness report of a White Slave revolt in Barbados in 1649 has been consistently referred down through the years as a rebellion of Negro Slaves by at least a dozen later historians such as Poyer, Oldmixon, Schomburgh et al. In their cases this does not seem to have been a matter of deliberate falsification, but rather a complete inability to conceive of Whites as Slaves.

Ligon had written that the rebels in question had not been able to "endure such slavery" any longer and the later historians automatically assumed that this had to have been a reference to Negroes. It is this persistent cognition by categorical preconception that renders much of what passes for colonial history in our era inaccurate and misleading.

17th century colonial slavery and 19th century American slavery are not a seamless garment. Historians who pretend otherwise have to maintain several fallacies, the chief among these being the supposition that when White "servants" constituted the majority of servile laborers in the colonial period, they worked in privileged or even luxurious conditions which were forbidden to Blacks.

In truth, White Slaves were often restricted to doing the dirty, backbreaking field work while Blacks and even Indians were taken into the Plantation Mansion houses to work as domestics: "Contemporaries were aware that the popular stereotyping of (White) female indentured servants as whores, sluts and debauched wenches, discouraged their use in elite planter households. Many pioneer planters preferred to employ Amerindian women in their households...With the...establishment of an elitist social culture, there was a tendency to reject (White) indentured servants as domestics...black women...represented a more attractive option and, as a result, were widely employed as domestics in the second half of the 17th century. In 1675 for example John Blake, who had recently arrived on the island (of Barbados), informed his brother in Ireland that his White Indentured Servant was a 'slut' and he would like to be rid of her...(in favor of a 'neger wench')." [349]

In the 17th century White slaves were cheaper to acquire than Negroes and therefore were often mistreated to a greater extent. Having paid a bigger price for the Negro, "the planters treated the black better than they did their 'Christian' White Servant. Even the Negroes recognized this and did not hesitate to show their contempt for those White Men who, they could see, were worse off than themselves..." [350]

It was White Slaves who built America from its very beginnings and made up the overwhelming majority of slave-adorers in the colonies not Blacks in the 17th century. Negro slaves seldom had to do the kind of virtually lethal work the White Slaves of America did in the formative years of settlement.  "The frontier demands for heavy manual labor, such as felling trees, soil clearance, and general infra structural development, had been satisfied primarily by White Indentured Servants (Slaves) between 1627 and 1643." [351]

The merchant class of early America was an equal opportunity enslaver and viewed with enthusiasm the bondage of all poor people within their grasp, including their own White kinsmen. There was a precedent for this in the English legal concept of villeinage, a form of medieval White Slavery in England.  "...as late as 1669 those who thought of large‑scale agriculture assumed it would be manned not by Negroes but by servile Whites under a condition of villeinage. John Locke's constitutions for South Carolina envisaged an hereditary group of servile 'leet men'; and Lord Shaftsbury's signory on Locke Island in 1674 actually attempted to put the scheme into practice." [352]

The Random House Dictionary of the English Language defines servitude as "slavery or bondage of any kind." The dictionary defines "bondage" as "being bound by or subjected to external control." It defines "slavery" as "ownership of a person or persons by another or others."

Hundreds of thousands of Whites in colonial America were owned outright by their masters and died in slavery. They had no control over their own lives and were auctioned on the block and examined like livestock exactly like Black slaves, with the exception that these Whites were enslaved by their own race.

White Slaves, "found themselves powerless as individuals, without honor or respect and driven into commodity production not by any inner sense of moral duty but by the outer stimulus of the whip." [353] Upon arrival in America, White Slaves were, "put up for sale by the ship captains or merchants... Families were often separated under these circumstances when wives and offspring were auctioned off to the highest bidder." [354]

Another example: "Eleanor Bradbury, sold with her three sons to a Maryland owner, was separated from her husband, who was bought by a man in Pennsylvania." [355]

White people who were passed over for purchase at the point of entry were taken into the back country by "soul drivers" who herded them along "like cattle to a Smithfield market" and then put them up for auction at public fairs. "Prospective buyers felt their muscles, checked their teeth...like cattle..." [356]

White Men and Women were driven by their Jewish slavers, just as a cowboy would a herd of cattle: "They are frequently hurried in droves, under the custody of severe brutal drivers into the Back Country to be disposed of as servants." [357]

Those Whites for whom no buyer could be found even after marketing them inland were returned to the slave trader to be sold for a pittance. These Whites were officially referred to as "refuse." The Virginia Company arranged with the City of London to have 100 poor White Children "out of the swarms that swarm in the place" sent to Virginia in 1619 for sale to the wealthy planters of the colony to be used as slave labor. The Privy Council of London authorized the Virginia Company to, "imprison, punish and dispose of any of those children upon any disorder by them committed, as cause shall require."

The trade in White slaves was a natural one for English merchants who imported sugar and tobacco from the colonies. Whites kidnaped in Britain could be exchanged directly for this produce. The trade in White Slaves was basically a return hall operation. The operations of Captain Henry Brayne were typical.

In November of 1670, Capt. Brayne was ordered to sail from Carolina with a consignment of timber for sale in the West Indies. From there he was to set sail for London with a load of sugar purchased with the profits from the sale of the timber. In England he was to sell the sugar and fill his ship with from 200 to 300 White Slaves to be sold in Carolina. The notion of a "contract" and of the legal status of the White in "servitude" became a fiction as a result of the exigencies of the occasion.

In 1623 George Sandys, the treasurer of Virginia, was forced to sell the only remaining eleven White Slaves of his Company for lack of provisions to support them. Seven of these White People were sold for 150 pounds of tobacco. The slave‑status of Whites held in colonial bondage can also be seen by studying the disposition of the estates of the wealthy Whites. Whites in bondage were rated as inventories and disposed of by will and by deed along with the rest of the property. They were bought, sold, bartered, gambled away, mortgaged, weighed on scales like farm animals and taxed as property.

Richard Ligon, a contemporary eyewitness to White Slavery, in his 1657 A True and Exact History tells of a White Slave, a woman, who was being traded by her master for a pig. Both the pig and the White Woman were weighed on a scale. "The price was set for a groat a pound for the hog's flesh and six pence for the woman's flesh..." [358] In general, Whites were not treated with the relative dignity the term "indentured servants" connotes, but as degraded chattel, part of the personal estate of the master and on a par with his farm animals. The term "indentured servitude" therefore is nothing more than a propagandistic softening of the historic experience of enslaved White People in order to make a false distinction between their sufferings and those of Negro Slaves!

This is not to deny the existence of a fortunate class of Whites who could in fact be called "indentured servants" according to the modern conception of the term, who worked under privileged conditions of limited bondage for a specific period of time, primarily as apprentices. These lucky few were given religious instruction and could sue in a court of law. They were employed in return for their transportation to America and room and board during their period of service. But certain [Jewish, or their lackys] historians pretend that this apprentice system, the privileged form of bound labor, was representative of the entire experience of White bondage in America.

In actuality, the indentured apprentice system represented the condition of only a tiny segment of the Whites in bondage in early America. "Strictly speaking, the term indentured servant should apply only to those persons who had bound them-selves voluntarily to service but it is generally used for all classes of bond servants." [359]

Richard B. Morris in Government and Labor in Early America notes that, "In the colonies, however, apprenticeship was merely a highly specialized and favored form of bound labor. The more comprehensive colonial institution included all persons bound to labor for periods of years as determined either by agreement or by law, both minors and adults, and Indians and Negroes as well as Whites." [360]

In a reversal of our contemporary ideas about White "indenture" and Black "slavery," many Blacks in colonial America were often temporary bondsmen freed after a period of time. Peter Hancock arranged for a Negro servant named Asha to serve for twelve months, thenceforth to be a free person. [361]  "...free Negro boys bound out as apprentices were sometimes given the benefit of an educational clause in the indenture. Two such cases occur in the Princess Anne County Records; one in 1719, to learn the trade of tanner, the master to 'teach him to read,' and the other, in 1727, to learn the trade of gunsmith, the master to teach him 'to read the Bible distinctly." [362]

Newspaper and court records in South Carolina cite, "a free Negro fellow named Johnny Holmes...lately an indented servant with Nicholas Trott..." and "a Negro man commonly called Jack Cutler ‑‑ he is a free Negro having faithfully served out his time with me four years according to the contract agreed upon..." [363]

David W. Galenson is the author of an Orwellian suppression of the horrors and conditions of White Slavery entitled White Servitude in Colonial America. He states concerning White slaves, "European men and women could exercise choice both in deciding whether to migrate to the colonies and in choosing possible destinations."

This is positively misleading! At the bare minimum, hundreds of thousands of White Slaves were kidnaped off the streets and roads of Great Britain in the course of more than one hundred and fifty years and sold to Jewish captains of Slave Ships in London known as "White Guineamen."

Ten thousand Whites were kidnaped from England in the year 1670 alone. [364]  The very word "kidnapper" was first coined in Britain in the 1600s to describe those who captured and sold White Children into slavery ("kid‑nabbers").

Another whitewash is the heralded "classic work" on the subject, Abbot Emerson Smith's Colonists in Bondage which is one long cover‑up of the extent of the kidnaping, the denial of the existence of White Slavery and numerous other apologies for the establishment including a cover‑up of the deportation and enslavement of the Irish people. But the record proves otherwise. [365] "Cromwell's conquest of Ireland in the middle of the seventeenth century made slaves as well as subjects of the Irish people. Over a hundred thousand men, women and children were seized by the English troops and shipped to the West Indies, where they were sold into slavery..." [366]

On September 11, 1655 came the following decree from the Puritan Protectorate by Henry Cromwell in London: "Concerning the young (Irish) women, although we must use force in takinge them up, yet it beinge so much for their owne goode, and likely to be of soe great advantage to the publique, it is not in the least doubted, that you may have such number of them as you thinke fitt to make use uppon this account." The "account" was enslavement and transportation to the colonies.

A week later Henry Cromwell ordered that 1,500 Irish boys aged 12 to 14 also be shipped into Slavery with the Irish Girls in the steaming tropics of Jamaica and Barbados in circumstances which killed off White Adult Slaves by the thousands due to the rigors of field work in that climate and the savage brutality of their overseers. In October the Council of State approved the plan. Altogether more than one hundred thousand Irish were shipped to the West Indies where they died in Slavery in Horrible Conditions.

Children weren't the only victims. Even eighty year old Irish women were deported to the West Indies and enslaved. [367] Irish religious leaders were herded into, "internment camps throughout Ireland, and were then moved progressively to the ports for shipment overseas like cattle." [368]

By the time Cromwell's men had finished with the Irish people, only one‑sixth of the Irish population remained on their lands. [369] Cromwell did not only enslave Catholics. Poor White Protestants on the English mainland fared no better.

In February, 1656 he ordered his soldiers to find 1,200 poor English Women for enslavement and deportation to the colonies. In March he repeated the order but increased the quota to "2,000 young women of England." In the same year, Cromwell's Council of State ordered all the homeless poor of Scotland, male and female, transported to Jamaica for enslavement. [370] Of course, Cromwell and the Puritan ruling class were not the only ones involved in the enslavement of Whites.

During the Restoration reign of Charles II, the king with Catholic sympathizers who had been Cromwell's arch‑enemy, King Charles enslaved large groups of poor Presbyterians and Scottish Covenanters and deported them to the plantations in turn. Legislation sponsored by King Charles in 1686, intended to ensure the enslavement of Protestant rebels in the Caribbean colonies, was so harsh that one observer noted, "the condition of these rebels was by this act made as bad, if not worse than the Negroes." [371]

Further we are told: "By far the largest number and certainly the most important group of White indentured servants (Slaves) were the poor Protestants from Europe." [372]

There were four categories of status for White People in colonial America: White freemen, White freemen who owned property, White apprentices (also called "indentured servants," "redemptioners" and "free‑willers") and White Slaves. The attempt by Abbot Emerson Smith, Galenson and many others at denying the existence and brutal treatment of White Slaves by pretending they were mostly just "indentured servants" learning a trade, regulated according to venerable medieval Guild traditions of apprenticeship runs completely counter to the documentary record. "...the planters did not conceive of their (White) servants socially and emotionally as integral parts of the family or household, but instead viewed them as an alien commodity...Having abandoned the moral responsibility aspect of pre‑capitalist ideology, masters enforced an often violent social domination of (White) servants by the manipulation of oppressive legal codes...transform(ing)...indentured servitude, with its pre‑industrial, moral, paternalistic superstructure, into a market system of brutal servitude...maintained by the systematic application of legally sanctioned force and violence." [373]

Informal British and colonial custom validated the kidnaping of working‑class British Whites and their enslavement in the colonies under such euphemisms as "Servitude according to the Custom" which upheld the force of "verbal contracts" which ship masters and press‑gangs claimed existed between them and the wretched Whites they kidnaped off the streets of England and sold into colonial slavery. These justifications for White slavery arose in law determined by penal codes. In other words, White slavery was permitted and perpetuated on the claim that all who were thus enslaved were criminals. No proof for this claim was needed because the fact of one's enslavement "proved" the fact of one's "criminality."

The history of White Slavery in the New World can be found within the history of the enforcement of the penal codes in Britain and America. Slaves were made of poor White "criminals" who had stolen as little as one sheep, a loaf of bread or had been convicted of destroying shrubbery in an aristocrat's garden. They would be separated from their parents or spouse and "transported" to the colonies for life.

In 1655 four teenagers were whipped through the streets of Edinburg, Scotland, burned behind the ears and "barbadosed" for interrupting a minister, James Scott, while he was preaching in church. [374] The "convict" label was so ubiquitous that it prompted Samuel Johnson's remark on Americans: "Sir, they are a race of convicts, and ought to be content with anything we allow them short of hanging."

But even an exclusive focus on the indentured servant or "apprentice" class cannot conceal the fact of White Slavery because very often the distinctions between the two blurred. Through a process of subterfuge and entrapment, White apprentices were regularly transformed into White slaves, as we shall see. White Slaves were owned not only by individual aristocrats and rich planters but by the colonial government itself or its governor. White Slaves included not just paupers but such "wicked villaines" as "vagrants, beggars, disorderly and other dissolute persons" as well as White Children from the counties and towns of Britain who were stolen from their parents through no Harriet Beecher Stowe rose to prominence in chronicling the anguish and hardship of these enslaved White Children.

A large number of the White Slaves arriving in America described as "convicts" were actually political prisoners. Of the Scottish troops captured at the battle of Worcester more than 600 hundred were shipped to Virginia as slaves in 1651. The rebels of 1666 were sent as slaves to the colonies as were the Monmouth rebels of 1685 and the Jacobites of the rising of 1715. "It is now commonly accepted that the African slave trade could not have operated for over three centuries without the active participation of some African states and political leaders. The human merchandise was obtained largely as a result of political conflicts between neighboring states and tribes. Less well known are the ways in which... (White Slave Laborers were obtained)...from the British Isles for the West Indies plantations in the seventeenth century. The English state ruthlessly rounded up victims of political conflict and prisoners of war at places like Dunbar, Worcester, Salisbury and, during territorial expansionism, in Ireland, for sale to West Indian merchants. In this respect English governments and African political leaders were responding to the same market forces." [375]

The Crown put tens of thousands of political dissidents in slavery, some being shipped to New England while others were deported to the plantations of the West Indies and worked to death in the island's boiler houses, mills and sugar cane fields. Cromwell sold the White survivors of the massacre at Drogheda to slave‑traders in the Barbados, "and thereafter it became his fixed policy to 'barbadoes' his opponents." [376]

By 1655, half of the total White population of Barbados consisted of political prisoners sold into slavery. [377] Establishment historians claim that only Blacks were slaves because Whites were released after a term of seven or ten years of servitude.

But the history of the enslavement of Britain's political prisoners disproves this notion. Plantation owners saw it as their profitable and patriotic duty to extend the servitude of the political prisoners on the plantations far beyond the supposed ten or twenty year limit. British political prisoners were shipped into slavery in America for life, not seven or fourteen years: "...those who survived the voyage worked out their lives in bondage on the plantations of America." [378]

Then: "After the battle of Worcester in 1652 the first mention is made of Royalists having been brought out to Barbados and sold as slaves...they had been taken prisoner at Exeter and IIchester...From there they were driven straight to Plymouth, put on a ship where they remained below deck, sleeping amongst the horses. On arrival in Barbados they were sold as chattel and employed in grinding the mills, attending to the furnaces and digging in the hot sun, whipped at the whipping post as rogues, and sleeping in stiles worse than pigs." [379]

This was no "temporary bondage." Of 1300 Cavaliers enslaved in 1652 in Barbados almost all of them died in slavery. [380] The enslavement of White political prisoners in the West Indies was debated in the English Parliament on March 25, 1659. The practice was allowed to continue and was still in operation as late as 1746 when Scottish Highland infantrymen and French and Irish regulars of the Jacobite army were transported into slavery in Barbados after the battle of Culloden. [381]

Whites convicted of no crime whatever were made slaves by being captured by press‑gangs in Britain and shipped into slavery in colonial America. These slave raids (also known as "spiriting") began under the reign of King Charles I, continued during the Commonwealth period and throughout the reign of Charles II.

It was an organized system of kidnaping English, Welsh and Scottish workers, young and old, and transporting them to the American colonies to be sold, with the profits split between the press‑gangs and the shipmaster to whom the captured Whyites were assigned in chains. These slave hunting gangs were viewed with covert approval by the British aristocracy who feared the overpopulation of the White underclass.

Confiscatory levels of taxation and the enclosure laws had driven British small farmers and village dwellers off the land and into the cities where they gathered and "loitered," a threat to the order and comfort of the propertied classes. 17th and 18th century economists advocated the enslavement of poor Whites because they saw them as the cheapest and most effective way to develop the colonies in the New World and expand the British empire. It was claimed that by making slave laborers out of poor Whites they were saved from being otherwise "chargeable and unprofitable to the Realm."

As the plantation system expanded in the Southern American colonies, planters demanded the legalization of the practice of kidnaping poor Whites. As it stood laws were on the books forbidding kidnaping but these were for show and were enforced with very infrequent, token arrests of "spirits." The planters' need for White slave labor expanded to such an extent that they tired of having to operate in quasi‑legal manner.

In response in February, 1652 it was enacted that: "...it may be lawful for...two or more justices of the peace within any country, citty or towne corporate belonging to this commonwealth to from tyme to tyme by warrant...case to be apprehended, seized on and detained all and every person or persons that shall be found begging and vagrant...in any towne, parish or place to be conveyed into the port of London, or unto any other port...from where such person or persons may be shipped...into any forraign collonie or plantation..." [382]

Parliamentary legislation of 1664 allowed for the capture of White Children who were rounded up and shipped out in chains. Judges received 50% of the profits from the sale of the White Youths with another percentage going to the king. With these laws, it was open season on the poor of Great Britain as well as anyone the rich despised.

In 1682 four White men from Devon, England were enslaved and transported to the colonies. The judges indicated the four for "wandering." From 1662 to 1665, the judges of Edinburgh, Scotland ordered the enslavement and shipment to the colonies of a large number of "rogues" and "others who made life unpleasant for the British upper classes." [383]

In Charles County court in Maryland in 1690 it was agreed that the "indentures" under which seven White Slaves were being held were "kidnapper's indentures" and therefore technically invalid. But the court ruled that the White Slaves should continue to be held in slavery to their various colonial masters based on the so‑called "custom of the country." The ladies of the royal court and even the mayor of Bristol, England were not beneath profiting from the lucrative traffic in poor White People.

Every pretense was used to decoy the victims aboard ships lying in the Thames. The kidnaping of poor Whites became a major industry in such English port cities as London, Plymouth, Southhapton and Dover and in Scotland at Aberdeen where the kidnaping of White Children and their sale into slaver "had become an industry."

The kidnaping of English children into slavery in America was actually legalized during the first quarter of the 17th century. In that period a large number of the children of poor parents, as well as orphan children were targeted for the White Slave trade. The poor White Children were described as a "plague" and a "rowdy element."

Aristocrats who ran the Virginia Company such as Sir Thomas Smythe and Sir Edwin Sandys viewed the children as a convenient pool of slave laborers for the fields of the Virginia colony.

In their petition to the Council of London in 1618 they complained of the great number of "vagrant" children in the streets and requested that they might be transported to Virginia to serve as laborers. A bill was passed in September of 1618 permitting the capture of children aged eight years old or older, girls as well as boys. The eight year old boys were to be enslaved for sixteen years and the eight year old girls for fourteen years, after which, it was said, they would be given land. [384]

A directive was issued for the capture of children in London, empowering city aldermen to direct their constables to seize children on the streets and commit them to the prison‑hospital at Bridewell, where they were to await shipment to America. [385]  "...their only 'crime' was that they were poor and happened to be found loitering or sleeping in the streets when the constable passed by." [386]

The street was not the only place child slaves were to be procured however. The homes of indigent parents with large families were also on the agenda of the slave‑traders. Poor English parents were given the "opportunity" to surrender one or more of their children to the slavers.

If they refused they were to be starved into submission by being denied any further relief assistance from the local government: "To carry out the provisions of the act the Lord Mayor [387]...directed the alderman...to (make) inquiry of those parents 'overcharged and burdened with poor children' whether they wished to send any of them to Virginia...those who replied negatively were to be told they would not receive any further poor relief from the parish." [388]

The grieving parents were assured that the shipment of their children to Virginia would be beneficial to the children because it was a place where "under severe masters they may be brought to goodness." [389]

In January of 1620 a group of desperate, terrified English children attempted to break out of Bridewell where they had been imprisoned while awaiting the slave‑ships to America. They rose up and fought: "...matters were further complicated by the refusal of some of the children to be transported. In late January a kind of 'revolt' occurred at Bridewell, with some of the 'ill‑disposed' among the children declaring 'their unwillingness to go to Virginia..." [390] "A hasty letter from (Sir Edwin) Sandys to the King's secretary (Sir Robert Naunton) quickly rectified the situation."

On January 31 the Privy Council decreed that if any of the children continued to their "obstinance" they would be severely punished. It is possible that one of the children was actually executed as an example to the others! What is certain is that a month later the children, mostly boys, were forced on board the ship Duty and transported to Virginia. From thence onward, English male child slaves came to be known as "Duty Boys." [391]

There would be many more shipments of these doomed children bound for the colonies in the years ahead. "From that time on little is known about them except that very few lived to become adults. When a 'muster' or census of the (Virginia) colony was taken in 1625, the names of only seven boys were listed (of the children kidnaped in 1619). All the rest were dead...The statistics for the children sent in 1620 are equally grim...no more than five were alive in 1625." [392]

On April 30, 1621 Sir Edwin Sandys presented a plan to the English parliament for the solution of the threat poor English people posed to the fabulously wealthy aristocracy: mass shipment to Virginia, where they would all be "brought to goodness."

When control of the colony of Virginia passed from the privately‑held Virginia Company directly to the king, it was deemed more expedient, as time went on, to privatize the traffic in White Children while placing it on an even larger basis to meet the cheap labor needs of all the colonies. In this way the Crown avoided the opprobrium that might have been connected with the further official sale of English children even as the aristocracy covertly expanded this slave trade dramatically.

The early traffic in White Children to Virginia had proved profitable not only for the Virginia Company but for the judges and other officials in England who administered the capture of the children: J. Ferrar, treasurer of the Virginia Company, indicated that he had been approached by the Marshal of London and other officials who had been involved in procuring children for the colony, proclaiming that they were owed a financial reward, "for their care and travail therein, that they might be encouraged hereafter to take the like pains whensoever they should have again the like occasion."

The officials subsequently received the handsome "cut" for their part in the loathsome traffic in kidnaped White Children which they had desired. [393] This collusion between the public and private sphere generated profits and established a precedent for many more "occasions" where "liek pains" would be eagerly taken.

