based on Jones's 2008 book The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History
Review by Rae West 26 April 2020
Christcuck E Michael Jones tries to negate white identity and confuse people with Talmudic sophistry because he's a grifter, betting on the Mestizo invaders of America boosting Catholic pew numbers and his book sales. He knows Christianity is dying in the white West and so he's clinging to negroids and mestizos to keep the religion alive. TOTAL RACE TRAITOR!!!
Probably at least half of E Michael Jones' followers are pooskin invaders living in the West. They cling to Jones because he gives them an excuse to occupy our ands under the guise of being "brothers in Christ". It's all a big psyop to usher n the Kalergi plan vis-a-vis Christian universalism and race denialism. It's tied in with Duginism, another Eastern variation of the pro-shitskin Christian larp. These people are very dangerous to white well-being.
Martinez' Spanish background gives him insight into misleading references to Spain:–
Hispanomutts ['mutts' from mongrel dogs] cling to Spain because they desperately want to be white, but aren't. They cling to Christianity to ease the pain of being racially inferior. Intentionally trying to blur he lines between race, ethnicity and culture to boost their low self-esteem. Truth is they're lowly mutt-hobbits from Bolivian caves who have produced some of the shittiest, lowest quality countries in the world with the highest murder rates. Half of Latin America is trying to flood into the nearest formerly white country, the USA, to be social parasites on the 150+ million American whites.
Mestizos and the Spanish language: see Instauration of 10 October 1977. The article on page 5, Chicano, is informative.
They try to hijack Spanish culture and Spanish identity. So they can larp ["Live Action Role Playing"] as white when they're not. They all fucking do this. All these mestizo people. You ask them, "What's your background? Where are you from, boy?" And they'll say "I'm Spanish". They all fucking do this. And they're liars. They're not Spanish; maybe 20% max. The look pure Aztec, pure dindu. they are Aztecs and Mayan and Andean. There are some whites—Argentina, Uruguay. There was even a German guy running Paraguay. The fake word Hispanic; it just means they speak fucking Spanish. "Hispanidad!" we're part of the West! No. They're mutt people. Nothing to do with blood. They want us all to be Kalergi rape babies. And they're going to use Christianity. All these brown people do this. They pretend they don't know the difference between white, Spanish, Hispanic and Latino. Latino is a completely made-up word. They don't speak Latin. It's just an attempt to show they're European.
Martinez has a Spanish view of Palestinians:– he recognises that Jews held open the gates of Spanish cities in the Moslem invasion, the masses presumably being related to present-day Palestinians. So he is unenthusiastic about Palestinians.
RW 23 Oct 2021
E Michael Jones in snowshoefilms' Goy Guide to History. Jones's website is culturewars.com
I'll work from that film making numbered notes on Jones, more or less in order of appearance. My numbering; my own comments are indicated.
E. Michael Jones—the 'E' is 'Eugene'—has a bow tie, a clear voice, and occasionally plays what may be an 8-string lute.
He works in South Bend, Indiana, I think from a house of the standard US plywood and cardboard walls and monoculture lawn type, utterly disconnected from traditional Roman Catholicism.
If things go wrong, many people will turn to comforting old beliefs, or so they say; it's even possible Jones may be controlled opposition for Catholics and Jews taken together.
EMJ (has a PhD on Nathaniel Hawthorne) has a number of books to his credit. He seems to have counted himself as a journalist. As is usual, no sales figures are available.
Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control (2000)
The Slaughter of Cities: Urban Renewal as Ethnic Cleansing (2004) is something like a Catholic answer to Jane Jacobs on American cities. Jones seems to take little interest in other countries, or their cities.
The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History (2008), on which this film is based. It is very low on wars and other violence; Jones says, for example, almost nothing on the Thirty-Years' War in Germany, with its huge death-toll of Catholics and Protestants in central Europe.
The Medjugorje Deception (2010). I can't remember having heard of this place previously; appears to be a money-making hoax in Croatia. Not very different from Lourdes, or for that matter the Christianities.
