Emily Pitts writes:

King’s Place in London held an elegant discussion last week on the art of rhetoric, led by Tony Benn, Simon Schama, Polly Toynbee, Geoffrey Robertson and curated by English PEN. The panel examined whether a speech is made great by careful use of rhetorical techniques, or whether the art in fact lies in choosing the right point in time for the speech to occur.

Three of the four panellists argued against the power of rhetoric, stating instead that dramatic speeches occur at dramatic points in history. The moment, they said, defines the language, rather than the other way around.

Simon Schama dissented. He argued that Obama is the best modern-day example we have of an artful rhetorician, citing the use of iambic pentameter in his inaugural speech; “I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors”, and his skilful use of the plural personal pronoun; “We can do it, Yes we can”. There has of course, been much written on Obama’s exemplary use of rhetoric – take a look at Max Atkinson’s blog for in-depth analysis.

During the course of the discussion, various other politicians came under scrutiny. It was suggested that the restraint of Gordon Brown’s language contributes to the perception of him as an inaccessible personality. Similarly, the “everyday Joe” language of Nick Griffin and his active oratory in local communities could be a significant factor in his success. Tony Blair was touted as the inventor of the ‘verbless sentence’ – a rather brazen grammatical omission – which allowed him to offer a promise without ever, in fact, making an actual commitment. “Our education system – a beacon to the world” is one example.

It is clear that artfully constructed language can be hugely powerful, especially when the point in history is hungry for words that can lead and provide strength. But more recently, blogging and instant communications seems to have had a ‘content over form’ effect on language – just getting the message “out there” has often become good enough.

However, with high-profile figures such as Obama leading the way, I suspect we may see a reversal of that trend over the next few years. We could see a return to more traditional values of well constructed and stylistically sophisticated language, both spoken and published. In the UK, the possible introduction of US-style televised political debates might raise the game for politicians and the language they use. It may not be Cicero, but the art of the spoken word could be about to resume an important place in public life.

The image is from Allan McDougall’s blog, and is used with thanks.

In what is turning out to be a sequel of a bad movie, the media is once again covering for a warmonger.

Obama’s propaganda paper of record headlines its piece

Obama’s Speech on Afghanistan to Envision Exit

A nice euphemism (not unlike clinching – to substitute “winning the primaries) The article is replete with anonymous senior officials who assure us  about that “vision” as well as the GOP-es who oppose it (the fiends!)

But Marc Ambinder, the shorthand scribe for the politically in the know describes the huddle that generated the NY Times propaganda

That suggests that the meeting was akin to a pre-game rally session by the commander-in-chief: he wants to get everyone from Gates to Gen. Stanley McChrystal to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the same page before his Tuesday speech.

and discloses the big one

Officials said last week that while would outline a clear exit strategy, he would not tie troop withdrawals to any specific political developments in Afghanistan, which might run into opposition from Democrats in Congress, who are demanding benchmarks.

Hence the nostalgic illustration for this entry. Of course, unlike in the original version of this movie, we won’t get theories proving a conexion between 9.11 and Iraq. This being the sequel

An official said that Obama plans to try explain the interconnection between the the stability of Pakistan and the nexus of terror in Afghanistan.

Which Ambinder qualifies as

An explanation that the American people would accept has proven elusive.

Don’t worry, propagandists! An Obama war is OK – as it has the Nobel Peace Prize stamp of approval on it!

I thought that since we are in the sequel, another  funny reminder of the first movie would help

I laughed and laughed seeing this one! Cartoonists say the darnest things!

I have recently begun to explore the Windows Speech API (SAPI) available on Windows XP and Vista. My earliest experiment involves a very simple WSH script that instantiates a SpVoice object, invokes the Speak() method, and then waits for the speech synthesis to finish by using WaitUntilDone()

I coupled the invocations of the two above SAPI SpVoice methods in a JavaScript function named speak().

speech.js

// Simple speech API call
//
// License: MIT / X11
// Copyright (c) 2009 by James K. Lawless
// jimbo@radiks.net http://www.radiks.net/~jimbo
// http://www.mailsend-online.com
//
// Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person
// obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation
// files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without
// restriction, including without limitation the rights to use,
// copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
// copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
// Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following
// conditions:
//
// The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
// included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
//
// THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
// EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES
// OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND
// NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT
// HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY,
// WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING
// FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR
// OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

   var voice=new ActiveXObject("SAPI.SpVoice");

   function speak(s) {
      voice.Speak(s,1);
      voice.WaitUntilDone(-1);
   }

   speak("I like peanut butter.");

To execute the above, type:

cscript speech.js

The next script I wrote uses the SAPI to synthesize speech for all arguments found on the command-line:

talker.js

// Speak the text supplied on the command line.
// cscript talker.js "phrase 1"  "phrase 2" ... etc.
//
// License: MIT / X11
// Copyright (c) 2009 by James K. Lawless
// jimbo@radiks.net http://www.radiks.net/~jimbo
// http://www.mailsend-online.com
//
// Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person
// obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation
// files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without
// restriction, including without limitation the rights to use,
// copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
// copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
// Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following
// conditions:
//
// The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
// included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
//
// THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
// EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES
// OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND
// NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT
// HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY,
// WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING
// FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR
// OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

   var voice=new ActiveXObject("SAPI.SpVoice");
   var args=WScript.Arguments;
   var i;

   function speak(s) {
      voice.Speak(s,1);
      voice.WaitUntilDone(-1);
   }

   for(i=0;i<args.Count();i++) {
      speak(args(i));
   }

The examples below illustrate how to use this script either from the command-line or from batch files:

cscript talker.js "Tippecanoe and tyler too."
cscript talker.js "This" "is a" "test"

The Speech Control Panel applet provides a simple GUI interface to the SAPI speech synthesis system. The script below emulates that function of the applet. Since the WSH JavaScript API does not provide a GUI input dialog, a mixed-language WSF file is used. The VBScript portion of the script wraps the InputBox function with a function called prompt(). The prompt function then becomes available to the JavaScript portion of the code.

speechui.wsf

<job id="Text2SpeechUI">
<!--
 Prompt for text and then synthesize the equivalent speech.

 License: MIT / X11
 Copyright (c) 2009 by James K. Lawless
 jimbo@radiks.net http:www.radiks.net/~jimbo
 http:www.mailsend-online.com

 Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person
 obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation
 files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without
 restriction, including without limitation the rights to use,
 copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
 copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
 Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following
 conditions:

 The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
 included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

 THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
 EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES
 OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND
 NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT
 HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY,
 WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING
 FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR
 OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
 -->
   <script language="VBScript">
      Function prompt(s)
        prompt = InputBox(s)
      End Function
   </script>
   <script language="JavaScript">
      var voice=new ActiveXObject("SAPI.SpVoice");
      var txt;

      function speak(s) {
         voice.Speak(s,1);
         voice.WaitUntilDone(-1);
      }

      for(;;) {
         txt=prompt("Enter a line of text.  Click 'Cancel' to exit.");
         if(typeof(txt)=="undefined")
            break;
         if(txt!="")
            speak(txt);

      }
   </script>
</job>

You can invoke the above by issuing the following command-line:

wscript speechui.wsf

Enter text in the input area and click OK.

Click ‘Cancel’ to terminate the script.

Save to del.icio.us
Digg it
Save to Reddit
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
More bookmarks

Unless otherwise noted, all code and text entries are Copyright © 2009 by James K. Lawless

Este cam întrebatoare această întâmplare. Te lasă pe ganduri după ce s-a terminat filmul. Este foarte trista intamplarea. Se spune că ar fi adevarată dar nu ştiu ce să cred în legatura cu acest subiect. Faza e că m-a pus pe ganduri în privinţa existenţei noastre ca oameni şi a ceea ce se ascunde dincolo de lumea materială în care nimeni probabil numai crede în ziua de azi. Nu ştiu ce să zic. O să mai studiez ceva despre, şi o să imi dau cu părerea. Recomandabil ar fi să nu vă uitaţi singuri la acest film, ori singure mai ales fiind fete. Întamplarea are ca subiect un cuplu de tineri care aud noaptea diverse sunete şi simt diverse prezenţe imateriale în propria casă. Ma repet, povestea se zice că ar fi reala. Totul fiind filmat în toamna anului 2006 de către prietenul fetei care era terorizată de aceea prezenţă.

Obama Prepares for Afghan Speech, Senators Offer Advice

Question Mark, Minneapolis Sculpture Garden, Minneapolis, Minnesota, January 2008, all photos © 2008-2009 by QuoinMonkey. All rights reserved.

A few weeks ago, I watched an interview on Bill Moyers Journal and was mesmerized by the work of Anna Deavere Smith. It is tough work. She takes on controversial subjects most would not touch in our sanitized, politically correct language of the day. Her 1992 one-woman performance Fires in the Mirror explored the violence between Jews and Blacks after an August 1991 civic disturbance in the New York neighborhood of Crown Heights in Brooklyn. Her solo performance in Twilight: Los Angeles dramatized the 1992 riots that broke out in L.A. following the first Rodney King trial.

For her current one-woman play Let Me Down Easy, Anna Deavere Smith interviewed Americans from all walks of life about healthcare, medical, and end of life issues. After 9 years and 300 plus interviews, she chose 20 people; through their words, body language and speech, she transforms on stage into each one. I’ve only seen snippets of her 90 minute performance on TV. And from bullrider to politician to Buddhist monk, I could hear the voice of all America inserted into the healthcare debate, leaving little room for doubt — something has to change.

We are trying to bring disparate worlds together, not so that we can all get along, but so we can see out of the ‘me’ into ‘us.’

– Anna Deavere Smith

__________________________________________

Highlights

Below are few notes I jotted down while listening to her conversation with Bill Moyers. A few may seem cryptic, but will make more sense when you watch the interview:

• Though Walt Whitman and Abraham Lincoln lived in the same town and Whitman saw Lincoln 22 or 23 times, they never met. Maybe it was a good thing; Whitman was doing another kind of work for the country. [Related article: Abraham Lincoln and Walt Whitman: War’s Kindred Spirits]

• The title Let Me Down Easy came to her almost out of a dream. There are two songs with the name. Of the title, James H. Cone of the Union Theological Seminary said they are the words of a broken heart and can be interpreted as broken love. “Don’t do it harshly. Not too mean. Let it be easy.”