The precedent established was the cornerstone of the trade in Child‑slaves in Britain for decades to come; a trade whose center, after London, would become the ports of Scotland: "Press gangs in the hire of local merchants roamed the streets, seizing 'by force such boys as seemed proper subjects for the slave trade.' Children were driven in flocks through the town and confined for shipment in barns...So flagrant was the practice that people in the countryside about Aberdeen avoided bringing children into the city for fear they might be stolen; and so widespread was the collusion of merchants, shippers, suppliers and even magistrates that the man who exposed it was forced to recant and run out of town." [394]

This man was Peter Williamson who as a child in 1743 was captured in Aberdeen and sold as a slave for America with 70 other kidnaped Scottish Children in addition to other freight. After eleven weeks at sea, the ship ran aground on a sand bar near Cape May on the Delaware river. As it began to take on water, the crew fled in a lifeboat, leaving the boys to drown in the sinking ship. The Planter managed to stay afloat until morning however, and the slavers returned to salvage their "cargo." Peter Williamson was twice‑blessed. He not only survived the Planter but had the great good fortune to have been purchased by a former slave, Hugh Wilson, who had also been kidnaped in Scotland as a child.

Wilson had fled slavery in another colony and now bought Williamson in Pennsylvania. He did so solely out of compassion, knowing the boy would be bought by someone else had Wilson not bought him first. Wilson paid for Williamson's education in a colonial school and years later on his death, bequeathed to the lad his horse, saddle and a small sum of money, all Wilson had in the world.

With this advantage, Williamson married, became an Indian‑fighter on the frontier and eventually made his way back to Scotland, seeking justice for himself and on behalf of all kidnaped children including his deceased friend Hugh Wilson. This took the form of a book, The Life and Curious Adventures of Peter Williamson, Who Was Carried Off from Aberdeen and Sold for a Slave. But when he attempted to distribute it in Aberdeen he was arrested on a charge of publishing a, "scurrilous and infamous libel, reflecting greatly upon the character and reputations of the merchants of Aberdeen."

The book was ordered to be publicly burned and Williamson jailed. He was eventually fined and banished from the city. Williamson did not give up but sued the judges of Aberdeen and took sworn statements from people who had witnessed kidnapings or who had had their own children snatched by slavers. Typical was the testimony of William Jamieson of Oldmeldrum, a farming village 12 miles from Aberdeen.

In 1741, Jamiesons's ten year old son John was captured by a "spirit" gang in the employ of "Bonny John" Burnet, a powerful slave‑merchant based in Aberdeen. After making inquiries, Jamieson learned that his son was being held for shipment to the "Plantations." Jamieson hurried to Aberdeen and frantically searched the docks and ships for his boy. He found him on shore among a circle of about sixty other boys, guarded by Bonny John's slavers who brandished horse whips. When the boys walked outside the circle they were shipped.

Jamieson called to his son to come to him. The boy tried to run to his father. Father and son were beaten to the ground by the slavers. Jamieson sought a writ from the Scottish courts but was informed, "that it would be vain for him to apply to the magistrates to get his son liberate: because some of the magistrates had a hand in those doings." Jamieson never saw his son alive again, "having never heard of him since he was carried away."

The testimony from Jamieson and from many others helped Peter Williamson to prevail. The Aberdeen merchants were ordered by the Edinburgh Court of Sessions to pay him 100 pounds sterling. Williamson was personally vindicated and his book would later be printed in a new edition. The kidnaping continued, however.

The enslavement of White Children from Great Britain became the subject of a much better known book, Robert Louis Stevenson's Kidnaped which was based on the real‑life case of James Annesley whose uncle, the Earl of Anglesey, had arranged for him to be seized and sold into slavery in America, in order to remove any challenge to the Earl's inheritance of his brother's estates.

Annesley was savagely whipped and brutally mistreated in America and it appeared as if he would die in chains. He was eventually re‑sold to another master who accepted his story that he was an English lord and the heir to the Anglesey barony. He managed to make his way back to Scotland where he wrote a book, Memoirs of an Unfortunate Young Nobleman, Returned from Thirteen Years' Slavery in America, which came to the attention of Robert Louis Stevenson.

Unfortunately this rare case involving the enslavement of a member of the English nobility attracted attention only because it involved royalty. The far more common plight of hundreds of thousands of poor British children who languished and died in slavery in the colonies was ignored and their lot remained unchanged in the wake of the publication of Stevenson's classic. The head of one kidnaping ring, John Stewart, sold at least 500 White youths per year into slavery in the colonies. Stewart's thugs were paid twenty‑five shillings for Whites they procured by force, usually a knock in the head with a blunt instrument, or fraud. Stewart sold the Whites to the masters of the "White Guineaman" slave ships for forty shillings each. One eyewitness to the mass kidnaping of poor Whites estimated that 10,000 were sold into slavery every year from throughout Great Britain. [395]

White Slaves transported to the colonies suffered a staggering loss of life in the 17th and 18th century. During the voyage to America it was customary to keep the White Slaves below deck for the entire nine to twelve week journey. A White Slave would be confined to a hole not more than sixteen feet long, chained with 50 other men to a board, with padlocked collars around their necks. The weeks of confinement below deck in the ship's stifling hold often resulted in outbreaks of contagious disease which would sweep through the "cargo" of White "freight" chained in the bowels of the ship. Ships carrying White Slaves to America often lost half their (White) Slaves to death. According to historian Sharon V. Salinger, "Scattered data reveal that the mortality for [White] servants at certain times equaled that for [Black] slaves in the 'middle passage,' and during other periods actually exceeded the death rate for [Black] slaves." [396]

Foster R. Dulles writing in Labor in America: A History, p. 6, states that whether convicts, children 'spirited' from the countryside or political prisoners, White slaves, "experienced discomforts and sufferings on their voyage across the Atlantic that paralleled the cruel hardships undergone by Negro slaves on the notorious Middle Passage."

Dulles says the Whites were, "indiscriminately herded aboard the 'white guineamen,' often as many as 300 passengers on little vessels of not more than 200 tons burden, overcrowded, unsanitary...THE MORTALITY RATE WAS SOMETIMES AS HIGH AS 50% and YOUNG CHILDREN SELDOM SURVIVED THE HORRORS OF A VOYAGE which might last anywhere from seven to twelve weeks."

Independent investigator A.B. Ellis in the Argosy writes concerning the transport of White Slaves, "The human cargo, many of whom were still tormented by unhealed wounds, could not all lie down at once without lying on each other. They were never suffered to go on deck. The hatchway was constantly watched by sentinels armed with hangers and blunder busses. In the dungeons below all was darkness, stench, lamentation, disease and death."

Marcus Jernegan describes the greed of the ship masters which led to horrendous loss of life for White Slaves transported to America: "The voyage over often repeated the horrors of the famous 'middle passage' of slavery fame. An average cargo was three hundred, but the shipmaster, for greater profit, would sometimes crowd as many as six hundred into a small vessel...The mortality under such circumstances was tremendous, sometimes more than half...Mittelberger (an eyewitness) says he saw thirty‑two children thrown into the ocean during one voyage." [397]

And: "The mercantile firms, as importers of (White) servants, were not too careful about their treatment, as the more important purpose of the transaction was to get ships over to South Carolina which could carry local produce back to Europe. Consequently the Irish, as well as others, suffered greatly...It was almost as if the British merchants had redirected their vessels from the African coast to the Irish coast, with the White Servants coming over in much the same fashion as the African slaves." [398]

A study of the middle passage of White Slaves was included in a Parliamentary Petition of 1659. It reported that White Slaves were locked below deck for two weeks while the slave ship was still in port. Once under way, they were "all the way locked up under decks... amongst horses."

They were chained from their legs to their necks. One White Woman Slave, Elizabeth Dudgeon, had dared to talk back to a guard. She was trussed up to a ship's grating and mercilessly whipped. One of the ship's officers relished watching her whipped: "The corporal did not play with her, but laid it home, which I was very glad to see...she has long been fishing for it, which she has at last got to her heart's content." [399]

In order to realize the maximum profit from the trade in White Slaves, the captains of the White Guineamen crammed their ships with as many poor Whites as possible, certain that even with the most callous disregard for the lives of the Whites the financial gain would still make the trip worth the effort.

A loss of 20% of their White "cargo" was regarded as acceptable. But sometimes losses were much higher. Out of 350 White Slaves on a ship bound for the colonies in 1638 only 80 arrived alive. "We have thrown over board two and three a day for many days together" wrote Thomas Rous, a survivor of the trip. A ship carrying White Slaves in 1685, the Betty of London, left England with 100 White Slaves and arrived in the colonies with 49 left. A number of factors contributed to the higher death rates for White Slaves than Blacks. Although the goal of maximum profits motivated both trades, it cost more to obtain Blacks from Africa than it did to capture Whites in Europe. White Slaves were not cared for as well as Blacks because the Whites were cheaply obtained and were viewed as expendable. "The African slave trade was not fully established in the early 17th century...The price of African slaves was prohibitively high and the English were neither familiar with nor committed to black slavery as a basic institution." [400]; "Sold to a master in Merion, near Philadelphia, David Evans was put to work 'hewing and uprooting trees,' land clearing, the most arduous of colonial labor, work that was spared black slaves because they were too valuable." [401]; "Before 1650, however, the greater victims of man's inhumanity were the mass of White Christian servants who suffered at the hands of callous, White Christian masters. For the time being, with all of their troubles, the blacks had it better." [402]

In the British West Indies the torture visited upon White Slaves by their masters was routine. Masters hung White Slaves by their hands and set their hands afire as a means of punishment. To end this barbarity, Colonel William Brayne wrote to English authorities in 1656 urging the importation of Negro slaves on the grounds that, "as the planters would have to pay much for them, they would have an interest in preserving their lives, which was wanting in the case of (Whites)..." many of whom, he charged were killed by overwork and cruel treatment.

Ship Captains involved in the White Slaves trade obtained White Slaves with penal status free of charge and for all other categories of White Slaves paid at most a small sum to an agent to procure them, forfeiting only the cost of their keep on board ship if they died. Moreover, traders in Black slaves operated ships designed solely for the purpose of carrying human cargo with the intent of creating conditions whereby as many Black slaves as possible would reach America alive. White Slave ships were cargo ships with no special provisions for passengers.

In addition, transportation rules decreed that, in cases where White Slaves were sold in advance to individual planters in America, if the White Slave survived the voyage beyond the halfway point in the journey, the planter in America, not the captain of the slave ship, would be responsible for the costs of the White Slaves' provisions whether or not the slave survived the trip.

Captains of the slave ships became infamous for providing sufficient food for only the first half of the trip and then virtually starving their White captives until they arrived in America. "Jammed into filthy holds, manacled, starved and abused, they suffered and died during the crossings in gross numbers. Thousands were children under 12, snatched off the streets..." [403]; "...the transportation...became a profitable enterprise. Traders delivered thousands of bound laborers to Pennsylvania and exhibited a callous disregard for their...cargoes." [404]

As a result, White Slaves on board these ships suffered a high rate of disease. The number of diseased White Slaves arriving was high enough for Pennsylvania officials to recommend a quarantine law for them.

Thus a new torment was to be endured for White Slaves who, "were often stopped just short of the New World, with land in sight, and forced to remain quarantined on board ships in which they had just spent a horrifying ten to twelve weeks." [405]

In 1738 Dr. Thomas Graeme reported to the colonial Council of Pennsylvania that if two ships crammed with White Slaves were allowed to land, "it might prove Dangerous to the health of the inhabitants of the Province." [406] Ships filled with diseased White Slaves landed anyway. In 1750 an island was established for their quarantine, Fisher Island, at the mouth of Schuylkill River. But the establishment of the quarantine area did nothing to protect the health of the White Slaves and the island was more typical of Devil's Island than a place of recuperation.

In 1764 a clergyman, Pastor Helmuth, visited Fisher island and described it as "a land of the living dead, a vault full of living corpses."

Even privileged 17th and 18th century "apprentices" often became slaves in the end (i.e., unpaid, forced laborers for life) based on contractual trickery, judicial malfeasance and usury employed against them during their supposedly limited term as indentured servants.

Such an apprentice would be enticed to borrow sums of money, sign a contract with impossible provisions guaranteeing his or her violation of the contractual terms and other unscrupulous means of extending both of the period of servitude as well as broadening the scope of the servant's obligations. By these means an apprentice could be transformed into a slave for life.

Free White people were sometimes induced to sign "indentures" and place themselves in voluntary "temporary" slavery with the promise of obtaining farm acreage at the end of their term of indenture. An American colony typically offered 50 acres to such persons. This was actually little more than an organized racket.

The alleged "servant" had his or her land grant entrusted to the landowner for whom they labored, with the understanding that title would pass to the servant at the end of his term of labor. But he could forfeit his rights to this promised land on the slightest pretext of his owner, on such grounds as running away (the owner's word would do) or for "indolence."

For the price of a White Slave's transport, six pounds, his owner secured a "headright" to the land which was supposedly intended to go to the "servant" but which was instead combined with the land supposedly set aside for other White Slaves and formed into an estate which would multiply in value. By this means and with an occasional additional fee to an English merchant or "spirit" who provided the landowner with kidnaped extra White Slaves, the plantation owners of colonial America played Monopoly with the fertile valleys and wooded uplands of Maryland and Virginia.

Meanwhile the rightful owners of this land lay in paupers' graves or enshackled for life. This monopolistic grip on the land market was detrimental to all White laborers. Those White slaves who did manage to obtain their freedom alter thirty or forty years as chattel, were swindled out of the spectral "freedom dues" of acreage, left to exist as landless peasants and scorned as "hillbillies" and "White trash," in spite of decades of labor under monstrous conditions of hardship. "One would like to think that some of the few survivors went on to become prominent leaders of the colony or were the founders of great families. This does not appear to be the case...Some were doubtless the progenitors of the 'poor white trash' of the South...many of the free whites who had descended from the poorer elements of the white servant class became objects of charity..." [407]; "...at no time after 1640 in either Barbados or St. Christopher, and probably Nevis, was there any cheap land enough for a man to purchase with his freedom dues ...the vast majority never became landholders..." [408]; "It then became the custom to give the servant at the end of his term, not land, but three hundred pounds of sugar, worth less than two pounds sterling...It was hardly worth the servant's while to endure the conditions which have been described for...($4 worth) of sugar." [409]

These former White Slaves' share of the accumulated wealth of the American colonies, measured by any standard, was negligible; their say in the planter aristocracy was virtually non‑existent. They were the "expendable" by‑products and survivors of a system of exploitation governed solely by merchant companies chartered in England by aristocratic fiat. It was the exclusive government by a merchant company which Adam Smith assailed as the worst of all governments for any country.

Often working conditions were made especially gruesome toward the end of the period when the [White] servant's contract was due to expire in order to induce him to run away, lose his 50 acres and be held extra years in enslavement for fleeing. "Toward the end of the term of servitude, working conditions would often be deliberately worsened, tempting the man to run away so the master might gain these advantages." [410]

Of 5,000 "indentured servants [Slaves]" who entered the colony of Maryland between 1670 and 1680, fewer than 1300 proved their rights to their 50 acre "freedom dues." What had become of the others? More than 1400 died from overwork, chronic malnourishment and disease. The others were defrauded. "By the 18th century the White Servant class was disillusioned...The planters had...squashed the laboring Whites...They were the easy pawns of the planters, who despised them..." [411]

The statutes overseeing non‑penal indentures servitude in colonial America were mere window‑ dressing and neither these statutes or the Common Law proved any obstacle to the gradual enslavement of those with the non‑penal status of "indentured servant," by means of tacking on extra time to be served, on the basis of fabricated or trumped charges and minor offenses. A Virginia law of 1619 provided that "if a servant willfully neglect his master's commands he shall suffer bodily punishment."

When Wyatt became Governor in 1621 he was ordered to see that punishment for offenses committed by White slaves would also be in terms of labor on behalf of the colonial government, such labor to be performed after the slave fulfilled his original period of service to his master. This is the evil practice of lengthening the time required for the White Person's term of labor, a practice which quickly resulted in the lengthening of the term of "service" by years and ended in the perpetual enslavement of the White.  "While it is true that the Common Law of England had the status of national law with territorial extent in the colonies, the relation of Master to servant in cases of what began as non‑penal indentured servitude, was unknown to the Common Law and could neither be derived from nor regulated by it." [412]

Both indentured servitude and the White Slavery were permitted under of the penal codes, depended for their regulation and sanction on special local statutes and tribunals which acted as the "necessities of the occasion" demanded.

The legacy of White enslavement bound up in the medieval English legal concept of "villeinage" contributed an informal framework or milieu at least, for legitimizing the enslavement of the White poor in British‑America. In this light, Richard B. Morris is only partially correct. There was in fact precedent for White Slavery in Common Law but it was little cited in the colonies, perhaps because such former legal citation would have exposed the indentures racket for what it was. Old English law did have something of a White Slave code, based on the concept of "villeinage" from which we derive the words villain and villainy with their now blatantly pejorative connotations.

With the emergence of the English Common Law (1175‑1225) came the ruse of the writ of novel dissension which dealt with who was qualified to contest land evictions. The aristocrats who drafted the writ established a category of juridical unfreedom known as villein tenure which could defeat any English peasant's claim to land, no matter how long his family had held it.

At first villain denoted a White peasant (from the French Carolingian word vilani, a general description for a peasant dependent upon a lord), and the sense of evil that was attached to the word was largely a construct of the rich who would naturally want their world order to be seen as good and therefore any White kinsman enslaved was seen as "justly deserving" of such treatment and hence had to have been bad, evil, a "villain."

It was as important for the English nobility to make this claim about English slave "villeins" as it was for American colonial merchants to label the Whites they enslaved as criminals and traitors or in the common parlance found in original documents of the period, as "rubbish and dung."

The Oxford Dictionary gives the following definition of villainy, "The condition or state of a villein, bondage, servitude, henace base or ignoble condition." [413]

In other words, the connection between villaniny and evil first came about from a premeditated association between the condition of being a slave and the state of being an evil person. Who is it that would benefit from stigmatizing White Slaves as evil beings? who but the slave holding aristocracy who could then justify any crime they committed against these "villains."

Much of the common understanding of the land swindles perpetrated against the English villein class is derived from the legal treatise, De legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliae, commonly known as Bracton after Sir Henry de Bracton. The Bracton code equates the English villein with the Roman servus or slave.

The Bracton code denies all rights to the villein by placing him in the same category as the Roman servus. Villeinage was considered a hereditary condition: "Neither of Duke, earl or lord by ancestry but of villain (vylayne) people." [414] "Thou are of vylayn blood on thy father's side." [415]

This propaganda‑labeling of enslaved Whites may be better understood if we examine the original meaning and the subsequent connotations associated with the use of another name, that of "churl." We call someone a churl today who is badly bred or bad acting. Yet according to the Random House Dictionary of the English Language, originally a churl was an English "freeman of the lowest rank" ‑‑ the poorest White who was not a slave. It is no coincidence that the names for White Slaves and White poor came to be linked with evil and bad breeding as part of a self‑serving process of appellation manufactured by their rulers.

A revealing display of the opprobrium associated with both words is exhibited in a description by Sir Walter Scott, "Sweeping from the earth some few hundreds of villain churles, who are born but to plow it."

The association of these names with what Scott views as a degraded existence of plowing the earth is a holdover from plutocratic ancient Roman philosophy. "Romans considered manual occupations...as degrading in themselves..." [416] Since these were associated in the aristocratic mind with the work of slaves. Up until recently, European history was largely written from the point of view of institutional Churchianity, the wealthy, the aristocracy and the merchant class, at the expense of the laboring people.

Rodney Hilton further cautions that, "historians risk falling into the trap dug for the peasants by the lawyers, for most of our evidence about freedom and serfdom depends on evidence which is a by‑product of the legal...process." [417]

The creation of an exculpatory nomenclature rigged to justify the depredations of the ruling class against the White poor by establishing an intrinsic relationship between being poor and being evil, is a masterstroke of propaganda. It leads to the internalization of these negative images in the minds of the White poor themselves.

Some memory of these connections and connotations were no doubt extant in the minds of colonial Americans and has surely contributed to the dearth of material on those who survived or were descended from White Slavery.

In Britain and Europe under the laws of villeinage, survivors and descendants of White Slavery were susceptible to discrimination before the law and even reenslavement: "The former (White) Slaves, now serfs, might gradually shift into another legal category over several generations, or the taint of servility might lose much of its practical meaning as they became de facto independent, but...the descendants of (White) Slaves were for centuries considered unfree in a way that other people in equally dependent economic positions were not." [418]

This taint, which the ruling class cleverly asserted was the result of some hereditary defect among White Slaves, has been applied to many nations of White peoples from the Slavs to the Irish, Welsh and Scottish. The stigma attached to White "slave blood" by the rulers served as an effective device for:

1). Keeping such descendants from seeking redress for past wrongs.

2). Being ashamed to identify their heritage and background in the form of written memorialization.

3). Serving as a neat propaganda justification for the continuing privileges and governance of the aristocracy.

This pattern is occasionally overturned when we examine unfiltered folk literature or music. For example, in such 13th century Icelandic folk sagas as the Frostbroeora and the Laxdoela, White Slaves are portrayed as fair and Nordic in general appearance and possessed of great personal courage and honor.

Biblical provisions for bound and hired labor were cited to justify White Slavery in early America, on the grounds that it was Scriptural and therefore humane. The Body of Liberties of 1641, the first law code of Puritan New England, established four categories of servitude, citing Exodus 21:2; Leviticus 25:39‑55 and Deuteronomy 23:15‑16.

However, had those Scriptures actually been obeyed, the enslavement of Christians (the heirs of the Israelites) would never have taken place. Deuteronomy mandates that a bondsman is not to be oppressed. Exodus decrees that the term of service will under no circumstance exceed six years. Leviticus forbids forced slavery for the payment of debts as well as child slavery. [419] The permanent enslavement of racial aliens and their children was permitted. [420]

Abraham Lincoln's use of the Bible, which according to his law partner he did not believe in [421], to justify rights for Negro slaves, is another example of this masterful politician's distortion of fact. While it is true that Galatians 3:28 contains the famous passage about there being "neither slave nor free...in Christ Jesus," this statement is meant to have only a spiritual application. The passage also contains the statement that there is neither male nor female in Christ, but I rather doubt Paul intended to sanction transvestitism or homosexuality. In Ephesians 6:5 slaves are ordered to obey their masters "with fear and trembling as unto Christ."

In considering the Biblical stand on slavery, it is necessary to differentiate Biblical laws concerning the enslavement of aliens and Israelites. The former could be permanent, the latter was to be temporary, even though many who claimed to be the Christian heirs of the Israelites acted otherwise.

In America, those who enslaved Blacks and disparaged the manual laborer generally did not derive their philosophy from Biblical sources, however: that legacy falls in the camp of ancient Rome. [422] Southern planters would sometimes justify the bondage of the Negro with Biblical arguments, but this was usually a rejoinder to abolitionist attacks, rather than the main source of enslavement praxis, it is chiefly from the aristocratic notions of the Romans toward manual labor that the classic mindset of the modern slaver in the West evolved. These concepts differ considerably from the status of the manual laborer in the Bible. Jesus Christ, the "King of Kings," toiled as a carpenter for most of His life.

Then as now, religious hypocrites of "Churchianity," as it more properly may be called, ignored Bible teachings on the subject even as they cited them for purposes of their own justification in enslaving fellow White Christians for pecuniary gain. It should be noted that some individual masters in early America who felt convicted by the Scriptures regulating bonded kinsmen moderated their treatment of White bondsmen accordingly.