Barren Metal: A History of Capitalism as the Conflict between Labor and Usury (2014). Not labor and capital, note. Jones appears to think 'usury' is the root of concentration of wealth. EMJ it seems discusses gold and the substitution of paper, the weak dollar implying militarism by the USA, and Qadaffi
gold backed dinar by Qadaffi. I haven't seen or read this book, but I expect it doesn't answer all the points.
How Meyer Lansky Took Over The Cincinnati Ballet: And What Four Ballerinas Did About It (2017).
Jewish Privilege (2019). I'll review this book soon. There's something strange about this book; it seems to have been withdrawn, or not exist. My Amazon order has vanished. Please be careful! —I'm told Amazon deleted it. But they're working on reprinting it.
Logos Rising: A History of Ultimate Reality (2020). Yes, he's a Roman Catholic.
All these books are handled by Amazon, a red flag—such books are very unlikely to be allowed to be deeply critical! EMJ's books are often unusually long, and high-priced when out of print. I haven't seen or read any, yet. But dictionaries, encyclopædias, Bibles, and religious works of all kinds exist in vast numbers, so it's easy enough to fill many volumes with material which is difficult to assess. (This link finds my index to Joseph McCabe's short but well-informed articles on Roman Catholicism. Unlike E Michael Jones, McCabe was utterly Jew-naive).
- Kerick Walters
One view of Christianity as an enemy: Christianity is “…the belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.”
One view of Christianity as a friend: Christianity introduced a nationwide network of civilised people, with administrative and pastoral functions, performing yearly festivals and time-honoured sanctified duties, recording important events such as births, marriages, and burials.
Christianity involved wars, slaughter, taxation, propaganda and destruction, land ownership on a huge scale, the spread of alien mental habits.
BUT PLEASE NOTE this article is mainly concerned with a different issue: can Christianity today help awaken people to the terrible menace of 'Jewish' power? Christians do at least have the potential to understand Jewish actions, via 'scripture', if they can throw off the mental chains tying them to 'Jews'. E Michael Jones is trying to do this. (Andrew C Hitchcock ('Synagogue of Satan') and Michael A Hoffman (revisionisthistory.org) are two fellow researchers of similar type. Hoffman hopes Jews by God's grace will see that rabbis are evil slavedrivers—my wording).
• 2 “Because of usury, the wealth has been concentrated in so few hands”. EMJ presumably follows simplified traditional Catholic teaching here. He quotes Aristotle in translation on usury, something like: ‘interest .. applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent’. Unimpressive reasoning, which seems to have been part of the 'controlled opposition', Roman Catholics denying interest to their sheep, while covertly taking Jewish money. BUT
(1) 'Wealth' is largely in the hands of Jews by mechanisms in which 'usury' isn't important. At present, the Federal Reserve system allows Jews to print money; this is enormously more important than scraps of interest.
(2) 'Usury' is not just a question of interest. In one form, 'usury' means the borrower has to repay in full, personally without assistance, or his entire assets are forfeit.
(3) Interest rates obviously make a difference. If it was illegal to charge more than 1%, most people would borrow.
(4) Borrowing is of huge importance to Jews and bankers. Most people can't understand how wars are funded easily. But anything Jews don't want is not funded. Jews in effect hand over paper money, and expect repayment over many years. I doubt if interest is all-important here; pure 'repayment' means they can buy assets; the more governments waste money, the more Jews get. And borrowing goes relatively unnoticed, in expenditure announcements, because it's spread over very many years.
It took me a long time to realise that Lyndon 'Butcher' Johnson wanted planes and helicopters to crash in Vietnam, and endless bombs and bullets to be used, so that non-Jews in the USA could be soaked for money in years to come.
• 3 “... totally unresponsive to the overwhelming majority of American people”. Yes, it is. EMJ leaves you to suppose Catholicism would not be. But he doesn't prove this; he just thinks Catholicism would follow 'the moral law'. He doesn't explain how Catholicism built up its enormous wealth.
• 4 “... Looting of the manufacturing base ...” Like most people, EMJ doesn't distinguish assets such as factories and roads from financial holdings, typically shares. There's now one black African listed as a billionaire. It's incredible that a primitive continent from (say) 1850 could have built up such a sum. No; it's a question of shares (of uncertain value) being handed over. This is the sort of thing easy to loot, but it's not the manufacturing base.
