Posts Tagged ‘Anti-Judaism’

Not Telling Truth Fosters “Anti-Semitism”, Perpetrator New York Times Reveals… Unwittingly

May 2, 2019

The Holocaust, World War Two and the Ascent of Hitler were rendered possible by US plutocracy. Said differently, with the same content: if US plutocracy had opposed Nazism, it would not have happened. It was simple: line up with the French Republic in 1933. Instead the USA, led by FDR, opposed France, and then pushed for something called “isolationism“, a fig leaf to hide US pro-Nazi feelings.

Some, who don’t even the know the basics that not only does history repeats itself, but sometimes, it just keeps on going, just the same as before, with different mask and lip service, will scoff, because they don’t realize it’s more of the same now.

New York Times had a flicker of self-consciousness today;

The Times published an appalling political cartoon in the opinion pages of its international print edition late last week. It portrayed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel as a dog wearing a Star of David on a collar. He was leading President Trump, drawn as a blind man wearing a skullcap… such an obviously bigoted cartoon in a mainstream publication is evidence of a profound danger — not only of anti-Semitism but of numbness to its creep, to the insidious way this ancient, enduring prejudice is once again working itself into public view and common conversation.”

What a contrast 2 years make… New York Times, 2 days before the election of Trump, had proclaimed that Trump was “Anti Semitic”… Something obviously in total conflict with reality (Trump beloved daughter had married an orthodox Jew and converted to Judaism…). Anything to support hatred… Hatred for Trump, yes, but, more generally love for hatred in general…

Yes, well, the most insidious creep, the most enduring prejudice, is indifference to truth, and the search thereof. That’s the main reason for civilizational collapse. Yes, it happened before, dozens of times. However, this time is different: the biosphere will follow.

New York Times: “For decades, most American Jews felt safe to practice their religion, but now they pass through metal detectors to enter synagogues and schools. Jews face even greater hostility and danger in Europe, where the cartoon was created. In Britain, one of several members of Parliament who resigned from the Labour Party in February said that the party had become “institutionally anti-Semitic.” In France and Belgium, Jews have been the targets of terrorist attacks by Muslim extremists. …

This is also a period of rising criticism of Israel, much of it directed at the rightward drift of its own government and some of it even questioning Israel’s very foundation as a Jewish state… anti-Zionism can clearly serve as a cover for anti-Semitism — and some criticism of Israel, as the cartoon demonstrated, is couched openly in anti-Semitic terms…”

“Funny Papers”. 1940 Anti Jewish propaganda on left, 2019 Anti Jewish propaganda on the right

I sent a comment to the New York Times, which censored it. Here it is:


Anti-Semitism” is too vague a term. It is important to have precise terms. What people generally means by “Anti-Semitism” is, truly, “Anti-Judaism”.

Nowadays, the most strident Anti-Judaism comes from a religion established by Semites… who were inspired by Judaism, but then insisted that the Jews had not respected the god of Abraham found in the Bible.

What are the roots of Anti-Judaism? They seem to be multiple, but that may be an illusion. The Roman Republic recognized the state of Israel, and presented itself as the guarantor of its independence to the rest of the Middle East. However, Rome then became a fascist empire, and subjugating the Jews culminated in the Judean War (66-73 CE). During which time the Gospels were written, which some view as Flavian propaganda (the three Flavian emperors rule finished with the assassination of Domitian). They were not favorable to the Jews. The Jewish temple was destroyed. Two subsequent revolts made matters worse. Jews were interdicted in Jerusalem.

Emperor Julian ordered (in 363 CE) the return of the Jews and the reconstruction of the Jewish Temple. However, he was assassinated by a Christian soldier. After that a Christian dictatorship was established, with “heresy” subjected to the death penalty. All Christian sects were annihilated, except for imperially defined Catholicism… And Judaism.