• Let Me Down Easy is a call about grace and kindness in a world that lacks that often –  in a winner take all world.

• Death is the ultimate form of loss, the ultimate form of abandonment

• It broke her heart to know that we, with all of our money and technology, believe that we can afford to leave people so alone

• Are we afraid of being poor, afraid of losing, afraid of being sick? Is that why we distance ourselves from that reality all around us?

• She chose these 20 particular people because they are very connected to the life cycle – death and life

• The most important thing you can do is be with someone when they die

• Art comes in when the official language falls apart. When things fall apart, you can see more and you can even be part of indicating new ways that things can be put together.

What seems to be important to Anna Deavere Smith is the art of listening. And letting what she hears soak into each cell of her body. Words matter. People matter. She believes something she learned from her grandfather (who was also the inspiration for her method of theater) — if you say a word often enough, it becomes you. In a New York Times article Through 1 Woman, 20 Views of Life’s End she says, “I try to embody America by embodying its words.”

Near the end of the interview, Bill Moyers asked, “When did you begin to listen to people so acutely?” Anna said when she was young, she lived next to a woman who weighed 400 pounds. The neighbor would ask her to go to the store to buy her fatback and she’d love to sit on her porch and listen to her stories –  that’s when she started really listening.

__________________________________________

Writing Topic — 3 Questions

How do we teach ourselves to listen? How do we get people to talk about what has meaning for them, moving beyond repetition or sound bites? In Anna’s words, “I say their words over and over. I listen and I wear the words.”

She said she also taught herself to listen by breaking up certain rhythmic speech patterns. She met a linguist at a cocktail party in 1979 who said she would give her 3 questions that were guaranteed to break the patterns and change the way people are expressing themselves:

Have you ever come close to death?

Have you ever been accused of something you didn’t do?

Do you know the circumstances of your birth?

And that’s the inspiration for this Writing Topic — 3 Questions.

Choose one of the 3 questions above. Write it down at the top of your paper. Take out a fast writing pen and do a timed 15 minute Writing Practice.

Maybe 3 questions, combined with the wild mind of Writing Practice, will break patterns in our writing and lead us to listen more closely to our own voices.

__________________________________________

Epilogue

Anna Deavere Smith is on fire. In pursuit of her mission to translate art into social commentary about race, poverty, and injustice, she’s won two Obie Awards, been nominated for the Pulitzer Prize and two Tonys, and is a recipient of the prized MacArthur fellowship. (Not to mention her role in NBC’s The West Wing, as National Security Advisor Nancy McNally.) You can read more about Anna Deavere Smith at Bill Moyers Journal. Or watch the full interview with Anna Deavere Smith and Bill Moyers at this link.

In November, the Moth Storytelling Awards in New York honored her as their 2009 recipient at the Annual Moth Ball. The Wall Street Journal blog Speakeasy covered the event. The blog also mentions a compelling account of Garrison Keillor’s stroke in September 2009. He had the stroke while on a massage table, eventually drove himself to the ER, and waited 15 minutes in line before he was able to tell anyone he was having a stroke. Read the full story at Speakeasy: Jonathan Ames, Garrison Keillor and Anna Deavere Smith Headline Annual Moth Ball.

In some ways the most effective politicians are the ones who have the best verbal clothes that they manipulate the best way. And there is a gap between that type of clothing and where people walk and where people live.

Whitman was doing another kind of work for the country at that time. Speaking a different song. And I think the politicians can sing to us but I respect, in a way, the limitation of their language. I mean I guess it’s a part of our culture that goes back as far as Jefferson, that they have to be so careful about what they say. My only desire would then be that we would find other places in our culture to work out our differences.

– Anna Deavere Smith from Bill Moyers Journal, November 2009

-posted on red Ravine, Sunday, November 29th, 2009

Zionists Declared war on Hitler in 1933,  Least we forget.

A Jewish Defector Warns America

Benjamin Freedman Speaks on Zionism

He left the Zionist movement, changed his name from the Jewish spelling (Friedman), and exposed  the diabolical plots that helped set the stage for  WWI and WWII.

Freedman was born on October 4, 1890 in New York City Freedman was present at the 1912 presidential campaign as an assistant to Bernard Baruch, and regularly sat at meetings with presidential candidate Woodrow Wilson. He affirmed in his  speech that he was a liaison between Rolla Wells and Henry Morgenthau, Sr.

The Video and transcript of his speech.

This should do it! For the second and last time we are updating the transcript of Ben Freedman’s 1961 speech at the Willard Hotel.

The piece has been posted for over a year now. A few months ago, a person challenged the authenticity of the transcript, because his version stated that Samuel Untermeyer had used the Columbia Broadcasting studios when he declared a worldwide boycott against Germany — in his words: ‘A Holy War’. We could not debate the issue, having never heard the actual recording of Mr. Freedman’s speech. Today, I discovered that we have a cassette tape of the speech, so I listened to the entire tape while reading the posted transcript. According to Mr. Freedman the radio station used by Untermeyer was, in fact, ABC.

There had also been some simple rearrangements of sentence structure in that transcript, and a line or two omitted in places. For the sake of authenticity, the corrections have been made. The transcript is now word for word from Mr. Freedman’s speech.

The original transcriber had ‘tidied up’ Mr. Freedman’s responses during the Q&A period, omitting superfluous and repetitious words. For the most part, we’ve left the tidied up version as it was, since it didn’t change the response, and actually helped to clarify Mr. Freedman’s answers. If the names were changed, he could have been making that speech yesterday.  – Jackie —  April 8, 2003

Here is our first update notice, about a year ago:

The original posting of this speech was taken from an existing web site. In going through our files we recently discovered a full transcript of the speech and realized the original posting was not complete.  Here is the transcript from our files, with additional text at the beginning – some within the body of the speech – and a question and answer section at the end that had not been included in the original posting.  There will be further postings from other writers and quotes that will confirm much of what Mr. Freedman said here.  Many of you will see the truth of it, as it stands.  – Jackie –

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Truth will stand on its own merit

A Jewish Defector Warns America:

Benjamin Freedman Speaks

by Benjamin H. Freedman

Introductory Note  – Benjamin H. Freedman was one of the most intriguing and amazing individuals of the 20th century.

Mr. Freedman, born in 1890, was a successful Jewish businessman of New York City who was at one time the principal owner of the Woodbury Soap Company. He broke with organized Jewry after the Judeo-Communist victory of 1945, and spent the remainder of his life and the great preponderance of his considerable fortune, at least 2.5 million dollars, exposing the Jewish tyranny which has enveloped the United States.

Mr. Freedman knew what he was talking about because he had been an insider at the highest levels of Jewish organizations and Jewish machinations to gain power over our nation. Mr. Freedman was personally acquainted with Bernard Baruch, Samuel Untermyer, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Joseph Kennedy, and John F. Kennedy, and many more movers and shakers of our times.

This speech was given before a patriotic audience in 1961 at the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C., on behalf of Conde McGinley’s patriotic newspaper of that time, Common Sense.  Though in some minor ways this wide-ranging and extemporaneous speech has become dated, Mr. Freedman’s essential message to us — his warning to the West — is more urgent than ever before. — K.A.S. —

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A CHRISTIAN VIEW OF THE HOLOCAUST

Ladies and gentlemen, you are about to hear a very frightening speech.  This speech is an explanation of the plans now being laid to throw the United States into a third world war.  It was made a short time ago before a large group in the Congressional `Room of the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C.  Both the speech and the question and answer period later so electrified the audience that a group of patriots has transferred it to two long-playing records which you may buy to play for friends, clubs, and your church group in your community. The speaker is Mr. Benjamin Freedman, noted authority on Zionism and all of its schemes. Mr. Freedman is a former Jew, and I mean a FORMER Jew.  He has fought the Communist world conspiracy tooth and nail, and stands today as a leading American patriot. We now take you to the speaker’s platform to present Benjamin Freedman.

(applause)

[Freedman's speech]

What I intend to tell you tonight is something that you have never been able to learn from any other source, and what I tell you now concerns not only you, but your children and the survival of this country and Christianity.  I’m not here just to dish up a few facts to send up your blood pressure, but I’m here to tell you things that will help you preserve what you consider the most sacred things in the world:  the liberty, and the freedom, and the right to live as Christians, where you have a little dignity, and a little right to pursue the things that your conscience tells you are the right things, as Christians.

Now, first of all, I’d like to tell you that on August 25th 1960 — that was shortly before elections — Senator Kennedy, who is now the President of the United States, went to New York, and delivered an address to the Zionist Organization of America.   In that address, to reduce it to its briefest form, he stated that he would use the armed forces of the United States to preserve the existence of the regime set up in Palestine by the Zionists who are now in occupation of that area.

In other words, Christian boys are going to be yanked out of their homes, away from their families, and sent abroad to fight in Palestine against the Christian and Moslem Arabs who merely want to return to their homes. And these Christian boys are going to be asked to shoot to kill these innocent [Arab Palestinians] people who only want to follow out fifteen resolutions passed by the United Nations in the last twelve years calling upon the Zionists to allow these people to return to their homes.

Now, when United States troops appear in the Middle East to fight with the Zionists as their allies to prevent the return of these people who were evicted from their homes in the 1948 armed insurrection by the Zionists who were transplanted there from Eastern Europe… when that happens, the United States will trigger World War III.

You say, when will that take place?  The answer is, as soon as the difficulty between France and Algeria has been settled, that will take place.  As soon as France and Algeria have been settled, that will take place. As soon as France and Algeria have settled their difficulty, and the Arab world, or the Moslem world, has no more war on their hands with France, they are going to move these people back into their homes, and when they do that and President kennedy sends your sons to fight over there to help the crooks hold on to what they stole from innocent men, women and children, we will trigger World War III; and when that starts you can be sure we cannot emerge from that war a victor. We are going to lose that war because there is not one nation in the world that will let one of their sons fight with us for such a cause.