In colonial America, White people could be enslaved for such an "offense" as missing church services more than three times or for "prevention of an idle course of life."

In 1640 a Virginia master needed to ensure further labor from his White servants in order to place his investments and land improvements on a more secure basis. He therefore falsely accused a number of his servants of a conspiracy, "to run out of the colony and enticing divers others to be actors in the same conspiracy."

As a result of his accusation the alleged "runaways" were severely whipped and had their term of forced labor lengthened an additional seven years, to be served "in irons." This can be regarded as a light sentence in view of the fact that seven years was a standard addition of the term of labor for the crime of running away, or conspiring to do so, to which would then be added, in terms of additional time, the expenses incurred for capture and return of the White to his master, such costs being likely to include rewards, sheriffs and slave‑hunters' bounties and jail fees. These latter were not fixed by law until 1726 and were a source of tremendous abuse by tacking on huge costs to the capture of the runaway and then commanding that the runaway pay for these inflated costs in terms of years of his life in further forced‑labor.

A White Slave who fled or was accused of fleeing often had his term of labor extended fifteen, twenty or even fifty years, as a result. White Slave Lawrence Finny received an additional seven years, eleven months of forced labor for running away, while escaped White Slave William Fisher on being caught, received an additional term of six years and 250 days. [423]

Just for being absent from the plantation at any time, a White Slave would be forced to undergo one additional year of slavery for every two hours he was absent. [424] Starving White Slaves who took extra food from their masters' overflowing larders were enslaved another two years for each commission of that "crime."

Further accusations, infractions and violations added to these additions and in sum amounted to a lifetime of total enslavement and not the allegedly limited, benign White "indentured servitude" our court historians fleetingly refer to on their way to their semester‑long devotion to Negro slave studies. Indeed, one‑half of White "indentured servants" did not live to attain their freedom. Lest anyone think this grim datum refers mainly to Whites enslaved in old age, it actually refers to Whites who were first "indentured" between the ages of 16 and 20. [425] "The truth is," wrote White Slave Edward Hill, "we live in the fear fullest age that ever Christians lived in."

Young white females in bondage were denied the right to marry, a clever device for helping extend their servitude into full‑fledged slavery since the penalty for a woman having a baby out of wedlock while a slave, was an extension of her term of slave labor another two and a half years.

A white male slave had at least four years added to his time for having sex with a White female slave or for entering into a compact of marriage with her. Twenty‑three year old Henry Carman, a White slave since he had been kidnaped in London at the age of seventeen, made White Slave Alice Chambers pregnant and received an additional seven years slavery for this "crime." [426]

A Virginia law of 1672 recognized that there were masters who had lengthened the enslavement of their White Female Slaves by making them pregnant by the slave master himself. No punishment was given to the master for such acts, however. As bad as this may seem it cannot compare with the dreadful fate that awaited the children of the enslaved White mother. The "bastard" or "obscene" children, as they were called, of unmarried White women‑slaves were bound over to the mother's slave master for a period of thirty‑one years! This heinous child‑slavery from birth was not modified until 1765 when the Assembly of Virginia declared it to be "an unreasonable severity to such children" and limited the term of bondage for such White Children to a "mere" 21 years for boys and 18 years for girls.

The following is an entry describing one such case of infant‑ enslavement: "Margaret Micabin servant to Mr. David Crawley having a bastard Child, Mr. Crawley prays the gentlemen of this Vestry to bind out the said Child as they think fit. It is ordered by the Vestry that the Church‑Wardens bind out the said Child named John Sadler born the 26th July last 1720. The foresaid child is by indenture bound unto Mr. David Crawley to serve according to Law." [427]

At other times the baby was forcibly separated from the White Slave mother shortly after birth. White woman Sally Brant was enslaved to the wealthy Quaker family of Henry and Elizabeth Drinker. The Quakers were strong campaigners against Negro slavery but had no qualms about White Slavery!

When Sally Brant's baby was born in the Drinker's country house. Sally was forced by the Drinkers to return to their main house in Philadelphia, leaving the newborn infant behind with a stranger. The White Slave father of the child was also not allowed to see his baby and the infant subsequently died.

Elizabeth Drinker, the wealthy Quaker slave owner, kept a diary in which she philosophically noted that the death of her White Slave's baby had most likely worked out for the best. "Unmarried (White) women servants who became pregnant, as did an estimated 20 percent, received special punishment. All had to serve additional years; some had their children taken from them and sold, for a few pounds of tobacco, to another master." [428] By 1769 all children born to even free White women who were unmarried were also candidates for enslavement: "...in 1769...the church wardens were instructed to bind out illegitimate children of free single White women." [429]

Long hours and exposure to disease and the elements were considered part of a first year "seasoning" process it was thought a good White Slave would require. A White Slave would work form sunrise to sunset in the fields and then might be put to work in a shed grinding corn until midnight or one a.m. and expected to return to the fields the next day at dawn.

In some southern colonies with extreme heat, as many as 80% of a shipment of White Slaves died in their first year in the New World. Richard Ligon, a traveling writer and eyewitness to White Slavery has written that he saw a White Slave beaten with a cane, "about the head till the blood has followed for a fault that is not worth speaking of; and yet he must be patient, or worse will follow." [430] How many White tourists today who take winter vacations in such Caribbean islands as Jamaica and Barbados know that they are visiting the site of a gruesome holocaust against poor White people who died by the tens of thousands and were slaves in those islands long before Blacks ever were? Historian Richard Dunn has stated that the early sugar plantations of the British West Indies were nothing more than mass graves for White workers. [431] Four‑fifths of the White slaves sent to the West Indies didn't survive the first year. [432]

In 1688 a member of the nobility wrote from a British colony in the Caribbean islands to the British government, "I beg...care for the poor White Servants here, who are used with more barbarous cruelty than if in Algiers. Their bodies and souls are used as if hell commenced here and only continued in the world to come." [433] "Twenty or more (White) servants laboring under the supervision of an overseer led the most wearisome and miserable lives...if a servant complained, the overseer would beat him; if he resisted, the master might double his time in bondage...the overseers act like those in charge of galley slaves...The cost in (White) lives of such inhuman treatment is incalculable, but it was very, very high." [434]

One example of the horrible conditions White Slaves labored under can be seen in the case of the White Slave known to history as Boulton. In 1646 Boulton's master was suspected of cheating a colonial official of a large shipment of cotton. The master asked the White Slave if he would take the blame.

If Boulton made the bogus confession in place of his master he was liable to have both his ears cut off by the colonial officials as well as having more time added to his period of bondage.

However Boulton's master promised that he would not only ignore the extra time if Boulton agreed to take the blame for him, but that he would free Boulton from slavery after Boutlton had been punished by the authorities.

So desperate was Boulton to be free that Boulton agreed to pretend that his master had told him to give the cotton to the officials, but that instead he had embezzled it for his own use. Both of the White Slave's ears were subsequently cut off. Afterward, his master kept his part of the bargain and Boulton was emancipated. "Some planters grew so desperate for help that they would ransom White captives from the Indians, returning them to a servitude which, according to one complainant, 'differeth not from her slavery with the Indians." [435]

"Fugitive Slave" laws, enacted to facilitate the apprehension and punishment of runaway White Slaves is another suppressed aspect of the history of early America. William Hening in his 13 volume Statutes at Large of Virginia records that the punishment for runaway Whites was to be "branded in the cheek with the letter R." they also often had one or both of their ears cut off.

In 1640 the General Court of Virginia ruled that two White slaves, "principal actors and contrivers in a most dangerous conspiracy by attempting to run out of the country and (by) enticing divers others to be actors in said Conspiracy," be whipped, branded and required to serve the colony an additional seven years in leg irons.

In the stock scenes from Hollywood films like Glory the Negro slave's shirt is dramatically lifted to reveal a back full of hideous scars from repeated whippings. This brings tears to the eyes of one of his White New England commanders in the fictional film Glory. Yet in reality, among the White soldiers in that scene there would have been more than a few who also bore massive scars from a whip or who had seen the scars of the lash on their White fathers' backs. The current image of Blacks as predominantly the ones who bore the scars of the whiplash is in error.

On September 20, 1776 the Continental Congress Authorized the whipping of unruly American enlisted men with up to one hundred lashes. There are cases on record of rank and file White troops receiving up to two hundred‑fifty whip‑lashes! [436]  This incredible savagery represented the level of treatment poor Whites sometimes experienced at the hands of the authorities in 18th century America, "...the officer class...came to use the lash unsparingly (on)... unpropertied ...recruits...the poor white rank and file..." [437]

White slaves, "found themselves powerless as individuals, without honor or respect, and driven into commodity production not by any inner sense of moral duty but by the outer stimulus of the whip." [438]; "In 1744 provision was made for whipping escaped servants through the parish, after proof had been made before a justice of the peace that they were fugitives...Dennis Mahoon was sentenced to be stripped naked to his waist and receive thirty‑nine lashes upon his naked back.' This was his punishment for a second offense in persuading fellow servants to run away..." [439]; "(White) servants were tortured for confessions (fire was inserted between their fingers and knotted ropes were put about their necks)..." [440]

Not only White Slaves were brutalized but also those who dared to aid them in gaining their freedom. The image of whites being hunted, whipped and even jailed for assisting fellow Whites out of slavery is completely absent from modern textbook accounts of slavery in America.

Those who helped White Slaves run away in colonial America were known as "enticers" and received 30 lashes with a whip if caught. Merely to counsel a White Slave to seek his freedom was considered by the colonial courts as illegal interference with the property rights of the rich and resulted in criminal penalties.

Hening states that to reduce the number of runaway White slaves a pass was required for any person leaving the Virginia colony and masters of ships were put under severe penalty for taking any White Slave to freedom. Advertisements regularly appeared in early American newspapers for fugitive White Slaves. One such wanted notice described a slave who had run off as having a, "long visage of lightish complexion, and thin‑flaxen hair; sometimes ties his hair behind with a string, a very proud fellow...very impudent..." [441]

Notices of runaway White Slaves in South Carolina newspapers included specific warnings against harboring or assisting the fugitive White Slaves and listed the statutory criminal penalties for doing so. Certificates of freedom were required to be carried on the person of freed White Slaves at all times. All White workers and poor in colonial America were regarded as suspect, guilty of being fugitive slaves unless they could "give an intelligent account of themselves" or show their certificate; a very convenient arrangement for enslaving free White men and women in America by claiming they were fugitive White Slaves. White Slaves who ran away found safe haven in portions of North Carolina which became known in Virginia as the "Refuge of Runaways." The mountains of Appalachia also served as hideouts for fugitive White Slaves. The hunting of White slaves became a lucrative practice.

In Virginia in 1699 persons who successfully hunted a White Slave received 1000 lbs. of tobacco, paid for by the future labor that would be extracted form the White Slave. Richard B. Morris describes the appearance of fugitive White Slaves: "One culprit was described as having a string of bells (fastened) around his neck which made a hideous jingling and discordant noise, another wore an iron collar, and others bore the scars of recent whippings on their backs." [442]

The history of "racist White toleration" of the hunting of Negro slaves as well as the controversy surrounding the capture of fugitive black slaves in the North just prior to the Civil War is incomprehensible without being placed in the context of the body of Fugitive Slave Law that was first established for use against White Slaves. In colonial America the fugitive White slave was considered the property of the master and the legal right to recovery was universally recognized.

The Articles of the New England Confederation provided that where a White Slave fled his master for another colony in the Confederation, upon certification by one judge in the colony to which the White Slave had fled, the fugitive would be delivered back into slavery.

Classed with "thieves and other criminals," the fugitive White Slave could be pursued "by hue and cry" on land and over water, and men and boats were often pressed in the hunt for him.

Magistrates, sheriffs or constables were authorized by statute to whip the fugitive white Man severely before returning him to his master, twenty to thirty‑nine lashes being the usual sentence imposed [Blacks were not commonly treated the same].

Massachusetts authorized that any White Slave who had been previously whipped for running away was to be whipped again just for being found outside his master's farm without a note of permission from the slave master.

Between February 12, 1732 and December 20, 1735, the South Carolina Gazette carried 110 wanted notices for fugitive Black slaves and forty‑one notices for fugitive White Slaves. The claims of masters in one colony upon the fugitive White Slaves in another jurisdiction were allowed from the beginning of colonial settlement in America.

The U.S. Constitution upheld the colonial fugitive White Slave laws in its Article IV, section 2: "No person held to service or labor in one state, under the Laws thereof escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labor, but shall be delivered up on a claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labor may be due." This law was enacted by Whites against fellow White people and allowed White slavery to continue in some parts of America right up until the Civil War.

The first legal blow to the system of White bondage didn't occur until 1821 when an Indiana court began to enforce the Ordinance of 1787 prohibiting White Slavery in the old "Northwest Territory." The decision cited the Constitution of the state of Indiana which in turn drew its base from the 1787 ordinance in holding all White Slavery null, void and unenforceable. The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution dealt a fatal blow to White Slavery. The enslavement of Whites in one form or another has proved very durable. bound White servitude for orphans and destitute children on contracts of indenture still occurred in New York State up until 1923 when they were finally banned.

During the American Revolution the Continental Congress, desperate for fighting manpower, permitted the recruitment of White Slaves into the army, which was tantamount to granting them their freedom.

This was not particularly radical however, in view of the fact that "four score and seven years" before Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, Lord Dunmore, the Royal governor of Virginia, freed the Negroes in his jurisdiction in the hope they would join the "Ethiopian Regiment" he had formed and fight the patriots. [443]

In 1765, a fourteen year old Irish lad, Matthew Lyon, was orphaned when his father was executed along with other leaders of the "White Boys," an Irish farmer's association organized to resist British government confiscation of their farmlands. The boy was enslaved and transported to America where he was purchased by a wealthy Connecticut merchant. Later he was made to endure the shame of being sold to another master in exchange of two deer "which was a source of no end of scoffs and jeers" at Lyon's "irreparable disgrace of being sold for a pair of stags." [444]

By the spring of 1775 Matthew Lyon had taken advantage of the manpower shortage of the American Revolution and joined an obscure, rag‑tag band of guerrilla fighters. Lyon and his fellow rebels were destined to enter the annals of historical fame when not long afterward they appeared out of nowhere at Ticonderoga in northern New York where their commander, Ethan Allen, demanded the surrender of the mighty British fort. Matthew Lyon had joined the Green Mountain boys. "Eighty five of us," Lyon would later recall with pride, "took from one hundred and forty British veterans the Fort Ticonderoga."

The guns, cannon and ammunition obtained at Ticonderoga would supply the American army throughout the war. One of the founders of the state of Vermont, he was elected to its assembly and later to the U.S. Congress, where the eponymous firebrand wrestled a Federalist on the floor of the House of Representatives. He was the first American to be indicted under President John Adams' Sedition Act, for publishing material against central Federal government and Adams. Forced to run for Congress from a jail cell, Lyon was overwhelmingly re‑elected and returned to a tumultuous hero's welcome in Vermont.

The colonies of Rhode Island, New Jersey and Maryland declared White Slaves eligible to enlist in the Continental Army without their master's consent. Though such decrees had the effect of granting the freedom of those slaves who fought, the American Revolution did not result in a prohibition of the institution of White Slavery itself.

In rhetoric it was conceded that White Slavery was "contrary to the idea of liberty" but the system remained profitable and many Southern and middle colony White Slaves had not been allowed to join the Revolutionary Army and they remained in bondage. The importation of White Slaves was resumed on nearly as large a scale after the American Revolution as it had existed before. Fear of rebellion by White Slaves led to the passage of a Virginia law to suppress "unlawful meetings" and directed that "all masters of families be enjoined to take especial care that servants do not depart from their houses on Sundays or any other days without particular lycence from them."

Individual acts of rebellion by White Slaves were constant and many slave masters were killed. "...unrest among White servants was more or less chronic." [445]

In the Caribbean colonies White Slaves revolted by burning the sugar cane of the slave master "to the utter ruin and undon of their Masters." Lured to colonial America with the promise of teaching job, Thomas Hellier was instead enslaved as a field worker. That betrayal combined with the viciousness of his slave master's wife led him to kill the slave master's entire family with an axe in 1678. Hellier was believed to have been inspired by Bacon's Rebellion two years before.

In 1676 Nathaniel Bacon led an uprising in Virginia. A small army of former White Slaves and fugitive White Slaves joined with the 30 year old Indian fighter Bacon against the House of Burgesses and the Governor, sparked by anger at the government's apathy in the face of warring Indians and their own penurious condition after having been cheated out of the "head" acreage they were promised.

There was great fear among the circle of the royal governor, William Berkeley, that the White Slaves of the entire region would rise with Bacon and "carry all beyond remedy to destruction."

Bacon's rebels burned down the city of Jamestown, plundered the plantations and expelled the royal Governor. Bacon died suddenly, allegedly of dysentery, on October 26 at the height of the insurrection, "...an incredible number of the meanest (poorest) of people were everywhere armed to assist him and his cause," and these fought on through the winter, until the last of them were captured or killed by January of 1677. Other

White Slave rebellions included the risings of 1634 which took 800 troops to put down, and 1647 in which 18 leaders of the White revolt were tortured and hung.

The rulers of Barbados even passed a proclamation in 1649, "An act for an Annual Day of Thanksgiving for our deliverance from the last Insurrection of servants."

Richard Ligon was an eyewitness to this White Slave plot on Barbados: "Their sufferings being grown to a great height, and their daily complaining to one another...being spread throughout the Island; at the last, some amongst them, whose spirits were not able to endure such slavery, resolved to break through it, or die in the act; and so conspired with some others...so that a day was appointed to fall upon their Masters and cut all their throats..." [446]

And in Virginia: "After mid‑century the number of runaway (White) servants increased steadily, and in 1661 and 1663, servants in two separate (Virginia) counties took up arms and demanded freedom. The first episode occurred in York County, where servants complained of 'hard usage'...Isaac Friend, their leader, planned to bring together about forty servants. They would then 'get arms' and march through the country, raising recruits by urging servants 'who would be for liberty, and free from bondage,' to join them. Once a large enough force had been aroused, the rebels would go through the country and kill those that made any opposition, and they would either be free or die for it." [447]

More White Slave "plots" and revolts occurred in 1686 and 1692 including a rebellion the "Independents," an insurgent group of White Protestant slaves and freedmen who revolted against Maryland's Catholic theocracy.

In 1721 White slaves were arrested while attempting to seize an arsenal at Annapolis, Maryland, the arms to be used in an uprising against the Planters. In Florida in 1768 White Slaves revolted at the Turnbull plantation in New Smyrna.

The government needed two ships full of troops and cannon to put down the revolt. "If the servant class threw up one radical hero, it was Cornelius Bryan, an Irish servant, imprisoned for mutiny on countless occasions and regularly whipped by the hangman for assembling servants and publicly making anti‑planter remarks." [448] The colonial powers were not adverse to call on unlikely policemen to suppress White slave revolts: Blacks. Blacks were admitted to the Colonial Militia responsible for policing White Slaves!

The aristocratic planters had felt the necessity to "arm part of their blackmen" to assist in suppressing White Slave revolts. [449] Armed Black militias patrolled the Carolinas from the end of the 17th century to at least 1710 when Thomas Nairne reported that Blacks continued to be members of armed colonial militias organized by local governments. These White rebellions foreshadowed the later switch from reliance on masses of White slaves to greater and greater importation of Blacks because of their pliability and passivity.

But throughout the 17th and much of the 18th century, the tobacco, sugar and cotton colonies maintained a sizable White Slave population. Negro Slaves simply cost too much to import and purchase. Whites were cheaper and more expendable, until they began to fight. "...planter, especially in the South, eventually elected to replace the restive White Servants with the more identifiable and presumably less criminal black slaves." [450]

The toughness and sturdiness of the White Slaves who not only fought in Bacon's Rebellion but took the worst duty in the French and Indian wars and the American Revolution may have been due in part to the presence of convicts in their ranks. Not all colonists looked with favor on the reliance upon White convict‑slave‑labor to build America.

Benjamin Franklin totally opposed White Slavery and supposedly referred to White convict‑slaves shipped to America as "human serpents." Yet when attempts were made to abolish White Slavery and thereby stop the flow of both kidnaped and convict labor into colonial America, the measures were generally voted down, as when in 1748 Virginia's Burgesses upheld the Act of 1705, which legitimized the White Slavery under a veil of legal phraseology.

White convict‑labor was used for the very harshest and life‑ threatening jobs others would not do, such as fighting the Indians and French in Arctic conditions with few, if any, firearms. Benjamin Franklin had been apprenticed at age 12 to his printer‑brother, the term of his indenture was to have been for nine years, but he managed to have his contract voided while his brother was in jail for seditious publishing. As a young man, Franklin was once mistaken for a fugitive White Slave, "and in danger of being taken up on that suspicion." The notion that Whites are particularly "hardhearted" and "racist" because they upheld a fugitive slave law against Blacks is specious when considered in light of the enactments against rebellious and fugitive White Slaves.

If a tiny clique of wealthy Whites didn't feel sorry for their own people thus enslaved, and hunted them when they escaped or revolted, why would anyone expect them to exempt Negroes from the same treatment? Sometimes the reverse was true.

Whites like Harriet Beecher Stowe were solely concerned with the plight of Blacks and avoided the slavery of Whites to deny the oppression of Whites. Like the wealthy White elite of the 1990s who do nothing for the White poor but campaign tirelessly for the rights of colored people.

The Quakers of colonial Philadelphia were early advocates of Black rights and abolition of Negro servitude even as they whipped and brutalized the White Slaves they continued to own. Harriet Beecher Stowe was one of the Great Hypocrites of the 19th Century, a Pious Fraud whose legacy of malignant hatred for her own kind has infected many another White Man and Woman of this day.

During her triumphal 1853 tour of Britain in the wake of the publication of Uncle Tom's Cabin, Stowe was the guest of Duchess of Sutherland, a woman of vast wealth who had an interest in the "betterment of the Negro."

The Sutherland wealth was based in part on one of the most criminal land‑grabs in British history. The Sutherlands had seized the ancient holdings of the traditional clans of Scotland and burned the Highland crofters off their lands, resulting in pauperism and in many cases, outright starvation of Scottish women and children. [451] At one point the Sutherlands even hired armed guards to prevent famine‑stricken Scottish Highlander "rabble" from catching fish in the Sutherland's well‑stocked salmon and trout rivers. [452]

When Harriet Beecher Stowe returned to America she wrote a glowing account of the Sutherlands in her travel book Sunny Memories, specifically praising them for their "enlightened land policies" in Scotland, which she described as "an almost sublime instance of the benevolent employment of superior wealth and power in shortening the struggles of advancing civilization." [453]

In response to Stowe's appalling whitewash of the crimes committed against the Scottish Highlanders, a London newspaper described Uncle Tom's Cabin as a "downright imposture" and "ranting, canting nonsense." [454]

White Slaves were punished with merciless whippings and beatings. The records of Middlesex County, Virginia relate how a slave master confessed; "that he hath most uncivilly and inhumanly beaten a (White) female with great knotted whipcord, so that the poor servant is a lamentable spectacle to behold."

A case in the country from 1655 relates how a White Slave was "fastened by a lock with a chain to it" by his master and tied to a shop door and "whipped till he was very bloody." The beating and whipping of White Slaves resulted in so many being beaten to death that in 1662 the Virginia Assembly passed a law prohibiting the private burial of White Slaves because such burial helped to conceal their murders and encouraged further atrocities against other White Slaves. A grievously ill White Slave was forced by his master to dig his own grave, since there was little likelihood that the master would obtain any more labor from him.