Next, Islam was invented, and was meant to be closer to the true word of God than Christianism, and Judaism, the latter being viewed as even more deviant. The basic texts of Islam (Quran, Hadith) are generally insulting to Judaism, and even lethally threatening.    


New York Times: “Both right-wing and left-wing politicians have traded in incendiary tropes, like the ideas that Jews secretly control the financial system or politicians.”

PA: If it were secret, they won’t know about it… (Hahaha)

New York Times: “most anti-Semitic assaults, and incidents of harassment and the vandalism of Jewish community buildings and cemeteries, are not carried out by the members of extremist groups. Instead, the perpetrators are hate-filled individuals.

In the 1930s and the 1940s, The Times was largely silent as anti-Semitism rose up and bathed the world in blood. That failure still haunts this newspaper. Now, rightly, The Times has declared itself “deeply sorry” for the cartoon and called it “unacceptable.” Apologies are important, but the deeper obligation of The Times is to focus on leading through unblinking journalism and the clear editorial expression of its values.”

Yes, sure. Which values at the New York Times, exactly? The Nazis, too, had “values”. Values so valuable to them, they died for them in large numbers. So tell me, NYT, why did you censor my preceding comment? Apparently your values include values intolerant of to the truth and reality I expressed.

New York Times: “Society in recent years has shown healthy signs of increased sensitivity to other forms of bigotry, yet somehow anti-Semitism can often still be dismissed as a disease gnawing only at the fringes of society. That is a dangerous mistake. As recent events have shown, it is a very mainstream problem.

As the world once again contends with this age-old enemy, it is not enough to refrain from empowering it. It is necessary to stand in opposition.

Not only did the USA not stand in opposition against Hitler (until Hitler attacked the USA), the US political class, media and the US mighty corporations and plutocratic class empowered Hitler… Sometimes throughout the war (some US corporations helped Hitler throughout the entire war, unbelievably enough; IBM went smoothly from ensuring its 35 German plants gave Nazism the organizational computing power it needed, all the way to 8 May 1945, to providing official translation of the Nuremberg tribunal proceedings… None of the 35 IBM plants was targeted in US precision bombing… nor were hundreds of other US owned plants. That was particularly blatant in Cologne: the city was thoroughly destroyed by US bombing on one side of the Rhine, whereas kilometers of US plants were intact on the other….).

Picture found in NYT, before they read my second censored comment, and removed it… When in doubt, accuse the French, it’s always safe and satisfying… Especially when they are right.

I sent another comment to the NYT for the further instruction of its deluded editorial board. I knew they were going to censor it. The point was to teach them something, supposing they can learn it (hope springs eternal). Here it is:


The New York Times illustrated its “anti-Semitic” description with a picture in France. That, implicitly suggests the phenomenon is stronger in France than elsewhere. However, historically was not the case; in 1939-1940, France accepted hundreds of thousand of Jewish refugees, and the USA, none.  France also declared war against the Nazis, Sept 3, 1939. The USA did not, making the Holocaust possible (Hitler declared war to the USA, Dec 11, 1941).

I sent a comment retracing how Rome launched Anti-Judaism, because of the fascist empire, and that was extended by the Roman state religion, Christianism… And that the same Anti-Judaic theme was extended by Islamism.

The NYT censored my comment… although I told the strict truth, and the Times itself admitted it did not behave well in the past, by NOT telling the truth. It is indeed the highest US authorities in media and politics which denied the Holocaust early in WWII when it could have been prevented it by helping France. Your present attitude is more of the same. Luther wrote strident texts against the Jews, wishing for their torture. Islam in its fundamental texts is lethally anti-Judaic.  

This is Hadith 41;6985: ”Allah’s Messenger: The last hour would NOT COME UNLESS the Muslims will FIGHT AGAINST THE JEWS and the MUSLIMS WOULD KILL THEM until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree, and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and KILL HIM…”[1]

You will censor my comment, though it is depicts the exact truth. So doing you think that you are wise, because you appease, by lying. Lying by omission is still lying. This is exactly what the US media did in 1939-41, making the Holocaust possible.