• 5 Note: Censorship by Roman Catholics in their great days vs censorship by Jews in modern times. Explicit censorship by Catholics may have been a huge mistake. Catholic books contain statements of Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur, saying the book is safe to be read by Catholics. Jews have a much less detectable system: books which Jews dislike are pressured into not being printed, not being reviewed, bought up, authors killed, print works arsoned, etc.
It's notable that both 'faiths' are keen to wipe out rivals. Ruthless destruction is common to 'Abrahamic' religions. The library at Alexandria illustrates the point; so do actions against early translations of the Bible; so does the wiping out of south American artefacts by the Spanish. That hostility recurs in Islam, particularly when the Q'uran is considered the only important book.
The 'Abrahamic' faiths have the same ideology when it comes to telling lies: 'pilpul' , 'taqiyya', and what is called 'sophistry' or 'Jesuitry'.
Unfortunately, this is an efficient strategy which perhaps in time will be applied to so-called Jews themselves. It is infinitely saddening to see white Americans whose 'knowledge' is confined to nonsense from the King James Bible and Jewish TV, movies, and press.
• 6 Jones uses lightweight journalistic Jewish categories which have grown to avoid mention of Jews: 'Conservatives' oppose abortion, gay marriage; 'Liberals' may oppose wars in the Middle East. But these feeble categories never mention Jews, and therefore continue to spread intentional confusion.
There are so many examples of these. One example is a stock market 'crash', meaning that dealers in title deeds valued the things lower—often for obvious reasons.
• 7 “Jews are protagonists of anti-logos.” "In the beginning there was logos"—"in a sense logos created us"—"logos is eternal"—"truth is logos". To anyone with any sense of geological and historical time, the idea that a word (in Greek, of about 200 BC) existed at the dawn of time and persisted forever is limiting and dwarf-minded. As is the idea that a word on its own is 'true' or 'good'. These are copied from Jewish scribbles.
In my opinion, EMJ weakens his case with this long-outdated tribal fetishism.
On 'logos', Aristotle's ‘three primary pillars of persuasive speech’ are (1) Ethos (authority, credibility), (2) Pathos (emotion, appeal), and (3) Logos (logic, reason). Note the absence of empirical evidence, which in this instance might mean authenticity of documents, reliability of witnesses, likelihood of fakes, bribery and force. It's easy to see why such issues are discouraged in religious disputes.
Another oddity—for a Roman Catholic—is the emphasis on Greek rather than Roman thought. Roman Law was a considerable achievement for Rome, but, again, it's easy to see why 'Jewish' interlopers would minimise it.
 |  |
The map (right) was drawn from descriptions by Herodotus (500 BC or so). The globe (far right) is from Google; I couldn't remove the clouds (or appearance of clouds), but the Mediterranean should be plain.
The Mediterranean and connected seas (and the Red Sea and Persian Gulf) are protected from the oceans and relatively storm-free. Ships with sails and/or oars allowed transport of large loads, including men—something far more difficult by road at the time. Raw materials, intermediate materials, finished goods, food, people with skills, could be moved.
The area is by far the largest set of inland waterways on earth.
As outlined above, areas with defensive barriers (most of Europe, though not in the east) could genetically have high-specialisation societies.
Areas with open areas (grassland, steppes, possibly deserts) without defensive barriers (eastern territories, but not to their west) could genetically have tribal, inward-looking, aggressive groups unable to spend time on arts, theories, techniques, beauty, speculation.
The spread of Christianity in my view offered successful members land ownership and control of largish areas. It involved groups who were neighbours being led to believe in common new idea(s). Trade routes would be an effective way to spread such ideas. Reading, writing, oratory, and some fluency in languages would be necessary. Probably money would be an essential part of such a package, to offer careers to some of the target populations. It could spread slowly; it certainly did.