The White Slave's owner, "made him sick and languishing as he was, dig his own grave, in which he was laid a few days afterwards, the others being too busy to dig it, having their hands full in attending to the tobacco." [455]

In New England, Nicholas Weekes and his wife deliberately cut off the toes of their White Slave who subsequently died. Marmaduke Pierce in Massachusetts severely beat a White Slave boy with a rod and finally beat him to death. Pierce was not punished for the murder.

In 1655 in the Plymouth Colony a master named Mr. Latham, starved his 14 year old White Slave boy, beat him and left him to die outdoors in sub‑zero temperatures. The dead boy's body showed the markings of repeated beatings and his hands and feet were frozen solid.

Colonial records are full of the deaths by beating, starvation and exposure of White Slaves in addition to tragic accounts such as one of the New Jersey White Slave boy who drowned himself rather than continue to face the unmerciful beatings of his master. [456] Henry Smith beat to death an elderly White Slave and raped two of his female White Slaves in Virginia. John Dandy beat to death his White Slave boy whose black and blue body was found floating down a creek in Maryland.

Pope Alvey beat his White Slave girls Alice Sanford to death in 1663. She was reported to have been "beaten to a Jelly." Joseph Fincher beat his White slave Jeffery Haggman to death in 1664.

John Grammar ordered his plantation overseer to beat his White Slave 100 times with a cat‑o'‑nine‑tails. The White Slave died from his wounds. The overseer, rather than expressing regret at the death he inflicted stated, "I could have givne him tenn times more."

There are thousands of cases in the colonial archives of inhuman mistreatment, cruelty, beatings and the entire litany of Uncle Tom's Cabin horrors administered to hapless White Slaves. In Australia, White Slave Joseph Mansbury had been whipped repeatedly to such an extent that his back appeared, "quite bare of flesh, and his collar bones were exposed looking very much like two Ivory Polished horns. It was with difficulty that we could find another place to flog him. Tony [Chandler, the overseer] suggested to me that we had better do it on the soles of his feet next time." [457]

Hughes describes the fate of White slaves as one of "prolonged and hideous torture." One overseer in Australia whose specialty was whipping White Slaves would say while applying his whip on their backs. "Another half pound mate, off the beggar's ribs." The overseer's face and clothes were described as having the appearance of, "a mincemeat chopper, being covered in flesh from the victim's body." [458]

In colonial America, in one case, the sole punishment for the murder of a White Slave (explained as an accident) consisted of the master and his wife being forbidden from owning any White Slaves for a period of three years.

A White girl enslaved by a woman called "Mistress Ward," was whipped so badly that she died from it. On the finding of a jury that such action was "unreasonable and unchristian like" Mistress Ward was fined 300 pounds of tobacco. "...it was no easy task to secure the conviction of a master for the murder of his (White) servant...Convictions of masters for the murder or manslaughter of their servants were definitely the exception. In a preponderance of such trials they were acquitted or let off lightly, often in the face of incontrovertible evidence of guilt." [459]

In 1678 Charles Grimlin, a wealthy American colonial planter, was found guilty of murdering a female White Slave he owned. He was pardoned and set free. In the same year a White woman "of low origins," killed her husband, a man of some wealth.

The same judge who pardoned Grimlin sentenced the White woman (who was probably a descendant of White Slaves) to be "burned alive according to the law." Nor should it be concluded that because some trials were held for those masters who murdered their White Slaves that this reflected a higher justice than that given to Black slaves.

In thousands of cases of homicide against poor Whites there were not rials whatsoever, murdered White Slaves were hurriedly buried by their masters so that the resulting decomposition would prohibit any enquiry into the cause of their deaths.

Others just "disappeared" or died from "accidents" or committed "suicide." Many of the high number of so‑called "suicides" of White Slaves took place under suspicious circumstances, but in every single case the slave master was found innocent of any crime. [460] At the same time, White Slaves, White Servants and poor White working men were forbidden to serve on a jury. Only Whites who owned property could do so. Judges were recruited solely from the propertied class. When the few cases regarding the torture and murder of white Slaves reached a court it was not difficult to predict the outcome.

A White orphan boy was kidnaped in Virginia and enslaved under the guise of "teaching him a trade." The boy was able to get the Rappahannock County Court to take notice of his slaver: "...an orphan complained on July 2, 1685 that he was held in a severe and hard servitude illegally and that he was taken by one Major Hawkins 'under pretense of giving him learning.' The case came before the court on August 2, but the justices decided that he must continue in the service of his present master." [461]; "They possessed one right, to complain to the planter‑magistrates concerning excessively violent abuse. But this right, which by custom was also available to black slaves in some societies, had little or no mitigating effect on the overall nature of their treatment on the estates." [462]

Constables and local magistrates in Virginia to whom mistreated White slaves might appeal were often the same men who enslaved and assaulted them. It should be recalled that the killing and maiming of White Slaves was visited upon them by kinsmen of the same race and religion as their slaves, making the callous disregard for their human rights doubly heinous. White Slaves were whipped, broken on the wheel, shot, hung or even burned alive. [463]

The whole apparatus of the institution of human slavery in English‑speaking America, which has been sparingly memorialized in the voluminous literature on Negro slavery, was first put into place in the enslavement of Whites who were kidnaped in their native land, died on board ship, suffered child slavery and separation of parents from children forever; endured fugitive slave‑laws, the banning of White Slave meetings and severe and extreme corporal punishment, sometimes unto death.

The motivation for the cover-up of the extent of White Slavery by establishment-funded and approved house scholars is obvious. To admit the True History of White Slavery and Record it faithfully in modern History is to furnish empirical evidence that White Skin does not necessarily embody power of status; that the "poor White," "redneck" of the 1990s who is asked to subsidize with his taxes and make sacrifices in his living wage and job prospects so that Blacks may be "compensated for slavery." In reality owes nobody for anything!

A 1679 colonial census of Whites who fled slavery to scratch out an existence as subsistence and tenant farmers shows that they had to flee to the worst land where they existed in extreme poverty, forming yeoman peasant communities in the hills. It is instructive to note that this White yeomanry was mocked and scorned by both the wealthy White planter elite as well as the Negroes.

Rich, White plantation owners joined with the Negroes in insulting White Slaves and poor White people, referring to them as "poor‑white earth-scratching scum," "redshanks," "redlegs" [forerunner of the "redneck" racial insult current nowadays], "Hill Billys" and "Scotland Johnnies." "The servants were regarded by the planters as 'white trash.'" [464]

White Slaves were taunted in the West Indies by Blacks who would chant the ditty, "Yella hair, speckly face and dey feet brick red" at them. [The epithet "redshanks" developed into the name redlegs which has since become a term for all survivors and descendants of White Slaves in the Caribbean region. Various merchants and aristocrats of the 18th and 19th centuries despised the independence of these survivors of White Slavery when they encountered them in the British West Indies. The chief hallmark of the redlegs has been their absolute refusal to interbreed with the Negroes and their independent subsistence lifestyle of fishing and gardening.

Here is a typical 19th century description of them by an aristocrat: "...that lowest of all beings, the 'redshanks.' The latter were miserable and degraded White Men who, priding themselves on their Caucasian origin, looked with contempt upon the African race." [465]

In 1654 Henry Whistler called the White slaves of Barbados "rubbish, rogues and whores." [466] In England they had been referred to by Edmund Burke as a "swinish multitude," by Samuel Johnson as "rabble" and by Sir Josiah Child as "loose, vagrant...vicious...people." While the public articulation of such negative epithets against Black people as "nigger" is regarded as a sacrilegious incitement to "hate crimes," hateful terms of abuse of White people such as "redneck" are gleefully used in newspapers and television today to express the contempt with which the corporate elite openly hold White working and poor people.

It is a travesty of historiography that out of deference to the vast political house‑of‑cards that has been built upon the myth that only Blacks were merchandised in the Atlantic slave trade, historians have failed to consistently describe White Chattel by the scientifically accurate term for their condition, that of slave.

By avoiding this description, many academics have perpetuated the propaganda of the plutocracy which inflicted these horrors upon White humanity. Powerful colonial land companies motivated by gigantic profits were loath to admit truths subversive of the fictions which permitted the smooth functioning of "business as usual." The label given the White laborer in bondage was crucial to a correct understanding of his condition. In the founding era of colonial America, both White and black slaves were referred to as "servants." Once the term slavery came into universal usage (a word derived from the enslavement of Slavic peoples), objective observers of the time who were without mercenary ties to the traffic in White "servants" called them slaves: "Contemporary observers described it as 'White Slavery' and referred to indentured servants as 'White Slaves.'" [467]

Some who in England lived fine and brave,

Was there like horses forc'd to trudge and slave.

Some view'd our Limbs turned us around,

Examining like Horses we were sound.

Some felt our hands others our legs and Feet,

And made us walk to see we were compleat,

Some view'd our Teeth to see if they was good,

And fit to Chaw our hard and homely food.

No shoes nor stocking had I for to wear

Nor hat, nor cap, my hands and feet went bare.

Thus dressed unto the fields I did go,

Among Tobacco plants all day to hoe.

Till twelve or one o'clock a grinding corn,

And must be up at day break in the morn.

For I was forc'd to work while I could stand,

Or hold the hoe within my feeble hands.

Forc'd from Friends and Country go go...

Void of all Relief...Sold for a Slave.

From the writing of White Slave John Lawson, 1754. [468] "Honored Father: '...O Dear Father...I am sure you'll pity your distressed daughter. What we unfortunate English people suffer here is beyond the probability of you in England to conceive. Let it suffice that I am one of the unhappy number toiling day and night, and very often in the horse's druggery, with only the comfort of hearing me called, 'You, bitch, you did not do half enough.' Then I am tied up and whipped to that degree that you's not serve an animal. I have scarce anything but Indian corn and salt to eat and that even begrudged. Nay, many Negroes are better used...after slaving after Master's pleasure, what rest we can get is to wrap ourselves up in a blanket and lay upon the ground. This is the deplorable condition your poor Betty endures..." [469] [470]

In spite of this history of White Slavery [471] the controlled mass media and contemporary history distorters have misrepresented the scope of Caucasian involvement with Negro slavery during the period of it was legally practiced in this country. Additionally, they have purposefully ignored the disproportionate percentage of Free Negroes who owned Slaves, as well as the oculus effect the percentage of black slaves had on the free White workingmen in the South.

In 1860 the vast majority of whites, including Southerners, did not own slaves. According to United States census reports for the year, there were nearly 27 million Whites in the country, including approximately 8 million in the South.

The census also determined that there were less than 350,000 slave owners. Even if all the slave holders had been White, which was not the case, that would calculate to only 1.4 percent of whites in the country, or 4.8 percent of Southern Whites, owning one or more slaves.

In the rare instances when the ownership of slaves by Free Negroes is acknowledged by the mass media, justification is provided based on a fictitious claim that the black slave masters were simply individuals who had purchased the freedom of a spouse or a child from a White slave owner.

The misrepresentation is debunked by records of the period on blacks who owned slaves, including Justus Angel and Mistress L. Horry, of Colleton District, South Carolina, who each owned 84 slaves in 1830. IN fact, it 1830 one-quarter of the free Negro slave holders in South Carolina owned 10 or more slaves; 8 owned 30 or more. According to Census reports, on June 1, 1860 there were nearly 4.5 million Negroes in the United States, under 4 million of whom lived in the Southern slave holding states. Of the blacks living in the South, 261,988 were not slaves; 36,855 of them resided in the Deep South. Of this number, 10,689 lived in the city of New Orleans.

According to the country's leading African American historian, Duke University Professor John Hope Franklin, in New Orleans alone over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves. That calculates to approximately 28 percent of the free blacks in the city owning slaves (compared to less than 1.4 percent of Southern Whites), indicative that, when in a position to do so, Negroes disproportionately become slave masters. The majority of slave holders owned one to five slaves, and worked along side them wherever they were employed, be it in the house or in the field. The few who owned 50 or more slaves were ranked in the top one percent, and have been defined as slave magnates.

In 1860 there were at least six Negroes in Louisiana who owned 65 or more black slaves. The largest number, 152 slaves, were owned by the widow C. Richards and her son P.C. Richards, who were sugar cane planters. Another magnate black slave master, with over 100 black slaves, was Antoine Dibuclet, a sugar cane planter whose estates were valued at $264,000 in 1860. That year the wealth of Southern White men was $3,987.

Outside of Louisiana, William Ellison, at Stateburg, South Carolina was the largest Negro slave master. Ellison, who purchased his freedom at age 27, owned 63 slaves at the time of his death in 1861, and had bought and sold hundreds of slaves during his lifetime. His sons, who lived with him, owned an additional nine slaves. At the time of his death, Ellison was conservatively worth $65,000; 15 times that of the average White Man in the South. One hundred and twenty-five free Negroes in the city of Charleston, South Carolina owned slaves; six owned 10 or more. Of the million and one half dollars in taxable property by free blacks in Charleston, more than $300,000 was in black slaves.

In 1935 the father of Louisiana Senator and leader of the Populist-Socialist Share Our Wealth Society, Huey "Kingfish" Long, told a visiting journalist: "My Father and my mother didn't have slaves. They didn't even have decent land. The rich folks had all the land and all the slaves; why their women didn't even comb their own hair! They'd sooner speak to a nigger than a poor white." Senior Long was among Louisiana Socialists who, in September 1903, petitioned to join the American Socialist Party with a plank in their charter that denied membership to non-whites.

The situation in Charleston just before the start of the American Civil War (War for Southern Independence, or War of Northern Aggression) is illustrative of the debilitating impact slavery had on white working men in the South, and their struggle with the slave holding oligarchy (both black and white) and their toadies who profited from it.

Urban masters often found it both convenient and lucrative to hire out their slaves. Especially during the busy fall and winter months when the year's rice and cotton crops funneled through the city on their way to Northern and European markets.

Slave masters took advantage of the increased demand for labor, and hired out any of their slaves they could do without. By confiscating most or all of the slave's wages, the masters pocketed the cash without selling their slaves or supervising their labor.

Employers were not at all reluctant to hire slaves. They were a handy source of labor, and they could not strike, or walk off the job and leave the city. But of far greater potential significance to the White workingmen were laws prohibiting the slaves from hiring their own time.

A master who wanted to hire out a slave was supposed to negotiate directly with the employer about the terms of the slave's employment.

If a slave carpenter, for example, reached an agreement about work and wages with an employer without intervention of his master, then the slave was hiring his own time. He was, in a sense, participating in the labor market as if he were free.

A municipal ordinance in 1796 prohibited slave skilled labor from hiring their own time and an 1822 law extended the ban to all male slaves. A master who violated the 1822 law was subjected to a penalty up to forfeiture of any slave who was allowed to hire his own time. But White Slaves were not protected by these laws, they were never allowed to hire themselves out as the Blacks did. Nor were they ever allowed to keep any of their earnings from being hired out by the Slave Owners!

Free White workingmen wanted to work at a decent wage in order to support themselves and their families, but that was impossible to do since it ran head on into the slave master's prerogative to hire out their slaves. Until laws were slowly changed state by state, between 1829 and 1840, White workingmen had no more political power than the black slaves that took work from them. This was due to state qualifications for voting and holding political office that allowed only those owning a significant amount of property to participate.

White skilled workers who attempted to protect themselves from slave competition were also hindered by their small numbers and by the specialized nature of their concerns. The majority of skilled Whites lived in the country, and their problems were far removed from the hiring practices.

The only way that White workingmen could avoid slave competition was by leaving for the North. The turnover of White laborers in the city was compounded by the seasonal job market, as hundreds of them emigrated South for the Winter, then left during the spring and summer lull. Many of these men had only recently immigrated from Germany and Ireland, which further distanced them from the native-born majority of the state.

In the fall of 1858, the White workingmen of Charleston were struck by a Yellow Fever epidemic that raged through the city for three months.

In that period, 645 Whites died from the disease. As thousands of White skilled workers and laborers lay sick and dying, their jobs were filled by black slaves, who were almost immune to Yellow Fever.

The epidemic and the loss of jobs made it more urgent than ever for White workingmen to attempt to jointly protect themselves from slave competition. Meeting in the Masonic Hall when the epidemic waned in October, they formulated a petition requesting that the Charleston City Council enact two laws.

The more moderate proposal asked that the penalty on the owner of a slave who hired his own time be extended to the employer, and that the fine for each violation be $100. The more drastic proposal would have prohibited slaves from working at any "mechanical pursuit" and from being hired-out either on their own or by their owners.

The White workingmen complained: "slaves are permitted to go at large, exercising all the privileges of free persona; making contracts, doing work, and in every way living and conducting themselves as if they were not slaves."

The Whites then attempted to gain support among the citizens of Charleston; and of the 1200 slave holders in the city, only four agreed to support the petition. The city's wealthy slave holding oligarchy (black and white) and their large merchant and attorney synchopathants, joined together to actively oppose the petition. The city's legislative committee referred the proposals to a special committee made up of the slave holding oligarchy and their cohorts. After delaying for six weeks, the committee reported that passage of the proposed laws would be "both inexpedient and improper."

They determined that to agree to the White worker's proposal, or even to enforce current law, "would create a revolution." It would, "drive away all slave labor from any employment in the towns and villages of the State."

Instead of fixing things with the White workers, the committee recommended gutting existing laws by exempting from the prohibition on slaves hiring their own time, those who worked as domestic servants, common laborers, porters, draymen, wagoners, carters, or stevedores; in sum, most of the slaves with whom Charleston's White workingmen competed.

Hardships experienced by Whites due to the presence of the Negro slaves also extended to the middle-class. The previously mentioned Negro slave masters, William Ellison, owned a large cotton plantation. White farmers who did not utilize slaves could not compete with him due to his lower production costs.  Ellison was also the largest cotton gin builder and repairer in the state. There he also employed his slaves. Several White men set up competing operations, but did not utilize slave labor, and they soon went out of business. Wherever cheap slave labor was used, Whites who were not themselves slaves, could not compete. The vast majority of White workingmen and middle classes, especially those in the South, suffered because of the presence of black slaves. A relatively small number of individuals profited from slaves; however, the various Indian tribes in the area owned over, 8,000 black and white slaves in 1860.

Until 1840, Free White workingmen and the majority in the middle-class were not allowed to vote or to hold political office, and consequently had no involvement in the institution and practice of slavery.

When they were in a position to participate in the political process, they attempted to limit the practice, but this was not due to a "humanitarian interest," but rather one of self-survival. They had no sympathy for either the black or White slaves, but they treated the White slaves and treated him as the deadliest enemy.

Descendants of the White working class, who had no involvement in the legalization of or the use of slaves, but also were victimized by the presence of black slaves, today are expected to pay the penalty for this countries use of slaves. The sons of the oligarchy are not passed over for the entrance to the universities due to racial and sexual quotas, where they effect only the White working and middle classes. Instead of hiring unemployed citizens of this country and paying a decent wage, the oligarchy and their ilk hire illegal aliens and avoid paying taxes. They come from both the so-called left-wing and right-wing. [472]

2). To Sir Humphry Gylberte, June 11, 1578: "Elizabeth by the Grace of God, Queen of England...do give and grant to our trusted and well‑beloved servant Sir Humphry Gilbert of Compton, in our castle of Devonshire Knight, and to his heirs and assigns for ever, free liberty and license from time to time, and at all times forever hereafter, to discover, find, search out, and view such remote, heathen and barbarous lands, countries, and territories not actually possessed of any Christian Prince or People... and forasmuch, as upon the finding out, discovering, and inhabiting of such remote lands, counties, and territories, as aforesaid, it will be necessary for the safety of all men that shall adventure themselves in those journeys or voyages, to determine to live together in Christian Peace and Civil quietness each with the other...according to such statutes, laws and ordinances, as shall by him, the said Sir Humphrey, his heirs and assigns, or ever, or any of them, devised or established for the better government of the said people as aforesaid: so always that the said statutes, laws, and ordinances may be as near as conveniently may, agreeable to the form of the laws and policy of England; and also, that they be not against the True Christian faith or religion now professed in the Church of England."

3). First Charter of Virginia, April 10, 1606: "I, James, by the Grace of God, King of England...We, greatly commending, and graciously accepting of, their Desires for the furtherance of so noble a Work, which may, by the Providence of Almighty God, hereafter tend to the Glory of his Divine Majesty, in the propagating of Christian Religion."

4). Sir Robert Heath by Charles 1st, Oct. 30, 1629: "Whereas our beloved and faithful subject and servant, Sir Robert Heath Knight our Attorney General, kindled with a certain laudable and pious desire as well of enlarging the Christian Religion..."

5). Orders of Connecticut, January 14, 1639: "Forasmuch as it hath pleased the Almighty God by the wise disposition of His Divine Providence so to order and dispose of things that we, the Inhabitants and residents of Winsor, Hartford and Wethersfield, are now cohabiting and dwelling in and upon the River of Connecticut and the Lands thereunto adjoining; and well knowing where a people are gathered together the Word of God requires that to maintain the peace and union of such a people there should be an orderly and decent government established according to God, to order and dispose of the affairs of the people at all seasons as occasion shall require; do therefore associate and conjoin ourselves to be as one Public State or Commonwealth; and do, for ourselves and our successors and such as shall be adjoined to us at any time hereafter enter into Combination and Confederation together, to maintain and preserve the Liberty and Purity of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus which we now profess as also the discipline of the churches, which according to the truth of the said gospel is now practiced amongst us..."

6). Articles of Confederation, 1643‑1684: "Whereas we all come into these parts of America with one and the same end and aim, namely, to advance the Kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ and to enjoy the liberties of the Gospel in purity with peace... that, as in Nation and Religion, so in other respects, we be and continue one according to the tenor and true meaning of the ensuing articles...The said United Colonies for themselves and their posterities do jointly and severally hereby enter into a firm and perpetual league of friendship and amity for offense and defense, mutual advice and succor upon all just occasions both for preserving and propagating the truth and liberties of the Gospel and for their own mutual safety and welfare."

There is no doubt, and it is clearly apparent the colonist knew they were to establish a theocratic form of government which was to conform to the Word of God, that they were, in actuality reestablishing the Kingdom of God on Earth, over which our Lord Jesus Christ will reign when He returns to claim His rightful place over His Israel People, The Anglo‑Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic and kindred peoples of the earth.

Common Law rights were protected by the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. This is a Key Document establishing our right to Common Law Judicial proceedings. This Ordinance was passed by the Congress of the United States. Article 5 provided for the creating of a maximum of five states which later became; Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota.

The last words of the introduction or preamble to the Articles of the Ordinance, are as follows: "It is hereby ordained and declared by the authority aforesaid, That the following article shall be considered as articles of compact between the original States in said territory and forever remain unalterable, unless by common consent, to wit."

These articles have never been altered by Common Consent or in any other manner and presently remain the Law of the Land. They may be found in the original forty‑eight states Compiled Laws if you were to check. Some points concerning the validity of the ordinance that should be considered is: a). It is a Federal Statute. The preamble reads forever unalterable. It is in the Compiled Laws of many States. and it is protected by Article 4, Section 2, Part 1 of the Constitution of the United States and reads as follows: "The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges of citizens in the several states."

Article 1, states: "No person, demeaning himself in a peaceable and orderly manner, shall ever be molested on account of his mode of worship or religious sentiments, in the said territory."

Article 2, states: "The inhabitants of the said territory shall always be entitled to the benefits of the writ of habeas corpus, and of the trial by jury...and of judicial proceedings according to the course of the Common Law..." We should remind you that the Old Testament is the original source of Common Law and is found in the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

The definitions of Noah Websters original finalized dictionary in 1828 were adopted by Congress and by the courts. His definitions were Common Law definitions and established a unity of language for the United States of America.