Amusingly, the New York Times did receive my comment and thought about it… because it removed the Anti-French picture they illustrated their story with, and replaced it by the lighting of candles… Not France implicitly accused anymore… I guess, even the NYT can learn a few things about itself…

Patrice Ayme



[1]: How much more horrendously hateful can one be as in this Hadith (which is repeated several times with micro variations, in the most basic Hadith texts)? This is allowable in fiction. However, in all too many mosques, and houses, this is taught as a basic fact of the universe.


Nota Bene: The essay above was posted May 1, US time. After publication, I discovered my first comment was posted (very belatedly, and well after the second comment was sent to the NYT). The second comment, more accusing, was not published. It seems it let to publication of the first… So I look like a liar now… Games…


January 7, 2012


How can entire countries, or civilizations go so wrong, for so long? Because of vicious ideas that, instead of being condemned and vilified, become adulated and celebrated, sometimes under the respectability of religion. Then the Dark Side itself becomes the object of a cult. Here is an example, how Germany became deviant.

It is often said that Germanic fascism and genocidal proclivities started with Hitler. But this is not true at all.

Genocide was part of a system of thought, Lutheranism, that Prussians were conditioned to respect as the highest religion for more than 400 years (And, in my generosity, I did not go back to the heydays of the Teutonic Knights who fabricated Prussia to start with, because they found the Middle East too hot in more ways than one!)

France and her National Constituent Assembly had made the Declaration of Human Rights the basis of her constitution. It was duly signed by King Louis XVI in August 1789. All men were supposed equal, including equal for tax purposes. That drove the plutocrats into a lethal fury.

Paris in 1792 was officially threatened of the exact same sort of Final Solution deployed at Auschwitz, 150 years later. And the reasons were even flimsier.

OK, maybe not. After all plutocrats will go to great extremities to avoid paying taxes. Yes, some things don’t really change, as long as one has not exerted really great, deep, mental and civilizational efforts, followed by thorough legislation. The great age of Greece, or the glorious centuries of the rise of the Roman republic, were preceded by extensive anti-plutocratic revolutions, all over.



Torturous, murderous anti-Judaism was fully written down by Luther. Luther was ever more inclined to utter criminal, lethal threats towards the Jews, the more famous he got.

Josel of Rosheim tried to help the Jews of Saxony. He wrote that their plight was “due to that priest whose name was Martin Luther — may his body and soul be bound up in hell!! — who wrote and issued many heretical books in which he said that whoever would help the Jews was doomed to perdition.”

Josel asked the city of Strasbourg to forbid the sale of Luther’s deadly anti-Jewish trash; the city did so after a Lutheran pastor in Hochfelden argued in a sermon that his parishioners should murder Jews.

Jews were the object of Luther hatred in his 65,000-word treatise Von den Juden und Ihren Lügen (On the Jews and Their Lies) and Vom Schem Hamphoras und vom Geschlecht Christi (Of the Unknowable Name and the Generations of Christ). It was reprinted five times within his lifetime.

As the (German) philosopher Karl Jaspers wrote regarding Luther’s treatise, On the Jews and Their Lies: “There you already have the whole Nazi program“. Everything is there indeed. And it’s there for all to see. How come does one not talk about it then? Has the Nazi program long been the program?

According to Martin Luther the Jews are a “base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth”… They are full of the “devil’s feces … which they wallow in like swine.” The synagogue was a “defiled bride, yes, an incorrigible whore and an evil slut…”

Luther argued, or one should say, more pertinently, argues, because that system of thought is still alive and influential, the following. “Synagogues and Jewish schools [should] be set on fire, sacred Jewish books destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, Jewish homes razed, so that Jews can live in ruins underground, moaning, and Jewish property and money confiscated.” Jews should be shown no mercy or kindness, afforded no legal protection, and these “poisonous envenomed worms” should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time.