Very likely some absurdity would be needed as a badge of credulity, to show willingness to submit. Exemplary violence, or threats, would be needed. Nominal beliefs would not be easily disprovable:– adherents could claim to speak in tongues, but not to fly; they could claim life after death, but not let the undead pay visits; they could claim healing powers, but not for serious diseases; they could claim credit for harvests, but not claim to generate food; they could claim priestly knowledge, but not what's now called science; they could claim darkness fell over the land some time ago, but couldn't claim to do it themselves; they could claim to be special to 'God', but not summon 'God' to show himself; they cold claim specially revealed information, but not supply proof.
I'd suggest something like this is what happened. And the vast Mediterranean, with the surrounding lands, was unique in the globe.
• 9 Jews and Catholics. EMJ has the long-established view of The Catholic church on Jews. EMJ said: “The [Roman] Catholic Church has long experience with Jewish minorities in Christian culture ... for many, many centuries it was the Catholic Church that kept Jewish power in check.”
Well, that's one way of putting it. It seems though that Jews and Christians parcelled out populations between them.
EMJ doesn't seem to realise that Catholicism took many centuries to 'convert' Europe. The last country in Europe to be officially Catholic was, apparently, Lithuania, in the 14th century. (See my piece on Early Christianity). It was not a monolithic process. It seems to have involved Jewish money, with collaborators in countries around the huge inland sea of the Mediterranean being picked off for conversion one by one. Jews and their allies got ports and towns and secret meetings, Christians got the land and tithes and the supposed Power of the Keys.
Both Catholics and Jews have very fixed ideas on the Roman Empire. I'm surprised Catholics don't kiss the Roman fort in Jerusalem along with Jews.
I'd guess EMJ's families once had Catholic church positions and benefits, in exchange for undemanding but literate work among simple country folk, taking money from Jews, who in turn extorted as much as they could from non-Jews.
Slogan time: the Roman Catholic/Jew Double Act Hypothesis says Jews and Roman Catholics secretly acted together in Europe; not necessarily completely—many countries partially co-operate—where Catholics got land and taxes and tithes and donations and pardons; Jews were actively protected by the Church, and extorted what they could for themselves. Jews were controlled opposition for Catholics, and Catholics were controlled opposition for Jews. They covered this up by furious denunciations of each other.
There were complications with aristocrats and monarchs: for example the Russian aristocracies seem to have had Hebrew connections, and offered free education to Jews, and may have co-operated with the Jewish coup in 1917.
Greek Orthodox Christians seem to have not co-operated with Jews. Nor did Russian, Bulgarian, Finnish and other orthodox Christians. All Jewish groups seems to have been hostile to local elites, UNLESS they penetrated them.
Some Jews, in my revisionist opinion, pretended to be kicked out, a cover sob-story, in fact taking their loot to Poland via Jewish towns, in well-established routes, or by river, often leaving behind ruined opponents, or Jewesses with aristocrats, or quasi-professional medical doctors, or court advisors.
Jews went with William the Bastard to invade England. Jews pretended to be kicked out of Spain and Portugal, to go to Holland. Jews secretly married into aristocracies in Poland, Italy, Germany, France. Jews decided to collapse Poland so they could diffuse into eastern Europe. Jews ran African slave ships. Jews established Freemasonry as a secret society, and the new 'revolutionary' U.S.A. was taken over by them. Jews invented the 'French' Revolution, killing many French people. Napoleon invaded the Middle East, with his eyes on Palestine. Disraeli took over Egypt. Jews ruined China with the opium wars, and owned the 'British' fleet. Jews using British armed thugs took over ores in South Africa. In 1913, Jews set up the Federal Reserve, then arranged both world wars, in the process taking over Russia.
EMJ mentions the Medieval slogan, attributed to Pope Gregory, “Sicut judaeis non” which gave Jews special protection. EMJ says between the 5th and 15th centuries “Christians were forbidden to take interest on loans”—he doesn't mention the Jewish claim that their money built Cathedrals. He doesn't point out that Roman Catholicism worked with Jews to keep their monopoly. He doesn't point out that Jewish money centres were near cathedrals. He doesn't point out that strategically-positioned colonies of Jews were given special protection.