I know and speak to these ambassadors in Washington and the United Nations — and of the ninety-nine nations there, I’ve consulted with maybe seventy of them – and when we go to war in Palestine to help the thieves retain possession of what they have stolen from these innocent people we’re not going to have a man there to fight with us as our ally.

And who will these people have supporting them, you ask.  Well, four days after President Kennedy — or he was then Senator Kennedy — made that statement on August 28, 1960, the Arab nations called a meeting in Lebanon and there they decided to resurrect, or reactivate, the government of Palestine, which has been dormant more or less, since the 1948 armed insurrection by the Zionists.

Not only that… they ordered the creation of the Palestine Army, and they are now drilling maybe a half a million soldiers in that area of the world to lead these people back to their homeland.  With them, they have as their allies all the nations of what is termed the Bandung Conference Group.  That includes the Soviet Union and every Soviet Union satellite.  It includes Red China; it includes every independent country in Asia and Africa; or eighty percent of the world’s total population.  Eighty percent of the world’s population.  Four out of five human beings on the face of the earth will be our enemies at war with us.  And not alone are they four out of five human beings now on the face of this earth, but they are the non-Christian population of the world and they are the non-Caucasians… the non-white nations of the world, and that’s what we face.

And what is the reason?  The reason is that here in the United States, the Zionists and their co-religionists have complete control of our government.  For many reasons too many and too complex to go into here at this — time I’ll be glad to answer questions, however, to support that statement — the Zionists and their co-religionists rule this United States as though they were the absolute monarchs of this country.

Now, you say, ‘well, that’s a very broad statement to make’, but let me show what happened while you were — I don’t want to wear that out — let me show what happened while WE were all asleep.  I’m including myself with you. We were all asleep.  What happened?

World War I broke out in the summer of 1914.  Nineteen-hundred and fourteen was the year in which World War One broke out.  There are few people here my age who remember that. Now that war was waged on one side by Great Britain, France, and Russia; and on the other side by Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey. What happened?

Within two years Germany had won that war:  not alone won it nominally, but won it actually. The German submarines, which were a surprise to the world, had swept all the convoys from the Atlantic Ocean, and Great Britain stood there without ammunition for her soldiers, stood there with one week’s food supply  facing her — and after that, starvation.

At that time, the French army had mutinied.  They lost 600,000 of the flower of French youth in the defense of Verdun on the Somme.  The Russian army was defecting.  They were picking up their toys and going home, they didn’t want to play war anymore, they didn’t like the Czar.  And the Italian army had collapsed.

Now Germany — not a shot had been fired on the German soil.  Not an enemy soldier had crossed the border into Germany.  And yet, here was Germany offering England peace terms.  They offered England a negotiated peace on what the lawyers call a status quo ante basis.  That means: “Let’s call the war off, and let everything be as it was before the war started.”

Well, England, in the summer of 1916 was considering that. Seriously!   They had no choice.  It was either accepting this negotiated peace that Germany was magnanimously offering them, or going on with the war and being totally defeated.

While that was going on, the Zionists in Germany, who represented the Zionists from Eastern Europe, went to the British War Cabinet and — I am going to be brief because this is a long story, but I have all the documents to prove any statement that I make  if anyone here is curious, or doesn’t believe what I’m saying is at all possible — the Zionists in London went to the British war cabinet and they said: “Look here.  You can yet win this war.  You don’t have to give up.  You don’t have to accept the negotiated peace offered to you now by Germany.  You can win this war if the United States will come in as your ally.”

The United States was not in the war at that time.  We were fresh; we were young; we were rich; we were powerful.  They [Zionists] told England: “We will guarantee to bring the United States into the war as your ally, to fight with you on your side, if you will promise us Palestine after you win the war.”

In other words, they made this deal:  “We will get the United States into this war as your ally. The price you must pay us  is Palestine after you have won the war and defeated Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey.”

Now England had as much right to promise Palestine to anybody, as the United States would have to promise Japan to Ireland for any reason whatsoever.   It’s absolutely absurd that Great Britain — that never had any connection or any interest or any right in what is known as Palestine — should offer it as coin of the realm to pay the Zionists for bringing the United States into the war.

However, they made that promise, in October of 1916.   October, nineteen hundred and sixteen. And shortly after that — I don’t know how many here remember it — the United States, which was almost totally pro-German — totally pro-German — because the newspapers here were controlled by Jews, the bankers were Jews, all the media of mass communications in this country were controlled by Jews, and they were pro-German because their people, in the majority of cases came from Germany, and they wanted to see Germany lick the Czar.

The Jews didn’t like the Czar, and they didn’t want Russia to win this war.  So the German bankers — the German-Jews — Kuhn Loeb and the other big banking firms in the United States refused to finance France or England to the extent of one dollar.   They stood aside and they said: “As long as France and England are tied up with Russia, not one cent!”  But they poured money into Germany, they fought with Germany against Russia, trying to lick the Czarist regime.

Now those same Jews, when they saw the possibility of getting Palestine, they went to England and they made this deal.  At that time, everything changed, like the traffic light that changes from red to green.  Where the newspapers had been all pro-German, where they’d been telling the people of the difficulties that Germany was having fighting Great Britain commercially and in other respects, all of a sudden the Germans were no good.   They were villains.   They were Huns. They were shooting Red Cross nurses.  They were cutting off babies’ hands.  And they were no good.

Well, shortly after that, Mr. Wilson declared war on Germany.

The Zionists in London sent these cables to the United States, to Justice Brandeis: “Go to work on President Wilson.  We’re getting from England what we want.  Now you go to work, and you go to work on President Wilson and get the United States into the war.”  And that did happen. That’s how the United States got into the war.  We had no more interest in it; we had no more right to be in it than we have to be on the moon tonight instead of in this room.

Now the war — World War One — in which the United States participated had absolutely no reason to be our war. We went in there — we were railroaded into it — if I can be vulgar, we were suckered into — that war merely so that the Zionists of the world could obtain Palestine.   Now, that is something that the people  in the United States have never been told. They never knew why we went into World War One. Now, what happened?

After we got into the war, the Zionists went to Great Britain and they said: “Well, we performed our part of the agreement.  Let’s have something in writing that shows that you are going to keep your bargain and give us Palestine after you win the war.”   Because they didn’t know whether the war would last another year or another ten years.   So they started to work out a receipt.   The receipt took the form of a letter, and it was worded in very cryptic language so that the world at large wouldn’t know what it was all about.   And that was called the Balfour Declaration.

The Balfour Declaration was merely Great Britain’s promise to pay the Zionists what they had agreed upon as a consideration for getting the United States into the war.   So this great Balfour Declaration, that you hear so much about, is just as phony as a three dollar bill.   And I don’t think I could make it more emphatic than that.

Now, that is where all the trouble started.  The United States went in the war.  The United States crushed Germany.  We went in there, and it’s history. You know what happened.  Now, when the war was ended, and the Germans went to Paris, to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, there were 117 Jews there, as a delegation representing the Jews, headed by Bernard Baruch.  I was there: I ought to know. Now what happened?

The Jews at that peace conference, when they were cutting up Germany and parceling out Europe to all these nations that claimed a right to a certain part of European territory, the Jews said, “How about Palestine for us?”  And they produced, for the first time to the knowledge of the Germans, this Balfour Declaration.   So the Germans, for the first time realized, “Oh, that was the game!  That’s why the United States came into the war.”  And the Germans for the first time realized that they were defeated, they suffered this terrific reparation that was slapped onto them, because the Zionists wanted Palestine and they were determined to get it at any cost.

Now, that brings us to another very interesting point.  When the Germans realized this, they naturally resented it.  Up to that time, the Jews had never been better off in any country in the world than they had been in Germany.

You had Mr. Rathenau there, who was maybe 100 times as important in industry and finance as is Bernard Baruch in this country.   You had Mr. Balin, who owned the two big steamship lines, the North German Lloyd’s and the Hamburg-American Lines. You had Mr. Bleichroder, who was the banker for the Hohenzollern family.  You had the Warburgs in Hamburg, who were the big merchant bankers — the biggest in the world.  The Jews were doing very well in Germany. No question about that.  Now, the Germans felt: “Well, that was quite a sellout.”

It was a sellout that I can best compare — suppose the United States was at war today with the Soviet Union.  And we were winning.  And we told the Soviet Union: “Well, let’s quit.  We offer you peace terms.  Let’s forget the whole thing.” And all of a sudden Red China came into the war as an ally of the Soviet Union.  And throwing them into the war brought about our defeat.  A crushing defeat, with reparations the likes of which man’s imagination cannot encompass.

Imagine, then, after that defeat, if we found out that it was the Chinese in this country, our Chinese citizens, who all the time we thought they were loyal citizens working with us, were selling us out to the Soviet Union and that it was through them that Red China was brought into the war against us. How would we feel, in the United States against Chinese?  I don’t think that one of them would dare show his face on any street.  There wouldn’t be lampposts enough, convenient, to take care of them. Imagine how we would feel.

Well, that’s how the Germans felt towards these Jews.  ”We’ve been so nice to them”; and from 1905 on, when the first Communist revolution in Russia failed, and the Jews had to scramble out of Russia, they all went to Germany.  And Germany gave them refuge.  And they were treated very nicely.  And here they sold Germany down the river for no reason at all other than they wanted Palestine as a so-called “Jewish commonwealth.”

Now, Nahum Sokolow — all the great leaders, the big names that you read about in connection with Zionism today — they, in 1919, 1920, ‘21, ‘22, and ‘23, they wrote in all their papers — and the press was filled with their statements — that “the feeling against the Jews in Germany is due to the fact that they realized that this great defeat was brought about by our intercession and bringing the United States into the war against them.”

The Jews themselves admitted that.  It wasn’t that the Germans in 1919 discovered that a glass of Jewish blood tasted better than Coca-Cola or Muenschner Beer.  There was no religious feeling. There was no sentiment against those people merely on account of their religious belief. It was all political.  It was economic.  It was anything but religious.