Actually Luther preaches the Final Solution “We are at fault in not slaying them.” Hitler was never that loud and explicit.

In modern France, such a hating creep would be repeatedly condemned to jail, and never see the light of the day. Since 1945, the French republic has rightly decided to punish some forms of hate crimes, and many countries have followed (for example Germany and the USA).

So can one equate Hitler and Luther? Sorry, that would be unfair. Unfair to Hitler. Luther came first. He was the teacher, he was the preacher. Hitler was imprinted on that venom.

And what of all those countless millions who admired Luther and produced his venom, for centuries? They, too came first. They too, advocated Lutheranism, that means, mass murdering anti-Judaism. Some will say:”Oh, no, there is much more to it than that!

Whatever. When one has threatened to have people killed, just because of whom they were born from, what can one do for an encore? Suppose someone goes around preaching, and writing than some categories of children ought to be slayed. And then he claims he wants to take care, and he wants to offer icecream to children, out of love, he says. Is not that even more disturbing?

Another thing: the top Nazis kept the Final Solution secret enough so that the average German could plausibly argue that he, or she, would never have suspected such a thing. But there was nothing secret about Luther’s writings and sermons.

Still another thing: mass murdering anti-Judaism was made in the name of Christ, a non-entity (nobody of official governmental record had ever seen his face; so his age varied by at least 7 years and his birth changed to the winter solstice 400 years later: imagine that we did not know when Augustus was born!) Let alone the slight contradiction that Jesus himself, supposing generously that he existed, assuredly existed as a Jew. So why did Luther hate Jews murderously, while loving Jesus to death? The answer is obvious.

In other words, it’s not really about Jews, and Jesus, or god needing some help with the multiverse. It’s all about mass murdering frenzy on the slightest pretext. It’s all about accepting mass murdering frenzy as a great organizing principle. So no wonder the Communists, the Slavs, the Poles, the Gypsies, the French, etc. were next in line. Luther, and his enraged followers, were insane maniacs, and all the worse, as they successfully persuaded themselves that they were the lamb of god. The latter enabling the former.

In truth they were raiding murdering chimps equipped with the printing press. Thus the mass murdering frenzy had a tribal character. Philosophers such as Kant and Herder only accentuated it. The former with the cult of obedience to his Lord and the associated social order, the latter with the cult of tribal spirit and the closed mind, the exact opposite of Pericles’ Open Society. By then, as France had taken Athens’ torch, the appropriately named Herder hated the appropriately named French, all the more since many German intellectuals looked up to the Closed Society and military order so much.



The Second Reich was created by Bismarck, in a succession of wars, starting with enormously dangerous Denmark. The wars stroked the nationalist and fascist fiber, which kept on growing until it devoured Bismarck himself in 1890.

Anti-Judaism was rabid by 1880 CE, all over Germany. Nietzsche had to give up on many friends, including Wagner, and his sister. He headed towards France and Bizet. Nietzsche had started as a German nationalist but the encroaching madness of the entire country turned him into a total enemy of the system of thought he saw rising there. He predicted that German hyper nationalism and racial hatred would cause the greatest wars, come the following century. This is all over Nietzsche’s later books, and thus demonstrate that the German catastrophe was thoroughly predictable, for anybody with an open mind.

Now, precisely because Luther, Kant and Herder had taught the closed mind, as a highest virtue, and precisely because those ideologies were now in power, throughout the Prussian university system, the average German was not programmed to understand what Nietzsche was talking about. To the point that the Nazis successfully turned Nietzsche’s message on its head, presenting him as their prophet, when he hated their sort to the greatest extent (something like that also happened to Muhammad’s message, his (ex) child bride Aisha herself had argued forcefully, around 660 CE) .