EMJ goes into a flurry of evasion: a film (!) A Serious Man, of a rabbi, a representative of Talmudic hate speech, keeping Jews in their place. (Michael A. Hoffman agrees that rabbis are bitter enemies of ordinary Jews; and both Hoffman and Jones hope for conversion—on the face of it a forlorn hope, since it failed in Spain, and seems like expecting people who wrote works of fiction to wholeheartedly believe the works were genuine. Imagine J K Rowling being asked to sincerely believe in 'Potterism'). EMJ wants Jews “waking up to logos ... fullest acceptance to accept baptism and Jesus”. EMJ claims “Positivism says history is meaningless—the only candidate [for explaining history] is the conflict between Jesus Christ and the Jews.”
Note that Jews seem to have compiled Islam and its practices, in the process taking over Moorish Spain and Turkey—and the north-west frontier of India, unmentioned by Jones. Many people are puzzled by 'Converso' or 'Marrano' Jews, and such facts as Castro being a Jew, and there being Jew areas in the West Indies, but most of these puzzles vanish with understanding.
[There are still pictures in the video, for a short time each. These MAY NOT BE JONES'S CHOICE; so here's just one list of several:–
Fed Reserve | Guy de Rothschild | Bernie Madoff | Sheldon Adelson | Michael Milken | Jack Abramoff | Milton Friedman | Max Boot | Cass Sunstein | Time (or Life) with Greenspan et al | Bernanke | Soros | Stanley Fischer | Janet Yellen | Netanyahu]
• 11 In 1230 Nicholas Donin, a Jewish convert to Christianity, translated the Talmud, presumably into Latin, and pressed 35 charges against it—which seems rather few. The Pope was Gregory IX. The Church, says EMJ, had no knowledge of the written Talmud, ‘even though it had existed for 600 years’. This is not very credible; all the earliest Popes were Jews. The Talmud's contents (such as Jesus in Hell in boiling excrement, and Mary being a whore) were shocking, but EMJ says nothing about Talmudic orders to kill even the best goyim, or that non-Jews were cattle, which could mean selective quoting from the Talmud. Anyway; St Raymond of Penufort 'put this book on trial.' It was found guilty and burnt—at least in France—which of course would remove the evidence.
EMJ says Thomas Aquinas was the result—an attempt to convert Jews. He seems to claim Thomism was aimed at Jews.
I'd guess the whole thing was a controlled opposition operation, to save Jews.
• 12 Note on Determinism, Free Will, Prediction. And on Destruction of Documents and History. (Unphilosophical people may ignore the first. In fact, they'll have to!)
Free Will seems to be a mistake. But an understandable one; given that every atom and molecule and wave produces a well-defined next step outcome, there are so many that they defy human interpretation—though huge aggregations, such as planets, are predictable enough. Most people think free will ought to imply human understanding of what will happen.
Both Jews and Catholics have similar attitudes to rivals; both like to erase them. So-called pagans and heathens wrote defences of their beliefs, but Christians, as soon as they were powerful, destroyed these works forever. Jews have the same attitude, destroying towns, people, women, children, animals, and documentary evidence of their activities. Very likely these attitudes come from the same source.
I have to say I found this site depressingly feeble. We have extracts from the paper version: Jones reviewing a series of violent Jew videos or movies or whatever, with Al Pacino earning his crust and apparently taken seriously. Jones doesn't seem to have any idea about WW2 and Jewish lies, though he's absolutely right about Jewish methods. There's a piece on Ireland, which among other things pretends Jew-funded Sinn Fein is a 'left' party. We have a look at a supposed 'visitation by the Mother of God' in Medjugorje, which looks like a skilful money-making scheme. There's a piece on Catholics and Jews relying entirely, so far as I could be bothered to peruse it, on 'scripture' and Papal announcements (in English translation) which have done so much to make the USA a sad and vicious braindead cultural desert. But I suppose they know their market.
