Early meme - intention is to include animated-GIF versions in Russian, Arabic, Turkish, Japanese, and Chinese warnings against Jewish fake traditions.
Probably it will be necessary to ensure all societies which have been Jew-compromised are aware of it, and co-operate.

The Passion of the Christ Mel Gibson film 2004

Review and notes by Raeto West 25 July 2024

I'm writing this after watching The Passion of The Christ (Mel Gibson film, 2004). Gibson produced, directed, and partly wrote the script for this film, jointly with Benedict FitzGerald (splendidly-named for post-WW1 Irish Roman Catholicism) which is said to have voices in Latin, Aramaic, and Hebrew. If the promotional material can be believed, it was intended to be 'released' without subtitles.
It's hard to judge other aspects of the film; it used a casting director, so it's hard to know how much was due to Gibson. It was filmed in Rome's Cinecittà, but also in Matera and Craco, noted tourist sites—in Italy; with music by several Turks, which included multiple drumming and Turkish instruments, probably electronically enhanced.
It's impossible to be certain of much here—box-office takings can't all go to the film; do the actors get more if a film is unexpectedly successful; how much influence do Jews exert?
'Satan' was represented by Rosalinda Celentano (the credits say so) accompanied by what looked to me like a dwarf, as indeed were other young 'devils' in other scenes. The odd Jewish assertions of reversion to non-sexuality don't appear.

The film has no deep background, nothing in the style of C J Bjerknes, the invention of the specifically Jewish ideas of God, which have elbowed out and permeated everywhere, a sort of permafrost of Jewish fanaticism. Nothing on the supposed uniqueness of Jews and their violence. And nothing hinting as to how the 'Rabbi' Yeshua would invent stories to capture the gullible goyim.
Poor old Pontius Pilate was played by a Bulgarian, Hristo Shopov, who was shown puzzling over truth in a lightweight fashion. Jews love other people having to take Jewish responsibilities.
Depth was replaced by cliché. The bloody moulage effects disappointed me—the underlying body seemed too firm and tough and not very much flayed, and the weight of the cross seemed too light for its size. The longest passages were probably the 'Stations of the Cross' but I didn't attempt to sort them out; Gibson used a Jesuit consultant—I'm not sure if this was FitzGerald. All the Roman soldiery was shown as heartless and rather ugly.
As far as I can tell, Gibson's image now is that he has no ideas of jewish real history and techniques: he's quoted: If anyone has distorted Gospel passages to rationalize cruelty towards Jews or anyone, it's in defiance of repeated Papal condemnation shows elegant ignorance by Gibson of Roman Catholic and Jewish symbiosis, which must have evolved as early Jewish Popes arranged things with Kahals.

Anyway, so much for the film, which is powerfully done and includes a few special effects—a raindrop including the crucifixion scene which splatters on the ground; a tear of 'God'? There's a worm in Satan's nose at one point, which seems not to have been noticed by anyone. There seems to be a permanent full moon. The earthquake effect seemed painfully wrong to me—exactly but unrealistically in the centres of stage sets. And the supposed darkness at the tragic event was reduced to some token cold weather.

On genuine issues here, the truth has probably been in parts of the Bible all along. Prof G A Wells, in his The Historical Evidence for Jesus (first published 1982, Prometheus Books) says that Paul's letters pre-dated the gospels, and are probably listed after them because they are 'turgid'. Wells says they are to 'Christianize' Europe, but what he means is the Letters are part of the psy-op process of injecting Jew-helpful poison, giving advice for example to Galatians, whoever they are. Think of them as memos from Jew owners of media empires.
The Passion of the Christ omits absolutely all the preparatory groundwork for the later 'gospels'.