The Republican form of limited government, just as established by our ancient Israelite ancestors, while encamped by Mount Siani, was established upon the premise: That each and every individual is the creation of the Almighty God, that each and every one has a separate and equal station to which the Laws of God entitle them. All men are created equal [in the sight of God] and endowed by their Creator with certain Inalienable Rights that are not to be encroached or infringed upon by another group, individual, or government. Among those rights are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness [the ownership of land].

Governments are formed for the express purpose of protecting those rights, maintaining the peace, and keeping law and order. The Government formed derives its just Powers from the Consent of the Governed themselves. When the Governing faction becomes abusive and destructive of these Ends delegated to them by the citizens it is the responsibility, right and duty of the people to dissolve, alter, or abolish it and institute New government which will provide safe guards for their future security. "For rulers [government leaders] are not a terror to good works, but to the evil...For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil." [473]

This simply means the Government was formed by the People through a written contact, Compact, or Constitution within which the people delegate to the elected or appointed representation presiding over the Government for the People the Laws, Rules, and Regulations of power and authority they may exercise.

The various governing bodies such as the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial of the Federal, State, county and local Municipalities must restrict their operations to within the boundaries of authority delegated them by the People unless changed by the People themselves. This is the principle describe in detail within the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation, the Northwest Ordnance, the Constitution of the United States of America and the first ten amendments known as The Bill of Rights.

The Constitution of the United States being the Supreme Law of the Land, until Christ returns, as is the added Ten Amendments both have a Preamble that illustrates its personal Spirit and Intent. "We The People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

This emphases the fact that Government is established by the People, having only powers and authority delegated to it by the People by Contact and it is to be contained within those boundaries.

The Preamble to the Ten Amendments known as The Bill of Rights is as follows: "The conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its power, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution..."

This preamble explains the Bill of Rights as being "Further Declaratory and Restrictive clauses" for the purpose of preventing "Misconstruction or Abuse" of Constitutional power. Our forefathers knew that Constitutional power can be misconstructed or abused by those who are in the seat of governing authority, even though placed there by the people who pay the bills, elect, appoint, or hire them.

These are Public Servants to be tried by the People themselves when found to be destroying, subverting, or changing the delegated authority by Constitutional Contract.

The Laws of God intended that in each and every case the position of central authority for earthly government should be vested within the people, and no one else.

In the words of S.D. Baldwin, who lived in the last century.

Principles

We lay down the following as our principles of interpreting symbolic prophecy.

First: Perfect coincidence of events with prophecy, is infallible proof of the fulfillment of prophecy. It was in accordance with this principle, that Jesus proved himself to be the Messiah.

Second: The definition of prophetic symbols is to be found in scripture, or to be determined by fulfillment. Where a symbol has more than one scriptural sense, which is rarely the case, its intended meaning must be determined either by its context or by fulfillment, or by both.

Third: All interpretations must coincide with the literal and evangelical doctrines of the Bible.

Fourth: All the symbolic days, months, and times, are interpretable on the same principles as are the seventy weeks, and have a double, or twice doubled interpretation and fulfillment.

Fifth: All symbolic prophecy of great events is given in twice doubled forms, or is interpreted by symbols, or literally.

Sixth: The people of God are symbolized, always, in a dual character, coinciding with the spiritual and civil departments of government, growing out of the spiritual and social nature of man and the dual nature of the great law of love to God and love to man.

Seventh: The globe and mankind are to be freed from the curse, and the globe is not to be annihilated, but renewed with all the splendors in the gift of Deity, and be the tabernacle of God, the Holy of Holies forever and ever.

For our work, we ask the calm and charitable attention of the reader. We present it as a theory, a true theory, of the dealings of God with the nations of the world; but we would by no means compel anyone to adopt our conclusions against His will; we would rather let the demonstrations be examined, and persuade by invincible and logical argument.

Our deductions are not the result of fugitive thoughts, but of unceasing attention by day and by night; our labors have been of unceasing attention, by day and by night, without intermission, for more than twenty years. In addition to this, it may not be improper to remark we sought God for wisdom to understand the mystery which He said should be unsealed.

Through the pity of some, the derision of others, the rebukes of many, and with the good wishes of but few, we have steadily pursued our course in quiet to the goal of our wishes; and we now return with gratitude to God for our success. We commit the work we have written to Him who hears the prayer of the humble, and doubt not but that it will do some good to our country, our Israel brethren, and the world.

The style of our composition is not labored, though we have been long in preparing our book; our time has been devoted mainly to systematizing and harmonizing the subjects as best we can. In doing this we have re‑written the substance of the work many times over. We have tried to make every sentence plain; but still it will require time and patience on the reader's part to go through with it. It will be observed that our interpretations of the future coincide with the positions assumed.

Should we be found somewhat in error in some small points relating to the future, it is no more than would be naturally anticipated; but we feel assured that we are not, and can not be. So far as the past is concerned, we feel assured that we are presenting to the public some of the most extraordinary proofs of the inspiration of [the government of the United States of America] in the scriptures that have ever been compiled in one place.

Being sustained, triumphantly, by the facts of the past, and judging the future by principles deduced from certain knowledge, we feel that our judgment, in most cases, will be found coincident with plain common‑sense views of things.

That ill fed and wounded vanity may instigate the hostility to our work of small envy and jealousy, of pride of sect and self‑inflated opinion, and the hatred of the Antichrists, of pride of sect and self‑inflated opinion, is what we expect to a small extent, and we rather court than shun such prejudiced enmity.

In every instance where we differ from others on the subject, we do so because they do not strictly conform to past facts, and by consequence must err, proportionally, with reference to the future.

In some cases; very exalted human authorities will be consulted against us; but we appeal, for support, to inspiration and to history and refuse to yield to any sanctified human opinion that is not punctilious in accordance with known truth. We claim to have discovered, that most old presentations are either erroneous in whole or in part.

Unknown to fame or to the famous, we appeal to common sense people, to read and decide our correctness, for on account of such we have written; we crave not the attention of chiefs and princes, but seek an humble place of consideration among the great Christian republican people of regathered Israel, The United States of America. The New Jerusalem and New Zion as spoken of in the scriptures.

Misfortune is the fate of discoverers and inventors generally, and we expect no exception will be made in our favor; yet, from a better sphere than this, we hope in triumph to descend at the appearing of the victory of God, and advent of that kingdom for which from infancy, each Christian child is daily taught to pray. "If, then, some humble place be ours among the glorified, we shall be more than recompensed for our toil."

The Israelite System of Government is Typical of Christianity; The entire Israelite system is a typical one. It is chronologically divided into seven periods, beginning with the fathers, the Judges, the Kings and back to a Republic to eventually culminate with our King of Kings and Lord of Lords taking His rightful place as the King of Israel, over regathered Israel.

The United States of America. As a system of types, it possesses a double application.

First: It represents the whole history of the world from Noah's times to the establishment of the final Kingdom, the United States of America.

Second: It represents the full history of Christianity from the first advent to the second, inclusive.

The first period is that of the fathers, embracing Isaac as a type of Christ; the second is that of the patriarchs, in which Judah was a type of Christ; the third is that of the descent into Egypt, and union of the Israelite family with the throne, in which Joseph was a type of Christ; the fourth is the bondage of Israel, in which the infant Moses was a type of the infant Jesus; the fifth is the exodus and organization of a church and state in the wilderness, in which the lawgiver Moses was a type of the lawgiver Christ; the sixth is the conquest and settlement of Canaan, in which Joshua was a type of Christ; and the seventh is the period of royalty, in which David was a type of Christ.

1). To this picture, the seven periods of the world's history sublimely correspond, or will correspond when the cycle of its woes and triumphs is complete.

The three fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, coincide with Shem, Ham, and Japhet; the twelve patriarchs correspond with the twelve sons of Shem and Japhet, who were the heirs of the world; the descent into Egypt, and the regal association of the Israelites, conform to the first great apostasy in the present earth, and the union of church and state in Babel under Nimrod, or the descent into spiritual Egypt and Sodom; the Israelite bondage coincides with the universal bondage of the world under paganism, and its evils of political and usury bondage.

The exodus and giving of the law, and organization of the Levitical church under Moses, coincide with Jesus Christ, the call of the lost tribes of Israel to the liberty of the gospel, the gospel laws, and the organization of the church of True Israel, or Christianity. The conquest and republic in Canaan typified the conquest of absolutism, and the millennial republic in Europe and America, and its ascendancy over the world.

The completion of the conquest under the three kings, together with the royalty itself, coincide with the predicted conquest of the entire world, and the full establishment of the kingdom of God in the regenerated heavens and earth. This is not to say that there will not be unbelievers in the future world with Christ as King, because the scriptures clearly relate that there will be. "And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honor into it. And the gates of it [New Jerusalem] shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. And they shall bring the glory and honor of the nations into it. And there shall in no wise enter into it anything that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life." [474]; "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever liveth and maketh a lie." [475]

2). The three fathers typified the Holy Trinity, taught so plainly by the gospel; and the twelve patriarchs typified the twelve apostles.

The descent into Egypt and union with the Egyptian throne, coincide with the descent of spiritual Israel into spiritual Egypt, of the union of the church of Christ's Israel with the throne of the Roman empire. The Israelite bondage consequent upon the descent into Egypt coincides with the civil and spiritual bondage suffered by spiritual Israel, after the union of church and state.

The exodus from typical Egypt, the crossing of the Red Sea, the overthrow of Pharaoh's host, the general thanksgiving, the organization of a republican confederacy of thirteen tribes, composed of three millions of people; the adoption of a written constitution by the tribes; the separation of the church and state departments, their freedom from control of one by the other; their laws of servitude and naturalization, and their full organization and deliverance under a noble leader, in a wilderness, have all a complete correspondence in the United States of America.

The conquest of Canaan, the overthrow of its monarchies in two great battles under Joshua, and the firm establishment of republicanism on both sides of Jordan, represent the conquest of Absolutism in Europe in two great battles, and the establishment of the millennial republic on both sides of the Atlantic, in the land promised to Abraham.

The choice of a royalty by the Israelites, and the full conquest of the land of promise, "from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates," coincide with that period predicted by Daniel, in which the saints shall take the kingdom, and give the kingdom and dominion to one like unto the Son of Man, who shall come to "the people of the saints" in the clouds of heaven. These expositions will doubtless be new to every one, for few have attempted to explain the Israelite types as a system, and but few of the parts of the system have ever been interpreted and applied.

In this introduction many thanks must be given to Almighty God and the Lord Jesus Christ for placing into my hands a book written over one hundred and fifty years ago, by S.D. Baldwin, A.M. entitled "Armageddon The Existence of the United States Foretold in the Bible."

The field before us, like others we have ventured to explore, is a trail with few footsteps, and our views should therefore be neither received nor rejected without reason; and study, they may be new, yet antiquity of opinions does not prove their truth, nor is novelty always proof of error. Our expositions here harmonize most beautifully with our expositions of the prophets and doctrines of the Bible, which would be impossible unless they were correct in all points, for error can not be harmoniously systematized.

We are now honor bound to show some fair reasons for these views, and we hope shall be as satisfactory to reasonable minds as the nature of the case will admit. In order to prove our points, we must possess some rule for testing a type, or of distinguishing it from an accidental resemblance.

A type is an example, pattern, or general similitude to a person, event, or thing which is to come. The term type is sometimes synonymous with that of symbol. It then is an abstract or compendium, a sign or representation of something moral by the figures or properties of natural things. Among theological writers we find no complete rule laid down by which to identify types. some things have been written upon them, but nothing satisfactory to a thorough inquirer. Having, therefore, no rule given us by others by which to be guided, we offer the following as truthful and sufficient:

1). Those things, persons, or events in the ages prior to Christianity which were expressly arranged by immediate divine interference, either by remarkable providence or by miracle, may be regarded as types or symbols.

2). It is, and has been universally conceded in all the ages of Christianity, that the whole Israelite dispensation, together with the preceding dispensations to Noah and Adam, were typical dispensations, rather than realizing ones.

3). Those events, persons, and things in the dispensations prior to Christianity, and which have had their exact counterparts in the Christian dispensation, must be regarded as types. No accidental resemblances can ever be considered as types, for our principles require that the events or persons or things in the Christian age to be regarded as antitypes, must have resemblance not only in character but in the order of sequence. The typical dispensation being a system stretching over ages, its several types follow each other in regular order, and in the realizing age, the counterparts of the several types must follow each other in the same regular order.

4). Whatever the scriptures affirm to be a type, must be esteemed such.

The three fathers were expressly arranged as a trinity by the miraculous power of Almighty God. Abraham was divinely called to enter Canaan; Isaac was born by miraculous interposition; and Jacob/Israel was born in answer to the prayer of Isaac. [476]

Isaac, as the second person of this trinity of fathers, was offered as the only begotten son of his father on Mt. Moriah, and thus clearly typified the offering of the only begotten Son of God by his father. Abraham received Isaac as from the dead, and thus occurred a type of the resurrection of Christ and of the dead in general, so God received Jesus from the dead, and He became the first fruits of them that slept. The limiting of the fathers to the number three, shows that it was an intentional limitation, and being in a typical dispensation, plainly confirms the number as typical.

Of course we are to look in the plan of redemption for the counterpart trinity of heads of a race. This counterpart or antitype is found only in the trinity of the three heads of the human race and in the divine trinity. The coincidence being perfect in each case, the type is realized in each.

The humiliation of Ham, of Isaac, and of Christ is a triennial coincidence and wonderfully correct. The twelve patriarchs being a number clearly ordered by God, was unquestionably typical, and as every one subscribes to this truth, we need not argue the question.

We therefore look into the plan of redemption to find its antitype, which must coincide in the number of persons and in exact order of sequence after the three heads of a race.

The sons of Shem, Ham and Japhet were the natural inheritors of the promises to the three fathers, but as the sons of Ham were given to Japhet and Shem, as servants, the heirship of the world fell to the twelve sons of Shem and Japhet [Which explains the remarkable success the Jews have had in their total control of the Communist Nations of the world]. The heirs of the three typical fathers in the above twelve heirs of the world find a striking coincidence.

The twelve apostles chosen as the especial heirs of the kingdom of the Divine Trinity also plainly coincide with the twelve patriarchs. Christ said to the twelve apostles, that when his kingdom was fully established they should eat and drink at His table in His kingdom, and sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

The term judging here used, has the sense of ruling or administering government; and the term Israel, means all the seed of Abraham "redeemed" by Christ, or all of the redeemed of the world. The descent into Egypt of the seventy souls of the patriarchs and families, finds its coincidence in order and character of events, in the submission of the true people of God to the sway of Nimrod, and of the union of church and state under Constantine and Justinian.

The union, of Jacob/Israel's family with Pharaoh's in the throne of Egypt was divinely arranged, and it was really the union of the Hebrew Church with the Egyptian State: in this union the church was inferior to the Pharaoh in the throne.

The particulars of the coincidence between this union of church and state are not so clearly marked under the monarchy of Nimrod in history, but the fact of the subjection of God's people to him in the throne is as clear; and had we a full history of the matter, we might find the coincidence minutely perfect.

The Empire of Rome, John says, is "spiritually called Sodom and Egypt," [477] and the descent of the Christians into union with Rome is therefore a clear counterpart or antitype of the union of the Hebrew Church with Egyptian royalty. For the likeness is perfect as to events, and the chronological order of the events is relatively the same. The bondage of the Israelites in Egypt finds also a double coincidence in time and character in the world's great history and in the history of Christianity.

From the days of the subjection to Nimrod, the people of the world have been in general bondage to regal or totalitarian governments and to Satan's spiritual power; and while one race of men have been bondmen, all have been servants of sin and Satan, as subjects of political and spiritual despotisms. The task‑ masters of the Israelite heirs of the promise, find their correspondence in kings, and princes of the earth.

In the union of church and state, true religion was soon to decrease, and all the true seed of Abraham were grievously persecuted or destroyed. The destruction of the Israelite infants was comparative kindness to the extensive butchery brought upon them by the Jews of recent times. The deliverance from bondage, the constitutional law, and the journey or probation under the law in the wilderness, find a double and sublime counterpart:

1). In the appearance of Christ as a second Moses, the new constitutional law He promulgated, and the long wilderness‑like probation of His people in past ages.

2). In the passage of the sea by Christ's people, to the land of enlargement promised by God to Abraham, the establishment of the Christian constitution of the United States, and the testing of the ability of the people to uphold it and be happy under it.

One should not fail to note that the coincidence of the history of Israel with the world's general history, is seen principally in the larger features of the Israelite system, and that in the narrower diameter of the Christian era the coincidence between Israelite and Christian history is seen in an ever greater number of points.

That Moses and Christ coincide, the scriptures affirm; and that the plan of the redemption of Israel taught by Christ, began an exodus from spiritual and political bondage, which will end in the release of the world, as Israel was released from Egypt, every one admits.

The probation in the wilderness was needed to accustom the people to new laws based upon republican principles, and the republican principles of Christianity needed to be tried by Israel a long season, in order to be appreciated, and ultimately adhered to with tenacity. Hence we read, "the woman fled into the wilderness from the face of the dragon for a time times and half a time."

The ceremonial law, given in connection with the moral and political law or constitution, is affirmed by scripture to have been typically illustrative of the Christian system.

The book of Hebrews gives the philosophy of the ceremonial law, and teaches that the whole Israelite economy was "a shadow of good things go come," "a figure for the time then present."

As therefore the bondage was followed by the scheme of Israel's redemption, so the universal bondage of the world was followed by the scheme of the world's ultimate redemption.

When Israel sighed by reason of oppression, and was willing to change its condition, and call to mind the promises, then a deliverer came; and when our Israel people of the United States sigh for relief, and is willing to hear of a change, then the world will sigh for relief, and will be willing to hear of a change, then a calm will fill the earth, and angels will herald the "desire of all nations," and the star of the east will once again hang over Bethlehem.

Secondly; the exodus from Egyptian bondage, the organization of a republican confederacy, and the probation under it till the conquest of Canaan, were typical of the exodus of the Christians from Europe, spiritual Egypt, to America, their organization of the republican confederacy of the United States, and their probation under a Republic up to the time of the conquest of absolutism.

The coincidences between these two great periods are more numerous than between any other typical and anti‑typical period whatever, excepting that of the same typical period and the epoch of Christianity.

We may premise here, that it should be specially recollected that like things always typify their like: thus, a person used as a type typifies a person; an event typifies an event; a thing typifies a thing; a country typifies a country; a period typifies a period; a church typifies a church; a state typifies a state; a bondage typifies a bondage; a deliverance typifies a deliverance; a probation typifies a probation; a war typifies a war; a priest typifies a priest, and a king typifies a king. One should now notice, more at large, the points of correspondence between the Israelite period of deliverance and the Christian period.

1). The children of "the free woman," or Israelites were freed by the exodus from the servitude of Egypt; and so the children of the free woman or Christians were, by the great exodus to America, freed from the bondage of "spiritual Egypt and Sodom," Europe. Let it ever be fixed in the mind, that almost all Christians are the seed of Abraham; they are the White Anglo‑Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian, Celtic peoples of the Christian Nations of the world, or the free woman, and full heirs of the promises.

2). The Israelites were pursued by the oppressor, and he was vanquished; and so the Christians were pursued by the oppressor, and he was vanquished.

3). The Israelites crossed a sea to get away from bondage, and so did the Christians in coming to America.

4). The Israelites sought the land promised to their paternal head, and so the Christians, in their exodus to America, come to the land promised to Abraham, their paternal head.

5). At the destruction of the Egyptian tyrant's forces, Israel decreed a general Thanksgiving to God, and so when the modern Pharaoh was defeated, a general Thanksgiving was decreed by the American Congress. Songs and shouts; and all the demonstrations of exultation, joined with Miriam to celebrate God's name, and so songs and shouts, bonfires, illuminations, ringing of bells, tears of rapture, devout worship, and lofty Thanksgiving celebrated the same God's praise through all our land. The Israelite exodus was a short period, but the American one extends from 1607 to ????.

6). According to Dr. Adam Clarke, and others, the number of the Israelites that escaped from bondage was estimated to be about three million; and the number of people in the revolutionary colonies, in 1776, was about three million.

7). The sea was frozen when the Israelites reached the safe side, and the Pilgrim Fathers found a frozen sea, and a snow covered shore, when they landed in America. This may or may not have been an accidental, and not a providential correspondence.

8). The Israelites were organized as a confederacy of thirteen tribes, and so there were thirteen colonies providentially organized into a Christian confederacy. Israel's tribes were called twelve, Joseph there sprung two tribes who received an inheritance, thus making thirteen.

It is also remarkable, that William Penn was proprietor of two colonies, Pennsylvania and Delaware. As Joseph was imprisoned, and yet had a double and birthright portion on account of his virtue, so William Penn suffered imprisonment for his virtue, and yet had a double portion.

9). The Israelite exodus was into a wilderness which was to be inherited as a part of the promised land; and so the exodus of the Christians was to a wilderness, which was a noble portion of Abraham's promised inheritance.

10). The Israelite confederacy was organized into a "more perfect union" after the exodus, by adopting a written constitution: and so the confederate colonies, after the war of independence, "in order to for a more perfect union," [478] adopted a written representative Republican federation constitution.

The Israelite constitution was submitted to the tribes for acceptance and ratification; [479] and so was the American constitution. It is not a little remarkable, that the Israel and American constitutions are the only two such type of written ones ever known to have been adopted at the birth of any nation, prior to 1776!

11). The Israelite nationality grew of the Hebrew church, or the seed of Abraham; and so the American nationality grew out of the Christian church, and the seed of Abraham. All of the Americans were not Christians at the framing of the constitution, and so were not all of the Israelites pious; as their culpable unbelief shows. Yet the unbelieving Israelites enjoyed the same political benefits as did the faithful, and so it was with the Americans. About one hundred and forty‑four thousand Christians were in America at the time of the Revolution, yet the prevalence of Christian maxims and principles was universal, and the virtuous political principles avowed by the Christians were adopted by all classes.

12). Church and state were disunited by the Israelite constitution and placed in the relation of associates. The church was debarred, as a church, from exercising direct control in civil affairs, so it was in the American constitution.

Many persons have either ignorantly or willfully mistaken the relations which the Israelite church and state held to each other. Some mistakes may have occurred on account of the fact, that, as some laws were alike political and spiritual, it was supposed consequently all laws were so. The Sabbath, the Sabbatic and jubilee years, and the rite of circumcision, were regulations of both a spiritual and secular nature.

With us the Sabbath illustrates the case of these laws, for we regard it as both a sacred and a secular institution: as a secular institution, its observance is compelled as a day of repose to wearied nature, and to prevent oppressors from grinding the poor to death by ceaseless toil; and also to give vigor to the general operations of society by the universal refreshment it bestows.

The civil arm has with us no right to compel its observance as a spiritual institution, and should have none. Precisely so was it in the Israelite law. The civil power was not the head of the Israelite church, as the monarchs of Rome, Russia, and England have been of the Roman, Greek and English churches. Neither the Judges nor kings of Israel could appoint a high priest of the church; nor could the priesthood compel the paying of tithes, or the offering of sacrifices, nor require the secular arm to do it.

In spiritual matters the Israelite was responsible only to God and to the ecclesiastical law of God, and was in no way responsible to civil authority for his spiritual conduct. The United States Constitution puts religion in just exactly the same relation to civil authority that God ordered, in the days of Moses. However, evil men in government, are today trying to control the churches through man made laws and statutes. The disunion of church and states is the great prophetic epoch of liberty and progress according to both Daniel and John. It is the beginning of the end of despotism, and when it fully prevails the "time of the end" will close, and despotism will forever cease on earth. The two separate departments of religion and politics in the Israel confederacy exactly coincide with these two departments in our country. At least it did in the beginning.