Starting in Namibia, the Prussian army committed systematic, deliberate, premeditated and threatened mass murdering atrocities. Goering, the father of Hermann Goering, and other Prussian occupiers of Namibia conducted at least two genocides there.

The French and the British did not do so in the gigantic swathes of Africa they ruled over (although the British engaged in a de facto genocide against the Boers). The genocides in Namibia were official, deliberate, premeditated, and aimed at the complete extermination of the locals.

Prussian war atrocities occurred in World War One. They were not just committed. They were threatened first. So they were deliberate, premeditated, and justified by the mass murdering system of thought reigning over Prussia. The Prussian army declared that, if it was fired on, it would deliberately kill civilians. In Belgium (a neutral country it had just invaded, itself a war crime).

Whereas the British, French and Italian did not commit any atrocities we know of in World war One.

Where does all this come from? As, I said, Luther’s mass murdering frenzy preaching had left a deep imprint on the souls.



Once the metaprinciple of mass murdering has been accepted and made into a sacred religion (Lutheranism), one can apply the sacred principle of utter destruction all over.

Starting in August 1789, France had become a Constitutional Monarchy headed by King Louis XVI, who had been for 15 years prior the absolute, legitimate King of France. Thus the French Constitutional Monarchy was fully legitimate (if it pleased the French King and the French Parliaments to change the constitution, it should have been their business, and theirs alone!)

However the plutocrats outside were furious, because the Upper Ones, the top 2% (the Second Estate, the Nobility) was forced to pay taxes, like everybody else. In this new Constitutional Monarchy.

No, I am not making this up.

Never mind that the constitutional king in the Ancient Regime, Louis XVI himself, once again, had tried to make them pay tax, from day one. So not only the plutocrats were furious against the constitutional monarch, but against that monarch’s old program, same old, same old, which he had tried to impose, from day one, 15 years before the revolution of 1789. Of course that is what was going on, but they did not couch it that way in 1792

So the plutocrats and their emperors and kings declared war to France. To the Constitutional Monarchy of France. And how did it do that? By threatening France, the French People, with the modern definition of GENOCIDE. Here it is:



“Their Majesties the emperor [of Austria] and the king of Prussia having entrusted to me the command of the united armies which they have collected on the frontiers of France, I desire to announce to the inhabitants of that kingdom the motives which have determined the policy of the two sovereigns and the purposes which they have in view.

After arbitrarily violating the rights of the German princes in Alsace and Lorraine, disturbing and overthrowing good order and legitimate government in the interior of the realm, committing against the sacred person of the king and his august family outrages and brutalities which continue to be renewed daily, those who have usurped the reins of government have at last completed their work…

His Majesty the king of Prussia, united with his Imperial Majesty by the bonds of a strict defensive alliance and himself a preponderant member of the Germanic body, would have felt it inexcusable to refuse to march to the help of his ally and fellow-member of the empire. . . .

To these important interests should be added another aim equally important and very close to the hearts of the two sovereigns, – namely, to put an end to the anarchy in the interior of France, to check the attacks upon the throne and the altar, to reestablish the legal power, to restore to the king the security and the liberty of which he is now deprived and to place him in a position to exercise once more the legitimate authority which belongs to him.

Convinced that the sane portion of the French nation abhors the excesses of the faction which dominates it, and that the majority of the people look forward with impatience to the time when they may declare themselves openly against the odious enterprises of their oppressors, his Majesty the emperor and his Majesty the king of Prussia call upon them and invite them to return without delay to the path of reason, justice, order, and peace. In accordance with these views, I, the undersigned, the commander in chief of the two armies, declare:

1. That, drawn into this war by irresistible circumstances, the two allied courts entertain no other aims than the welfare of France, and have no intention of enriching themselves by conquests.

2. That they do not propose to meddle in the internal government of France, and that they merely wish to deliver the king, the queen, and the royal family from their captivity, and procure for his Most Christian Majesty the necessary security to enable him, without danger or hindrance, to make such engagements as he shall see fit, and to work for the welfare of his subjects, according to his pledges.