Hutton Gibson (1918-2020), Mel's dad, seems to have been intelligent enough to be involved in some of the controversy over the film. I don't know detail, though I noticed a website huttongibson.com was created on 2005-09-06 by J Militis in Chicago. Hutton seems to have been a sedevacantist, of whom the best-known, at least to me, is Richard Nelson Williamson (1940- ; "I don't have anything against the mother of god" he said, in case you think he may be clever), though he may be a mentevacantist—I'm trying not to misrepresent him. Williamson was a victim of media hacks over Williamson's stand on the 'Holocaust' fraud.
Wiki says Hutton Gibson said the Second Vatican Council was "a Masonic plot backed by the Jews" which sensible statement still enrages wiki.
Hutton died quite recently; I have no idea if he continued his interests, though I hope so. I'd have been interested in his WW2 impressions.
In July 2006, Mel Gibson, driving his car along the Pacific coast, apologised for his "despicable" remarks after a Los Angeles police officer claimed that the actor had shouted a barrage of anti-semitic abuse, including a claim that "the Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world". This of course manufactured a media stormy teacup.
Mel seems to have been forced by Jews to apologise, and I think also to produce/direct/act in crap military films about Jew wars—which seems out of character for him, and his father, who seems to have moved the Australia to delay hassle over the Jew-induced Vietnam War. I saw a filmed thing where he discussed the Vietnam War, I think being forced to acknowledge the fake expression 'Viet Cong'. Probably Jews like nothing more than forcing goyim to swallow their principles and grovel for money.

Twenty years later. Here are some Youtube comments, possibly genuine, of the sort that say "Americans are collectively so Jew-naive they are too stupid to live". All that pain and suffering, to spare us our sins, so much love he has for us. Thanks you Jesus the Messiah | Brilliant film showing the sacrifice Our Lord made well done to Mel Gibson and Jim C for all their hard work in making this heartwrenching protrayal of our Lord's Passion x | We did this to JESUS. But HE is ready and willing to forgive our sins when we repent and trust in HIM. Such grace! | This is the best of it all... so realistic

Examples of Persistent Horrible Influence of Ancient Jewish Rubbish

Even if Christianity, Islam etc are removed, many people seem unable to reject Judaism

• Luke O'Farrell 2005 “I didn't take the final step, the step to full recognition of the Jewish problem, until I watched the reaction to Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ. ... I had a lot of sympathy for Mel Gibson as I watched the hysterical campaign against him. ... They didn't like something and they were moving heaven and earth to get it stopped. And what was it they didn't like? A movie about an event at the heart of European art, literature, and culture: the crucifixion of Christ. So here was another obvious conclusion: Jews hate European art, literature, and culture. In other words, Jews hate White civilization and the White race who created it.” (https://big-lies.org/ofarrell-loathing.html)
That extract is from O'Farrell in early 2005, 'in full recognition of the Jewish problem'. But note his own self-contradiction. He thinks the 'crucifixion' is at the heart of European art, literature, and culture.
BUT it IS NOT the central event in Europe. Europe has had countless events, wonderful and tragic, great and small, superficial and deep. But the Jewish thing is not important.

• Richard Dawkins 2006 The God Delusion I think rather oddly has no reference to Gibson's film, although it was causing or being given a lot of publicity. Clinton Richard Dawkins (full name!) can be considered Jew-controlled and naive, or fully aware, being according to his family tree part of the Norman Invasion.

I've written a series of commentaries on Dawkins; I recommend, for horrific impact, Wikipedia's articles, which make it clear that Jewish groups, in secret, co-operate to give each other awards, write books and magazines and TV for each other, praise each other, censor rivals, and of course collect, donate, pay, and contribute to each other. The one subject they always avoid is any reference to Jews. It can be amusing to see them pretending to debate with 'distinguished theologians', old-established professors, media journalists and film-makers, always avoiding such things as Cain and Abel, the 'Chosen People', Jewish racism in both theory and practice. Dawkins as a 'Professor of Public Understanding of Science' was a joke: what did he say about 'genetically modified organisms', for example?