Jones gives the story of the Roman Empire, the Masada holdout and defeat, and another 'revolutionary', Simon bar Kochba who holed up in Jerusalem, permitted by Vespasian to start a school. Obviously Christians would like to claim priority; but Hiburim pre-history, as thugs descending on the plains, and as supposed priests or shepherds, suggests real or faked pre-Christian longevity. There has of course been endless debate, forgery, and destruction on the subject. EMJ is sure that Jesus was first, and that he existed. EMJ seems to have no view on the Phoenician idea, that the Mediterranean allowed for shipping of heavy loads, which assisted sailing, oar technology and navigation, permitting trade and wealth, things which were impossible to other areas.
“"What is a Jew?” Jones: “Jewish people are an organised entity, whose constitution is the Talmud, which is anti-logos. Jewish leaders keep the Jewish people captive.” This seems to be taken from La Civiltà Cattolica on the Jewish question. Teasingly, this appears to be (or have been) a Jesuit publication—i.e. possibly a Jewish operation. (Why not see e.g. Miles Mathis on Jesuits?)
• 14 E Michael Jones on Economic Accumulation. Jones says Rome was based on usury; it was "capitalism before there was capitalism". "All the wealth of English aristocrats [presumably Normans] was stolen—centuries of stored labor and acquired wealth... land enclosure... sheep ..." This in my view is hopelessly vague, vaguely like Marx.
Protestants "Appropriated surplus value from labour—Jews lent surplus to labourers". It was "like the US in 1970s with credit cards to give the illusion of having money." "Christianity arose to fill the gap left by the Roman empire ... Christianity understood the value of labor ... you owed your lord labor, or the produce of your labor
... all that wealth stolen by Henry VIII..."
I don't think Jones's comments are anything like precise enough. But perhaps they can be arranged in a more accurately-defined way. There is a place for generalisations; it's obvious that modern techniques are far more productive than ancient techniques, and also obvious that they may be far more destructive, and offer far more scope for effort in many directions. It seems likely that attack is stronger than defence. More precision may lead to insights at present being missed.
• 15 RE-EXAMINING JEWISH EXPULSIONS. — I suggest 'expulsions' are an ex post facto justification for two types of event:–
• (1) When Jews leave more or less in secret, to escape with loot or having achieved some Jewish purpose. Expulsions between 1100 and 1600 'to Poland', the Paradisus Judaeorum may illustrate.
• (2) As an excuse to move to a newly-selected territory. I suspect the abolition of the Venetian Republic gave a reason for Jews to move to the Spanish Netherlands. The expulsion by Isabella may in fact have really been to move Jews. Supposed expulsion by Hitler was used to move Jews to Palestine.
• 16 Jews and Drugs and Alcohol
seem to form a perennial Jewish pattern. EMJ says "something like 18 rum distilleries in Boston were owned by Jews." EMJ states that Jews were licensed as alcohol producers in Poland. Jews seem to have dominated illegal booze production during the USA Prohibition Era—in fact I'd guess they were behind the push against alcohol. Seagrams is very likely in the same tradition. Even Rothschilds vineyards may be part of this. Jews lent money to Ukrainian farmers; if they couldn't repay Jews owned the grain harvest, and converted it to alcohol. If the truth about the Holodomor ever comes out, however, I'd expect this to be based on the causing of famine—judging by Jews in Africa, famine is another favourite trick.
The Opium Wars form another aspect of Jews and drugs. So do the Sacklers and the opium-derived 'Oxycontin'.
• 17 Jews and Aristocrats. For my taste, Miles Mathis has made refreshingly new examinations, including intentional targeting of aristocrats by Jews, suggestions usually starting in Poland, of Jewish crypto-aristocrats such as the Jagiellons, and even Russian aristocracies, suggesting the 'Russian' Revolution partly involved the Yiddish-speaking Tsar.
• 18 Jews and Wars. Both Jews and Catholics have a similar attitude to wars: they like them if they can make money from them. Jones says nothing about the incredibly destructive Thirty Years' War. Discussing wars between Roman Catholics and Protestants, he casually talks of some territories being taken back. I've noticed this with regard to the US invasion of Vietnam; the French had left a wobbly Roman Catholic caste, and Roman Catholics were happy with any amount of destruction. This sort of thing, 'corruption', of course helped propel the Reformation, though, equally of course, events did not follow the ideologues' expressed wishes.