13). The political offices of the Hebrews were elective, and not hereditary, and so it is in our government.

14). Their government was not originally an aristocratic republic; the people decided in general assembly all questions of war, treaties, and peace, and Moses always appealed to the whole, and not to the few aristocrats, to accept or reject his propositions. Josephus says it was an aristocratic republic, but it is plain that he must speak of the executive department of the government and not of the legislative. We might in a similar manner call our government an aristocratic republic. The term aristocratic meant, anciently, the best; it now signifies, in an odious sense, the worst!

15). The people of Israel chose God as their only king, and renounced allegiance to all other monarchs by acclamation, and so did the people of the United States.

16). The Israelite constitution recognized the institution of bondage, and so did the American constitution.

17). The Israelite constitution forbade foreigners ever becoming supreme magistrates, and so does the American.

18). The Israelite constitution provided for the naturalization of foreigners, and so does the American, but not so strictly.

These coincidences between the exodus of Israel and that of the Christians, are of the most extraordinary nature if we take them singly, but when taken together they are nothing less than miraculous. The sixth period of Israelite history, which includes the conquest of Canaan and establishment of the republic, coincides with the sixth period of the world, and the sixth of Christianity. The great points in this period particularly noticeable are these: first, the conquest of Canaan was completed by two great battles; secondly, the conquest of Canaan under Joshua and the Judges did not embrace all of the promised land.

The promise extended from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates, and was not realized until the days of Solomon. The prophets assure us, the monarchies of the Japhetic race shall be broken in two great battles at the conquest by Liberty, and hence the war for possession of Canaan by republican Israel, coincides with the predicted war of the Christian republicans for possession of the territories of Japhet, and the two great battles and victories of Joshua coincide with the two predicted battles in the war for liberty.

These two battles are pointed out by John in Ezekiel 38 and 39 and in the 14th chapter of Revelation, and in other places. The first is indicated by, "I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company" and "I will turn thee back, and leave but the sixth part of thee."

Then "One like unto the Son of Man" on a white cloud who "thrust in his sickle on the earth and the earth was reaped;" and the second by the reaping of the vine of the earth, and its being cast into the wine‑press without the city, and the blood coming out of it "even unto the horse bridles, by the space of sixteen hundred furlongs."

And again John says, that three agencies went fort to gather all the kings of the earth to the battle of the great day of God Almighty, and that they assembled at a place called Armageddon. He then, after a short episode, describes the United States and the attack of the confederate kings upon it, and states that the beast or Russian power was taken, and that Europe or the False Prophet was taken at the same time.

The reaping of the earth signifies the destruction of European monarchy, and the reaping of the vine indicated the dreadful flow of blood at the fall of all the European thrones. As all thrones in Canaan fell before carnal Israel to make room for the republic, so all thrones must fall before Christian Israel to make room for the great republic.

Let skeptics smile at our simplicity in writing the doom of European thrones: yet let them be serious as they hear Daniel the prophet saying, "I beheld till the thrones were cast down," and "became lie the chaff of the summer threshing‑floor, and the wind carried them away, and there was no place found for them." [480]

The world was promised to Abraham as truly as was Canaan, and Canaan was but typical of the world.

A country typifies a country, and a people typifies a people; and so the conquest of a large part of Canaan was, therefore, typical of the conquest of a large portion of the earth; and as a republic typified a republic, the commonwealth established in a great part of Canaan, typifies a commonwealth erected over a great part of the earth.

The Millennium so often and lovingly spoken of in the pulpits of America is clearly a state of the world in which a portion of it only is embraced under the blessings of civil and religious republicanism, or Christianity. The seventh period of Israelite history coincides with the seventh of the world and of Christianity.

This period is that in which the republic was changed to a monarchy by the universal voice of the people. During the reign of a trinity of monarchs, the promised land was take from the foe, a capital of the kingdom was selected, and a temple of transcendent glory was raised, and the Israelites attained the zenith of splendor. As like typifies its like, this royalty typified a royalty, and the full conquest, under it, of all the typically promised land, typified the full conquest of the world under the final royalty of Christ.

Now, prophecy declares that the people shall at last give up the government of the world to the Son of Man, who shall come in the clouds of heaven, and that He shall destroy all the wicked, shall renew the world, and reign for ever among men. It further says that the capital of the redeemed world shall descend out of heaven to the earth; and it will hold the same relation to all the world that old Jerusalem did to Canaan.

We have now briefly pointed out the great coincidences between the seven periods of the world from Noah to the final redemption, and the seven periods of Christianity. We have by no means descended to notice the minute resemblances between Christianity and Hebraism as religious type and anti‑type, which fully accord with our expositions; we have refrained from touching them for want of space, and because they have been largely set forth by others.

Secondly, each of these periods is also marked by a clear type of Messiah. Thus in the first period, that of the fathers, Isaac was clearly a type of Christ. In the second, or that of the patriarchs, Judah was a type of Christ.

The scepter was not to depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver, until Shiloah came, and he was to be the "Lion of the tribe of Judah." In the third period, Joseph is called "the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel," [481] and is allowed by all to prefigure Christ most graphically. In the fourth period, the infant Moses prefigures the infant Jesus.

As Pharaoh decreed the destruction of the Israelite infants, so did Herod, the Jew; and as Moses was providentially preserved, so was Christ; and as Moses came unto his own and they received him not, so did Christ.

In the fifth period, Moses, as a prophet, declares that he was a type of our Lord; and in the sixth period, Joshua prefigured Jesus according to Paul, and in the seventh period, David was certainly the type of his Son Jesus.

No one can know that anything is inspired until it inspires him. Thus, the Bible must remain an uninspired book to multitudes, regardless of their theory and creed, no matter how much they may profess to believe in its inspiration, because they have not experienced its inspiration. And by the same token the Bible is always being rediscovered as an inspired book because its penetrating, communicable livingness is continually being experienced afresh by old and new readers and by new generations. But, many will ignore what is written, just as they will ignore the perfect coincidences of the above and refuse to see what has been presented to them. Marking it off as some sort of coincidence that has no bearing upon yesterday or todays events.

The Bible labors under the disadvantage of being regarded as primarily a religious book. Yet one must go a long way in the Bible before coming upon anything that even savors of religion. As we have very briefly demonstrated, it begins with geology and astronomy, meteorology and biology, anthropology and psychology ‑ all the materials of the physical and mental sciences, the concepts of time and space and motion, of creative method and purpose and progress. It has far less theology than most people imagine.

Of course, God is central, but God is not a religious character. Certainly God is not an ecclesiastical character. The creating and sustaining God of the Bible and history appears as the sole competent Personality, the one completely Normal Being, of eternal wisdom, power and purpose, who upholds all things by His spirit. It is a thousand pities that the inclusive thought of God should have suffered in men's minds by being mixed with an exclusive thought of religion.

Religion appears in the Bible only after man's unnatural, sinful departure from God's naturalness; that is, religion appears as an emergency element, a rescue force brought in because of abnormal human breakdown. And when it fulfills its part in the work of restoration, it will disappear. The last New Testament seer foresaw the distant future under the figure of heaven, and he wrote, "I saw no temple therein." [482] Religion, as we know it, had fulfilled its purpose. The original plan of God had been restored. There was only God and the people.

                                          The White Race Is An Old Race But Not The Oldest

In the discussion of race there is much careless talk. We speak of a "superior race" in a boastful tone. The Gentile [non‑Jew] boasts of his superiority over the Jew, the Jew over the Gentile; the Prussian in Germany over the Saxon; the Dane over the Swede; the Parsee, descendant of royal Persians, over the various peoples of India; the Japanese (who have no idea of their own origin) over the Chinese; and so.

We Americans are accustomed to say that we are "a new race." Englishmen insist that we are "a new race," as if the branch that grows over the wall is not as old as the branch that hangs over the garden. Both branches are as old as the tree that bears them. Their roots are the same.

We Americans are as old as our roots. We are indeed a very old race; much older than our American nation; older than the settlement in England; older than our first appearance in Europe. And never a barbarous or an enslaved race! The true effect of race knowledge is not to feed our vanity or rouse our boastfulness; rather, it should arouse a profound sense of responsibility.

Race has a great significance for the moral sanity and purpose of the individual. We should not speak carelessly of race. It means too much. For example: Moses, as you will remember, started out to be a reformer and failed because he used force as his method. Then he fled out of Egypt into the land of Midian.

There one day at a well he courteously helped some shepherdesses to water their flocks. The task took them so much less than the usual amount of time that when they returned home their father asked them, "How is it ye are come so soon today?" And they said, "An Egyptian drew water for us and watered the flock."

Had these young women been correct in their racial deductions, it would have altered everything. Moses was not an Egyptian; otherwise he would never have become the great lawgiver and the leader of Israel and we would never have heard of him or of those girls at the watering well. [483] Moses was of Israel and that racial fact made all the difference.

Today especially we feel a revulsion against speaking of race at all. We dislike drawing offensive distinctions between people, as some feel they must do if they open the subject of race. Many do not know how to discuss this fact except upon a formula of marking other races down and we see in other countries to what hideous conditions such a course can lead. But all of this simply indicates some basic lack of knowledge in ourselves. We should lay it down as a rule that whenever the thought of race leads us to boastfulness or contempt, there is something false in it.

Nevertheless, race is a great fact and cannot be evaded. It is here. Men belong to various races, as trees belong to different varieties. The races are different and they do fulfill different destinies. We are not speaking of nationalities. National divisions are largely artificial; they are constantly changing and, with the increase of civilization, will tend more and more to disappear.

However, race is not artificial; it is a basic natural fact. Take the Anglo‑Saxon, for example, a distinct and easily distinguishable race. You will find Saxons who call themselves Germans or Bohemians; in France, Frenchmen; in Holland, Dutchmen; in northern Europe, Scandinavians; in England, Britons. All belong to one race stream, but divided by national names and language.

Yet touch them on the intrinsic racial nerve and their response to liberty, reverence, orderly social life and progress are everywhere the same. The States and Canada, two nations of one blood who, before the Revolution, were one nation. Do their national divisions really divide them in the things that really matter? Not in the least.

Whatever appears in life appears also in the Bible. Race is one of the most indelible natural facts and race is one of the most insistent Biblical facts. The Bible is not a history of the human race at large, but of one distinct strain of people amongst the family of races. All the other races are considered with reference to it. This painfully irks critics like most of to days Baal preachers of Organized Religion, who thinks the Bible should be rewritten to include all the races of antiquity with their religions. If this Book were the history of the human race at large, of course that is the way it should be written.

However, the Bible is not ancient history; it is contemporary chronicle. It has nothing to do with dead races and dead relations, but with the race and religion which were to flow and widen and deepen to the end of the stream bed of time. The Bible is not a treatise, but a panorama which moves to the mighty music of the Pilgrims' March of the Ages. You will find no disquisitions upon history in all its pages, no metaphysical speculations upon the nature of the soul and the Beyond of Death; you will find a contemporary panorama of life and the soul spread out before your eyes.

The Bible deals with one race which flows like a Gulf Stream through the ocean of humanity. As the actual Gulf Stream touches two conti­nents and blesses the nations, so this race, in its origin, histo­ry and desti­ny, was selected and equipped for the ser­vice of the nations. If any book can be called a racial book, it is the Bible. The racial question will never be properly stated, and its meaning will never be found, except on Biblical principles. "But why should race appear in the Bible at all?" some may as; "Is not God equally the God of all men?"

Race is not in the Bible in the sense that the Bible can or does decree anything concerning it. Race is in life. This presentation explains what has been done and why; shows us the revelation in process. God writes no books. God writes in life. When He would show us oakness, He does not write a botanical or chemical formula, He makes an oak tree. God's choicest manuscript for us is our race and the Bible gives us the highest reading of that manuscript that has been made.

Our Lord Jesus Christ followed the same method. He wrote nothing. He left no book or creed or written rules behind Him. Twelve living men were his manuscripts. Upon them the Holy Spirit wrote His message; grave it on the tablets of the soul; planted in the racial bloodstream, more imperishable than inscribed parchment or sculptured granite. In doing this, our Lord followed the Divine method, such a method as only a Divine Author can use.

Acts Which Cannot Be Ignored

The race to whose story our Bible is largely devoted is called "The Chosen People." On this very point more people part company with the Bible than on any other point, excepting perhaps the moral law. People do not deny that a chosen race is mentioned there, in the plainest words, over and over again, from Genesis to Revelation. They do not deny it; they coolly ignore it as a point of no importance. And yet, if it be true, not only in the Bible, but actually and realistically in the changing, fermenting world, that there is a people chosen to fulfill, and actually fulfilling, a very important world destiny, such a fact certainly cannot be ignored. You may expunge the words of a book; it is not so easy to expunge one of the dominant facts of life.

You may arbitrarily decline the idea of a chosen race as a Biblical proposition, but none can intelligently ignore the fact that a race is in the world actually doing all that the Bible‑described chosen race was chosen to do. The present importance of that fact lies just here, that race, at this moment, needs to know this in order to extricate itself from the present distress.

For the benefit of those who have not given detailed study to this matter, let us run over some of the salient points of the evidence underlying the facts of the identity, responsibility and destiny of this race. We will have to take you back to one of your great ancestors, a man whose fame has spanned 4000 years. When we say his name is Abraham, and that very recently we discovered his home city Ur of the Chaldees, where he lived in houses much like our own two‑storied ones, he may not seem so distant in time.

Had he possessed our calendar, he could have written 1933 B.C. in his time as we have written 1933 A.D. in ours. We know how he lived; we know the arts, the sciences, the financial system which were familiar to him. It was a brilliant civilization, but a brittle one, doomed to disaster because God was not in it. Wherever material progress out runs moral and spiritual progress, the knell of doom is already rung. The man Abraham is no more a myth or legend than his city or his civilization.

By some strange call, some compelling inner voice, this man was led to depart from his kindred and go out into the less settled spaces of the Semitic world, away from idolatry and materialism, to the uncontaminated silences of nature, all in obedience to a call that certified itself to Abraham's inner consciousness as the voice of God. The simple record of it is that Abraham "obeyed and went out, not knowing whither he went." [484]

In the course of years it became clear to Abraham, in words which have come down to us in the Bible which we call the terms of the unconditional Abrahamic Covenant, that he was to be the progenitor of a distinct people whose destiny would reach to the remotest ages. He was to become a great nation and "many nations." His descendants were to be as the sand of the sea, and as the stars of heaven. His name was to become great. All the nations of the earth were to be blessed through him. Father of many nations, kings and rulers were to come out of him, and his God was to be the God of his race through all the ages of time. [485]

Abraham had many sons, but the racial line was to descend through only one of them, named Isaac, "In Isaac shall thy seed be called." [486] From Isaac it would pass to Jacob and then to Jacob's sons.

These were not Jews but Hebrews, which means an "immigrant" or "outlander," for Abraham had been an emigrant from Ur of the Chaldees. [487] Thence forth they were also called Israelites, after Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel. [488]

In Egypt, whither these Hebrew families had gone because of famine, they became a great nation. Led out by Moses to the land that had been promised them, they organized their government according to the Divine pattern given to them at Mount Sinai along the way and established an economic system that became the envy of surrounding nations.

Still they grew in numbers and prestige and their destiny expanded until, in King David's time, the Prophet Nathan announced that one more move awaited them. They were to be planted in another land which was to become their own, a land they did not know, and there they would be established, to be removed no more. [489] They became a peculiar people in the earth, separate from the nations by reason of their religion, their social code and their economic system.

They were a distinct people, with a distinct mission in history. Through them the imperishable literature we call the Bible was preserved and perpetuated. They were the vehicle by which the world was given the concept of One Living God.

There can be no doubt that the idea of a chosen people is a basic Biblical idea. The Bible declares: "When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. For the Lord's portion is his people; Jacob is the lot [or measuring rod] of his inheritance." [490]

You hear that all through the Scriptures, in the Psalms and in the books of the prophets: "Israel, my chosen;" "Israel, mine elect;" "You only have I known of all the families of the earth." [491] Of these promises Mary, the mother of Jesus, sang in the Magnificent. [492] Our Lord Himself spoke of the "lost sheep of the House of Israel." [493]

The Apostle Paul and Peter discuss these matters in full. They simply cannot be disregarded by anyone who reads the Bible with a sincere determination to understand it. Of course, many people still have their own ideas about this, and that creates a difficulty. For when people get their own ideas about things, it always leads to confusion. A man will rise and demand, "By what right does God choose one race or people above another?"

We like that form of the question. It is much better than asking by what right God degrades one people beneath another, although that is implied. God's grading is always upward. If He raises up a nation, it is that other nations may be raised up through its ministry. If He exalts a great man, an apostle of liberty, or science, or faith, it is that He might raise a degraded people to a better condition.

The Divine selection is not a prize, a compliment paid to the man or the race, it is a burden imposed. To appoint a chosen people is not a pandering to the racial vanity of a "superior people;" it is a yoke bound upon the necks of those who are chosen for a special service. Kipling knew this when he wrote, "Take up the White man's burden."

This selection of a nation by Divine choice for a special purpose has always seemed so great a thing that men have continually asked, "Why?" It is indeed a great thing, and many attempts have been made to explain it. Hear Moses challenging: "Ask now of the days that are past, which were before thee, since the day that God created man upon the earth, and ask from the one side of heaven unto the other, whether there hath been any such thing as this great thing is, or hath been heard like it? Did ever people hear the voice of God speaking out of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live? Or hath God assayed to go and take him a nation from the midst of another nation, by temptations [tests], and by signs, and by wonders, and by war, and by a mighty hand, and by a stretched out arm?" [494]

It was a great thing when this American nation was taken out of the midst of another great nation and made a separate constellation amongst the powers of the world. The people asked Moses why and he answered negatively: "The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: But because the Lord loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers..." [495]

That answer, you see, explained the continuance of the choice in after generations. It is not the complete answer for today, since Israel is now, not the smallest, but the greatest in number of all peoples. The answer for today would be: "The Lord hath made you great because of what He is going to make you to do."

The Apostle Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans, also gives an answer to the question, Why? He said the chosen people still continued chosen even in his time because "the gifts and calling of God are not subject to change," they are absolute and unconditional. [496] There were no "ifs" in this great racial choice. It was not said, "If you obey me, you shall be my people." It was said, in effect, "You are my people and you shall obey me." And in that "shall" we may find a key to what we are going through today.

Finally, the Apostle Paul referred the choice of the people back to the sovereignty of God: "Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor [of distinction], and another unto dishonour [for ordinary use]?" [497]

That is as far as written words of explanation can go. The fuller answer can only be found in the actual outworking in history of the purpose which was to be accomplished through the people so sovereignty chosen.

By what right did God do this? If the right people were chosen for a right purpose, it must settle any question as to the prerogative to make the choice. Anyone has the right to do what is correct, and we certainly cannot deny this right to Deity. So, then, suppose all these promises of God were illusions of Abraham's mind; suppose they were delusions of grandeur; a vain desire for distinction for his posterity, they would have died when Abraham died.

Delusions die with deluded men. They do not translate themselves into substantial and continuing realities. If these promises had been the creation of man's imagination, no matter how sincerely men may have believed them to be the Word of God, they would have come to naught. If there was not then and there, selected and predestined, a servant‑ruler race, then that race has not ruled or served. So it is not entirely a matter of faith; we can test it by history. Either it is valid as fact, or it is as invalid as a pious dream.

Of one fact we may be perfectly certain; the idea of a chosen race did not vanish with the patriarchs. It outlived Abraham's time and his great‑grandchildren's time. It reached down 400 years to Moses' time. Another 450 years and it was a living, dominant idea in King David's time. Another 300 years and we find it swaying the major prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Go on 300 years, and its regal sway was just as great in the last book of the Old Testament as in the first.

This great truth remained alive throughout the 400‑year dark age between the Old Testament and the New, being distinctly present and potent in the Apocrypha. It appears in the Gospels, Epistles and Apocalypse. It was living in the time of the Great Reformation. The common language of our Pilgrim forefathers enshrined it. The Prayer Book of the Episcopal Church and the hymns of Christendom use its phraseology. This is an amazing genealogy for an idea, an expanse of 4000 years in which practically every idea that mankind started out with has been changed. Yet this idea, this truth, survived!


[1] Hebrews. 10:31.

[2] Hosea 6:1.

[3] Revelation 11:15.

[4] Psalm 127:1.

[5] Deuteronomy 8:11‑18.

[6] Genesis 48:19.

[7] Isaiah 17:10‑11.

[8] Psalm 31:3.

[9] Psalm 78:35.

[10] Exodus 19‑24.

[11] Exodus 18:21.

[12] Exodus 32.

[13] Isaiah 17:11.

[14] Daniel 12:1.

[15] Isaiah 26:21.

[16] 2 Peter 1:19

[17] Acts 20:32.

[18] Hebrews 6:19.

[19] 2 Chronicles 20:5-12.

[20] Isaiah 18:5.

[21] Psalm 40:2‑3.

[22] The Independent Newsletter (1995), P.O. Box 53, Spencer, MA 01562. And reprinted in Flash Bulletin 2, by the Seventieth Week Magazine, P.O. box 771, Gladewater, Texas 75647, in the March 1995 issue, p. 10.

[23] PBS TV documentary first shown November 1993, and shown again in July 22, 1994.

[24] Affiliated with United Churches of Christ, one of the most liberal denomination in America today.

[25] Romans 1:27, 32.

[26] 1 Corinthians 6:9-10.

[27] Galatians 2:7-9.

[28] Proverbs 27:17.

[29] 2 John 7.

[30] 2 John 9-11.

[31] John 14:6.

[32] Acts 4:12.

[33] Romans 16:17-18.

[34] 1 Corinthians 15:1-5.

[35] Galatians 1:7-8.

[36] Matthew 7:21-23.

[37] Matthew 8:29.

[38] Mark 1:24.

[39] Mark 3:11.

[40] Mark 5:7.

[41] Luke 4:41.

[42] Acts 19:15.

[43] James 2:19.

[44] Matthew 18:15-17.

[45] Romans 15:5-7.

[46] 1 Corinthians 1:10.

[47] Ephesians 4:3-6.

[48] Ephesians 4:11-13.

[49] Ephesians 4:1-2.

[50] Romans 14:1.

[51] Romans 14:2-5.

[52] Romans 14:6-8.

[53] Romans 14:10.

[54] Romans 14:13.

[55] Romans 14:19.

[56] Romans 14:21.

[57] John 8:44.

[58] 2 Chronicles 7:14.

[59] 2 Kings 17:34.

[60] Isaiah 43:7.

[61] Isaiah 48:1.

[62] Isaiah 63:17-19.

[63] Ezekiel 11:14-16.

[64] Luke 21:24.

[65] Obadiah 11.

[66] Ezekiel 36:5.

[67] Amos 9:11-15.

[68] Obadiah 17-20.

[69] Zechariah 14:21.

[70] Amos 9:12.

[71] Revelation 2:9; 3:9.

[72] National Jewish Information Service.

[73] Matthew 15:3,6,9; Mark 7:6-19,13.

[74] Isaiah 29:1-16.

[75] Abodah Zarah 16b-17a.

[76] See pages xv-xvi of the Foreword.

[77] Sanhedrin 69a.

[78] Sanhedrin 106a-106b.

[79] Jewish Encyclopedia, "Jesus."

[80] Numbers 25:1-9.

[81] Numbers 24:17.

[82] Sanhedrin 106b.

[83] Sanhedrin 43a-45b; 67a.

[84] Jewish Encyclopedia.

[85] Sanhedrin 46a; Jewish Encyclopedia.