Dawkins gives no consideration whatsoever of the assemblage of the Jewish 'God'—monotheistic, murderously Chosen People-y, Talmudically obsessive and secretive, using Kahals to organise theft, using navies to install colonies, using writing and reading for power, and other things which are moving, I hope, into general awareness.
Dawkins gives a bibliography, some of his old favourites—Darwin and a bit on Wallace, J B S Haldane, Trivers, Lionel Tiger; some 1990s ones, largely humanist and supposed rationalist groups; and more recent, up to 2005, presumably taken from modern American lists of absurd Argument-from-Design types.
From my viewpoint, Dawkins is naive—no Butz on The Hoax of the 20th Century; believes in the 'Holocaust' with support from Atkins the chemist, then-hubby of Susan Greenfield; gullible about Einstein; no idea about 9/11; childish credulity about official stories and the BBC; inability to understand Hitler as a pawn; believes language has a 'deep structure'—and innocent of Jewish frauds in the USA as I hope exposed since then by Miles Mathis. Dawkins has no idea how Jewish money-printing allows them to fund books and magazines and TV and films.
Dawkins is very keen to ascribe religion to some genetic cause (but what about Needham on China as unbelievers?) and goes to great lengths of censorship to hide Jewish parasitism, spread to collaborators, so there was terrific waste from the viewpoint of non-Jews, but wealth for Jews. No wonder his hardback was distribute in supermarkets.

• Kevin MacDonald 2024 responding to VDARE.COM being attacked politically, can think of no better reply than a poem by James Russell Lowell, a sort of US equivalent of Tennyson, a superstitious Victorian. ‘and, behind the dim unknown, Standeth God within the shadows, keeping watch above his own.’ MacDonald at some level perhaps thinks a Jewish phrase presides over Jewish destruction. MacDonald's website has a tragic indifference to quality control of it contributors.

• Nick Griffin and the British National Party knew Jews wanted him to mention Islam disparagingly—but not talk about Jews and banks. He used a Spitfire image to promote 'nationalism'. BUT he was adamant that the BNP was Christian.

• Tony Benn on the Bible as supposedly 'revolutionary' Methodism is almost obsolete now. Benn (1925-2014) was unusual in taking it seriously. He seems to have had a Jewish wife from America, a system of trusts for family wealth, and theoretical support for English people like the Levellers. Here's a little extract, I think by Chris Mullin, a journalist: ‘Christians believe that the Almighty created man to be his children and that the brotherhood of man, under God, is the basis of all social morality, and the divine source of morality for it.’ There's quite a bit on the Levellers, and Cromwell, and the Bible, but nothing on Jews. Dare to be a Daniel (2004) is my review/obituary. It was deleted by Amazon. My poor old dad was taken in by this rubbish.

• Bertrand Russell. For some reason I remembered this passage, on the terrible weight of the past: The Past is an awful God, though he gives Life almost the whole of its haunting beauty. I believe those whose childhood has been spent in America can scarcely conceive the hold which the Past has on us of the Old World: the continuity of life, the weight of tradition, the great eternal procession of youth and age and death, seem to be lost in the bustling approach of the future which dominates American life. And that is one reason why great literature is not produced by your compatriots.
Yes, indeed. But Russell is selective: he memorized and knew lots about Victorian hymns, the Englisn hierarchy, Bible stories in detail, some branches of the Aristocracy. But nothing on the history of the English, Saxons, Danes; nothing of the horrors of Jewish activities, supporting wars, Kahals, extracting huge amounts of money. The moronic old fool had no idea.

• Excommunication in ordinary histories is supposed to have been a holy terror, inspiring supernatural fears of almighty rage by the Jewish enraged 'God'. But very likely it was a threat of loss of money or credit. Just like having assets frozen at the present time. Learn to interpret the truth behind stories, if you can.

• 'Commandments' (if this displays correctly!) start with Jewish-structured nonsense I suppose because it has to be repeated at every possible opportunity:
And God fpake all these words,saying,
2 I am the LORD thy God...
3 Thou shalt have no other Gods before me.
4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any grauen Image, or any likeneffe that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath ...

• Overview expressions—'atheists', 'anti-religious people', 'conservatives', 'blasphemy', 'pagan' are usually simplish hate expressions, used to prevent thought and disallow options.
Most people (I guess) think of 'atheists' in a Jewish way, as opposed to one God, not many gods; a fanatical God, not easy-going; existing vaguely, not non-existent. These sort of Jewish expressions are likely to be be difficult to uproot, because they are insidiously repeated in the same sequence over many years.
I was fascinated with Dr Lorraine Day, who knew a lot about Jewish medical corruption, and even spoke about it, but was a complete sucker for jewish theology (short video). Try not to be caught like her!