Nobody cared in Germany whether a Jew went home and pulled down the shades and said “Shema’ Yisrael” or “Our Father.”  No one cared in Germany any more than they do in the United States.  Now this feeling that developed later in Germany was due to one thing: that the Germans held the Jews responsible for their crushing defeat, for no reason at all, because World War One was started against Germany for no reason for which they [Germans] were responsible.  They were guilty of nothing. Only of being successful.  They built up a big navy. They built up world trade.

You must remember, Germany, at the time of Napoleon, at the time of the French Revolution, what was the German Reich consisted of 300 — three hundred! — small city-states, principalities, dukedoms, and so forth.  Three hundred little separate political entities. And between that time, between the period of. . . between Napoleon and Bismarck, they were consolidated into one state. And within 50 years after that time they became one of the world’s great powers. Their navy was rivalling Great Britain’s, they were doing business all over the world, they could undersell anybody and make better products.  And what happened?  What happened as a result of that?

There was a conspiracy between England, France, and Russia that: “We must slap down Germany”, because there isn’t one historian in the world that can find a valid reason why those three countries decided to wipe Germany off the map politically. Now, what happened after that?

When Germany realized that the Jews were responsible for her defeat, they naturally resented it.   But not a hair on the head of any Jew was harmed.  Not a single hair.  Professor Tansill, of Georgetown University, who had access to all the secret papers of the State Department, wrote in his book, and quoted from a State Department document written by Hugo Schoenfelt, a Jew who Cordell Hull sent to Europe in 1933 to investigate the so-called camps of political prisoners. And he wrote back that he found them in very fine condition.

They were in excellent shape; everybody treated well.  And they were filled with Communists. Well, a lot of them were Jews, because the Jews happened to be maybe 98 per cent of the Communists in Europe at that time.  And there were some priests there, and ministers, and labor leaders, Masons, and others who had international affiliations.

Now, the Jews sort of tried to keep the lid on this fact.  They didn’t want the world to really understand that they had sold out Germany, and that the Germans resented that.

So they did take appropriate action against them [against the Jews].  They. . . shall I say, discriminated against them wherever they could?  They shunned them.  The same as we would the Chinese, or the Negroes, or the Catholics, or anyone in this country who had sold us out to an enemy and brought about our defeat.

Now, after a while, the Jews of the world didn’t know what to do, so they called a meeting in Amsterdam.  Jews from every country in the world attended in July 1933.  And they said to Germany: “You fire Hitler!  And you put every Jew back into his former position, whether he was a Communist, no matter what he was.  You can’t treat us that way!  And we, the Jews of the world, are calling upon you, and serving this ultimatum upon you.”  Well, the Germans told them. . . you can imagine.  So what did they [the Jews] do?

They broke up, and Samuel Untermyer, if the name means anything to people here. . .  (You want to ask a question? — Uh, there were no Communists in Germany at that time.  they were called ‘Social Democrats.)

Well, I don’t want to go by what they were called.  We’re now using English words, and what they were called in Germany is not very material. . . but they were Communists, because in 1917, the Communists took over Germany for a few days. Rosa Luxembourg and Karl Liebknecht, and a group of Jews in Germany took over the government for three days.  In fact, when the Kaiser ended the war, he fled to Holland because he thought the Communists were going to take over Germany as they did Russia, and that he was going to meet the same fate that the Czar did in Russia. So he left and went to Holland for safety and for security.

Now, at that time, when the Communist threat in Germany was quashed, it was quiet, the Jews were working, still trying to get back into their former — their status — and the Germans fought them in every way they could, without hurting a hair on anyone’s head.  The same as one group, the Prohibitionists, fought the people who were interested in liquor, and they didn’t fight one another with pistols, they did it every way they could.

Well, that’s the way they were fighting the Jews in Germany.  And, at that time, mind you, there were 80 to 90 million Germans and there were only 460,000 Jews. . . less than one half of one percent of Germany were Jews.  And yet, they controlled all of the press, they controlled most of the economy, because they had come in and with cheap money — you know the way the Mark was devalued — they bought up practically everything.

Well, in 1933 when Germany refused to surrender, mind you, to the World Conference of Jews in Amsterdam, they broke up and Mr. Untermeyer came back to the United States — who was the head of the American delegation and the president of the whole conference —  and he went from the steamer to ABC and made a radio broadcast throughout the United States in which he said:

“The Jews of the world now declare a Holy War against Germany.  We are now engaged in a sacred conflict against the Germans.  And we are going to starve them into surrender.  We are going to use a world-wide boycott against them, that will destroy them because they are dependent upon their export business.”

And it is a fact that two thirds of Germany’s food supply had to be imported, and it could only be imported with the proceeds of what they exported.  Their labor.  So if Germany could not export, two thirds of Germany’s population would have to starve. There just was not enough food for more than one third of the population.

Now in this declaration, which I have here, it was printed on page — a whole page — in the New York Times on August 7, 1933,  Mr. Samuel Untermyer boldly stated that: “this economic boycott is our means of self-defense.  President Roosevelt has advocated its use in the NRA” . [National Recovery Administration]  – which some of you may remember, where everybody was to be boycotted unless they followed the rules laid down by the New Deal, which of course was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court at that time.

Nevertheless, the Jews of the world declared a boycott against Germany, and it was so effective that you couldn’t find one thing in any store anywhere in the world with the words “made in Germany” on it.

In fact, an executive of the Woolworth Company told me that they had to dump millions of dollars worth of crockery and dishes into the river; that their stores were boycotted.  If anyone came in and found a dish marked “made in Germany,” they were picketed with signs: “Hitler”,  ”murderer”, and so forth,  and like — something like these sit-ins that are taking place in the South.

R. H. Macy, which is controlled by a family called Strauss who also happen to be Jews. . . a woman found stockings there which came from Chemnitz, marked “made in Germany”.  Well, they were cotton stockings. They may have been there 20 years, because since I’ve been observing women’s legs in the last twenty years, I haven’t seen a pair with cotton stockings on them.  So Macy!  I saw Macy boycotted, with hundreds of people walking around with signs saying “MURDERS”  and “HITLERITES”, and so forth.

Now up to that time, not one hair on the head of any Jew had been hurt in Germany.  There was no suffering, there was no starvation, there was no murder, there was nothing.

Now, that. . . naturally, the Germans said, “Why, who are these people to declare a boycott against us and throw all our people out of work, and our industries come to a standstill?  Who are they to do that to us?”  They naturally resented it.  Certainly they painted swastikas on stores owned by Jews.

Why should a German go in and give their money to a storekeeper who was part of a boycott who was going to starve Germany into surrender into the Jews of the world, who were going to dictate who their premier or chancellor was to be?  Well, it was ridiculous.

That continued for some time, and it wasn’t until 1938, when a young Jew from Poland walked into the German embassy in Paris and shot one of the officials [a German official] that the Germans really started to get rough with the Jews in Germany.  And you found them then breaking windows and having street fights and so forth.

Now, for anyone to say that —  I don’t like to use the word ‘anti-Semitism’ because it’s meaningless, but it means something to you still, so I’ll have to use it — the only reason that there was any feeling in Germany against Jews was that they were responsible: number one, for World War One; number two, for this world-wide boycott, and number three — did I say for World War One, they were responsible? For the boycott — and also for World War II, because after this thing got out of hand, it was absolutely necessary for the Jews and Germany to lock horns in a war to see which one was going to survive.

In the meanwhile, I had lived in Germany, and I knew that the Germans had decided [that] Europe is going to be Christian or Communist: there is no in between. It’s going to be Christian or it’s going to be Communist. And the Germans decided: “We’re going to keep it Christian if possible”.  And they started to re-arm.

And there intention was — by that time the United States had recognized the Soviet Union, which they did in November, 1933 — the Soviet Union was becoming very powerful, and Germany realized: “Well, our turn is going to come soon, unless we are strong.”  The same as we in this country are saying today, “Our turn is going to come soon, unless we are strong.”

And our government is spending 83 or 84 billion dollars of your money for defense, they say. Defense against whom?  Defense against 40,000 little Jews in Moscow that took over Russia, and then, in their devious ways, took over control of many other governments of the world.

Now, for this country to now be on the verge of a Third World War, from which we cannot emerge a victor, is something that staggers my imagination.  I know that nuclear bombs are measured in terms of megatons.  A megaton is a term used to describe one million tons of TNT.  One million tons of TNT is a megaton.  Now, our nuclear bombs have a capacity of 10 megatons, or 10 million tons of TNT.  That was when they were first developed five or six years ago.  Now, the nuclear bombs that are being developed have a capacity of 200 megatons, and God knows how many megatons the nuclear bombs of the Soviet Union have.

So, what do we face now?   If we trigger a world war that may develop into a nuclear war, humanity is finished.  And why will it take place?  It will take place because Act III. . . the curtain goes up on Act III.  Act I was World War I.  Act II was World War II.  Act III is going to be World War III.

The Jews of the world, the Zionists and their co-religionists everywhere, are determined that they are going to again use the United States to help them permanently retain Palestine as their foothold for their world government.  Now, that is just as true as I am standing here, because not alone have I read it, but many here have read it, and it’s known all over the world.

Now, what are we going to do?  The life you save may be your son’s.  Your boys may be on their way to that war tonight; and you you don’t know it any more than you knew that in 1916 in London the Zionists made a deal with the British War Cabinet to send your sons to war in Europe.  Did you know it at that time?  Not a person in the United States knew it.  You weren’t permitted to know it.

Who knew it?  President Wilson knew it.  Colonel House knew it.  Other ’s knew it. Did I know it?  I had a pretty good idea of what was going on:  I was liaison to Henry Morgenthau, Sr., in the 1912 campaign when President Wilson was elected, and there was talk around the office there.

I was ‘confidential man’ to Henry Morgenthau, Sr., who was chairman of the Finance Committee, and I was liaison between him and Rollo Wells, the treasurer.  So I sat in these meetings with President Wilson at the head of the table, and all the others, and I heard them drum into President Wilson’s brain the graduated income tax and what has become the Federal Reserve, and also indoctrinate him with the Zionist movement.

Justice Brandeis and President Wilson were just as close as the two fingers on this hand, and President Woodrow Wilson was just as incompetent when it came to determining what was going on as a newborn baby.  And that’s how they got us into World War I, while we all slept.