[86] Sanhedrin 52a.

[87] Yebamoth 6b.

[88] Sanhedrin 52a.

[89] Yebamoth 12b.

[90] Sanhedrin 52a; 106a. Jewish Encyclopedia.

[91] Gittin 57a.

[92] Sanhedrin 105a.

[93] Sanhedrin 105a-105b.

[94] Sanhedrin 107b; Jewish Encyclopedia.

[95] Sanhedrin 106a.

[96] Deuteronomy 21:23.

[97] Jewish Encyclopedia under "Jesus."

[98] JEWISH LEGEND: The Jewish legends in regard to Jesus are found in three sources, each independent of the others (1) New Testament apocrypha and Christian polemical works, (2) in the Talmud and the Midrash, and (3) in the life of Jesus ("Toledot Yeshu'") that originated in the Middle Ages. It is the tendency of all these sources to belittle the person of Jesus by ascribing in him illegitimate birth, magic, and a shameful death. In view of their general character they are called indiscriminately legends. Some of the statements, as that referring to magic, are found among pagan writers and Christian heretics: and as the Ebolonites, or Judeo-Christians who for a long time lived together with the Jews, are also classed as heretics, conclusions may be drawn from this as to the origin of these legends.

   It ought also to be added that many of the legends have a theological background. For polemical purposes, it was necessary for the Jews to insists on the illegitimacy of Jesus as against the David descent claimed by the Christian church. Magic may have been ascribed him over against the miracles recorded in the Gospels; and the degrading fate both on earth and hereafter of which the legends speak may be simply directed against the ideas of the assumption and the resurrection of Jesus. The Jewish legends relating to Jesus appear less inimical in character when compared with the parallel passages which more especially as such legends are fixed and frequently occurring themes of folk-lore; and imaginations must have been especially excited by the historical importance which the figure of Jesus came to have for the Jews.

   The earliest authenticated passage ascribing illegitimate birth to Jesus as that in Yeb. iv.8. The mysterious phrase ("that man") cited in this passage as occurring in a family register which R. Simeon ben Azza is said to have found seems to indicate that it refers to Jesus, and here occur also the two expressions so often applied to Jesus in later literature ("that anonymous one," the name of Jesus being avoided") and (-"bastard": for which in later times was used). Such a family register may have been preserved at Jerusalem in the Judeo-Christian community.

   The Jews, who are represented as inimical to Jesus in the canonical Gospels also, took him to be legitimate and born in an entirely pastoral manner. A contrary statement as to their attitude is expressed for the first time in the "Acts of Pilate" ("Gospel of Nicodemus,") Celaus makes the same statement in another passage, where he refers to a written source, adding that the seducer was a soldier by the name of Panthera. The name "Panthera" occurs here for the first time; two centuries later it occurs in Epiphanius, who ascribes the surname "Panther" to Jacob, an ancestor of Jesus; and John of Damascus...includes the names "Panther" and "Barpanther" in the genealogy of Mary. It is certain, in any case, that the rabbinical sources also regard Jesus as the "son of Pandera." Although it is noteworthy that he is called also "Ben Stada."

   It appears from this passage that, aside from Pandera and Stada, the couple Pappus b. Judah and Miriam the hairdresser were taken to be the parents of Jesus. Pappus has nothing to do with the story of Jesus, and was only connected with it because his wife happened to be cited "Miriam" (="Mary"), and was known to be an adulteress.

   The one statement in which all these confused legends agree is that relating to the birth of Jesus. Although this is ascribed only to the Jews, even in Celsus, the Jews need not necessarily be regarded as its authors, for it is possible that it originated among heretics inimical to Jesus, as the Ophites and Cainites, of whom Origen says "they uttered such hateful accusations against Jesus as Celsus himself did" ("Contra Celsum,"). it is probable, furthermore, that the accusation of illegitimacy was not originally considered so serious; it was ascribed to the most prominent personages, and is a standing motive in folk-lore (Krause, "Leben Jesu,").

   The incident of Jesus concerning the dispute with the Scribes was copied by the rabbinical sources (Kallah 18b). All the "Toledot" editions contain a similar story of a dispute which Jesus carried on with the Scribes who on the ground of that dispute, declared him to be a bastard. Analogous to this story are numerous tales of predictions by precocious boys.

   The sojourn of Jesus in Egypt is an essential part of the story of his youth. According to the Gospels he was in that country in his early infancy, but Celsus says that he was in service there and learned magic; hence he was there in early manhood. R. Joshus b. Perahyah is said to have fled with his pupil Jesus to Alexandria in order to escape the persecutions of the Jewish king Yannal (103-76 B.C.); on their return Jesus made a remark on the spot faultless beauty of their hostess, whereupon R. Joshua excommunicated him: and when Jesus approached him again and was not received he set up a brick for his god, and led all Israel into Apostasy (Sanh. 107b; Sotah 47a; Yer. Hag. 77d). This account is supplemented by the statement, made on the assumption that Ben Stada is identical with Ben Pandera, that Ben Stada brought magic from Egypt (Sanhadren 104b). The story that Joshua b. Persbyah, a contemporary of Simeon b. Sheta, was the teacher of Jesus, is not clearly stated in the various "Toledot:' it is said merely that Jesus was named after this brother of his mother. The assumption that Oshua b. Perahyah was the uncle of Jesus is confirmed by Kirkisani, who wrote about 987 a history of Jewish sects...The references to Yannai, Salome Alexandra, and Joshua b. Perabyah indicate that according to the Jewish legends the advent of Jesus took place just one century before the actual historical date; and some medieval apologists for Judaism, as Nahmanides and Salman Zebi, based on this fact their assertion that the "Yeshu'" mentioned in the Talmud was not identical with Jesus; this however, is merely a subterfuge.

   According to Celsus and to the Talmud (Sanhedrin 104b), Jesus learned magic in Egypt and performed his miracles by means of it; the latter work in addition, states that he cut the magic formulas into his skin. It does not mention, however, the nature of his magic performances (Tosef. Shab. xi.4; Yer. Shab. 18d); but as it states that the disciples of Jesus healed the sick "in the name of Jesus Pandera." (Yer. Shab. 14d; Ab. Zarah 27b; Eccl. R. I.8) it may be assumed that its author held the miracles of Jesus also to have been miraculous cures. Different in nature is the witchcraft attributed to Jesus in the "Toledot." When Jesus was expelled form the circle of scholars, he is said to have returned secretly from Galilee to Jerusalem, where he inserted a parchment containing the "declared name of God" ("Shem ha-Meforash"), which was guarded in the Temple, into his skin, carried it away, and then, taking it out of his skin, he performed his miracles by its means. This magic formula then had to be recovered from him, and Judah the Gardener (a personate of the "Toledot" corresponding to Judas Iscariot) offered to do it; he and Jesus then engaged in an aerial battle (borrowed from the legend of Simon Magus), in which Judah remained victor and Jesus fled.

   The accusation of magic is frequently brought against Jesus. Jerome mentions it, quoting the Jews: "Magum vocant et Judel Dominum Meum"; Marcus, of the sect of the Valentinians, was, according to Jerome, a native of Egypt, and was accused of being, like Jesus, a magician. There were even Christian heretics who looked upon the founder of their religion as a magician, and public opinion at Rome accused all Christians of magic (W.M. Ramsay, "The Church in the Roman Empire Before A.D. 170,"). The Apostles were regarded in the same light ("Acts Petri et Andreae,"). Neither this accusation nor that concerning the birth of Jesus is found in the canonical Gospels, but it occurs in the apocryphal account...(The Jewish Encyclopedia, pp. 170-171).

[99] John 8:44.

[100] Titus was the Roman General who completely destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

[101] 1 Timothy 4:1.

[102] Isaiah 5:20.

[103] A person suffering from an incurable disease which will end in their death.

[104] This is why our ancestors, although lost in time and because the Judeo-Christian preachers stopped preaching about it, used to sit up at night with the dead, because the Jews would rob them of their gold teeth, or anything else of value that might have been laid in the casket with the loved one, and to prevent them from having sex with the dead.

[105] Sanhadrin 59a.

[106] Abhodah Zorah, 26b.

[107] A fetus (unborn baby skin - the Jews are doing this today with the skins of many of the aborted babies - but is unknown to Cabala. Gaster explains why these means were thought to be effective. It appears that every angel and demon is bound to appear and obey when he hears a certain name uttered. Even Hai Gaon says, "Amulets are written, and the divine name is spoken, in order that angels may help." But a great deal was made to depend upon using the right name at the right time, a condition likewise frequently insisted on in the Egyptian and Babylonian magical works.

   "Practical Cabala," or the art of employing the knowledge of the hidden world in order to attain one's purpose, is founded upon the mysticism developed in the "Sefer Yezirah" (Book of Creation). According to this work, God created the world by means of the letters of the alphabet (and numbers) and particularly those of His name which He combined in the most varied ways. If one learns these combinations and permutations, and applies them at the right time and in the right place, one may thus easily make himself master of creation, since God Himself not only permits but desires this; for these formulae all proclaim monotheism. The Egyptians held a similar view. The mystic book "Razel" (eleventh century), in so far as it is to be considered here, is also of Oriental origin, and reflects similar views. Instructions are given for the preparation of amulets; and particular days and hours are indicated as suitable for the manufacture.

   In Europe, Spain comes most prominently into view in the consideration of amulets, that country being a hotbed of superstition (a result of the teachings of the Catholic Church) and Cabala. Namaides and Adret permit the employment of a metal plate with the image of a lion as a remedy against a painful cough. This superstition was a universal one, and is mentioned also by Manasseh ben Israel of Amsterdam (seventeenth century), who remarks that Leone Soavio, recommended it to Paracelsus as a cure for stomach pain. Other amulets were written upon parchment, on the public and is kept carefully hidden) or of a deer, but wee of avail only when the writer and the chosen time were propitious...

   Strangely enough, in the later Middle Ages, Jews attached to their arms, where the phylacteries were applied, amulets containing the names of Christ and the three holy kings. Insanity or epilepsy was cured by hanging beets around the patient's neck. People were warned, however, that the preparation of these amulets would irritate demons. Against miscarriage women carried a stone around the neck, called À_____À, a word evidently derived from the French enceinte; a hole was pierced through it; it was as large and as heavy as a hen's egg. These stones, which had a glazed appearance, were found in the fields, and were esteemed of priceless value. A similar purpose was served in antiquity as well as in the Middle Ages by actuates. For lightening labor, Jewish women wore a piece of a man's vest, girdle, or other clothing. Luther relates that a Jew presented Duke Albert of Saxony with a button, curiously inscribed, which would protect against cold steel, stabbing, or shooting. The duke made the experiment on the Jew, hanging the button around his neck and then slashing him with a sword. The Italian coin, with its abracadabra-like inscription, described by GUdemann, was probably of Jewish, and not of Christian, origin. The medallion bears on the one side the words below, the Hebrew transliteration of "Majestas YHWH regis domini mei animum benignum mihi foveat" (May the majesty of YHWH foster a kindly disposition in my lord the king toward me). Upon the other side is "Majestas YHWH animum mei regis and me inclinet" (May the majesty of YHWH incline the king's soul to me).

   The expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492 caused the dissemination of the Cabala far and wise thorough the East and the West. Their unexampled sufferings served to foster their mystic bent more than ever. The Holy Land, as far as repeopled by Spanish exiles (notably Safed), became the hotbed of the most abstruse secret lore, which favored, among other things, the employment of amulets. From Turkey on the one side and from Italy on the other, the Cabala spread to Poland and lands adjacent; Hasidism arose there and flourishes there today. This mysticism also prepared the ground for amulets, so that there are whole books devoted exclusively to kemi'ot still extant in manuscript form. This so-called "practical Cabala" recommended a number of talismans, a description of which must be omitted here in order to described the celebrated kemi's contest of the middle of the eighteenth century. Jonathan Eibenschutz, remembered by Jews today as an eminent Talmudist prepared a number of amulets.     He issued them in Metz, where he was rabbi, and later in Hamburg, Altona, and Wandsbeck, over the united communities of which he presided as chief rabbi. He made them for sick children, for expectant mothers, also as remedies against nose-bleed, epilepsy, and the evil eye. He furnished one that would banish "croaking demons" from a house; upon digging into the foundations, the demons would then be found in the shape of veritable croaking frogs. To find the body of one drowned, he provided a charm in the shape of a written parchment to be laid on the bank of the river or pond.

   He claimed to have been particularly successful with his amulets in helping women in various emergencies; and statistics were said to support his statements that since he had officiated as rabbi in Hamburg scarcely one Jewish woman had died in childbirth, while in the year preceding his arrival "God's wrath had raged widely" in such cases.

   The congregational Hebrah Kaddisha (burial society) confirmed this claim officially. All of this became matter of public discussion when Jacob Emden, then residing in Altona, and Jacob Joshua Falk, chief rabbi of Frankfort-on-the-Main, both learned and respected men, openly charged Eibenschutz with invoking as Savior in his amulets the false Messiah, Shabbethai Zebi.    The contest waged furiously; the scholars and communities of Germany, Holland, Italy, Turkey, the Holy Land, Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, and elsewhere took active part in a most vehement discussion. Even the temporal authorities were appealed to by Eibenschutz's opponents, application being made to the City Council of Hamburg, and to the king of Denmark. The charge was based particularly upon five amulets issued by Eibenschutz while officiating in Metz, and which were certified to by the congregational officials, as having been written by him.

   It is a curious fact that in all the voluminous discussion, the only point at issue was the employment of the false Messiah's name in these amulets; not a voice was raised against the folly of amulets in general. The common impression probably was that they could do no harm and might serve as spiritual stimulants in the way of the wearer's reassurance and mental comfort.

[108] Rabbi Moshe Maggal of the National Jewish Information Service said in 1961 when the term Judeo‑Christian was relatively new, "There is no such thing as a Judeo‑Christian religion. We consider the two religions so different that one excludes the other." (National Jewish Information Service, 6412 W. Olympic Blvd. L.A. CA).

[109] Galatians 6:14.

[110] See also Luke 10:16; Matthew 10:40; Mark 9:37; John 13:20; 1 Thessalonians 4:8.

[111] 2 Chronicles 19:2.

[112] Psalm 139:21-22.

[113] Luke 6:36.

[114] Matthew 13:34.

[115] John 10:26.

[116] Here, Jesus is clearly telling us that the Jews are NOT Abraham's Children! They are his seed, yes, but they are not his children, they are the mixed race - the bastards: THAT THEY ARE NOT ISRAELITES, but are of a mixed race.

[117] John 8:39-40.

[118] John 8:44.

[119] John 8:47.

[120] Revelation 2:9; 3:9.

[121] Alfred Lilienthal, The Zionist Connection II.

[122] Revelation 17:5-6.

[123] According to Jewish sources both before and after the war, there were never anywhere near six million Jews living in all the territory occupied by the Nazis and many of these escaped. The six-million myth is being steadily exploded by truth seeking historians. But the Jews are desperately afraid that the world will learn the so-called holocaust never happened, and the repercussions that would result from that revelation.

[124] 2 Timothy 4:2.

[125] Letters of the Late Bishop England to the Hon. John Forsyth on the Subject of Domestic Slavery...Concerning the African Slave Trade, printed by John Murphy, Baltimore, 1844.

[126] Rebel Bishop, by John Ellis, p. 42.

[127] "Concerning the Jews," Harper's Monthly Magazine, September 1899)

[128] Rebel Bishop, p. 205-206.

[129] Rebel Bishop, p. 206.

[130] John 8:44.

[131] His idea on "race" is the same as the idea on race which was propagated by a Jewish scientist from the Soviet Union in the 1930s and 1940s. This was Pavlov, who said that it was environment which created races and not heredity.

[132] Genesis 5:1-2.

[133] Genesis 5:3.

[134] 1 Chronicles 1:1-2.

[135] Genesis 2:5-8.

[136] Ezekiel 23:3-15.

[137] Book of Seth.

[138] 1 Peter 1:23.

[139] Deuteronomy 28:1.

[140] Deuteronomy 6:1-3.

[141] Deuteronomy 6:4-12; 7:3-4.

[142] Exodus 20:2-5.

[143] Deuteronomy 32:8.

[144] Matthew 13:51‑52.

[145] The phrase one blood, does not mean that all the races have the same blood characteristics. #129 Strong's Concordance states: 'alua baims, hah'ee-mah; of uncert. der.; blood, lit. (of men OR ANIMALS), fig. (the juice of grapes) or spec. (the atoning blood of Christ); by impl. bloodshed, also kindred: - blood. This when studied clearly shows that each RACE has its own blood characteristics, as well as the animals.

[146] Acts 17:24-26.

[147] Romans 15:4.

[148] John 5:43‑47.

[149] Deuteronomy 18:15.

[150] Acts 3:22.

[151] Acts 7:37.

[152] Exodus 34:11‑16.

[153] Matthew 5:17‑20.

[154] Proverbs 16:1‑6.

[155] Deuteronomy 30:19.

[156] Deuteronomy 4:2.

[157] Revelation 22:18‑19.

[158] Leviticus 18:23.

[159] Leviticus 20:15‑16.

[160] Numbers 25:5-13.

[161] mam-zare'; a mongrel, i.e. born of an Israelite father and a heathen {non-Israelite} mother. #4464 Strong's Concordance) - the child of a mixed marriage, not a child conceived out of wedlock as the clergy of organized religion would have you believe.

[162] Deuteronomy 23:2‑3.

[163] Genesis 22:12.

[164] See also Hebrew 11:18.

[165] Leviticus 21:10‑15.

[166] Leviticus 19:19.

[167] Genesis 2:9.

[168] The ten tribes which had been taken captive by Assyria ‑‑ By this WE KNOW, GOD WAS NOT TALKING OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL WHEN HE SAID 'THESE ARE THE MEN THAT DEVISE MISCHIEF, AND GIVE WICKED COUNSEL IN THIS CITY!' ‑‑ WE KNOW GOD WAS SPEAKING OF THE JEW!!!

[169] Ezekiel 11:1‑25.

[170] Matthew 23:35.

[171] 2 Thessalonians 2:11.

[172] Luke 24:20.

[173] Acts 2:36.

[174] Acts 4:9.

[175] Acts 5:30.

[176] Acts 10:39.

[177] Acts 13:27.

[178] 1 Thessalonians 2:14‑15.

[179] Deuteronomy 32:8.

[180] Genesis 6:1‑5.

[181] Genesis 6:12.

[182] Genesis 6:9.

[183] Matthew 1:3.

[184] 2 Samuel 11:3.

[185] See 1 Kings 8:53; Ezekiel 10:11; Matthew 25:32; 2 Co. 6:17.

[186] 2 Kings 6:14.

[187] Matthew 15:21‑22.

[188] Joshua 23:12.

[189] Jasher 71:1‑11.

[190] Exodus 2:11‑15.

[191] Jasher 72:23‑37; 73:2; 73:31‑37; 74:4‑13.

[192] Deuteronomy 18:9-12.

[193] Deuteronomy 7:1-4.

[194] Exodus 34:13-16.

[195] Deuteronomy 7:6.

[196] Deuteronomy 33:29.

[197] Psalm 33:12-21.

[198] Isaiah 42:1.

[199] Isaiah 45:4-5.

[200] Isaiah 45:11-12.

[201] Isaiah 43:1-4; 65:9.

[202] 1 Corinthians 10:1-4.

[203] Matthew 8:28-32.

[204] Luke 7:21; 8:2; Acts 19:12.

[205] Luke 22:3; John 6:7.

[206] Matthew 7:13-16.

[207] 2 Peter 2:1-2.

[208] Matthew 23:15.

[209] John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; Ephesians 2:2; 2 Corinthians 4:4.

[210] 1 Corinthians 2:10-16.

[211] 1 Peter 1:1-2.

[212] 1 Peter 2:3-7.

[213] Genesis 1:1.

[214] Genesis 12:2‑3.

[215] Amos 3:2.

[216] Romans 9:4.

[217] Luke 1:67‑73; Acts 3:13, 7:2 and Romans 15:4.

[218] Romans 15:4.

[219] Genesis 15:5‑6.

[220] See Gen. 17:2‑7; 17:15‑16 among others.

[221] Genesis 17:18.

[222] Genesis 17:19‑21.

[223] Genesis 24:60.

[224] Genesis 28:14.

[225] Genesis 35:20‑21.

[226] Genesis 48:16.

[227] 1 Chronicles 5:1‑2.

[228] Exodus 1:8‑9.

[229] Exodus 2:11‑12.

[230] Exodus 2:23‑24.

[231] Isaiah 54:5.

[232] Exodus 20:2‑3.

[233] Deuteronomy 33:13‑17.

[234] 1 Kings 10:1‑9.

[235] Jeremiah 3:8; Hosea 3:8.

[236] 2 Kings 17:24.

[237] Numbers 21:30; Isaiah 15:2.

[238] Numbers 32:38; Josh. 13:17.

[239] Numbers 32:37.

[240] Numbers 32:3; Joshua 16:2.

[241] Jeremiah. 48:24; Amos 2:2.

[242] Numbers 32:3‑38; Isaiah 15:2.

[243] Isaiah 15:4,

[244] Deuteronomy 2:36; 3:12; 4:48.

[245] Numbers 21:19; Isaiah 15:2.

[246] Joshua 13:17.

[247] Deuteronomy 4:43.

[248] Jeremiah 48;22.

[249] Joshua 13:17; Jeremiah 48:23.

[250] Isaiah 15:5; Jer. 48:3, 5, 34.

[251] Companion Bible Appendix 54, p. 77‑78.

[252] Jeremiah 7:14.

[253] Jeremiah 37:8‑10.

[254] Daniel 9:2.

[255] Jeremiah 25:11‑12; 29:10.

[256] Ezra 2:64‑65.

[257] Romans 11:1‑2.

[258] James 1:1.

[259] 2 Kings 17:6.

[260] 2 Esdras 13:40‑44.

[261] Amos 9:9.

[262] Isaiah 65:15.

[263] Ezekiel 34:6‑13.

[264] Matthew 15:24.

[265] Luke 19:10.

[266] Matthew 10:16.

[267] Luke 1:72‑73.

[268] Galatians 4:4‑5.

[269] Romans 15:8.

[270] 2 Samuel 7:10; 1 Chronicles 17:9.

[271] Isaiah 11:12.

[272] Isaiah 11:1‑4.

[273] Isaiah 11:14.

[274] Psalm 72:8.

[275] Zechariah 9:10.

[276] Hosea 2:14.

[277] Jer. 3:14‑15.

[278] Isaiah 60:22.

[279] Deuteronomy 33:13.

[280] Isaiah 35:1.

[281] Isaiah 35:6.

[282] Matthew 19:5.

[283] Isaiah 62:4.

[284] Isaiah 61:9.

[285] Isaiah 49:6.

[286] Galatians 3:29.

[287] Revelation 16:16.

[288] Hosea 12:1.

[289] Jeremiah 51:19‑20.

[290] Daniel 7:27.

[291] Isaiah 54:14.

[292] Isaiah 58:1.

[293] Exodus 19:8.

[294] Isaiah 59:1‑3.

[295] Ezekiel 33:10‑11.

[296] Joel 2:17.

[297] Mal. 4:1.

[298] Mal. 4:4‑6.

[299] Isaiah 51:1‑2.

[300] Ezekiel 20:37‑38, 44.

[301] Exodus 18:14‑16.

[302] Deuteronomy 1:12‑18.

[303] The Beginnings of New England, John Fiske, 1889.

[304] 2 Corinthians 6:14-18.

[305] Proverbs 25:19.

[306] Daniel 12:4.

[307] Daniel 12:9.