Jones said little about Jewish funding of two or more sides; I'll look for that reviewing his book Jewish Supremacy. Ditto with people who takes sides in wars without the slightest grasp of the issues, such as people asking "Did we win the war in Vietnam?" I hope Jones will go some way to clarifying these issues for ordinary Americans.
• 19 The Reformation and After. EMJ has a long list of Roman Catholic claims, rather reminiscent of Jews' victim pleadings and lies. He says the papacy at the Renaissance (naming Alexander VI) was indeed deep in ‘carnal riches’, but it was reformed through mendicant orders! He says Luther helped the European aristocracy (singular) to steal church property. He thinks this 'began the rise of capitalism, which is state sponsored usury'.
EMJ is fixated on 'usury'; I hope he can learn a more general view of finance. He regards Henry VIII as a 'man of appetites' without stating whether the then-recent Popes were worse or better. He doesn't like the Elizabethan Age, since Catholics were hanged, drawn, and quartered. He doesn't express any surprise that Protestants hung on to the reverence for rabbi Yeshua, the dead male 'Jew'. He doesn't like Francis Drake stealing huge amounts of money from the Spaniards, but has no comment on the Spaniards looting south America.
Jews and Shipping is an issue perhaps derived ultimately from shipping and trade and slave labour in the Mediterranean, expanded after 1500 into the Atlantic, and the rest of the world. The starting-point was the Netherlands—"the delta of the Rhine"—and"20,000 European ships, 15,000 Dutch." The Dutch East Indies followed, then British East Indies. And Cromwell and the 1651 Navigation Acts. EMJ relates economic theories to Jews, which must be correct, even if suppressed: mercantilists, physiocrats, Heinrich Pesch (1854-1926), a Jesuit (EMJ doesn't seem to have checked to see if they were Jews!), up to Milton Friedman and newly invented 'Nobel' prizes for Jews to avoid serious economics. Flags of convenience, and shipping lines seem largely Jewish; Hilaire Belloc remarked on the Jew Balin in Germany.
EMJ doesn't (I think) clearly distinguish between types of colonisation. Some look more permanent than others, though Jews don't seem to think so. Barbados, Jamaica, St Thomas; slaves, sugar, rum; and the first masonic lodge in Newport Rhode Island—and a synagogue. Jews 'chased out of Portugal and Spain'—see my doubts on the accuracy of this claim; maybe it was an excuse to move— were stockholders in the Dutch West Indian Company, and Jews in Brazil dealt in slaves, including warehousing, auctioning, provisioning. Sephardic Jewish names—Lopez, Nunez, Castro, Ferrero—have not been recognised by Americans, and have led to acceptance of extraordinary rubbish, for example about Cuba.
• 20 Jews and north America. EMJ borrows from Kevin MacDonald: Freud, the Institute for Social Research ('Frankfurt School'), Boasian anthropology, ethnic warfare, cultural subversion, The Authoritarian Personality (1950. Copyright the American Jewish Committee). EMJ, at least in that film, said nothing about the huge advantage of having unlimited money, and handing out 'advanced degrees' to unqualified Jews, before, during, and after WW2 (the 'GI bill'), a technique now extended to third worlders. EMJ also mentions porn. And the 'Russian Revolution'
EMJ mentions Congress giving 29 standing ovations to Netanyahu—"told by AIPAC if they don't do it they'll get no money."
And the 'Russian Revolution', with long list of 'Bolshevik' Jews. And the coup of 9/11 and the 'Project for the New American Century' (PNAC), with the Jew Wesley Clark saying things which may be true, or not. And a convoy flying a white flag bombed. And a list of Rothschild-owned central banks.
But there are very worrying omissions, as there are in MacDonald. EMJ is unscientific and has no conception of the harm that race-mixing can do. He doesn't know much about even gross science frauds, as per NASA and coronavirus and nukes. He said nothing in the film on the holohoax or the world wars. Possibly these things are insuperable in E Michael Jones, a huge dam of silt deposited presumably in childhood by Roman Catholicism.
But he did say: “We cant pretend any more. Those days are over.” I'll review his book on Jewish supremacy soon.
RW 26 April 2020