Now, at this moment… at this moment they may be planning this World War III, in which we don’t stand a chance even if they don’t use nuclear bombs.  How can the United States — about five percent of the world — go out and fight eighty to ninety percent of the world on their home ground?  How can we do it… send our boys over there to be slaughtered?  For what?  So the Jews can have Palestine as their ‘commonwealth’?  They’ve fooled you so much that you don’t know whether you’re coming or going.

Now any judge, when he charges a jury, says, “Gentlemen, any witness that you find has told a single lie, you can disregard all his testimony.” That is correct.   I don’t know from what state you come, but in New York state that is the way a judge addresses a jury.  If that witness said one lie, disregard his testimony.

Now, what are the facts about the Jews?

The Jews — I call them Jews to you, because they are known as Jews. I don’t call them Jews.  I refer to them as so-called Jews, because I know what they are.  If Jesus was a Jew, there isn’t a Jew in the world today, and if those people are Jews, certainly our Lord and Savior was not one of them, and I can prove that.

Now what happened?  The eastern European Jews, who form 92 per cent of the world’s population of those people who call themselves Jews, were originally Khazars.

They were a warlike tribe that lived deep in the heart of Asia.  And they were so warlike that even the Asiatics drove them out of Asia into eastern Europe — and to reduce this so you don’t get too confused about the history of Eastern Europe — they set up this big Khazar kingdom: 800,000 square miles.  Only, there was no Russia, there were no other countries, and the Khazar kingdom was the biggest country in all Europe — so big and so powerful that when the other monarchs wanted to go to war, the Khazars would lend them 40,000 soldiers. That’s how big and powerful they were.

Now, they were phallic worshippers, which is filthy.  I don’t want to go into the details of that now.  It was their religion the way it was the religion of many other Pagans or Barbarians elsewhere in the world.

Now, the [Khazar] king became so disgusted with the degeneracy of his kingdom that he decided to adopt a so-called monotheistic faith — either  Christianity, Islam — the Moslem faith — or what is known today as Judaism — really Talmudism.  So, like spinning a top and calling out “eeny, meeny, miney, moe,”  he picked out so-called Judaism.  And that became the state religion.

He sent down to the Talmudic schools of Pumbedita and Sura and brought up thousands of these rabbis with their teachings, and opened up synagogues and schools in his kingdom of 800,000 people — 800,000 thousand square miles — and maybe ten to twenty million people; and they became what we call Jews.  There wasn’t one of them that had an ancestor that ever put a toe in the Holy Land, not only in Old Testament history, but back to the beginning of time.  Not one of them!  And yet they come to the Christians and they ask us to support their armed insurrection in Palestine by saying:

“Well, you want to certainly help repatriate God’s  chosen people to their Promised Land, their ancestral homeland,  It’s your Christian duty.  We gave you one of our boys as your Lord and Savior.  You now go to church on Sunday, and kneel and you worship a Jew, and we’re Jews.”

Well, they were pagan Khazars who were converted just the same as the Irish [were converted].  And it’s just as ridiculous to call them “people of the Holy Land,” as it would be. . . there are 54 million Chinese Moslems.  Fifty four million!  And, Mohammed only died in 620 A.D., so in that time, 54 million Chinese have accepted Islam as their religious belief.

Now imagine, in China, 2,000 miles away from Arabia, where the city of Mecca is located, where Mohammed was born. . . imagine if the 54 million Chinese called themselves  ’Arabs’.  Imagine! Why, you’d say they’re lunatics.  Anyone who believes that those 54 million Chinese are Arabs must be crazy.  All they did was adopt as a religious faith; a belief that had its origin in Mecca, in Arabia.

The same as the Irish.  When the Irish became Christians, nobody dumped them in the ocean and imported from the Holy Land a new crop of inhabitants that were Christians. They weren’t different people.  They were the same people, but they had accepted Christianity as a religious faith.

Now, these Pagans, these Asiatics, these Turko-Finns. . . they were a Mongoloid race who were forced out of Asia into eastern Europe.  They likewise, because their king took the faith — Talmudic faith — they had no choice.  Just the same as in Spain:  If the king was Catholic, everybody had to be a Catholic.  If not, you had to get out of Spain.  So everybody — they lived on the land just like the trees and the bushes; a human being belonged to the land under their feudal system — so they [Khazars] all became what we call today, Jews!

Now imagine how silly it was for the Christians. . . for the great Christian countries of the world to say, “We’re going to use our power, our prestige to repatriate God’s chosen people to their ancestral homeland, their Promised Land.”

Now, could there be a bigger lie than that?  Could there be a bigger lie than that?

And because they control the newspapers, the magazines, the radio, the television, the book publishing business, they have the ministers in the pulpit, they have the politicians on the soap boxes talking the same language . . . so naturally you’d believe black is white if you heard it often enough.  You wouldn’t call black black anymore — you’d start to call black white.  And nobody could blame you.

Now, that is one of the great lies. . . that is the foundation of all the misery that has befallen the world.  Because after two wars fought in Europe — World War I and World War II — if it wasn’t possible for them to live in peace and harmony with the people in Europe, like their brethren are living in the United States, what were the two wars fought for?  Did they have to — like you flush the toilet — because they couldn’t get along, did they  have to say, “Well, we’re going back to our homeland and you Christians can help us”?

I can’t understand yet how the Christians in Europe could have been that dumb because every theologian, every history teacher, knew the things that I’m telling you.  But, they naturally bribed them, shut them up with money, stuffed their mouths with money, and now. . . I don’t care whether you know all this or not.  It doesn’t make any difference to me whether you know all these facts or not, but it does make a difference to me.  I’ve got, in my family, boys that will have to be in the next war, and I don’t want them to go and fight and die… like they died in Korea.  Like they died in Japan. Like they’ve died all over the world.  For what?

To help crooks hold on to what they stole from innocent people who had been in peaceful possession of that land, those farms, those homes for hundreds and maybe thousands of years?  Is that why the United States must go to war?  Because the Democratic Party wants New York State — the electoral vote?  Illinois, the electoral vote? And Pennsylvania, the electoral vote?… which are controlled by the Zionists and their co-religionists?. . . the balance of power?

In New York City there are 400,000 members of the liberal party, all Zionists and their co-religionists.  And New York State went for Kennedy by 400,000 votes.  Now, I don’t blame Mr. Kennedy.  I’m fond of Mr. Kennedy.  I think he’s a great man.  I think he can really pull us out of this trouble if we get the facts to him.  And I believe he knows a great deal more than his appointments indicate he knows.  He’s playing with the enemy.  Like when you go fishing, you’ve got to play with the fish.  Let ‘em out and pull ‘em in.  Let ‘em out and pull ‘em in.  But knowing Mr. Kennedy’s father, and how well informed he is on this whole subject, and how close Kennedy is to his father, I don’t think Mr. Kennedy is totally in the dark.

But I do think that it is the duty of every mother, every loyal Christian , every person that regards the defense of this country as a sacred right, that they communicate — not with their congressman, not with their senator, but with President Kennedy.  And tell him, “I do not think you should send my boy, or our boys, wearing the uniform of the United States of America, and under the flag that you see here, our red, white and blue, to fight there to help keep in the hands of these that which they have stolen”.  I think everyone should not alone write once, but keep writing and get your friends to write.

Now, I could go on endlessly, and tell you these things to support what I have just asked you to do.  But I don’t think it’s necessary to do that.  You’re above the average group in intelligence and I don’t think it’s necessary to impress this any more.

But. . . I want to tell you one more thing.  You talk about… “Oh, the Jews.  Why the Jews?  Christianity.  Why, we got Christianity from the Jews and the Jews gave us Jesus, and the Jews gave us our religion”.  But do you know that on the day of atonement that you think is so sacred to them, that on that day… and I was one of them!  This is not hearsay.  I’m not here to be a rabble-rouser.  I’m here to give you facts.

When, on the Day of Atonement, you walk into a synagogue, the very first prayer that you recite, you stand — and it’s the only prayer for which you stand — and you repeat three times a short prayer. The Kol Nidre.  In that prayer, you enter into an agreement with God Almighty that any oath, vow, or pledge that you may make during the next twelve months — any oath, vow or pledge that you may take during the next twelve months  shall be null and void.

The oath shall not be an oath; the vow shall not be a vow; the pledge shall not be a pledge. They shall have no force and effect, and so forth and so on.

And further than that, the Talmud teaches: “Don’t forget — whenever you take an oath, vow, and pledge — remember the Kol Nidre prayer that you recited on the Day of Atonement, and that exempts you from fulfilling that”.

How much can you depend on their loyalty?  You can depend upon their loyalty as much as the Germans depended upon it in 1916.

And we’re going to suffer the same fate as Germany suffered, and for the same reason.  You can’t depend upon something as insecure as the leadership that is not obliged to respect an oath, vow or pledge.  Now I could go on and recite many other things to you, but I would have a little respect for your time, and you want to really, uh, get through with all of this.  Tomorrow’s going to be a long day.

Now I want to say one thing. You ask me. . . well, you think to yourself: “well how did this fellow get mixed up in this the way he got mixed up in it.”  Well, I opened my mouth in 1945, and I took big pages in newspapers and tried to tell the American people what I’m telling you.  And one newspaper after another refused the advertisement.  And when I couldn’t find a newspaper to take them — I paid cash, not credit — what happened?  My lawyer told me, “There’s an editor over in Jersey with a paper who will take your announcement”.  So, I was brought together with Mr. McGinley, and that’s how I met him.

So somebody told me the lawyer who introduced me, who was the son of the Dean of the Methodist Bishop, he said: “Well, I think he’s a little anti-Semitic.  I don’t know whether I can get him over here.  So he brought him over to my apartment and we hit it off wonderfully, and have since then.

Now, I say this, and I say it without any qualifications.  I say it without any reservations.  And I say it without any hesitation. . . if it wasn’t for the work that Mr. Conley McGinley did with “Common Sense” — he’s been sending out from 1,800,000 to 2,000,000 every year — if it wasn’t for the work he’s been doing sending those out for fifteen years now, we would already be a communist country. Nobody has done what he did to light fires.  Many of the other active persons in this fight learned all about if for the first time through “Common Sense”.

