Were the United States, Civilized Society Founded on 'The Seven NoahideLaws'?

According to U.S. Public Law,  102-104 they were.

The text reads:

H.J.Res.104

One Hundred Second Congress of the United States of America

AT THE FIRST SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, the third day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-one

Joint Resolution

To designate March 26, 1991, as `Education Day, U.S.A.'.

Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was founded;

Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws;

'Protocols of Zion' - 2005 "Documentary" About the Strange Rise ofAntisemitism After 9/11

According to IMDB:

'Protocols of Zion' is...

"A documentary about the rise of antisemitism in the USA after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001."

Antisemitism increased after 9/11? Well, that is strange!

I wonder how in the world these things could be connected? If Arab Muslims perpetrated the attacks on 9/11... why is 'antisemitism' (defined by the Jews as an irrational and baseless hatred of Jews) increasing?

"A documentary" with 'all-star' appearances by:

• Kofi Annan - United Nations (archive footage)
• Father Coughlin - Roman Catholic (archive footage)
• Eric Daniels - Prisoner
• Mehdi Eliefifi - Interfaith Activist
• Abraham Foxman - Anti-Defamation League
• Mel Gibson - 'Antisemite' (archive footage)
• Alan Levin - Director's father and 'Holocaust Survivor™'
• Marc Levin - Director, Illusionist
• 'Pastor' John MacArthur - Grace "Church", one of the good (Noahide) "Christians", shows us how wrong the real Christians have been for 2,000 years
• Heidi Markenson - 9 / 11 Widow, husband was Jewish, you are to believe that this proves conclusively that "Jews did 9/11" is wrong
• Mahathir Mohamad - Malaysia's former Prime Minister (archive footage)
• Daniel Pearl - Jewish journalist, supposedly beheaded by Muslims, Levin shows portions of the beheading video, again somehow supposedly proving conclusively that "Jews did 9/11" is wrong (archive footage)
• George Lincoln Rockwell - Founder of the 'American Nazi Party' in 1959 (archive footage)
• Shaun Walker - National Alliance, White Nationalist, seller of WWII era German National Socialist memorabilia.
• Elie Wiesel - Weasel, liar, 'Holocaust Survivor™' (archive footage)

...

Anyway, the other day I was looking for something RE: 9/11 and I stumbled upon this gem. I'm sure most have seen this already... but it was new to me so I'm going to pick at it a bit. Levin did not do as good of a job "debunking" anything as he thinks (or wants us to think) he did.

Here's the page I found it on (Needless to say 'Missing Links' is not found on this large list of 9/11 videos):

http://www.911docs.net/

Anyone who can honestly take a good look look at the events of 9/11 and not come away with the conviction that it was the 'Jewish state', dual-citizen 'Jewish' traitors and a few of their paid Goyish stooge American politicians that did it... must be suspect - if not for outright deception then certainly for a lack of intelligence.

As for the above page... I am very doubtful that the purveyors of the site could have compiled all of those videos without stumbling upon the glaring evidence of 'Jewish' involvement in all of this. It's possible I suppose (if one only listened to Alex Jones or his ilk) but not likely. This is in my opinion intellectual dishonesty at its finest. Why exclude direct evidence?

Anyway... Levin's 'documentary' (an exceedingly lame attempt at damage control) begins with a Black man on the street in New York (who - for all we know Levin could have chucked a C-note) saying:

"All of this stuff that happened here in America - THE JEWS! Here's my point...

Who's Yehudi?

From Wikipedia:

The catchphrase "Who's Yehoodi?" (or, alternatively, "Who's Yehudi?") originated when violinist Yehudi Menuhin was a guest on the popular radio program of Bob Hope, where sidekick Jerry Colonna, apparently finding the name itself humorous, repeatedly asked "Who's Yehudi?"

Colonna continued the gag on later shows even though Menuhin himself was not a guest, turning "Yehudi" into a widely understood late 1930s slang reference for a mysteriously absent person. 

The United States Navy chose the name "Project Yehudi" for an early 1940s precursor to stealth technology.

[caption id="attachment_1258" align="aligncenter" width="323" caption=""I'm Yehudi!""][/caption]

A song with the title and catchphrase "Who's Yehoodi?" was written in 1940 by Bill Seckler and Matt Dennis. It was covered by Kay Kyser and more famously by Cab Calloway. The final stanza of the song is:

The little man who wasn’t there
Said he heard him on the air
No one seems to know from where
But who's Yehoodi?

Both the catchphrase and the song eventually lost all of their original connection with Menuhin. Its double meaning of "Who Is Jewish?" — the word "Yehudi" means "Jew" in the Hebrew language — was emphasized in a short sound film ("soundie") of the song with variant lyrics made in 1943 with singer Lane Truesdale and the Kingsmen, a male trio, in which a "living portrait" of a pejoratively stereotypical Jew with black hat and long beard leers inappropriately at Truesdale's swinging hips before finally announcing "I'm Yehoodi!"