[308] 2 Samuel 8:5, 13, 10:18.

[309] 1 Chronicles 19:7.

[310] 1 Chronicles 19:9.

[311] Psalm 83:1-18.

[312] 1 Chronicles 22:3.

[313] National Geographic, Vol. 152, No. 6, December 1977, pp. 769.

[314] To this date no one has found the remains of the bodies because of the acid content of the soil which destroys all remains in less than 100 years. Additionally, our early American settlers removed the headstones from the burial sites and placed them in hedgerows along the sides of the fields and so the headstones are not now located near the actual graves.

[315] Ezekiel 27:12.

[316] Genesis 10:4.

[317] The arif was a precentor in charge of a small congregation lacking an ordained priest of the North African Coptic Church.

[318] 1 Kings 3:16-28; 1 Corinthians 6:1-8.

[319] Deuteronomy 19:14; 27:17; Job 24:2; Proverbs 22:28; 23:10; Joshua 5:10.

[320] Exodus 18:21-22; 22:9; Leviticus 19:15; Deuteronomy 1:13-15.

[321] Deuteronomy 19:16-20; Proverbs 6:16-19; and Leviticus 19:16.

[322] 2 Samuel 22:26; Psalm 18:25.

[323] Leviticus 6:2-6.

[324] Leviticus 1-30.

[325] Isaiah in 52:11 says the same thing.

[326] See the following: Barry Fell, Bronze Age America, Ruggles De Latour, New York; Barry Fell, America B.C., Simon & Schuster, New York; Barry Fell, Saga America, Times Books, New York; Cyclone Covey, Calalus, Vantage Press, New York; Samuel Morison, The European Discovery of America, Oxford University Press; Samuel Morison, Admiral of the Ocean Sea, Little, Brown & Co., Boston; and Christian Crusade For Truth, Intelligence Newsletter, March-April 1992, Deming, New Mexico.

[327] National Geographic, Vol. 152, No. 6, December 1977. p. 769.

[328] 2 Chronicles 9:20-23.

[329] 1 Kings 9:16.

[330] James 5:17.

[331] 1 Kings 18:10.

[332] This entire chapter was taken from "Intelligence Newsletter," written by Pastor Earl F. Jones, and a much more complete and informative book by Pastor Jones can be purchased from: "Christian Crusade For Truth," HC 66 Box 39, Deming, NM 88030, (505) 895-5365.

[333] Soncino edition, section Ecclesiastes, p. 58.

[334] The British Empire in America, John Oldmixon, Vol. 2, p. 186.

[335] Documents Illustrative of the History of the Slave Trade to America, Elizabeth Donnan, pp. 125‑126.

[336] An Historical Account of the Rise and Growth of the British West Indies, Dalby Thomas, pp. 36‑37; The Role of the Sephardic Jews in the British Caribbean Area in the Seventeenth Century, G. Merrill; Caribbean Studies, Vol. 4, No. 3 [1964‑65]; 32‑49.

[337] White Servitude, Hilary McD. Beckles, pp. 6‑7, 71.

[338] From Columbus to Castro, Eric Williams, p. 103.

[339] Laboring and Dependent Classes in Colonial America, Marcus W. Jernegan, p. 45.

[340] Stowe Manuscripte 324, f. 6.

[341] Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary, p. 2,739.

[342] cf. Genesis 9:25 in the New International Version Bible.

[343] Handlin, p. 205.

[344] Handlin, pp. 202‑204, 218.

[345] Hening, Vol. 1, pp. 226, 258, 540.

[346] Natural Rebels, Beckles, p. 29.

[347] Handlin, p. 216.

[348] See Hening, Vol. 2, pp. iii, 170, 283, 490.

[349] Natural Rebels, Beckles, pp. 56‑57.

[350] Bridenbaugh, p. 118.

[351] Natural Rebels, Beckles, p. 8.

[352] Handlin, p. 207.

[353] White Servitude, Beckles, p. 5.

[354] Labor in America: A History, Foster R. Dulles, p. 7.

[355] Van der Zee, p. 165.

[356] To Serve Well and Faithfully, Labor and Indentured Servants in Pennsylvania, Sharon Salinger, 1682‑1800, p. 97.

[357] Jernegan, p. 225.

[358] p. 59.

[359] A History of Colonial America, Oliver P. Chitwood, p. 341.

[360] p. 310.

[361] Bridenbaugh, pp. 120‑121). Black indentured servants in the 18th century even had an "education clause" in their contracts.

[362] Jernegan, p. 162.

[363] Warren B. Smith, p. 106.

[364] History of the United States, Vol. 2, Edward Channing, p. 369.

[365] For more on Abbot Emerson Smith's errors cf. Warren B. Smith, White Servitude in Colonial South Carolina, p. ix.

[366] Slavery in Colonial America, America's Revolutionary Heritage, George Novack, p. 142.

[367] The Curse of Cromwell: A History of the Ironside Conquest of Ireland, D.M.R. Esson, 1649‑53, p. 176.

[368] D.M.R. Esson, p. 159.

[369] Esson, p. 168.

[370] Eric Williams, p. 101.

[371] Acts Passed in the Island of Barbados, Richard Hall, p. 484.

[372] Warren B. Smith, p. 44.

[373] White Servitude, Beckles, pp. xiv and 5.

[374] Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, America and West Indies, Vol. 5, p. 1,113.

[375] White Servitude, Beckles, p. 52.

[376] Eric Williams, p. 101.

[377] The 'Redlegs' of Barbados, Jill Sheppard, p. 18.

[378] Glencoe, John Prebble, p. 65.

[379] A History of Barbados, Ronald Tree, p. 35.

[380] Bridenbaugh, pp. 110‑111; Heinrich von Uchteritz, Kurze Reise, pp. 3‑10.

[381] Sheppard, p. 3.

[382] Egerton Manuscript, British Museum.

[383] Register for the Privy Council of Scotland, third series, Vol. 1, p. 181; Vol 2. p. 101.

[384] The Transportation of Vagrant Children from London to Virginia, 1618‑1622, Robert C. Johnson, in Early Stuart Studies, p. 139.

[385] Johnson, pp. 130‑140.

[386] Johnson, p. 142.

[387] Sir William Cockayne.

[388] Johnson, p. 142.

[389] Johnson. p. 143.

[390] Johnson, p, 143.

[391] The First Republic in America, Alexander Brown, p. 375.

[392] Johnson, p. 147.

[393] The Records of the Virginia Company of London, Susan M. Kingsbury, ed., Vol. 1, p. 424 and Johnson, pp. 144‑145.

[394] Bound Over, Van der Zee, p. 210.

[395] Information in a pamphlet by M. Godwyn, London, 1680.

[396] Salinger, p. 91.

[397] Jernegan, pp. 50‑51.

[398] Warren B. Smith, p. 42.

[399] Journal of Ralph Clark, entry of July 3, 1787.

[400] White Servitude, Beckles, p. 3.

[401] Van der Zee, p. 138.

[402] Bridenbaugh, p. 120.

[403] Kendall, p. 1.

[404] Salinger, p. 88.

[405] Salinger, p. 89.

[406] Minutes of the Provincial Council of Pennsylvania, Colonial Records, 4:306.

[407] Johnson, p. 147; Jernegan, pp. 56 and 178.

[408] Bridenbaugh, p. 113.

[409] Eric Williams, pp. 102‑103.

[410] Kendall, p. 7.

[411] Rebels and Reactionaries, Beckles, pp. 18‑19.

[412] Massachusetts and the Common Law, American History Review, cf. Richard B. Morris, 1926.

[413] Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary, p. 3,631.

[414] St. Werburge, Bradshaw, 1513.

[415] Caxton, 1483.

[416] William Phillips, p. 28.

[417] Freedom and Villeinage in England, Past and Present, Hilton, July, 1965, p. 6.

[418] Karras, p. 36.

[419] cf. 25:40‑41.

[420] Leviticus 25:45‑46, Exodus 21:4, which destroys the whole basis of Abraham Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address.

[421] Little has been published about the early life of Abraham Lincoln. However, during a search of some old property records and will in a small courthouse in central North Carolina, Alex Christopher the author of "Pandora's Box,"; in one of the old will books dated around 1840, he found the will of one A.A. Springs. Upon reading the will he was shocked and amazed at the secret that it disclosed, but one must remember that it is a known fact that wills, even though they are classified public records the same as property and corporation records, they are rarely combed through as he was doing at the time, and these records hold many dark secrets that can be hidden in public view, but are never uncovered because there are very few who research these old records.

      This practice of hiding secrets in public view and the conspirators can say, when faced with the facts and accused of concealing the records; they can reply "Well it was there in the public record in plan view for any and all to find." In the will of A.A. Springs was the list of his property. it went into detail to whom the property was to be dispersed and it included his children. Mr. Christopher and others were looking to find what railroads and banks this man might have owned and had left to his son Leroy Springs. He didn't find anything like that, but he did find the prize of the century. On the bottom of page three of four pages was a paragraph where the father, A.A. Springs, left to his son an enormous amount of land in the state of Alabama which amounted to the land that is today known as Huntsville, Alabama and then he went into detail to name the son and at first Mr. Christopher and the others with him couldn't believe what they were seeing, but there it was the name of the son and it was "Abraham Lincoln!"

      This new information that they had about the Springs (real name Springstein) family, this was just another twist to add to the already manipulative family. This new information about Lincoln built a fire under them to see where this new lead would take them, because everything they had found in the railroad and banking saga had been areal mind-bender. They figured this one would be the same; so they inquired at the local archives and historical records on families and found a reference to one Abraham Lincoln in the family genealogy of the family of the Carolina by the name of McAdden, in a published genealogy on the family. The family members in the Carolinas were in a limited edition that at one time could be found in the public libraries. The section on Lincoln and the story went something like the following: "In the late spring of the year of 1808 Nancy Hanks, who was of the family lineage of the McAdden family was visiting some of her family in the community of Lincolnton, North Carolina. While on her stay with family in the Carolina', she vistaed with many of the neighboring families that she had known for many years; one such visit was the Springs family. The sordid details had been omitted but obviously the young Nancy Hanks had found herself in a compromised position and was forced to succumb to the lust of A.A. Springs. She became pregnant as a result. There were no details of a love affair or an act of violence on a helpless female. Abraham Lincoln was the result of that act, which leads one to wonder if the name Lincoln was real or a fabricated name for the are of conception was Lincolnton. Was there really a Thomas Lincoln? Since the Spring were of the race that called themselves Jewish, that made Lincoln part Jewish and as part of the Springs family, he also became a relative of the Rothschild family by blood."

      The following information was derived from information that exists in the Smithsonian, National Archives, the Congressional Library, Courtroom Police files, public and private libraries and storage vaults across the United States and Europe: "Abraham Lincoln was slapped three times with a white glove by a member of the Hapsburg royal family of Germany (Payseur family relatives) during a White House reception in 1862. The German royal family member demanded a pistol duel with the, then, President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln. The blows to the face stunned Lincoln but he non-verbally refused to participate in the duel by bowing his head before walking out of the reception room. What had ol' honest Abe done to so enrage and up-set the royal European personage?

     It seems that the practice of promiscuity was running rampant in many families in those days and the German King Leopold had, had an illegitimate daughter named Elizabeth who was sent to America, where she lived in a very comfortable manner. Although Leopold could not recognize her position, he was very interested in her life.

     In the early or mid 1850s, Abraham Lincoln and Elizabeth began having sexual liaisons that produced twin daughters named Ella and Emily in 1856. The regal German father who was so royally up-set with ol' honest Abe probably had full knowledge of what the true blood line of Lincoln really was. Abraham's wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, did not find out about Elizabeth, Ella and Emily until 1865. Previous to being informed about Elizabeth and the twins, Mrs. Lincoln had developed a ravaging dependency on opium. Her main supplier of the drug was a former member of the Confederate Intelligence community, he was a former member because the Southern gentlemen did not approve of his drug pushing and unreliable behavior. It was because of his involvement with the Souther Intelligence Community, Mary's supplier; John Wilks Booth, knew about the lover and the illegal twins.

     After being spurned by the Confederate intelligence community, Mary's 'candy man' approached and became involved with the Rothschild Empire of Europe, for he realized the European banking moguls would be very interested in his pipeline to the White House.

     (At this time) Abraham was searching for an issue that would unite the North and South AFTER the Civil War ended. The issue needed to be popular to all levels of American citizenry so they could 'rally around the Stars and Stripes' thus rapidly healing the wounds of the bloodiest war in history. Lincoln was seriously considering one major movement or event that would galvanize his fellow Northern and Southern patriot countrymen into cutting loose the United States of America from the dictatorial grip of the Hapsbergs bloodline of banking control in Europe. All the time, the Rothschilds were trying to take control of the entire world monetary system, and at that time the Rothschilds were trying to get a foot-hold in America and find a way around the British, Virginia Company, and French Bourbon family that were gaining control in this country through government help...

     Lincoln found himself in real hot water, because under the Virginia Company covenant the 48 families that formed it were all of the Holy Grail Bloodline. This country was to be an extension of what all the royal families of Europe controlled. The royalty of Europe is Hapsburg, no matter what their name is. The royal family of England is one such example. Now what Lincoln did is he wanted to become independent of the cogenant (in favor of his family) on the Rothschild side...the Rothschilds and their family bloodline have always been undermining the affairs of the Hapsbergs and stealing the monetary control away from them. No matter what the history books say, the Rothschilds didn't get (total) real control on things in America and the Federal Reserve until the Springs usurped the Payseur family companies in the early 1920s...

     (But Lincoln had fallen from Rothschild grace also and so, due, in part to his Executive Order to print United States Greenbacks, thus interfering with the Jewish International Banks profits) It appears that the Rothschild family wanted Lincoln embarrassed to the maximum degree. (So) Mary Todd's drug dealer (John Wilks Booth) was hired to kidnap the President of the United States. Abraham would be put on a boat for a two month cruise of the Atlantic where he would be injected with and addicted to opium and then dumped on the streets of Washington. While the forcefully addicted President was stumbling around our nation's capital, the press would be informed of Elizabeth, Ella and Emily.

    The drug pusher (Booth) and collaborator (agent) of the Rothschilds had his perfect accomplice in the plot to kidnap and discredit the leader of the North American continent in the First Lady Mary Todd Lincoln. After being informed of Abe's lover and the twins and the kidnap plot by her drug supplier, Mary was promised that after her husband resigned or was impeached, she and Abe would be moved to Europe to live happily ever after with plenty of opium. Superficially Mary expressed a desire to live in Europe with plenty of opium and no Civil War or politics to distract her husband or family. But her drug suppler had totally underestimated the confusion, desperation and anger of Mary Todd Lincoln.

     The plotters decided the Presidential snatch needed to take place in a public, yet discreet location where minimum witnesses would be present. There were too many potential witnesses at the White House. Two hours before the capture was to take place, Mary Todd had on the floor, a tantrum, because Abe had decided not to go out of the White House that night. Mary's outrageous outburst caused Abe to change his mind and the First family departed. Several minutes after arriving at the kidnap location, Mary instructed the family bodyguard to take a position that placed the First Family out of his visual sight. The position also required the bodyguard to traverse several flights of stairs to reach Abe and Mary should he be needed for any reason...A wagon with a wooden cover arrived at the back entrance of the kidnap location with several men including Mary's opium supplier. The plan was for the drug pusher to traverse the backstairs entrance, silently move down a hallway, and open an unlocked door to a darkened room where Mary and Abe were sitting.

     After entering the room, Mary's drug man (Booth) would tell the President an urgent message was waiting for him at the War Department. Before descending down the backstairs, Abe would be knocked out with a chloroform loth. The kidnappers would load the limp body into the covered wagon and swiftly stow Lincoln on an opium boat for a novel 'cruise' of the Atlantic Ocean. When Booth actually opened the door to the darkened room where Abe and Mary were sitting, he went into a panic and shock. Abe was asleep with his head on Mary's left shoulder and the First Lady had her head turned toward the left looking at the door... When she was sure the man who opened the door was Booth, she turned and looked at the President to be sure the pistol she was pointing would explode beneath the lower left earlobe of her husband.

     Before Mary pulled the trigger, John Wilkes Booth, drug supplier to the First Lady, realized he was the patsy in all this mess. But he did not know if he was only Mary's patsy or also a chump for the Rothschild family. Were the men hiding around the back door of Ford's Theater there to help Booth with the kidnaping or there to point the false finger at the 'innocent' Booth? Booth was not about to run into the hallway or down the backstairs to find out the answer to that question. The only escape route was to jump the balcony and crash onto the stage during the performance. That night, Booth gave a literal interpretation of the theatrical phrase 'brake a leg' as he fractured one of his during his leaping act from 'lethally looney Mary' and the men lurking around the back entrance of Ford's Theater.

     In a novelty case on a wall in Ford's Theater is 'The Gun That Shot Abraham Lincoln.' If anyone (assassin) were to kill a head of state, they would use a revolver, because several bullets might be needed to accomplish the murder and stop any guards during the escape. One would only use a one-shot pistol if they were absolutely sure they had intimate access to the victim. The gun on the wall of Ford's Theater is a derringer-the perfect weapon for the left handed female assassin who did not attend her husbands funeral. Mary Todd was not hiding in her room due to overwhelming grief and sorrow; she was imprisoned in her room with two armed guards for two weeks after killing her husband.

     In the 1860s, an act of Congress mandated the compensation of widows of former and active Congressmen, Senators, Vice Presidents and Presidents. The mouth and duration was ratified by both Houses of Congress for each widow. Mary Todd Lincoln applied for her widowers compensation three times and was denied the mandated compensation three times by both Houses of Congress. An unknown benefactor paid for Mary's passage to Europe where she died in small cottage in Germany.

     In 1867, the Secret Service was founded so that drunken municipal law enforcement could not unwittingly participate with drug-addicted First Ladies or Gentlemen in vengeful high-brow killings of philandering Presidents of the United States. (To cover up the murders committed which would reflect a bad light for the presiding Administration, such as the Foster murder is doing at the present time).

     Before Booth jumped out of the balcony of the Presidential Box of the Ford Theater, he shouted at General Riley and his wife who were sitting to the right-front of the Lincolns. Booth's words expressed his innocence but also sealed the fate of the Rileys. Within a week of the shooting, General Riley and his wife were packed off to an insane asylum where they both died of 'unknown causes' within 30 days of being committed." (Pandora's Box, by Alex Christopher, pp. 282-286).

[422] see Classical Antiquity and the Proslavery Argument, Slavery and Abolition, J. Drew Harrington, May 1989.

[423] Petitions, Chester County, Pennsylvania, Court of Quarter Sessions, August 1731 and June, 1732.

[424] White Servitude, Beckles, p. 84.

[425] Bridenbaugh, p. 123.

[426] Johnson, p. 148.

[427] The Vestry Book and Register of Bristol Parish Virginia, 1720‑1789.

[428] Levine, p. 52.

[429] Jernegan, p. 180.

[430] Ligon, p. 44.

[431] Sugar and Slaves: The Rise of the Planter Class in the English West Indies, p. 302.

[432] Van der Zee, p. 183.

[433] Sir Thomas Montgomery to the Lords of Trade and Plantations, August 3, 1688, Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, 1685‑1688, p. 577.

[434] Bridenbaugh, p. 107; Pere Biet, Voyage, p. 290.

[435] Van der Zee, p. 85.

[436] Reflections of 'Democracy' in Revolutionary South Carolina, in The Southern Common People, Walter J. Fraser, Jr., p. 16.

[437] Frasher, p. 17.

[438] White Servitude, Beckles, p. 5.

[439] Warren B. Smith, p. 76.

[440] Rebels and Reactionaries, Beckles, p. 14.

[441] Jernegan, p. 51.

[442] Government and Labor in Early America, Morris, p. 435.

[443] Ronald Hoffman, pp. 281‑282.

[444] Life and Services of Matthew Lyon, Pliny H. White, p. 6.

[445] Bridenbaugh, p. 108.

[446] Ligon, p. 45.

[447] Levine, p. 56.

[448] Rebels and Reactionaries, Beckles, p. 18.

[449] Rebels and Reactionaries, Beckles, p. 17.

[450] Van der Zee, p. 266.

[451] The Slave Trade, Domestic and Foreign, Henry C. Carey, pp. 204‑209; The Highland Clearances, John Prebble, pp. 288‑295.

[452] Prebble, p. 293.

[453] Cunliffe, p. 18, Prebble, p. 292.

[454] Cunliffe, ibid.

[455] Journal of a Voyage to New York and a Tour of Several American Colonies, Jaspar Danckaerts and Peter Sluyter, 1679‑1680.

[456] American Weekly Mercury, September 2‑9, 1731.

[457] The Fatal Shore, Robert Hughes, p. 115.

[458] Hughes, p. 115.

[459] Morris, pp. 485 and 487.

[460] For acquittals of masters in Virginia or instances of failure to prosecute them for the murder of White slaves, see Virginia General Court Minutes, pp. 22‑24, VMYH, XIX, 388.

[461] Jernegan, pp. 159‑160.

[462] White Servitude, Beckles, p. 5. For information on blacks allowed to accuse White slave masters in court and who were freed from slavery as a result of hearings before White judges, see the Minutes of Council of March 10, 1654 in the Lucas Manuscripts, reel 1, f. 92, Bridgetown Public Library, Barbados.

[463] The Tragicall Relation of the Virginia Assembly, 1624 in the Library of Congress.

[464] Capitalism and Slavery, Eric Williams, p. 17.

[465] Sheppard, p. 3.

[466] Journal of the West India Expedition.

[467] Beckles, p. 71.

[468] Quoted in Van Der Zee, Bound Over.

[469] From a letter by White Slave Eliabeth Sprigs in Maryland to her father John Sprigs in London, England, September 22, 1756.

[470] Public Record Office, London, England, High Court of Admiralty, 30:258; No. 106.

[471] Taken, in part, from "They Were White and They Were Slaves: The Untold History of the Enslavement of Whites in Early America, by Michael A. Hoffman II, Wiswell Ruffin House, P.O. Box 236, Dresden, New York 14441, ISBN 0-929903-02-1. Mr. Michael A. Hoffman II, is also the author of "Masonic Assassination," "The Great Holocaust Trial," "Psychology and Epistemology of Holocaust Newspeak," "A cnadidate for the Order," and "Secrets of Masonic Mind Control."

[472] The American Negro, Ray Logan and Irving Cohen; Black Masters, Michael Johnson and James Roark; The Forgotten People, Gary Mills; Reconstruction 1863-1877, Eric Foner; Men and Wealth in the U.S. 1850-1870, Lee Soltow; and The Stream of American History, Leland Baldwin.

[473] Romans 13:3‑4.

[474] Rev. 21:24‑27.

[475] Rev. 22:14‑15.

[476] Genesis 25:21.

[477] Revelation 11:8.

[478] Hebrews 9:11.

[479] Exodus 19:8.

[480] Daniel 2:35; 7:9.

[481] Genesis 49:24.

[482] Revelation 21:22.

[483] Exodus 2:16‑20.

[484] Hebrew 11:8.

[485] See Gen. 12:1‑3; 13:16; 15:5; 17:4‑7 and 15‑16.

[486] Genesis 21:12.

[487] Genesis 14:13.

[488] Genesis 32:24‑28.

[489] 2 Samuel 7:10; 1 Chronicles 17:9.

[490] Deuteronomy 32:8‑9.

[491] Isaiah 44:1; 45:4; Amos 3:2.

[492] Luke 1:46‑55.

[493] Matthew 10:6.

[494] Deuteronomy 4:32‑43.

[495] Deuteronomy 7:7‑8.

[496] Romans 11:29.

[497] Romans 9:21.



Reference Materials