Now, I have been very active in helping him all I could.  I’m not as flush as I was.  I cannot go on spending the money. . . I’m not going to take up a collection.  Don’t worry.  I see five people getting up to leave.  (laughter)

I haven’t got the money that I used to spend.  I used to print a quarter of a million of them out of my own pocket and send them out.  Mr. McGinley, when I first met him, had maybe 5,000 printed and circulated them locally.  So I said, “With what you know and what I know, we can really do a good job”.  So I started printing in outside shops of big newspaper companies, a quarter of a million, and paid for them.  Well, there’s always a bottom to the barrel.  I suppose we’ve all reached that at times.

I’m not so poor that I can’t live without working and that’s what worries the Anti-Defamation League.  I can just get by without going and asking for a job or getting on the bread line.  But Mr. McGinley is working.  He’s sick and he’s going at this stronger than ever.  And all I want to say is that they want to close up “Common Sense” more than any other single thing in the whole world, as a death-blow to the fight Christians are making to survive.

So I just want to tell you this.  All they do is circulate rumors: “Mr. Benjamin H. Freedman is the wealthy backer of ‘Common Sense’.”   The reason they do that is to discourage the people in the United States: don’t send any money to Common Sense. They don’t need it.  The’ve got the wealthy Mr. Freedman as a backer.  That all has strategy.  They don’t want to advertise me so that people that have real estate or securities to sell will come and call on me. They just want people to lay off “Common Sense”. And all I’m telling you is, I do try to help him, but I haven’t been able to.  And I will be very honest. One thing I won’t do is lie.  In the last year I’ve had so much sickness in my family that I could not give him one dollar.

How he’s managed to survive, I don’t know. God alone knows.  And he must be in God’s care because how he’s pulled through his sickness and with his financial troubles, I don’t know.  But that press is working. . . and every two weeks about a hundred or a hundred-fifty-thousand of “Common Sense” go out with a new message.  And if that information could be multiplied. . . if people that now get it could buy ten or twenty five, or fifty, give them around.  Plow that field.  Sow those seeds, you don’t know which will take root, but for God’s sake, this is our last chance.

[Freedman then discusses the importance of people forgoing unnecessary purchases to 'buy more stuff', play golf, etc., and use the money to keep "Common Sense" going.  He explains that the paper is going in debt; could be closed down and he (Freedman) no longer has the funds, having spent some $2,400,000 in his attempt to bring the information to the American public and elected officials.  He then asks for questions from the audience.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

{Question inaudible]

Freedman:  All right, I’ll comment on that.  This is rather deep, but you all have a very high degree of intelligence, so I’m going to make an attempt.  In the time of Bible history, there was a geographic area known as Judea.  Judea was a province of the Roman Empire.  Now, a person who lived in Judea was known as a Judean, and in Latin it was Judaeus; in Greek it was Judaius.  Those are the two words, in Greek and Latin, for a Judean.

Now, in Latin and Greek there is no such letter as ‘j’, and the first syllable of Judaeus and Judaius starts ‘ghu’.  Now, when the Bible was written, it was first written in Greek, Latin, Panantic, Syriac, Aramaic… all those languages.  Never Was the word Jew in any of them because the word didn’t exist.  Judea was the country, and the people were Judeans, and Jesus was referred to only as a Judean.  I’ve seen those early… the earliest scripts available.

In 1345, a man by the name of Wycliffe in England thought that it was time to translate the Bible into English.  There was no English edition of the Bible because who the Devil could read?  It was only the educated church people who could read Latin and Greek, Syriac, Aramaic and the other languages.  Anyhow, Wycliffe translated the Bible into English.  But in it, he had to look around for some words for Judaeas and Judaius.

There was no English word because Judea had passed out of existence.  There was no Judea.  People had long ago forgotten that.  So in the first translation he used the word, in referring to Jesus, as ‘gyu’, “jew”.  At the time, there was no printing press.

Then, between 1345 and the 17th century, when the press came into use, that word passed through so many changes… I have them all here.  If you want I can read them to you.  I will.  That word ‘gyu’ which was in the Wycliffe Bible became. . . first it was ‘ gyu ‘,  then ‘ giu ‘,  then ‘ iu ‘ (because the ‘ i ‘ in Latin is pronounced like the ‘ j ‘.    Julius Caesar is ‘ Iul ‘   because there is no ‘j’ in Latin) then ‘ iuw ‘,   then ‘ ieuu ‘,  then ‘ ieuy ‘,  then ‘ iwe ‘,  then ‘ iow ‘,  then ‘ iewe ‘, all in Bibles as time went on.  Then ‘ ieue ‘,  then ‘ iue ‘,  then ‘ ive ‘,  and then ‘ ivw ‘, and finally in the 18th century… ‘ jew ‘.  Jew.

All the corrupt and contracted forms for Judaius, and Judaeas in Latin.  Now, there was no such thing as ‘Jew’, and any theologian — I’ve lectured in maybe 20 of the most prominent theological seminaries in this country, and two in Europe — there was no such word as Jew.  There only was Judea, and Jesus was a Judean and the first English use of a word in an English bible to describe him was ‘gyu’  – Jew.  A contracted and shortened form of Judaeus, just the same as we call a laboratory a ‘lab’, and gasoline ‘gas’… a tendency to short up.

So, in England there were no public schools; people didn’t know how to read; it looked like a scrambled alphabet so they made a short word out of it.   Now for a theologian to say that you can’t harm the Jews, is just ridiculous.  I’d like to know where in the scriptures it says that.  I’d like to know the text.

Look at what happened to Germany for touching Jews.  What would you, as a citizen of the United States, do to people who did to you what the so-called Jews — the Pollacks and Litvaks and Litzianers — they weren’t Jews, as I just explained to you.  They were Eastern Europeans who’d been converted to Talmudism.  There was no such thing as Judaism.  Judaism was a name given in recent years to this religion known in Bible history as Torah [inaudible].  No Jew or no educated person ever heard of Judaism.  It didn’t exist.   They pulled it out of the air. . . a meaningless word.

Just like ‘anti-Semitic’.  The Arab is a Semite.  And the Christians talk about people who don’t like Jews as anti-Semites, and they call all the Arabs anti-Semites.  The only Semites in the world are the Arabs.  There isn’t one Jew who’s a Semite.  They’re all Turkothean Mongoloids.  The Eastern european Jews.  So, they brainwashed the public, and if you will invite me to meet this reverend who told you these things, I’ll convince him and it’ll be one step in the right direction.  I’ll go wherever I have to go to meet him.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yes, ma’am.  Well… I can answer that.  First of all, your first premise is wrong.  Your first premise that all the Jews are loyal to each other is wrong.  Because, the Eastern European Jews outnumber all the rest by so many that they create the impression that they are the Jewish ‘race’; that they are the Jewish nation;  that they are the Jewish people. . . and the Christians swallow it like a cream puff.

But in 1844 the German rabbis called a conference of rabbis from all over the world for the purpose of abolishing the Kol Nidre from the Day of Atonement religious ceremony.  In Brunswick, Germany, where that conference was held in 1844, there was almost a terrific riot.  A civil war.

The Eastern Europeans said, “What the hell.  We should give up Kol Nidre?  That gives us our grip on our people.  We give them a franchise so they can tell the Christians, ‘Go to hell.  We’ll make any deal you want’, but they don’t have to carry it out.  That gives us our grip on our people”.  So, they’re not so united, and if you knew the feeling that exists. . .

Now, I’ll also show you from an official document by the man responsible for. . . uh, who baptized this race.  Here is a paper that we obtained from the archives of the Zionist organization in New York City, and in it is the manuscript by Sir James A. Malcolm, who — on behalf of the British Cabinet — negotiated the deal with these Zionists.

And in here he says that all the jews in England were against it.  The Jews who had been there for years, the [inaudible - probably Sephardim], those who had Portuguese and Spanish ad Dutch ancestry… who were monotheists and believed in that religious belief.  That was while the Eastern European Jews were still running around in the heart of Asia and then came into Europe. But they had no more to do with them than. . . can we talk about a Christian ‘race’?  or a Christian religion?… or are the Christians united?

So the same disunity is among the Jews.  And I’ll show you in this same document that when they went to France to try and get the French government to back that Zionist venture, there was only one Jew in France who was for it.  That was Rothschild, and they did it because they were interested in the oil and the Suez Canal

————————————————

[Question inaudible]  Freedman:  You know why?  Because if they don’t, they’re decked up.  They come around and they tell you how much you must give, and if you don’t . . . oh, you’re anti-Semitic. Then none of their friends will have anything to do with them, and they start a smear campaign. . . and you have got to give.

In New York city, in the garment center, there are twelve manufacturers in the building.  And when the drive is on to sell Israel Bonds, the United Jewish Drive, they put a big scoreboard with the names of the firms and opposite them, as you make the amount they put you down for, they put a gold star after the name.  Then, the buyers are told, “When you come into that building to call on someone and they haven’t got a gold star, tell them that you won’t buy from them until they have the gold star”.  BLACKMAIL.  I don’t know what else you can call it.

Then what do they do?  They tell you it’s for ‘humanitarian purposes’ and they send maybe $8 billion dollars to Israel, tax exempt, tax deductible.  So if they hadn’t sent that eight billion dollars to Israel, seven billion of it would have gone into the U.S. Treasury as income tax.  So what happens? That seven billion dollars deficit — that air pocket — the gullible Christians have to make up.

They put a bigger tax on gas or bread or corporation tax.  Somebody has to pay the housekeeping expenses for the government.  So why do you let these people send their money over there to buy guns to drive people out of their ancient homeland?  And you say, “Oh, well.  The poor Jews.  They have no place to go and they’ve been persecuted all their lives”.  They’ve never been persecuted for their religion.  And I wish I had two rows of Rabbis here to challenge me.  Never once, in all of history, have they been persecuted for their religion.