The national swing dance/lindy hop community website Yehoodi derives its name from this catchphrase, as popularized by the Cab Calloway version of the song.

~~~ ~ † ~ ~~~

Wikipedia...

Sneaky they are...

They only list the very last part of the lyrics of the song in Calloway's version... and they make it sound like the song had nothing to do with Jews until Lane Truesdale and the Kingsmen modified it for use in their soundie (shown below in the comments).

But the complete original lyrics went like this:

An Orthodox Perspective on Christian Zionism

By Father Daniel Swires

---

In the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

There is an ancient belief among some people known as “millenarianism” or “chiliasm.” This is the belief that Christ will set up an earthly kingdom and will rule it for a thousand years, usually referred to as the “Millenium.”

This belief actually has its origin in post-exilic Judaism. An anticipation that survived the Babylonian exile was that one day God would restore the kingdom of David under a model anointed king, the Messiah. Even though idealized, this would be an earthly, historical kingdom, and most often its relation to the end-time was not specified.

Another expectation that developed, especially in apocalyptic writings, was that God would directly intervene in the end-time, without any mention of a restoration of the Davidic kingdom.

One way of combining the two expectations was to see two divine interventions: (1) a restoration of an earthly kingdom or period of blissful prosperity to be followed by (2) God’s end-time victory and judgment. Many writers speculated about these two events. They are found in 1^st Enoch, in 4^th Ezra, in 2^nd Baruch, in the Ascension of Isaiah. It is interesting, though, that each of these writers sees a different time frame for these events. It is quite probable, in fact, that most of them never intended to convey exact times. Rather, they were symbolic ways of predicting divine victory over evil forces that are an obstacle to God’s Kingdom or rule.

St. John, then, in writing the Apocalypse, also used the idea of a thousand-year reign of Christ, not to describe a historical, earthly kingdom, but as a way of saying that ultimately, in His own time, God will have the victory. (It is worth reminding ourselves that only one passage in the Apocalypse, consisting of two verses, mentions a thousand-year reign: from this one small passage has come a lot of exaggerated speculation.)

Here We Go Again: 'The Smurfs Are Racist, Antisemites'!

Look! Under that rock! It's... Antisemitism!!

From: Huffpost Entertainment

Smurf Village or Hitler's Berlin? Same thing, posits one new book.

French sociologist and author Antoine Buéno asserts in "Le Petit Livre Bleu," or, "The Little Blue Book," that the seemingly friendly little blue creatures living a mostly idyllic existence are actually packed with racial propaganda and are, "the embodiment of a totalitarian utopia, steeped in Stalinism and Nazism".

The comics, created by Belgian artist Peyo, were first introduced in a Belgian newspaper in 1958; by 1960, they had their own comic strip, and it was off to the races. The animated series, produced by Hanna Barbera, was launched in 1981.



As relayed by Todaysxm.com, Buéno says that Papa Smurf, the leader of the village, is an authoritarian figure, and that their lack of private property and collective-style economy is a clear nod to socialism.

Meanwhile, their enemy seems Jewish:

Benjamin Freedman Speaks on Zionism and the So-called 'Jews'

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.

Have No Fear! It's Foreskin Man!

I was looking something up the other day and I found a story about a comic book called 'Foreskin Man'... Here's a link to the original (so you can go ahead and view both issues in full before you pass judgement):

Foreskin Man

Anyhow... I came to find out that San Francisco has been actively trying to ban the act of infant genital mutilation, which I found hard to believe... and that some within that movement (who call themselves 'Intactivists') had created and published a couple of comic books to help advance their agenda...

One of these comic books deals specifically with the 'Jewish' religious aspect of all of this (obviously because they circumcise their male children) so I posted a link about the story to the Orthodox Christianity.net forum:

'Foreskin Man' Comic Book Attacks Circumcision

I also posted the following images...

Understanding Money

An understanding of the true nature of money is essential for those seeking economic reforms toward the creation of sustainable societies. People today have more erroneous ideas about money than Victorians had about sex, so please read the following with care.

Let's begin with the distinction between "legal tender" money which only the government or its agency, the Bank of Canada in the case of Canada, can create, and the "money" created by private banks-and increasingly by "near banks". If you happen to have a Bank of Canada note, on it you will read the words "This note is legal tender."

These notes, and checks drawn on the Bank of Canada, are the only legal money in Canada. What that means is that if you owe someone $20 and you give him a $20 bill he is paid and if he refuses payment in this form you are absolved of the debt. By contrast, he does not have to accept your check drawn on a private bank, or even a certified check of a private bank. Money issued by the Bank of Canada is sometimes called "Right of Purchase" money to distinguish it from "Promise to Pay" money created by private banks.

While private banks are in effect creating money out of nothing, they are (ostensibly) providing a (seemingly) important service as their "promise to pay money" is for many purposes safer and more convenient to use and store than actual cash. Furthermore, it costs the banks billions of dollars to maintain the payments system that clears your check back to your account and to keep the necessary records. All those nice, or not so nice, people who work in those banks, deciding who gets a loan and what happens if they can't pay have to be paid their salaries. Banks also have to pay phone bills, electricity, heat and so on. What they create is intangible, but at the same time very real. Essentially, the bank is substituting its promise to pay-which is accepted as money-for your promise to pay, which is not.

Today only about 4 percent of the money in circulation in Canada is Bank of Canada legal tender. In other words, 96 percent of our money is created by private banks (the Royal Bank and the Bank of Montreal are the most prevalent in this area). In 1945 the Bank of Canada accounted for 27 percent of our money. At that time the bank rate of interest was only 1.5 percent and the Canadian economy boomed.