3. That the allied armies will protect the towns and villages, and the persons and goods of those who shall submit to the king and who shall cooperate in the immediate reestablishment of order and the police power throughout France.

4. That, on the contrary, the members of the National Guard who shall fight against the troops of the two allied courts, and who shall be taken with arms in their hands, shall be treated as enemies and punished as rebels to their king and as disturbers of the public peace. . . .

7. That the inhabitants of the towns and villages who may dare to defend themselves against the troops of their Imperial and Royal Majesties and fire on them, either in the open country or through windows, doors, and openings in their houses, shall be punished immediately according to the most stringent laws of war, and their houses shall be burned or destroyed. . . .

8. The city of Paris and all its inhabitants without distinction shall be required to submit at once and without delay to the king, to place that prince in full and complete liberty, and to assure to him, as well as to the other royal personages, the inviolability and respect which the law of nature and of nations demands of subjects toward sovereigns. . .

Their said Majesties declare, on their word of honor as emperor and king, that if the chateau of the Tuileries is entered by force or attacked, if the least violence be offered to their Majesties the king, queen, and royal family, and if their safety and their liberty be not immediately assured, they will inflict an ever memorable vengeance by delivering over the CITY OF PARIS TO MILITARY EXECUTION and COMPLETE DESTRUCTION, and the rebels guilty of the said outrages to the punishment that they merit. . . .

Given at the headquarters at Coblenz, July 25, 1792.


Duke of Brunswick-Luneburg.


How genocide as a cultural habit starts, indeed….


Get it? That was a year before the “Terreur”. Hence the terror was INITIATED and caused by the plutocrats, those self-declared “sovereigns” attacking France in July 1792… And, as I said, in this light, the monstrous crimes against humanity of 1914 and Auschwitz are put in the different light of blatant cultural habit of Germanic “sovereigns”….



The criminally inclined Brunswick captured the French city of Longwy, August 23 1792, and Verdun, September 2. Marching on Paris, he was cut from behind by general Dumouriez coming from the north, and general Kellermann coming from the east. Brunswick was sorely defeated at Valmy on September 20, in an artillery duel, where French artillery, using new technology, proved superior.

The King was deposed as head of state on September 21. The Austrian born and raised Queen had been sending secret messages to the plutocratic coalition about the deployment of the armies of France (made mostly of veteran professional royal troops…) The First French Republic was proclaimed the next day by the National Convention. Mr. and Mrs. Capet were condemned for high treason.



Thus one sees that the will to mass murder out of tribal hatred passed from Luther to Brunswick, and from there all the way down to Hitler. Now Luther did not invent criminal anti-Judaism of the gory type. Famously, Saint Louis (IX) had written that nothing would please him more than to twist a knife around the belly of an unbeliever or Jew. But this is precisely the point: the words of Saint Louis, who was himself making a show of many of the principles Luther later adopted, were no doubt very well known to Luther.

Thus Saint Louis was an earlier apologist of genocide purely to satisfy hatred, the Dark Side. And that system of thought was actually present even earlier in Saint Bernard, and the Roman emperors who invented it in the Later Roman empire. How did the same monstrous system of thought propagate from the Fourth Century to the Twentieth Century? Well, because nobody attacked it with the most substantial arguments. Mass murdering hatred progressed under the cover of Jesus and his pretended religion of love (many workers of Christ worked really for love, and only for love, but that does not include the mythical founder, and certainly not his most powerful advocates!)

And, of course, much was about plutocracy all along. High time to raise their taxes sky high. If you don’t want the eagle to keep on eating you alive, just don’t wait for Heracles, clip its wings, now! At least that is what Prometheus would not doubt recommend.

Some things don’t really change, unless one exerts really great and thorough mental efforts. But the latter, by themselves, are the only god we need.


Patrice Ayme