Do you know why the Jews were driven out of England?  King Edward the First in 1285 drove them out, and they never came back until the Cromwell Revolution which was financed by the Rothschilds.  For four-hundred years there wasn’t a Jew.  But do you know why they were driven out?  Because in the Christian faith and the Moslem faith it’s a sin to charge ‘rent’ for the use of money.  In other words – what we call interest [usury] is a sin.

So the Jews had a monopoly in England and they charged so much interest, and when the Lords and Dukes couldn’t pay, they [Jews] foreclosed.  And they were creating so much trouble that the king of England finally made himself their partner, because when they they came to foreclose, some of these dukes bumped off the Jews. . . the money-lenders.  So the king finally said — and this is all in history, look up Tianson [Tennyson?] or Rourke, the History of the Jews in England; two books you can find in your library.  When the king found out what the trouble was all about, and how much money they were making, he declared himself a fifty-percent partner of the money lenders.  Edward the First.  And for many years, one-third of the revenues of the British Treasury came from the fifty-percent interest in money-lending by the Jews.

But it got worse and worse.  So much worse that when the Lords and Dukes kept killing the money-lenders, the King then said, “I declare myself the heir of all the money-lenders.  If they’re killed you have to pay me, because I’m his sole heir”.  That made so much trouble, because the King had to go out and collect the money with an army, so he told the Jews to get out.  There were 15,000 of them, and they had to get out, and they went across to Ireland, and that’s how Ireland got to be part of the United Kingdom.

When King Edward found out what they were doing, he decided to take Ireland for himself before someone else did.  He sent Robert Southgard with a mercenary army and conquered Ireland.  So, show me one time where a Jew was persecuted in any country because of his religion.  It has never happened.  It’s always their impact on the political, social, or economic customs and traditions of the community in which they settle.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Question inaudible] Freedman:  Yes, sir.  Well, they say most of those things themselves.  It was unnecessary for Benjamin Franklin to say it.  Most of those things they say themselves.  But Benjamin Franklin observed, and by hearsay understood, what was happening in Europe.

When Russia, in 920 was formed, and gradually surrounded the Khazar Kingdom, and absorbed them, most of the well-to-do Khazars fled to Western Europe and brought with them the very things to which you object and I object and a lot of other people object.  The customs, the habits, the instincts with which they were endowed.

When Benjamin Franklin referred to them as Jews because that’s the name that they went by, and when the Christians first heard that these people who were fleeing from Russia — who they were — that they had practiced this Talmudic faith — the Christians in Western Europe said, “They must be the remnants of the lost ten tribes!”

And Mr. Grutz, the greatest historian amongst the Jews, said that — and he’s probably as good an authority on that subject as there is.  So when Ben Franklin came to Europe in the 18th century, he already saw the results of what these people had done after they left their homeland.  And every word of it is true… they say it themselves.  I can give you half a dozen books they’ve written in which they say the same thing:  When they have money they become tyrants.  And when they become defeated, they become ruthless.  They’re only barbarians.  They’re the descendants of Asiatic Mongols and they will do anything to accomplish their purpose.

What right did they have to take over Russia the way they did?  The Czar had abdicated nine or ten months before that.  There was no need for them. . . they were going to have a constitutional monarchy. But they didn’t want that.  When the constitutional monarchy was to assemble in November, they mowed them all down and established the Soviet Union.

There was no need for that.  But they thought, “Now is the time”, and if you you will look in the Encyclopedia Britannica under the word ‘Bolshevism’, you’ll find the five laws there that Lenin put down for a successful revolution.  One of them is, “Wait for the right time, and then give them everything you’ve got”.  It would pay you to read that.

You’d also find that Mr. Harold Blacktree, who wrote the article for the Encyclopedia Britannica states that the Jews conceived and created and cultivated the Communist movement.  And that their energy made them the spearhead of the movement.  Harold Blacktree wrote it and no one knew more about Communism than he.  And the Encyclopedia Britannica for 25 years has been printing it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Question inaudible] Freedman:  Well, I can’t advocate that you do anything that’s criminal, but I can tell you this.  You can start what I call an endless chain.  If you can get your friends to write, objectively, here is the statement:  Mr. Kennedy’s office gave me this himself.  Mr. Smith, who succeeded Mr. Kennedy, took over his office — was in his office — and gave me this.  He delivered this on the 25th, and it says here:

“For release to AM (that means morning papers), August 25th”.  ”Israel is here to stay.  It is a national commitment, special obligation of the Democratic Party.  The White House must take the lead.  American intervention.  We will act promptly and decisively against any nation in the Middle East which attacks its neighbor.  I propose that we make clear to both Israel and the Arab states our guarantee that we will act with whatever force and speed are necessary to halt any aggression by any nation”.

Well, do you call the return of people to their homeland [the Arab Palestinians] aggression?  Is Mr. Kennedy going to do that?  Suppose three million Mexicans came into Texas and drove the six million Texans into the deserts of Arizona and New Mexico.  Suppose these Mexicans were slipped in there armed — the Texans were disarmed — and one night they drove them all out of Texas and declared themselves the Republic of the Alamo.  What would the United States say?

Would we say it’s aggression for these Texans to try to get their homes back from the Mexican thieves?  Suppose the Negroes in Alabama were secretly armed by the Soviets and overnight they rose up and drove all the whites into the swamps of Mississippi and Georgia and Florida. . . drove them out completely, and declared themselves the Republic of Ham, or the Republic of something-or-other.  Would we call it aggression if these people, the whites of Alabama, tried to go back to their homes?

Would we. . . what would we think if the soviet Union said, “No, those Negroes now occupy them! Leave them there!”, or “No, those Mexicans are in Texas.  they declared themselves a sovereign state.  Leave them there.  You have plenty of room in Utah and Nevada.  Settle somewhere else”.

Would we call it aggression if the Alabama whites or the Texans wanted to go back to their homes?  So now, you’ve got to write to President Kennedy and say, “We do not consider it aggression in the sense that you use the word, if these people want to return to their homes as the United Nations — fifteen times in the last twelve years — called upon the Zionists in occupation of Palestine to allow the Arab Palestinians to return to their former homes and farms”.

[End of transcript of Benjamin Freedman speech, given in 1961 at the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C., on behalf of Conde McGinley's patriotic newspaper of that time, Common Sense.] Source

• US Presidents, Jewish Pawns
• The Truth about Khazars
• His speech in 1974

After World War II The Morgenthau Plan was put into motion. It was a horrible plan. Many innocent people died because of it.

The Allies were no better then Hitler’s Nazies.  Something they neglected to teach us in school.

The Morgenthau Plan

World War I  Approximately 16 million deaths.

World War II Approximately 60 million deaths.

The country that lost the most people during WW II was China, 10,000,000 to 20,000,000 perished. Civilian deaths in China 7,000,000 to 16,000,000.

The warning should have been taken seriously.

Seems Mr Freedman was right to warn Americans.

Related Articles

“We will have to kill them all”: Israeli Effie Eitam

West Bank Rabbi: Jews can kill Gentiles who threaten Israel including Children and even Babies

Who Benefited the most by J.F. Kennedy’s Death?

Rabbi’s are just as abusive as those from any other Religions

Israel’s Dirty Nuclear Secrets, Human experiments and WMD

Gaza (1): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

A very interesting Read.

The Great Zionist Cover Up

One of the best days of your life for you. It's finally time to retire. They have so much to say thank so many people, but you're not quite sure how they all fit in a short speech to retirement.

To play your retirement speech project, meaning, depth, and especially who you really are and how you feel. Millions of people are faced with this same dilemma every year. The good news is that there are a few basic tips you can use to make your retirementQuestion one, that make a difference to win and respect among your employees.

The first 3 seconds …

The first thing you want to do when retirement is giving your speech in order to ease your nerves. Most people do this by saying, I'm nervous or is it difficult or a variety of other methods. Unfortunately this is not the way to begin a memorable retirement speech. The best thing we do is in the first 3 seconds, to say nothing at all. Simply step on the podium and a deepBreath and exhale.

The next 5 seconds …

Once you have taken a deep breath and relax your nerves, you will want to smile. Yes, for the next 5 seconds, you give your audience a big smile and maybe a laugh. Not a false smile and laugh, but a joy. You must realize that you really enjoy something that only happens once in a lifetime, most people at the time, so this time have met!

The 8 Second Ride is Over

OK, now you have eased your nerves and relax the tension in theRoom. A bull rider must stay on the ride for 8 seconds to win the battle. Congratulations – you've just ridden the bull. Now the rest is easy. If you are disciplined enough to just enjoy the moment your retirement speech a success. One, the significance and depth, as you had imagined it would.

Try to discuss this issue and you will be amazed at how professional the people will think you are. It may be too simple. What will you say or how you say it. The truth is – you willnever say that everything is in order, or get everything, but what are the first few seconds of those who most people are talking about judges. If they like you in the first 8 seconds can be confused, and they will still be moved.

Text: Matthew 12:35-37
35 A good person produces good things from the treasury of a good heart, and an evil person produces evil things from the treasury of an evil heart. 36 And I tell you this, you must give an account on judgment day for every idle word you speak. 37 The words you say will either acquit you or condemn you.”  NLT

Words.  Words will either condemn you or acquit you.  Scary thought being accountable for EVERY SINGLE word you utter.  Words reveal the heart.  Jesus said it is not what you eat that defiles you, it is what comes from your mouth, and your mouth reflects the heart.

I don’t know about you, but the thought of accountability for every single word that comes from my mouth for a lifetime is frightening.  I have blown it more than once.   There are the obvious times – when words come out you wish could be retrieved.  They are like nails driven into wood.  You can retract them, but the damage remains.  Then, there are the more subtle words; the innuendo, the sarcasm,  the body language that speaks louder than the words (rolling eyes always does the trick).  Negative talk.  This can be the most powerful and least considered.  When you continue to speak negatively about someone, Jesus said we are in danger of hell itself.  With the tongue we have the power to bless or curse.

I recently read a book about barriers that keep people from advancing to the next level.  The power of speech was a vital part of the barriers that hinder people.  The author would challenge clients to go 30 minutes without uttering a negative word.  If they did, they would owe him $20.  He often collected $60 within ten minutes.  We are not aware of nature and impact of our speech.  We do not steward our words.  Unfortunately, our families can be the brunt of the negativity, and even toxic speech.  Fortunately, we can change.  Jesus transforms our hearts and words.  He touches our lips and cleanses them.  He forgives when we confess.

Thought for the Day – May the words from your lips reflect a treasury of good in your heart deposited by the Holy Spirit.

In 2006 Peter Schiff tells over 1000 mortgage brokers they are about to be jobs. Watch how he completely nails the coming real estate / mortgage debacle before anyone else even realized that it come.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G3Qefbt0n4&hl=en

30 Candles blown out. Angie makes a heartfelt speech.

The party started at 14:30. The die-hard partiers left at 22h45. Outstanding party.

Wang Zifei has become an internet sensation after merely sitting in the Audience of an Obama speech.  Some have accused her of courting the attention by removing her bright red coat during the speech, an accusation she vehemently denies in her own blog.  Others believe that her placement in the audience was some kind of conspiracy. Zifei is beautiful to be sure, but she is one among millions of beautiful Chinese women.  So what’s the big deal?  Did the world just now discover that not only do they all not look the same, but a lot of them are hot?

For a translation into English of Zifei’s blog entry ragarding the hype and more pictures of her, read this China Hush Article:

http://www.chinahush.com/2009/11/24/mystery-woman-in-black-behind-obama-at-the-town-hall-meeting-becomes-popular-then-speaks-out/#more-3608

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1231120/Barack-Obamas-woman-black-takes-China-storm-reluctant-internet-hit.html

Please take my poll:

http://milodivincenzo.wordpress.com/2009/09/22/280/

Movie – Any Given Sunday (Al Pacino, Jamie Fox) "tat" Half-Time speech @ ta Football Playoffz …

Friends Link : DIY home addictionsnetwork.wordpress.com yourselfimprovement.wordpress.com motivational-tutorials.blogspot.com/

Gee, I’m so surprised. Got this from The Briefing Room. I just tried it and it’s still as they said. You can type all the way to c-l-i-m-a-t-e-g-a-t  and not get a prompt other than climate Guatemala. How about this search: Climb A Gyrating Dildo, you statist scumbags.

For comparison, here’s Armed Geek’s waffle search from the comments.

YouLube can join them. Guess how many letters you have to type to get the Hide The Decline video. Coincidence? I. Think. Not!!!

UPDATE: From a commenter over at WUWT, where they mimicked this post a short time ago:

Russ Steele (14:29:57) :

3019867    โสตสัมผัสวิทยาและคลินิกการพูด    Audiology And Speech Clinic

ศึกษาความรู้พื้นฐานทางการได้ยิน วิธีการตรวจการได้ยินแบบต่าง ๆ การตรวจความผิดปกติของการพูด และแปลผล การดูแลรักษาผู้ป่วยที่มีความผิดปกติของการได้ยินและการพูด รวมทั้งการใส่เครื่อวช่วยการได้ยิน

(To study the basic knowledge and various methods in audiology and speech disorder clinic as well as how to interpret the data and how to handle various disorders in hearing and speech including hearing and fitting.)

(3019867 จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย)

(All Scriptures in the NKJV version)

It is absolutely imperative that the Christian “bridle” his tongue:

If anyone among you thinks he is religious, and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this one’s religion is useless. (James 1:26)
He who guards his mouth preserves his life, but he who opens wide his lips shall have destruction. (Prov. 13:3)
Whoever guards his mouth and tongue keeps his soul from troubles. (Prov. 21:23)

If a Christian maintains integrity in all other areas, yet allows his tongue free reign, his religion is worthless. He is self-deceived. He thinks he can praise God and curse men at the same time. He thinks he can walk in the flesh and walk in the Spirit at the same time. How small the tongue is, yet how much damage it can do if unbridled even a short time!

For we all stumble in many things. If anyone does not stumble in word, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle the whole body.

Indeed, we put bits in horses’ mouths that they may obey us, and we turn their whole body. Look also at ships: although they are so large and are driven by fierce winds, they are turned by a very small rudder wherever the pilot desires.

Even so the tongue is a little member and boasts great things. See how great a forest a little fire kindles! And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity. The tongue is so set among our members that it defiles the whole body, and sets on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire by hell. For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and creature of the sea, is tamed and has been tamed by mankind. But no man can tame the tongue. It is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. With it we bless our God and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the similitude of God. Out of the same mouth proceed blessing and cursing.

My brethren, these things ought not to be so. Does a spring send forth fresh water and bitter from the same opening? Can a fig tree, my brethren, bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Thus no spring yields both salt water and fresh. (James 3: 2-12)

The fruit of our lips gives evidence of the true condition of our hearts. Jesus said,

For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things. (Matt. 12:34-35)

Knowing this, let us examine what is in our hearts. Curses, slanders, and coarse jestings (Eph. 5:4) do not just slip out of the mouth; they slip out of a heart that has made a home for them! Perhaps for this reason, David linked his words with the meditations of his heart:

Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable in Your sight, O LORD, my strength and my Redeemer. (Ps. 19:14)

What are we meditating on in the secret places of our hearts?

Jesus said that EVERY “idle word” will all be accounted for!

But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned. (Matt. 12:36-37)

Knowing this, let us be careful to not speak hastily or presumptuously:

Do you see a man hasty in his words? There is more hope for a fool than for him. (Prov. 29:20)
He who answers a matter before he hears it, it is folly and shame to him. (Prov. 18:13)
Keep back Your servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me. Then I shall be blameless, and I shall be innocent of great transgression. Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable in Your sight, O LORD, my strength and my Redeemer. (Ps. 19:13-14)

Let us not be talebearers, slanderers, or liars:

Where there is no wood, the fire goes out; and where there is no talebearer, strife ceases. (Prov. 26:20)
Whoever hides hatred has lying lips, and whoever spreads slander is a fool. (Prov. 10:18)
Therefore, putting away lying, “Let each one of you speak truth with his neighbor,” for we are members of one another. (Eph. 4:25)
He who would love life and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips from speaking deceit. (I Pet. 3:10)

Let us also not speak rudely or harshly:

Love…does not behave rudely…(I Cor. 13:4-5)
She opens her mouth with wisdom, and on her tongue is the law of kindness. (Prov. 31:26)
A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger. (Prov. 15:1)

Let us not be given to “too many words”:

In the multitude of words sin is not lacking, but he who restrains his lips is wise. (Prov. 10:19)
He who has knowledge spares his words, and a man of understanding is of a calm spirit. Even a fool is counted wise when he holds his peace; when he shuts his lips, he is considered perceptive. (Prov. 17:27-28)
Do not be rash with your mouth, and let not your heart utter anything hastily before God. For God is in heaven, and you on earth; therefore let your words be few. (Eccl. 5:2)

Control of the tongue is especially important when we correct those who oppose God:

And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will. (2 Tim. 2: 24-26)

David said:

I will guard my ways, lest I sin with my tongue; I will restrain my mouth with a muzzle, while the wicked are before me. (Ps. 39:1)

While “no man can tame the tongue” (James 3:8), Jesus said, “The things which are impossible with men are possible with God” (Luke 18:27). A fruit of the Holy Spirit is self-control. It is by His Spirit that the Christian can “put to death” the evil deeds of the restless tongue:

For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. (Rom. 8:13-14)

A Spirit-controlled tongue brings glory to God and blessing to others!

A wholesome tongue is a tree of life… (Prov. 15:4)
The tongue of the righteous is choice silver… (Prov. 10:20)
A man has joy by the answer of his mouth, and a word spoken in due season, how good it is! (Prov. 15:23)
A word aptly spoken is like apples of gold in settings of silver. Like an earring of gold or an ornament of fine gold is a wise man’s rebuke to a listening ear. (Prov. 25:11-12)
The mouth of the righteous man utters wisdom, and his tongue speaks what is just. (Ps. 37:30)

May God help us to submit our tongues to the Lordship of Jesus Christ, for we can do all things through Christ, who gives us strength!

Anything I would add would only detract from this. From a great commenter and American on this blog, Joyce,

“CW,…. I received this email from a very good friend of mine.  He is honest and I know that this is from him.
 
 Just more good things about Sarah Palin.  She is an amazing woman who I know loves this country. I hope you can read thru it with out tears.  I couldn’t!!!!!!
 
Joyce”
“This e-mail was sent to me today by my Step-sister xxxxxx xxxxxxx. She took her Dad  (my Step-Dad) to meet Sarah Palin yesterday when she was in Birmingham doing a book signing promoting her newly released book. The date was November 22, 2009. I was amazed to hear the story and called her to verify that it happened to her and not just a “forward” that I so often receive.
   I took my Dad to meet Sarah Palin tonight. He wore his Marine’s hat and his Purple Heart pin. Before we entered the signing place, we were stopped by Sarah’s aunt. She grabbed my dad’s hand  and told him thanks for his service to our country. He was so proud. Next, we waited our turn to meet Sarah. She shook my hand and we exchanged greetings. When I introduced her to my dad, she held (not shook) his hand and thanked him for her freedom – yes, her freedom. She thanked him for his service to our  country. My dad began to cry. She
 asked where he served, and she told him that her book was in honor of him and his dedication to America . My Dad thanked Sarah for her service and told her how proud he was of her. She then thanked me for bringing my Dad and said God Bless you.

As we were leaving we were stopped by a man who asked to meet my  Dad and it turned out  to be Sarah’s Dad. He hugged me and thanked me for bringing my Dad & then hugged him and told him it meant so much to him that we took the time to stand in line to meet his daughter. Trying to find his voice, with a face full of falling tears, my Dad said, no… Thank you…thank you for your daughter.
 As we left, tears filled  Sarah’s father’s eyes and everyone, incuding security and all told him goodbye. As we were leaving, we learned that Sarah stopped by Fort Hood unexpectedly and donated the money from her book signing today to the victim’s families. She is a Great lady!

xxxxxx xxxxxxx

Birmingham, AL”

http://www.ted.com Playing sound effects both pleasant and awful, Julian Treasure shows how sound affects us in four significant ways. Listen carefully for a shocking fact about noisy open-plan off…

SEEN on Monday’s edition of The Black Commentator: