Wednesday 29 August 2012

ATTACK ON ISLAM AND MUSLIMS - ENGLISH INDIAN SHIT FOR PUNJABI SHIT!

 BBC ATTACK ON ISLAM AND MUSLIMS - ENGLISH INDIAN SHIT FOR PUNJABI SHIT!


Controversial: The first episode of BBC comedy series Citizen Khan attracted in the region of 200 complaints
Controversial (SHIT): The first episode of BBC comedy series Citizen Khan attracted in the region of 200 complaints

 Heavily made-up girl in a hijab provokes storm of complaints as BBC is accused of insulting Muslims with new sitcom Citizen Khan

  • Viewers say the programme 'takes the mickey out of Islam' and is guilty of 'stereotypes about Asians'
  • Comedy series follows the fortunes of a Muslim community leader
  • BBC1 show was watched by 3.6million viewers
By Paul Revoir
|
It was probably unlikely that a TV (RACIST) comedy series about a Muslim community leader would pass without comment.

And so it was that in the region of 200 (THEY SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED 1 MILLION OR BE DEALT WITH ACCORDINGLY!) complaints were made to the BBC yesterday after it broadcast the first episode of Citizen Khan.

It was claimed that the programme ‘takes the mickey out of Islam(AND IT DOES OR YOU MUST BE EITHER RACISTS OR STUPID NOT TO SEE THAT YOURSELVES!), was guilty of ‘stereotypes about Asians’ and was ‘disrespectful to the Koran’. (WHAT IF THIS WAS DONE TO THE VEDAS, GITA, BIBLE...)

Scroll down to watch the trailer
Provocative: The programme's British Muslim creator Adil Ray (second from left) stands with co-stars Bavna Limbachia (left), Maya Sondhi (second from right) and Shobu Kapoor (right)
Provocative (SHIT): The programme's British Muslim creator Adil Ray (second from left) stands with co-stars Bavna Limbachia (left), Maya Sondhi (second from right) and Shobu Kapoor (right)

One scene that particularly provoked anger was where a heavily-made up girl, Mr Khan’s daughter, rushed to put on a hijab and pretended to be reading the Koran when her father entered.

The six-part series, which aired for the first time on BBC1 on Monday at 10.35pm, has been created by British Muslim Adil Ray, who also plays the lead role.
One viewer wrote on the BBC’s messageboard: ‘This is terrible stereotyping, ignorant and just dreadful.’

Another said: ‘HIGHLY disappointed especially when her father walks in and she dis-respectfully opens the Koran!!’

But others defended the show. One said: ‘People are reading too much in to Citizen Khan, especially the hijab thing, it happens!’ 

Complaints: The series, which follows the fortunes of a Muslim community leader, has been accused of being 'disrespectful to the Koran'
Complaints (200 JOKERS!): The series, which follows the fortunes of a Muslim community leader, has been accused of being 'disrespectful to the Koran'
Family argument: The first episode was about the troubled wedding plans of one of Mr Khan's daughters
(DEGENERATE) Family (SHIT) argument: The first episode was about the troubled wedding plans of one of Mr Khan's daughters

TWITTER REACTS WITH ANGER TO 'INSULTING' BBC COMEDY

@Saduf_I: Caked in makeup, a sleeveless top & tight clothes? A pathetic portrayal of a hijabi. The hijab defines modesty. This isn't it.

@Sana_Choudery: Why did they have to make the hijabi like that? #citizenkhan Insult to all hijabis!

@_Raja_Talat_ : Citizen Khan is very disrespectful.. they crossed the line when they brought religion into it.

@MarwaZiane: Citizen Khan is honestly the dumbest show EVER. It's not even funny & quite disrespectful.

@sayeedahassan1: When will BBC stop with racial sterotyping? Re:citizen khan

@Original_Ted: Citizen Khan is just s***, why try make Islam look like that?

@kalrlz: I was so disgusted with that Citizen Khan sitcom aired yesterday. Shame on the person who thought of such a concept.

@j_sabre: Aaliyah on Citizen Khan? That stereotype does exist, it exists for a reason. Because its true!

@BAPB00: I watched Citizen Khan.. And it is quite rude and i can see why people are getting offended but its alllllll trueee 
The series stars former My Family actor Kris Marshall as the mosque manager and Shobu Kapoor, who is known for her work on EastEnders, who plays Mr Khan’s wife.

The comedy mocks Mr Khan’s self-importance, including his delusions about his position in the community and about his standing in the business world.

Critics have complained that it repeats many stereotypes about British Muslims, with the first episode all about the troubled wedding plans of one of Mr Khan’s daughters, Shazia.

Some claimed while Goodness Gracious Me, the acclaimed BBC2 Asian sketch show, had challenged stereotypes, the new show reinforced them.

The two other writers on the show, Anil Gupta (DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A MUSLIM SOUNDING NAME!) and Richard Pinto (THE OTHER SHIT!), had both worked on Goodness Gracious Me.

A BBC spokesman said: ‘Citizen Khan has made a very positive start, launching successfully with 3.6million viewers (PORN SHIT GETS EVEN MORE THAN THAT!) and a 21.5 per cent share in a late-night slot.

'New comedy always provokes differing reactions from the audience. The characters are comic creations and not meant to be representative of the community as a whole.'

In a recent interview with BBC Breakfast, Mr Ray said the show was allowing the Muslim community to laugh at itself.

He said: 'I think it is a great opportunity, with Mr Khan as a Pakistani Muslim (SHIT) and the character, to take that kind of really rich content and laugh at ourselves and I am a firm believer in that.'

'Disrespectful': Critics have complained that the show repeats many stereotypes about British Muslims
'Disrespectful': (THE DECADENT WEST DOES NOT KNOW WHAT RESPECT MEANS!) Critics have complained that the show repeats many stereotypes about British Muslims
Criticism: One viewer wrote on the BBC's messageboard that the show was 'terrible stereotyping, ignorant and just dreadful'
Criticism: One viewer wrote on the BBC's messageboard that the show was 'terrible stereotyping, ignorant and just dreadful'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2194972/Citizen-Khan-provokes-200-complaints-BBC-accused-insulting-Muslims.html#ixzz24yIChlrs

JEHOVAH SAVE THE QUEEN AND THE BBC!

Tuesday 28 August 2012

Croisade raciste et violente de la laïcité – Maurice n’est pas la Turquie !



CROISADE ET LAÏCITÉ FALSIFIÉE

 Croisade raciste et violente de la laïcité – Maurice n’est pas la Turquie !

L’église catholique remet en question le système westminstérien de Maurice dont les lois sont formulées en langue anglaise. Elle fait pression sur le gouvernement afin que des lois ou concepts antagonistes provenant du système français y soient rajoutées alors que cette démarche ne saurait que causer des problèmes.  Cette démarche est une révolte contre le système existant à Maurice.  Pourquoi pas y ajouter la Shari’a islamique pendant qu’on y est ?  Le mot anglais « secularism », est correctement traduit en français par « sécularisme » et non par « laïcité », un terme d’église, cheval de combat de la franc-maçonnerie.  Maurice post-indépendance n’ayant jamais adopté une religion d’État comme le catholicisme l’était en France, il ne peut donc y avoir de laïcité à Maurice en dépit de cette Croisade.  La laïcité française est une atteinte à la liberté religieuse. 

PM Ramgoolam, Président Purryag et Archevèque Piat

L’Église, c’était l’État jadis
En France prérévolutionnaire, l’Église était l’État. Le roi de France était « le lieutenant de Dieu sur terre ». La Réforme affirma le principe de l’identité entre le souverain et les sujets, selon l’adage « cujus regio, ejus religio » - « telle la religion du prince, telle celle du pays », et les lois régies selon l’adage « une foi, une loi, un roi ». Le roi de France était « le lieutenant de Dieu sur terre ». Ce n’est donc qu’un phénomène purement d’Église, voire de « L’AUTORITÉ CATHOLIQUE », qui, contrairement aux autres lieux de culte, est une institution hiérarchique, La révolution française de 1789 fut provoquée par l’emprise de l’Église catholique sur l’État français avec ses procès de sorcellerie, etc. La philosophie des années lumières européennes [1745-1785] se veut en France, Descartes l’annonçait, essentiellement laïque dans le but de retirer la France de l’ « obscurantisme catholique ». (v. Descartes, Malebranche, Fontenelle, Fénelon, Voltaire, Montesquieu, Diderot, Rousseau, quelle que soit leur diversité). Y a-t-il un ‘obscurantisme hindou’ à Maurice pour que l’église s’abroge le droit de nous proposer un remède anticlérical en son nom ?  L’église est folle à lier car le paradoxe est trop flagrant !

La laïcité et la Turquie
Les agitateurs de la laïcité semblent imiter les Jeunes ‘Turcs’ ou le Comité pour l’Union et le Progrès à l’occidental, et les Vladimir Jabotinsky ne manquent pas à Maurice : l’église catholique, certains médias, etc.  La laïcité, chouchou des Loges judéo maçonniques de France, financées et contrôlées par les Rothschilds, fait des ravages dans le monde des Croyants (surtout des non-Chrétiens et non-Juifs).  C’est une exception française intraduisible en anglais. Les judéo chrétiens ayant réussi à détruire le Khilafah ottoman en pleine décadence, y imposèrent la laïcité judéo maçonnique à la française qui eut pour résultat :

1. L’abolition du Khilaafah
2. L’abolition de l’éducation islamique
3. L’abolition de l’appel à la prière, le Adhaan
4. L’abolition du fez turc
5. L’abolition de la langue arabe et de l’utilisation de son alphabet pour écrire le Turc qui dorénavant fut écrit avec l’alphabet latin
6. La fermeture des écoles islamiques
7. L’assassinat les  érudits musulmans
8. La tentative d’enlever tous les tapis des Masajid (mosquées) et les remplacer par des sièges afin qu’ils ressemblent à des églises
9. La tentative de remplacer le Saint Qur’ân arabe par des traductions en Turc et une liturgie en Turc uniquement (l’église de Maurice dit avoir remplacé la liturgie catholique par le créole et veut la communion en créole ! Jésus est ainsi devenu ZEZI !)  
10. L’emprisonnement, l’instauration de la torture, ou l’exécution sur la place publique de tous ceux qui désobéissaient à la laïcité turque !
11. Le génocide des Arméniens chrétiens, de Grecs, d’Assyriens et d’Araméens

La liste est très longue.

Après avoir fichu le bordel en Turquie, les occidentaux cherchent à faire de même à Maurice qu’ils se servent comme « laboratoire de la laïcité » et des Mauriciens comme cobayes.

Vérité et mensonge
Bien que ce soit le gouvernement à majorité hindouiste qui est visé, ce sont les communautés musulmanes qui seront les victimes sûres de cette croisade, comme en France et d’autres pays de l’Europe !  Dans son homélie à l’occasion de la messe célébrée à l’occasion de la fête de la St-Louis, samedi 25 août 2012, en présence des invités politiques le PM le Dr Navin Ramgoolam, le leader de l’Opposition Paul Bérenger et le Président ‘apolitique’ Kailash Purryag, le Prêtre Jean-Claude Véder ne dit pas la vérité quand il dit que « La République mauricienne repose sur des valeurs de laïcité » (Matinal 27 août 2012). Dire que « Notre société est une société laïque » n’est qu’un autre mensonge qu’on matraque les Mauriciens avec. Les Mauriciens instruits doivent savoir que Maurice a un système westminstérien et ses lois sont formulées en langue anglaise. Des lois antagonistes provenant du système français ne sauraient y être ajoutées sans causer des problèmes en ce qui concerne leurs applications.  La démarche de l’église est une révolte contre le système existant à Maurice ce que le Premier Ministre est sensé de savoir.  La république mauricienne se repose non sur la laïcité, mais sur un arrangement politique pour le partage du pouvoir entre l’ancien Premier Ministre Anerood Jugnauth du MSM et le leader de l’Opposition Paul Bérenger du MMM où le PM serait du MSM (SAJ) et le Président du MMM (Cassam Uteem). Alors que la laïcité française devait extraire la France de « l’obscurantisme catholique », l’Église catholique de Maurice, cherche-t-elle à retirer Maurice du prétendu « obscurantisme hindou » parce que les groupes socio-culturels hindous sont proches du pouvoir ?  Mais les groupes socio-culturels catholiques et juifs, ne sont-ils pas proches du pouvoir en France et aux USA?

Dans la pratique, en France, la laïcité est devenue une arme principalement contre les minorités musulmanes dans plusieurs aspects de leur vie quotidienne. C’est une politique d’intégration et d’assimilation forcées dans la ou les cultures de souche.  Dans quel esprit l’Église catholique se fait-elle le porte-parole d’une telle politique agressive et fasciste à Maurice, dont elle fut elle-même victime jadis, alors que la majorité des Mauriciens est non-catholique, c-a-d, Hindou et Musulmane?

Les Mauriciens témoignent déjà, durant les dernières décennies, les fracas de la politique de la créolité d’importation étrangère (avec laquelle l’église s’identifie) où le Patois Mauricien est épuré de ses apports linguistiques indiennes (hindi, urdu, etc.) pour devenir plus créole catholique à la haïtienne et à la DOM-TOM.

Conclusion
Si l’Église catholique de Maurice veut réellement séparer l’Église de l’État mauricien, elle doit donner l’exemple en cessant sa politique européenne de la créolité mise en œuvre que pour servir les intérêts de l’Europe et non de l’Afrique (ou de l’Inde) en ce qui concerne les langues et cultures ancestrales des Mauriciens d’origine africaine et malgache. Est-il alors surprenant que de nombreux Afro-Mauriciens disent toujours qu’ils souffrent d’une crise identitaire et d’un « malaise créole » ? Elle doit également mettre un terme à sa croisade politique en faveur de la laïcité, également d’importation européenne. L’Église fait clairement de la politique tout en prétendant vouloir séparer la religion de la politique.

Inviter le Premier Ministre et le Président à l’occasion de la messe de la Saint Louis pour leur donner des leçons politiques sur la laïcité, pratiquée avec discrimination et racisme en France, et avec violence en Turquie, est-ce le rôle de l’église catholique ? Mais, Maurice n’est pas la Turquie. « L’ÉTAT C’EST NOUS », et nous sommes là pour établir la vérité comme nous commandent les Saintes Écritures. Ce serait déjà fait si certains médias n’avaient pas fait obstacle, tout comme ils font obstacle concernant la politique de la créolité, en nous refusant la libre expression afin d’informer la nation.

M Rafic Soormally
Londres
28 août 2012

COPIED TO:
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Ghyslaine ROC 
To: "administration@icjm-mu.com" <administration@icjm-mu.com>
Cc: "jeanclaudeveder@icjm-mu.com" <jeanclaudeveder@icjm-mu.com>; "daniellepalmyre@icjm-mu.com" <daniellepalmyre@icjm-mu.com>; "counselling@icjm-mu.com" <counselling@icjm-mu.com>; "jimmyharmon@icjm-mu.com" <jimmyharmon@icjm-mu.com>; "jonathanravat@icjm-mu.com" <jonathanravat@icjm-mu.com>; "gerardsullivan@icjm-mu.com" <gerardsullivan@icjm-mu.com>; "secretariat@pastoralzenn.org" <secretariat@pastoralzenn.org>
Sent: Wednesday, 29 August 2012, 13:22
 
http://muhammad-ali-ben-marcus.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/croisade-raciste-et-violente-de-la.html?showComment=1346242614251#c689009634036626772

La Laïcité falsifiée

01.04.2012


La laïcité falsifiée, c'est quand la droite plus ou moins dure utilise les principes de laïcité pour stigmatiser des pratiques, des religions (en général, pas catholiques ...). Ce faisant, elle bafoue les principes dont elle se réclame.

laïcité,loi 1905,baubérot Vous êtes laïque mais vous ne comprenez plus rien à la laïcité ?

Vous vous demandez si la laïcité est toujours une valeur de gauche ?

Vous vous demandez comment Marine Le pen a-t-elle pu réaliser le hold up du siècle en s’emparant de la laïcité ?

Quand JF Copé s’affirme républicain et laïque vous vous dites, pourquoi pas, mais au fond de vous, il y a qqchose qui vous gène sans bien savoir quoi ?

A force de retourner la question du foulard dans tous les sens, vous ne savez plus si vous êtes pour ou contre le port du foulard dans les lieu publics, dans les administrations, les écoles, dans la rue, dans les avenues, sur les boulevards, à la piscine, dans les boulangeries … et surtout vous ne savez plus si vous êtes pour ou contre une loi d’interdiction …

Bref, vous vous étonnez qu’on se réfère à la loi de 1905 pour justifier tout et son contraire …

laïcité,loi 1905,baubérotEt bien écoutez Jean Baubérot ! Il était, Mercredi 28 Mars 2012, l'invité de Voix Contre Oreille.

Jean Baubérot est Professeur émérite de la chaire histoire et sociologie de la laicité à l’école pratique des hautes études, Membre de la commission Stasi en 2004. Auteur de nombreux ouvrages sur le sujet dont :

La laïcité expliquée à M Sarkozy, 2008 chez Albin Michel.

La Laïcité falsifiée, La Découverte, 2012.

Après avoir lu ce livre on a envie de lui dire MERCI ! Merci d''éclairer notre lanterne, merci de remettre à l'endroit un débat qui marche sur la tête ...

laïcité,loi 1905,baubérot



The Decline of the Secular State: Merging Faith and Politics in Britain

Paper ID: 72 Last updated: 18/05/2011 14:07:56
Criteria: bullet Impact:  Likelihood:  Controversy:  Where: Domestic/National When: 11-20yrs How Fast: Years
0 people thought this paper expanded their thinking bullet
Keywords: bullet religion, values, society, domestic, church, secular, community, education, creationism, state

 

Summary bullet

While political leaders are often privately religious, it is controversial in the United Kingdom to invoke religion for political gain. However, a widespread rise in religious sentiment could shift the balance and make explicitly spiritual politics popular at the ballot box. A blurring of faith and politics could have far-reaching implications for policy, notably, in the areas of social care and welfare, social cohesion and education.

 

Discussion bullet

Religion has played a significant influence on politics throughout history; internationallly, throughout the 21st century, this influence seems to have continued to a noticeable degree. [1] A variety of political conflicts in the 21st century have been shaped by both religion and politics, [2] for instance, as seen in the political developments in Nigeria, Sri Lanka and Afghanistan, among others.

In the UK, religion has not disappeared from political discourse. Former Scottish Labour Secretary Jim Murphy stated that faith values were at the heart of the Labour party, [2] contrasting with former Labour party communications chief Alastair Campbell who stated, ‘We don’t do God’. [3] [4] David Cameron has discussed his personal Christian faith publicly, [3] [4] and Liberal-democratic leader Nick Clegg stated he did not believe in God, but retained respect for those with faith. [3] Faith groups also gained political attention in climate change discussions. Prior to Copenhagen, Prince Philip formally approved religious groups’ plans to cut emissions and promote a green agenda. [5]
The above instances reveal that there is space for religion to be discussed in British politics. If there were a widespread renewal in feelings of religiosity and piety in wider society, faith could come to influence the politics of society as a whole. [6] Religious leaders could become more politically focused and entrench a meaningful influence over policy by setting the political agenda. [7] In the UK, the British Social Attitudes 26th Report finds that people in the UK who are religious also tend to have more conservative social attitudes than the non-religious, such as towards homosexual sex or women’s and men’s roles in the household. [8] Depending on the nature of the religion embraced, their input could lead to the government adopting more socially conservative policies. [9]

Depending on the balance and nature of religious affiliations of those in political power, the blurring of religion and politics could affect social cohesion. On one hand, social cohesion could be consolidated around shared values [10] of tolerance or ‘brotherly love’, as found in religious texts. In this case, religion in politics could be a uniting factor, as differences such as in culture or socioeconomic status could become less divisive. However, on the other hand, religious groups could instead pursue policies that increase differences. Competition between religious communities could increase as they seek more followers, influence and money could result in segregation and division. [11] Voting patterns could change as people increasingly vote based on religious affiliations and recommendations. Rather than be dominated by secular values, religious value systems could gain a foothold in policy disputes. 


 

Implications bullet

A greater influence of religion in UK politics could have several implications for domestic and international political relations, social welfare provision and education policy, among other areas. Those with religious identifications could seek political representation that explicitly endorses their religious values, [12] resulting in a shift among politicians to more obviously supporting religious viewpoints on policy issues. The nature of the resulting political platforms could then depend on the relative influence of different religious viewpoints. For instance, religious viewpoints could motivate politicians to promote tolerance of differences, such as through multi-faith groups, or they could feel threatened by difference and seek to maintain strict control over social, political and/or religious behaviour.

In foreign policy, an increasingly religious state in the UK could affect decisions about involvement in foreign conflicts, and could affect the nature of relations with both religious and secular states. States linked to other religious groups could change their attitudes towards Britain, either seeing faith as a common ground or becoming hostile on the basis of religious differences.

Religion in politics also could strengthen or threaten social cohesion. Christian and Muslim faith communities are becoming increasingly diverse in the UK, particularly in urban centres, with growing numbers of ethnically diverse congregations. [13] As people find common ground in religion, ethnic differences may become less important, changing how people relate to each other and understand difference.

However, religion could also become a source of political and social contention. There could be an increase in disillusionment and tensions as atheists or minority religious groups feel disempowered against the religious bodies with more direct influence over policy. The UK National Office for Statistics has found that levels of unemployment and perceptions of ill-health follow some religious demarcation lines. For instance, in 2004 unemployment was three times higher among Muslim men than Christian men. If these differences become more pronounced and correspond with perceived political inequalities, they could lead to conflict. [14] As well, as religious leaders gain greater influence in politics, they could increasingly seek to maintain control over society, becoming less concerned with social well-being and more concerned with maintaining influence, as can be seen to have occurred historically in Britain following the civil war.

Social welfare policy could be affected if the state relies more completely on religious networks to provide social care and welfare services. If budgetary pressures increase or there is continued economic recession, religious groups could take over state responsibility for social welfare provisions from the public sector. This could ensure continued provisions amidst budgetary and economic pressures, while also posing a risk that social care could become more concentrated within religious groups or within the communities surrounding religious institutions. Religious groups providing social welfare could result in new inequalities in the distribution of social care, in line with religious affiliations.

Finally, religion has already entered into debates about education policy and faith schools in the UK. [15] In February 2010, the House of Commons passed a bill allowing faith schools to teach personal, social, health and economic lessons in ways reflecting religious beliefs and values. [16] In 2009, faith schools were estimated to constitute one-third of schools in the UK. [8] If religion and politics become increasingly intertwined, practicing faith schools could obtain increased financial and political support to the disadvantage of other schools, thus playing a more direct role in shaping the curriculum and teaching.

 

Early indicators bullet

Increased religious observance, particularly among different ethnic groups.
A more vocal and prominent role of strongly associated religious lobby groups and political parties.
Growing strength of faith-based initiatives in the United States (US) and increasing international outreach activities .
Increase in number of/support for faith schools.
Increased British involvement in international conflicts with religious dimensions.
Increased frequency of references to personal religious values and beliefs among UK political party leaders.

 

Drivers & Inhibitors bullet

Drivers:
Growing economic instability and frustration of opportunity.
Search for community and social belonging.
Individual and religious institutional resistance to secularism.
The use of religion to make sense of environmental and economic uncertainties.
Increased societal awareness of the role of religion in politics internationally.
Increased support for religious groups through immigration and transnational faith networks.

Inhibitors:
Entrenched secularism stemming from the enlightenment.
Declining church attendance in the UK.
Multiculturalism and beliefs in the value of a pluralist society.
Popular trust in science and rational reasoning.
Growing separation of religion and politics in other western countries.
Rising perceptions in the UK of religion as a cause of political conflict.

 

Parallels & Precedents bullet

Large established evangelical movements and centres, such as in the US. [17] [18]
The long standing association of religion with political parties in other countries, such as in American domestic politics, and with Christian Democrat parties across Europe. [19] [20]
The binding of religion and the state throughout history, and in modern Muslim dominated and Islamic states (e.g. The Islamic Republic of Iran).
The Christian Peoples Alliance in the UK. [21]
Creation of The Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (CFBCI) at the US Department of Labor. [15]
Christian parties in mainland Europe.

 

Social Bookmarking bullet

 http://www.sigmascan.org/Live/Issue/ViewIssue/72

  http://www.defimedia.info/defi-quotidien/dq-actualites/item/17935-suite-%C3%A0-la-d%C3%A9claration-du-p%C3%A8re-v%C3%A9der-%E2%80%93-l%E2%80%99%C3%A9tat-et-la-religion-deux-entit%C3%A9s-indissociables-?.html

Wednesday, 29 August 2012 11:45
Suite à la déclaration du père Véder – L’État et la religion, deux entités indissociables ? Featured
Written by  Patrick Hilbert 
Le Père Véder plaide pour un rôle apolitique mais social des religions
Politique et religion. Un cocktail explosif ou un mal nécessaire ? Le père Véder a relancé le débat sur la laïcité. Les religieux d’autres confessions donnent leurs opinions.

Faut-il que la religion se mêle de politique et vice versa ? Ou faut-il une démarcation claire et nette entre ces deux sujets ? Le père Jean-Claude Véder a relancé l’éternel débat sur la question de la laïcité, samedi, lors de la messe de la Saint-Louis. S’il plaide pour un rôle apolitique mais social des religions, tout le monde ne partage pas cet avis.

« Si un politicien vient avec un discours politique, nous ne pouvons l’en empêcher. Que des politiciens participent à des activités religieuses, on le constate partout dans le monde, y compris dans les pays avancés », argue Veerendra Ramdhun, président de la Hindu House. Il précise toutefois que son association socioculturelle n’accepte pas que les membres de son exécutif fassent de la politique active. « Si quelqu’un recherche des avantages d’un ministre, il doit démissionner de l’exécutif. »

Il est cependant un fait qu’à Maurice la proximité entre politiciens et religieux est indéniable. Il suffit de voir le nombre de membres d’associations sociocul­turelles qui siègent au conseil d’administration des compagnies d’Etat ou d’entités paraétatiques. Certains parviennent même à occuper la présidence du conseil d’administration de tel ou tel organisme.

Pour le politicien, le religieux représente un apport de voix certain au moment des élections. C’est l’homme providentiel qui ouvre la porte aux réservoirs de votes. «C’est une fausse perception des choses, estime Bissoon Mungroo, président de la Mauritius Sanatan Dharma Mandir Sangathan. « Les associations socioculturelles ne représentent qu’elles-mêmes. Il n’est pas vrai de dire qu’elles parlent au nom de telle ou telle communauté. Quand aux mots d’ordre, ils n’ont guère d’effet. Cela ne marche pas dans la réalité.»

Pour Bissoon Mungroo, « chaque votant a déjà fait son opinion et ce n’est pas un quelconque mot d’ordre qui va changer cela ». Il admet cependant que la religion et la politique sont de bons alliés, « dans le contexte mauricien, c’est dans notre sang ».

Somduth Dulthumun, président de la Mauritius Sanatan Dharma Temples Federation, préfère botter en touche. « Je fais ce que ma religion me permet. Le religieux peut assumer des responsabilités sociales. »

Religion et débat civil
Pour le père Véder, le pape Benoît XVI ouvre un chemin intéressant : « le rôle de la religion dans le débat civil n’est pas de donner des normes ni des directives, mais plutôt d’aider à purifier la raison et de l’éclairer pour qu’elle puisse découvrir des principes moraux objectifs ». La religion peut aussi agir comme chien de garde. «  La raison privée de l’apport de la religion laisserait place au totalitarisme, le nazisme en est un exemple. La religion privée de l’apport de la raison tomberait dans le fondamentalisme. Notre pays n’en a pas besoin », devait-il déclarer samedi en s’exprimant au nom de l’Église sur cette question.

Enfin, pour le prêtre, il faut « différencier les religions qui veulent travailler pour une société moderne et laïque et les groupuscules sectaires (que l’on retrouve dans toutes les religions) qui veulent utiliser les politiciens pour un gain quelconque. Nos hommes et femmes politiques auront-ils le courage et la liberté de conscience pour séparer le politique du religieux ? L’enjeu est de taille. Il mérite qu’on puisse en parler dans toutes les religions, de manière dépassionnée, et de l’aborder chez nos parlemen­taires et les hommes et les femmes politiques.»

Nissar Ramtoola, président de la Jummah Mosque, indique pour sa part que la politique et islam sont indissociables. Il rappelle d’ailleurs que le prophète Mahomet a lié islam et politique en offrant la Constitution de Médine et en établissant le tout premier État islamique sous la forme d’une fédération.


«En outre, le prophète a conclu une alliance politique avec d’autres communautés et entités politiques, qui existaient à l’époque, sous la forme de tribus ».

«Toutefois, ceux qui confondent la politique et les partis politiques, la propagande, les élections et la lutent pour le pouvoir font erreur. La politique, c’est l’art de gérer les affaires de l’État pour plaire à Dieu dans l’intérêt suprême de ses créatures…»

 

Dans un pays multiculturel, avec une forte présence des grandes religions, chacune ses spécificités, il sera bien difficile de donner une définition uniforme d’État laïc.



7s7

Un prof devenu femme à la rentrée des classes

Sauvegarder

édité par: Sophie Lapy
4/09/12 - 09h16  Source: afp.com 
  © photo news.
Un enseignant du lycée Saint-Stanislas, parti en juin en vacances avec son identité d'homme, devait rentrer mardi devant ses élèves avec sa nouvelle identité de femme, selon une information de Presse-Océan mardi confirmée par l'AFP auprès de la direction de l'enseignement catholique.
 
Ce professeur de Technologie et sciences industrielles, âgé d'une quarantaine d'année, est revenu lundi pour sa pré-rentrée sous sa nouvelle apparence féminine, avec un prénom féminin, en attendant de subir dans les prochains mois une intervention chirurgicale pour véritablement changer de sexe.

Ce changement s'est fait en plein accord et concertation avec la direction diocésaine de l'enseignement catholique à Nantes, a confirmé à l'AFP Didier Groleau, adjoint au directeur diocésain de l'enseignement catholique de Loire-Atlantique, également interviewé par Presse-Océan. L'enseignant "nous avait prévenu de son choix l'année dernière. (...) Nous l'avons invité à prévenir le rectorat qui est son employeur. Nous avons ensuite organisé, avec son accord, l'information auprès des autres enseignants et des parents d'élèves et élèves concernés, qui ne sont qu'une petite vingtaine", a déclaré M. Groleau à Presse-Océan.

Ainsi, des courriers ont été envoyés aux familles et le service psychologique de l'enseignement catholique a été avisé. Il s'agit du deuxième cas en deux ans, de changement de sexe d'un professeur en Loire-Atlantique, et dans les deux cas, dans l'enseignement privé.

En septembre 2010 c'était un professeur de physique du collège-lycée Saint-Dominique de Saint-Herblain qui avait sauté le pas. Selon M. Groleau, dans cet autre établissement, depuis lors, "tout se passe tout à fait normalement sans le moindre problème".

Monday 27 August 2012

CROISADES CRÉOLES - PYROMANE BENJAMIN MOUTOU!


Mensonges, propagande et propos incendiaires de Benjamin Moutou, un vrai pyromane ?
par M. Rafic Soormally

Il existe un groupement raciste  d’une ethnie de fabrication créole qui cherche à faire la pluie et le beau temps dans le pays depuis la chute de l’emprise directe de l’église catholique blanche et de l’administration britannique sur les affaires de la néo-colonie. En dépit de tous les efforts de quelques rarissimes intellectuels non soumis parmi nous, nous voyons maintenant devoir faire face à une nouvelle identité, un monstre de fabrication créole, le « CRÉOLE INDIEN » !     

Historian Benjamin Moutou and some Jewish owners of slave ships

Mais, je tiens à répondre, au plus pressant, ici, à deux mensonges et à une incitation à la haine contre les « Arabes », qui dans l’esprit de l’occident tout entier, veut dire Musulmans !  Quand on s’attaque aux Musulmans et à l’Islam à Maurice comme ailleurs, surtout l’église catholique ou les fanatiques chrétiens, on leur balance (aux Musulmans) toujours « les Arabes » à la tronche comme étant les plus grands esclavagistes ou meurtriers de l’histoire.  Bien sûr, ce n’est fondé sur aucune histoire digne de ce nom, et n’est que de la propagande pure et raciste anti-arabe et anti-musulmane!  Quand Maurice produira-t-elle un seul historien intègre ?

Dans son interview publiée dans l’Express du 7 décembre 2011, Benjamin Moutou admet que « l’Eglise, Rome, la Chrétienté sont responsables » pour le « Code noir », que « les esclaves seront baptisés dans le Christ dans les huit jours suivant leur arrivée » et que le Pape lui-même avait donné « sa bénédiction pour l’institution de l’esclavage », mais tente de justifier cette pratique raciste et inhumaine en prétendant que c’était « à une époque où les choses étaient différentes ». Mais, par ailleurs, il dit que « Selon l’UNESCO, il y a plus de 80 millions qui sont morts dans les razzias, soit à travers les marchands arabes ou dans les tribus ». Selon lui, il y aurait eu aussi un ‘Code noir arabe’, mais ne cite pas le nom arabe de cette pratique qui aurait existé selon ses sources.  Soucieux de citer les chiffres d’un ‘Holocauste arabe’ envers les Africains noirs (alors que l’Afrique comporte des centaines de millions de Musulmans dans de nombreux pays, il n’en cite aucun pour les millions d’Africains jetés par-dessus bord et réduits en esclavage par les Européens, et dont près d’un tiers fut musulman. La vérité est qu’il n’y a jamais eu de « traite négrière » à l’arabe ou musulmane sauf dans l’esprit tordu et raciste de certains.  Il n’existe aucun équivalent dans la pratique musulmane du concept d’esclavage à l’européenne.  Tout humain est né libre et musulman !  Mais, sans aucune honte, et montrant une méconnaissance totale de l’Islam et de l’histoire musulmane, cet historien nous cache le fait que les Arabes Musulmans étaient les premiers à libérer les esclaves, et à abolir tout racisme de couleurs et de races.  Bilal, l’Africain noir, fut le premier muezzin (celui qui fait l’appel à la prière en Islam) était un esclave libéré par les Arabes musulmans, et non par les Arabes juifs ou chrétiens.  La population dite arabe comportait des Noirs, des Blancs et des gens de toutes les couleurs ! 

Quand dans l’Express du 17 août 2012, l’ancien Président Cassam Uteem dit que les esclaves « furent achetés et vendus dans des lieux publics, enchaînés et traités comme des animaux que l’on mène à l’abattoir. Ils n’avaient droit ni à leurs opinions ni à s’opposer à quoi que ce soit : ils n’avaient qu’à obéir à leurs maîtres faute de quoi ils recevaient le fouet ou avaient les oreilles tranchées. Ils furent dépouillés de tout, de leurs noms et on leur en donna de nouveaux selon l’humeur du maître de leur religion », parlait-il des Arabes ou des Musulmans ?

Holocaustes perpétrés par l’Occident et non par des « marchands arabes » !
En Occident, l’esclavage des « Nêgres » (le Code noir) était une INSTITUTION légalement pratiquée et soutenue par les églises et les gouvernements et non pratiquée par certains ‘marchands européens’. Maintenant, quant aux « 80 millions morts [..] à travers les marchands arabes ou dans les tribus », que Monsieur Moutou nous fournisse les éléments qui prouvent indiscutablement que les Musulmans, arabes ou non, sont coupables de la mort de ces 80 millions de personnes, et nous dire de quels « marchands arabes » il s’agit, de quelle religion, de combien ils furent, et de quelles nationalités et religions étaient ces morts.  L’UNESCO, c’est vague !  Que dit l’UNESCO sur les attaques du 11 septembre 2001, de Londres du 7 juillet 2005, de Mumbai ou encore des holocaustes ou massacres de Musulmans : Kashmir, Assam, Gujerat, Maurice, Afghanistan, Iran, Irak, Soudan, Somalie, Algérie, Philippines, Birmanie, Indonésie, etc., ou encore des Musulmans tués lors de la « Traite négrière », du colonialisme et de l’impérialisme des occidentaux et de l’église catholique ?  Souvent, j’ai lu dans la presse raciste de Maurice ce genre d’attaques ou d’insinuations contre les Arabes et les Musulmans, qui sont de toute évidence des INCITATIONS À LA HAINE!

Le racisme contre les noms
En s’attaquant au Best Loser System, clairement dans le but de marginaliser la minorité musulmane, Benjamin Moutou dit « qu’à Maurice, tout se joue dans le nom et le prénom des gens » (Interview par Annick Daniella Rivet, Défi Quotidien, 20 juin 2012), tout en affirmant que le prénom dira si un candidat est « Musulman, Hindou ou Chrétien ». Clairement, Monsieur Moutou déforme même l’histoire des noms, car les Rafics, les Bachirs, les Khalils peuvent bien être des Chrétiens ou Musulmans (ou Juifs). Monsieur Moutou aurait du parler de son propre prénom « Benjamin », qui est normalement un nom sémite (israélite ou juif biblique adopté par les églises européennes), comme Benjamin Disraeli et Benjamin Netanyahu. Ce n’est certainement pas un prénom « créole », car les noms dits créoles n’existent pas à moins de vouloir désigner les Blancs nés dans les esclavageries coloniales. Contrairement aux idées préconçues de Monsieur Moutou sur le nom des autres, pour moi, le nom Benjamin Moutou ne me renseigne pas sur son appartenance religieuse, son type biologique ou ses préférences politiques !  Les renégats ne changent pas de nom même quand ils quittent l’église et partent en Croisade contre Dieu et la religion !  Par contre, en lisant ses écrits, nous voyons suinter la politique juifiste et raciste chez le Sioniste Benjamin Moutou, et qui est responsable pour l’holocauste des Palestiniens (et pire encore).  Cela crève les yeux.

L’holocauste rebaptisé la Shoah
Benjamin Moutou ne demande pas non plus, que le Code noir soit reconnu en tant que Code de la Shoah ou de l’Holocauste des Africains. Sa timidité est désarmante quand il dit « Si on a demandé pardon pour la Shoah qui a tué 6,2 millions de juifs, pourquoi ne peut-on pas le faire pour l’esclavage ? », en avançant un autre faux chiffre de 6,2 millions de Juifs (européens ashkénazes et majoritairement non Sémites) tout en cachant le fait que les entrepreneurs et banquiers juifs finançaient la « Traite négrière » et qu’ils étaient même propriétaires des bateaux transporteurs d’esclaves et aussi propriétaires d’esclaves. (v. Jews and the Black Holocaust).

Il a été archi prouvé, y compris par certains Juifs eux-mêmes, que l’holocauste des Six Millions de Juifs ainsi que les chambres à gaz homicides, ne sont que pures fabrications -  notamment par le Professeur juif français Roger Dommergue Polacco de Menasce et le Juif David Coleman, par Fred Leuchter, le professeur Robert Faurisson, Michael Hoffman Jr II, le Professeur Fréderick Toben, David Irving, Arthur R. Butz, Ernest Zundel, etc.  Au lieu d’effectuer des pèlerinages en Palestine occupée (Israël !) ou à Rome, ces menteurs créolistes et autres feraient mieux de visiter Auschwitz-Birkenau et voir sur place que même la plaque indiquant la mort de 4 millions de « people » a été remplacée par une plaque indiquant « environ 1,5 million » de « men, women and children » de tués, mais les Polonais furent forcés par le tout puissant Lobby juif d’y ajouter à côté du chiffre d’environ 1,5 million la mention « mainly Jews ». Mais, attendez, le tout dernier chiffre en date émis par le gouvernement polonais est celui D’UN MILLION SEULEMENT!  Alors, le chiffre de 6,2 millions avancés par Monsieur Moutou, n’est-ce pas que de la propagande sioniste, et un colossal mensonge ?

 Benjamin Moutou, qu’a-t-il fait des 60 millions de morts durant la Deuxième Guerre Mondiale après que les Juifs européens aient déclaré la Guerre à l’Allemagne en 1933 (« Judea declares war on Germany ») ? Ont-ils jamais demandé pardon ? Alors, la Shoah juive !


Pardon et réparations
À quoi cela sert de demander pardon pour l’esclavage ou les holocaustes (1) Que ce soit par l’Eglise catholique quand on veut toujours être ‘créoles’ pour prouver leur attachement éternel à l’Europe et l’homme blanc, et que l’église ‘blanche’ n’est surtout pas disposée à compenser qui que ce soit ; (2) ou « En Australie, l’ancien Premier ministre, Kevin Rudd » qui « avait officiellement demandé pardon à la communauté des aborigènes » (Benjamin Moutou, l’Express du 07/12/2011), alors que leur pays reste toujours sous occupation des racistes européens et leurs primogénitures. En Australie, les Blancs ont toujours des « indigènes » !  Je croyais qu’ils étaient tous des Australiens !

Mensonges et insultes
En résumé, il y a des « pyromanes » mauriciens comme Benjamin Moutou qui ont le droit de mentir sur l’histoire, la vraie, d’insulter les Musulmans et inciter à la haine des Arabes sous prétexte de défendre leur agenda politique créoliste raciste, fanatique et fasciste !

Ø      Imposer la laïcité française intolérante et raciste
Ø      Interdire, à Maurice, les noms à connotation religieuse
Ø      Abolir le Best Loser System pour marginaliser la minorité musulmane
Ø      Promouvoir la Shoah juive et ignorer les Shoahs des Musulmans (ou des autres !)
Ø      Prétendre que la souffrance des Africains est supérieure à celle des Indiens
Ø      Imposer le « mauricianisme », une autre fabrication raciste pour détruire les cultures indiennes, hindouistes et islamiques
Ø      Imposer la « discrimination positive », c’est-à-dire, le RACISME À L’ENVERS !
Ø      Instaurer une justice discriminatoire qui favorise les Créoles
Ø      Imposer (depuis janvier 2012) la « langue créole » (avec une graphie difforme importée de Haïti et des Départements outremer français) d’un groupe bien spécifique à l’école et sur la nation par ‘coup d’état’, alors que le créoliste Dr Carpooran admet que cette langue parlée est « non-épanouie » et  « non-diversifiée » (Défi Quotidien 6 août 2012)
Ø      Propager le mensonge et la déception

Pourquoi ne pas imiter Martin Luther King Jr et revendiquer aussi une « Terre Promise » pour les dits créoles et non pour les dits Coulis ?

Truth and Justice Commission
Comment Benjamin Moutou s’est-il vu octroyer le poste de Commissaire de la Commission Justice et Vérité « pour donner une vraie version de l’histoire de l’esclavage et des immigrants indiens » (le Mauricien 24 août 2011) à Maurice est surprenant vu ses idées préconçues, ses préjugés et mensonges flagrants. Benjamin Moutou a toujours été un historien très biaisé en faveur des dits créoles. Dans son interview publié dans le Défi Quotidien du 24 août 2012, nous lisons ceci : «  Benjamin Moutou : « Pour une discrimination positive pour les créoles »  ». La discrimination positive est le racisme à l’envers et elle est une invention européenne pratiquée en faveur des Chrétiens noirs et des homosexuels. Le gouvernement mauricien est à majorité indienne, non responsable pour le Code noir que Monsieur Moutou mentionne.   De plus, il n’a jamais pu définir  ce que c’est qu’un créole.  Peut importe leurs prénoms, il existe bien des Musulmans or des Hindous de descendances créoles à Maurice.  « Qui dit créole dit esclave noir », selon l’adage, et le racisme n’est qu’au tournant.

Conclusion
Le problème soi-disant créole n’est pas un problème d’État car (la majorité) des dits descendants des créoles (voire esclaves) ont choisi de préserver l’appellation créole (européen ou rattachée à l’Europe et surtout la France)  ayant rejeté leurs origines africaines et malgaches alors que l’esclavage fut aboli il y a de cela 177 ans. Par ailleurs, les descendants des Indiens (voire « travailleurs engagés ») n’ont pas préservé l’appellation péjorative que les Britanniques leur avaient donnée : Coulis !  Seuls les Indiens concernés revendiquent leurs origines indiennes car ils ne souffrent d’aucune crise identitaire. Environ 70% de la population mauricienne sont d’origine indienne et les Indiens n’ont jamais été propriétaires d’esclaves. Le Masjid et le Mandir (lieux de culte et non des institutions) n’étaient pas impliqués dans la Traite négrière, un phénomène purement européen et l’institution de l’église catholique.

Benjamin Moutou fausse l’histoire en citant des termes politiques et propagandistes comme ‘CRÉOLE INDIEN’, par exemple. Personnellement, je récuse ce terme raciste que je trouve tout à fait insultant. Où a-t-il trouvé ce soi-disant ‘Indo-Créole’ même s’il y avait aussi des esclaves indiens originaires de Pondichéry et des autres comptoirs français de l’Inde ? Il joue sur les mots quand cela l’arrange ! Ce ne sont que des termes politiques racistes inventés de toutes pièces ou empruntés à d’autres usages pour insulter les Indo-Mauriciens. Benjamin Moutou doit présenter des excuses aux Mauriciens d’origine indienne pour sa tentative de créolisation qui réduit les Indiens au statut de descendants d’esclaves en crise pour leur faire plaisir.  Mais, les Indiens ne sont pas dupes car ils ont leurs identités propres ! Les propos de Benjamain Moutou sont incendiaires et risquent à la longue de causer l’irréparable.

M Rafic Soormally
Londres
26 août 2012

cc. Hon. PM Dr Navin Ramgoolam


FROM "THE FRENCH CONNECTION" 
Daryl Bradford Smith

Who Brought the Slaves to America?

By Walter White Jr., 1968
The story of the slaves in America begins with Christopher Columbus. His voyage to America was not financed by Queen Isabella, but by Luis de Santangelo, who advanced the sum of 17,000 ducats (about 5,000 pounds-today equal to 50,000 pounds) to finance the voyage, which began on August 3, 1492. 

Columbus was accompanied by five 'maranos' (Jews who had foresworn their religion and supposedly became Catholics), Luis de Torres, interpreter, Marco, the surgeon, Bemal, the physician, Alonzo de la Calle and Gabriel Sanchez (1).

Gabriel Sanchez, abetted by the other four Jews, sold Columbus on the idea of capturing 500 Indians and selling them as slaves in Seville, Spain, which was done. Columbus did not receive any of the money from the sale of the slaves, but he became the victim of a conspiracy fostered by Bemal, the ship's doctor. He, Columbus, suffered injustice and imprisonment as his reward. Betrayed by the five maranos (Jews) whom he had trusted and helped. This, ironically, was the beginning of slavery in the Americas (2).

The Jews were expelled from Spain on August 2, 1492, and from Portugal in 1497. Many of these Jews emigrated to Holland, where they set up the Dutch West Indies Company to exploit the new world.
In 1654, the first Jew, Jacob Barsimson, emigrated from Holland to New Amsterdam (New York) and in the next decade many more followed him, settling along the East Coast, principally in New Amsterdam and Newport, Rhode Island. They were prevented by ordinances issued by Governor Peter Stuyvesant from engaging in the domestic economy, so they quickly discovered that the territory inhabited by the Indians would be a fertile field. There were no laws preventing the Jews from trading with the Indians.

The first Jew to begin trading with the Indians was Hayman Levy, who imported cheap glass beads, textiles, earrings, armbands and other cheap adornments from Holland which were traded for valuable fur pelts. Hayman Levy was soon joined by Jews Nicholas Lowe and Joseph Simon. Lowe conceived the idea of trading rum and whiskey to the Indians and set up a distillery in Newport, where these two liquors were produced. Within a short time there were 22 distilleries in Newport, all of them owned by Jews, manufacturing and distributing 'firewater.' The story of the debauching of the Indians with its resultant massacres of the early settlers, is a dramatic story in itself.

It is essential to comprehend the seaport of Newport. It is important in order to recognize the Jewish share in the Slave commerce. There was a period when it was commonly referred to as 'The Jewish Newport-World center of Slave Commerce.' All together, at this time, there were in North America six Jewish communities: Newport, Charleston, New York, Philadelphia, Richmond, and Savanuah. There were also many other Jews, scattered over the entire East Coast. Although New York held first place in the settlers of Jews in North America, Newport held second place.

New York was also the main source of Kosher meat, supplying the North American settlements, then the West Indies and also South America. Now Newport took over! Newport also became the great trade harbour of the East Coast of North America. There, vessels from other ports met, to exchange commodities. Newport, as previously mentioned, represented the foremost place in the commerce of rum, whiskey, and liquor dealings. And to conclude, it finally became the Main Center of Slave dealings. It was from this port that the ships left on their way across the ocean, to gather their black human cargo and then derive great sums of money in exchange for them.

An authentic, contemporary report, based on authority, indicates that of 128 Slave ships, for instance, unloaded in Charleston, within one year, their "Cargo," 120 of these were undersigned by Jews from Newport and Charleston by their own name. About the rest of them, one can surmise, although they were entered as Boston (1), Norfolk (2), and Baltimore (4), their real owners were similarly the Jewish slave dealers from Newport and Charleston.

One is able to assess the Jewish share in the entire dealings of the Newport, if one considers the undertaking of a lone Jew, the Portuguese, Aaron Lopez, who plays an important part in the over-all story of the Jews and Slavery.

Aaron Lopez
Aaron Lopez
Concerning the entire commerce of the Colonies, and the later State of Rhode Island, (which included Newport) bills of lading, concessions, receipts, and port clearances carried the signature name of the Jew Aaron Lopez (3). This all took place during the years 1726 to 1774. He had therefore more than 50% of all dealings under his personal control for almost fifty years. Aside from that there were other ships which he owned, but sailed under other names. 
 In the year 1749, the first Masonic Lodge was established. Ninety percent of the members of this first lodge, fourteen all told, were Jews. And one knows that only so-called "prominent" individuals were accepted. Twenty years later, the second Masonic Lodge, "King David," was established. It is a fact that all of these members were Jews.

In the meantime, the Jewish influence in Newport had reached such proportions that President George Washington decided to pay them a visit. Upon his appearance, both of the Masonic Lodges sent an emissary—a Jew named Moses Seixas (4) —to approach the President with a petition, in which the Jews of Newport stated: "If you will permit the children of Abraham to approach you with a request, to tell you that we honor you, and feel an alliance...... and then: "Until the present time the valuable rights of a free citizen have been withheld. However, now we see a new government coming into being based on the Majesty of the people, a government, not sanctioning any bigotry nor persecution of the Jew, rather, to concede the freedom of thought, which each shares, whatever Nation or Language, as a part of the great Government machine."

It is necessary at this point to consider the disclosures as to who in reality obtained this legendary freedom in America at the founding of the Union. To be sure, the province became independent and severed from the English Jurisdiction. However, we can see from the petition (5) which Moses Seixas offered President Washington in the name of the Jews of Newport, that it was not in reality this type of freedom which they had in mind. They were merely concerned about themselves, and their "own civil rights," which had been withheld. Therefore, following the Revolutionary War, the Jews were accorded equal rights, and freed of all restrictions! And the Negroes? The Revolutionary War not withstanding, they remained Slaves! In the year 1750, one sixth of the population in New York was Negroid, and proportionately in the Southern parts of the Country, they outnumbered the others, but the proclamation of Freedom did not touch them. More of this later.

Let us scrutinize at close range this dismal handwork of the Jews which gave them influence and power, so we may comprehend the Slave Trade; for there has been so much written since that time by the zealous Jewish writers, that at the present, long since removed, it might appear natural, for the time element has a tendency to make things nebulous.

Let us follow the journey of one ship, owned by a slave dealer, Aaron Lopez, which had made many trips to the African coast.

For instance, in the month of May, 1752, the ship "Abigail" was equipped with about 9,000 gallons of rum, a great supply of iron foot and hand restraints, pistols, powder, sabres, and a lot of worthless tin ornaments, and under the command of the Jewish Captain Freedman, sailed off for Africa. There were but two Mates and six sailors comprising the crew. Three and one half months later they landed on the African Coast. Meantime, there had been constructed an African Agency, by the Jewish slave dealers, who had corralled them, and prepared them for sale. This organization reaching deep into Africa, had many ramifications, including the heads of groups, villages, etc. This method to win over these leaders for the Jewish slave trade, was similar to' that which the Jews had employed with the Indians.

At first, they presented them with rum, and soon found themselves in an alcoholic delirium. When the gold dust, and ivory supply was exhausted, they were induced to sell their descendants. At first their wives, and then their youths. Then they began warfare among each other, plotted and developed mostly by the Jews, and if they captured prisoners, these, too, were exchanged for rum, ammunitions and weapons to the Jews', using them for further campaigns to capture more Negroes. The captured Blacks were linked two by two and driven through the medieval forests to the coast. These painful treks required weeks, and some of them frequently became ill, and felled by exhaustion, and many unable to rise even though the bull whip was applied as an encourager. They were left to die and were devoured by wild beasts. It was not unusual to see the bones of the dead laying in the tropical sun, a sad and gruesome reminder to those who would later on tread this path.

It has been calculated that for each Negro who withstood the rigors of this wandering, there still had to be the long voyage across the ocean, before they reached American soil, nine out of ten died! And when one considers that there was a yearly exodus of ONE MILLION black slaves, then, and only then, can one assess the tremendous and extensive exodus of the African people. At present Africa is thinly populated, not alone due to the 1,000,000 literally dragged out of huts, but due to the five to nine million who never reached their destination. Once they reached the coast, the black slaves were driven together, and restraints were applied to hold them until the next transport ship docked. The agents—many of them Jews—who represented the Chief, then began the deal with the Captain. Each Negro was personally presented to him. But the captains had learned to become suspicious. The Black one must move his fingers, arms, legs, and the entire body to insure that there were not any fractures. Even the teeth were examined. If a tooth was lacking, it lowered the price. Most of the Jew agents knew how to treat sick Negroes with chemicals in order to sell them as sound. Each Negro was valued at about 100 gallons of rum, 100 pounds of gun powder, or in cash between 18 to 20 dollars. The notations of a captain inform us that on September 5, 1763, one Negro brought as much as 200 gallons of rum, due to the bidding among the agents, raising the price.

Women under 25 years, pregnant or not, resulted in the same measure, if they were well and comely. Any over 25 years lost 25%.
And here it should be stated that those Negroes, purchased free at the African Coast for 20 to 40 dollars, were then resold by the same slave dealers in America for two thousand dollars.

This gives one an idea how the Jews managed to acquire tremendous fortunes. Following the bargaining, Captain Freedman paid the bill, either in merchandise or cash. He also recalled some advice which his Jewish employers gave him as he left Newport for Africa: "Pour as much water into the rum as you possibly can." In this manner the Negro chiefs were cheated two times by the Newport Jews!

The next step was to shave the hair from the head of the acquired slaves. Then they were bound and branded with a hot iron, either on the back, or the hip, identifying them with their owners. Now the Negro slave was indeed the property of the Jewish purchaser. If he fled he could be identified. Following this procedure, there was a farewell celebration. There were instances when entire families were brought out of the interior, to the coast, and then separated through the buyer—the father going with one ship, the sons and daughters into another. These "farewell" celebrations were usually packed with emotion, tears, drama and sadness. There was little joy, if ever.

The following day the transport began from land to ship. It was managed by taking four to six Negroes at one time in rowboats to the ship. Of course the slave dealers were aware of how the Negro loved his homeland above all else, and could only be induced by great force to leave it. So, some of the Negroes would leap into the water. But here the overseers were prepared with sharp dogs and retrieved the fleeing men. Other Negroes preferred drowning. What came aboard alive was immediately undressed. Here was another opportunity to jump overboard and reach land and freedom. But the slave dealers were pitiless and ruthless; they were merely concerned to get their Black cargo to America with the least loss. Therefore, an escapee, recaptured, had both of his legs cut off before the eyes of the remaining Negroes in order to restore "Order."
On board the ship the Negroes were separated into three groups. The men were placed in one part of the ship. The women into another, whereby the lusty Captain arranged it so that the youngest, mostly comely Negro women were accessible to him.

The children remained on deck, covered with a cloth in bad weather. In this fashion the slave ship proceeded on its journey to America. In the main, the ships were too small, and not at all suitable to transport people. They were barely equipped to transport animals, which the Negroes were likened to. In one space, one meter high (39 inches) these unfortunate creatures were placed into a horizontal position, pressed close together. Mostly they were chained together. In this position they had to remain for three months, until the end of the voyage. Rarely was there a captain who sympathized with them or evidenced any feelings whatever for these pitiable creatures. Occasionally they would be taken in groups to the deck for fresh air, shackled in irons.

Somehow, these Negroes were expendable and endured much. On occasion, one of them became insane, killing the other one pressed closely to him. They also had their fingernails closely cut so they could not tear at each other's flesh. The most horrible battles came about among the men, to acquire a centimeter or two for a comfortable position. It was then that the slave overseer stepped in with his bullwhip. The unimaginable, horrible, human excrement in which these slaves had to endure these trips is impossible to describe.

In the women's quarters the same conditions prevailed. Women gave birth to children lying pressed closely together. The younger Negro women were constantly raped by the captain and the crew resulting, thereby, a new type of Mulatto as they came to America.

In Virginia, or in any of the other Southern port cities, the slaves were transferred to the land and immediately sold. A regular auction would take place, following the method of purchase in Africa. The highest bidder obtained the "Ware." In many cases—due to the indescribable filth—some of the Blacks became ill during the sea voyage from Africa to America. They became unemployable. In such cases the captain accepted any price. It was rare to dispose of them for no one wanted to purchase a sick Negro. Therefore, it is not surprising that the Jewish, unethical doctor senses a new form of revenue. They purchased the sick Negro for a small sum, then treated him, and sold him for a large sum. On occasion, the captain would be left with a few Negroes for whom he did not find a buyer. In that case he returned to Newport and sold them to the Jews for cheap domestic help. In other cases, the Jew owner of the ships took them over. This is why the city of Newport and its surroundings had 4,697 black slaves in the year 1756.

Slavery did not extend to the North. Moreover, in many of the North American Colonies, slavery was strictly forbidden. Georgia came under discussion; likewise also Philadelphia. And again it was the Jews who managed a loophole, which had given them freedom following the Revolutionary War, so, they schemed to make slave trading legal.

One had but to read the names of those persons living in Philadelphia who were requesting the elimination of existing laws regarding the slavery dealing. They were: the Jews Sandiford, Lay, Woolman, Solomon, and Benezet. That explained it all! But let us turn back to the slave ship "Abigail." Its captain—and we are reading from his ship's books—did a profitable business. He sold all of his Negroes in Virginia, invested some of the money in tobacco, rice, sugar, and cotton, and went on to Newport where he deposited his wares.
We learn from Captain Freedman's books that the "Abigail" was a small ship and could only accommodate 56 people. He managed, however, to clear from one trip 6,621 dollars, which he in turn delievered to the owner of the ship: one Aaron Lopez.

The staggering amounts of money acquired by the Jew ship owners and slavery dealers is better illustrated when we emphasize the many years in which this sale and purchase of human flesh was practiced. Prior to 1661, all of the Colonies had laws prohibiting slavery. It was in that year that the Jews had become powerful enough to bring about the repeal of these laws, and slavery began in earnest.

The Jews had discovered that the Colonists needed additional manpower to help them clear their fields for planting, helping in the construction of dwellings, and in general to help with harvesting their crops. This was particularly true of the Southern states which we have referred to earlier. The Southerners had vast tracts of rich soil suitable for rice, cotton, tobacco and cane sugar. At first, impoverished Europeans were recruited. English prison doors were opened and finally prisoners ot war from England and Holland were brought to the Colonies, made to work until they had paid the cost of transporting them by ship and then set free.
It doesn't take a Jew long to discover what his brothers are doing, so a group of Jews settled in Charleston, South Carolina, where they set up distilleries for making rum and whiskey. They, too, learned that they could trade with the natives on the West Coast of Africa for ivory, and several ships were purchased and sent to Africa, trading the usual glass beads and other cheap ornaments for ivory, which, however, took up but little space on board ship. It occurred to these Jew traders that they could supply the plantations in the South with 'Black ivory', needed under swampy and malarial conditions which European labor could not tolerate without sickness, and which would not only fill the holds of their ships, but bring enormous profits. (This same group had earlier tried selling Indians as slaves but they found them completely unsatisfactory, as the Indians would not tolerate this type of work.) Thus, another segment of the slave trading had become active and profitable out of Charleston, South Carolina. Several shiploads of Black slaves were sent by the Dutch West Indies Company to Manhattan.

During this time there were a number of plantation owners established in the West Indies and two Jews, Eyrger and SayUer, with strong Rothschild connections in Spain, formed an agency called ASIENTO, which later operated in Holland and England. It was through these connections that Jews in Holland and England exerted influence and both of these connections cooperated in helping the Jews provide Black Slaves for the Colonists.

With the yearly capture and transport of one million Black slaves it is not difficult to figure that from 1661 to 1774 (one hundred thirteen years) approximately one hundred ten million slaves had been removed from their native land. About ten percent, or ELEVEN MILLION, Black slaves reached the Colonies alive.

We have talked about the small ship "Abigail" which could accommodate only 56 people and yet the profits per trip were enormous, with little or no investment. There were many other ships but we will concentrate here on only a few, such as the "La Fortuna," "Hannah," "Sally" or the "Venue" which made very great profits. The "La Fortuna," by the way, transported approximately 217 slaves on each trip. The owner cleared not less than $41,438.00 from such a trip. These were dollars which the slave dealers 'could keep'. And these were dollars of value which would buy a great deal in return.

When one considers that the Jews of Newport owned about 300 slave-transporting ships, active without interruption, docking at Newport-Africa, Charleston, (or Virginia), one can approximate the tremendous earnings which made their way to Jewish ship owners. Indeed, the Jews admit, that of the 600 ships, leaving Newport harbor into all the world, "at least half of them" went their way to Africa, and we know what these ships going to Africa "were seeking."

The fact that Aaron Lopez had control of over more than half of the combined deals in the Colonies of Rhode Island, with Newport, is well-known. The well-known Rabbi Morris A. Gutstein, in his book, The Story of the Jews in Newport, attempts to remove these facts, maintaining that there is not any evidence that the Jews were connected with the Slave Trade. It is therefore imperative to prove that the Jew was indeed connected with the slave trading. Especially so since this rabbi insists they had made great contributions, and how very "blessed" their residence became for the city of Newport. Surely Morris A. Gutstein will grant us permission to present the facts which he was unable to find.

Turning to one report of the Chamber of Commerce of the "Rhode Island Colony" in the year 1764, we find, for instance, that in the year 1723 "a few merchants in Newport" devised the idea to send their Newport rum to the coast of Africa. It developed into such a great export that in the matter of a few years "several thousand (hogsheads)" of rum went that way. To which purpose did this rum serve?

The Carnegie Institute in Washington, D.C., presents and makes public authentic documents entitled "Documents Illustrative of the History of the Slave Trade in America". We wish to present a few facts from this particular collection of original documents and scrutinize them at closer range, and not at all to prove the heretofore Rabbi Morris A. Gutstein in error. In this collection of the first American institute of learning, we evaluate the capital "Rhode Island" which contributed the main share of the public documentation regarding the Slave trading. Here we find documented the recipients of the numerous shipping letters, also letters to the Slave dealers, and correspondence to the ship's captains, who were about 15% Jews, living in Newport. Among these we find, for instance, the Jew Isaac Elizar. He wrote a letter to Captain Christopher Champlin on February 6, 1763, saying he would like to be an agent for a load of slaves. Then follows the Jew Abraham Pereira Mendez, and one of the main slave dealers, Jacob Rod Rivera-the father-in-law of Aaron Lopez. And then there is Aaron Lopez, himself, and many, many more other Jews. Although we have considered Aaron Lopez several times, the size of this documented treatise limits us, and we cannot describe all of the writers concerned in the Slavery Dealing correspondence, their names and the special dates—rather, we wish to study the documentation of the 'Carnegie Institute' itself—keeping Aaron Lopez in mind. We wish to see what in the main this Jew was pursuing and what his business was. This is due to the fact that Rabbi Morris A. Gutstein presents him as a "lofty and fine civilian of Newport" who was so generous and even "made contributions to welfare."

In a great number of published original unprejudiced writings in the Carnegie Institute, we find that Aaron Lopez pursued a tremendous commerce in rum with the African coast in exchange for slaves. These irrefutable facts are as follows:
  • June 22, 1764, a letter by Captain William Stead to Aaron Lopez.
  • July 22, 1765, a letter by Aaron Lopez to Captain Nathaniel Briggs.
  • July 22, 1765, a letter to Captain Abraham All.
  • February 4, 1766, a letter to Captain William Stead by Aaron Lopez.
  • March 7, 1766, a letter by Captain William Stead to Aaron Lopez.
  • February 20, 1766, a letter by Aaron Lopez to Captain William Stead.
  • October 8, 1766, a letter by Captain William Stead to Aaron Lopez.
  • February 9, 1767, a letter by Captain William Stead to Aaron Lopez.
Aside from that, there are similar statements out of letters by Aaron Lopez in the original, which he directed to the Captains Henry Cruger, David Mill, Henry White, Thomas Dolbeare, and William Moore. Indeed, one letter by Captain William Moore to Aaron Lopez & Company, is particularly revealing, and of special mention at this point. We wish to remark on the main contents of this letter in which Captain Moore writes: "I wish to advise you that your ship 'Ann' docked here night before last with 112 slaves, consisting of 35 men, 16 large youths, 21 small boys, 29 women, 2 grown girls, 9 small girls, and I assure you this is such a one rumcargo (rum in exchange for slaves) which I have not yet encountered, among the entire group there may be five to which one could take exception."

The date of the above letter was November 27, 1773. We have not yet concluded, because of lack of space, the excerpts and grateful compilations made available by the "Carnegie Institute."
On November 29, 1767, the Jew Abraham Pereira Mendez—who had been cheated by one of his kind—from Charleston, where he had journeyed to better control his Black cargo, wrote Aaron Lopez at Newport:
"These Negroes, which Captain Abraham All delivered to me, were in such poor condition due to the poor transportation, that I was forced to sell 8 boys and girls for a mere 27 (pounds), 2 other for 45 (pounds) and two women each for 35 (pounds)." (No doubt, English money)
Abraham Pereia Mendez was very angry and accused Aaron Lopez of "cheating" him. This letter delineates to us that this generous and fine citizen of Newport was insatiable in his greed for money. This is what caused the Rabbi Morris A. Gutstein to present this nobleman, Aaron Lopez, to pursue his objectionable methods. Negroes presented to him but a commodity.

In all of the letters which the "Carnegie Institute" published, it stresses the lack of human sympathy for the poor Negro slaves. This lack of feeling and compassion for the abused and pitiful Blacks at the hands of their Jewish dealers, can be read out of the diary of a captain who manned a ship owned by Aaron Lopez. The entrees concern a trip from the African Coast to Charleston. Moreover, they are authentic documents, published by the "Camegie Institute" in Washington, D.C., calling attention to an organization which had heretofore known little or nothing about; neither had they encountered further publicity in books or newspapers. Therefore, it is not to be wondered at that the facts of the leading share of American Jews in the slave trade could be pointed out as a monopoly, and unknown to the non-Jewish Americans, including the great masses of people all over the world. Others, however, acquainted with the facts, had good reason to remain painfully quiet.
The captain of another ship, the "Othello" among other things, makes the following entries in his diary:
  • February 6th: One man drowned in the process of loading.
  • March 18th: Two women went overboard because they had not been locked up.
  • April 6th: One man dead with Flux. (No doubt an illness.)
  • April 13th: One woman dead with Flux.
  • May 7th: One man dead with Flux.
  • June 16th: One man dead by Kap Henry.
  • June 21st: One man dead by James Fluss.
  • July 5th: One woman dead with fever.
  • July 6th: One girl, sick for two months, died.
This vessel was on its way for five months. What terrible and unspeakable suffering was the lot of these millions of Blacks, who were torn with brutal force from their friendly African huts, jammed together, like animals below deck, and then sold with less concern than selling a head of cattle. Small wonder that ten of them died, being purchased for just a few dollars, and then sold for the sum of $2,000.00.

Some Negroes managed, through insurrection, to gain control of one or another ship and turned it around, with full sails, toward their African home. The crew of one slave ship, "Three Friends" for instance, tortured their Black cargo in such a manner that the Negroes reciprocated in a bloody rebellion. They killed the captain and the entire crew and threw the dead overboard. They then sailed back to Africa where they had barely escaped their hard-won freedom.

A similar fate struck the slave ship "Amistad". Among the slaves was the son of an enemy tribal chief. Once the ship was under way, he schemed with his compatriots to attack the ship's crew. Following a bloody battle, they managed to capture the captain. The Negro prince forced him to turn back to Africa, then in the evening, under cover of darkness, he changed his course, zigzagged for months untfl he came close to the American coast, and encountered a government ship. This took place in the year 1839 when slave trading was already forbidden and illegal.

The Negro slaves were freed and the captain punished. These sea voyages were not without danger when they had Black cargo, which accounts for the fact that the Jews most always engaged non-Jewish captains.
The slave dealers preferred to remain in their offices and counted the fat winnings following each journey, such as Aaron Lopez, who left his heirs one of the largest fortunes in the New England era.

When reviewing the documented facts contained herein, it is important that one always remembers that it was a lucky captain who did not lose more than 9 out of 19 slaves on the return trip.

It is equally important to remember that these poor Black creatures had to lie in human excrement for the entire trip. Think of it! No wonder sickness and disease took such a high toll. Remember the figures: approximately one hundred ten million Black people were captured and removed from their homeland in Africa. Only ELEVEN MILLION of these Black slaves reached the Colonies alive.

And the Jews still talk about the Germans and Hitler and how six million Jews were exterminated during World War II. This is the greatest LIE ever perpetrated upon the people of the world-whereas the story of the poor Black slaves is documented. Documented with TRUTH. The evidence is still available for the people of the world to see.

The "Carnegie Institute of Technology" is located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

As this document is distributed, eventually reaching the hands of the Jew, the evidence will probably be removed and destroyed until finally all documentation is removed which is damaging to the Jew. The Jews have been engaged in this practice for centuries. Truth, however—truth which bears fact cannot remain covered or hidden forever—and more truths are being disclosed by those of us who intend to free America of these sons of the devil—the Jews.

The published documentation contained herein was obtained from the Carnegie Institute of Learning, presently known as "The Carnegie Institute of Technology."

The following is a partial of the slave ships owned by Jews:
  • 'Abigail' by Aaron Lopez.
  • Moses Levy and Jacob Franks.
  • 'Crown' by Isaac Levy and Nathan Simpson.
  • 'Nassau'by Moses Levy.
  • 'Four Sisters' by Moses Levy.
  • 'Anne & Eliza' by Justus Bosch and John Abrams.
  • 'Prudent Betty' by Henry Cruger and Jacob Phoenix.
  • 'Hester' by Mordecai and David Gomez.
  • 'Elizabeth' by David and Mordecai Gomez.
  • 'Antigua' by Nathan Marston and Abram Lyell.
  • 'Betsy'by Wm. DeWoolf.
  • 'PoUy'by James DeWoolf.
  • 'White Horse' by Jan de Sweevts.
  • 'Expedition' by John and Jacob Rosevelt.
  • 'Charlotte' by Moses and Sam Levy and Jacob Franks.
  • 'Caracoa' by Moses and Sam Levy.
Slave-runners, also owned by Jews were the 'La Fortuna', the 'Hannah', the 'Sally', and the 'Venue'.
Some of the Jews of Newport and Charleston who were engaged in the distillery or slavery trade, or both, were: Isaac Gomez, Hayman Levy, Jacob Malhado, Naphtaly Myers, David Hart, Joseph Jacobs, Moses Ben Franks, Moses Gomez, Isaac Dias, Benjamin Levy, David Jeshuvum, Jacob Pinto, Jacob Turk, Daniel Gomez, James Lucana, Jan de Sweevts, Felix (cha-cha) de Souza (known as the 'Prince of Slavers' and second only to Aaron Lopez), Simeon Potter, Isaac Elizer, Jacob Rod, Jacol) Itodrigues Rivera, Haym Isaac Carregal, Abraham Touro, Moses Hays, Moses Lopez, Judah Touro, Abrtham Mendes and Abraham All.
Of some 600 ships leaving the port of Newport, more than 300 were engaged in the slave trade. A typical cargo of one ship, 'La Fortuna', was 217 slaves which cost about $4,300 and sold for $41,438.00.

Only about 10% of the slave ship captains were Jews, not wanting to subject themselves to the rigors of the 6-month journey. They preferred to stay at home and continue their distillery operations which continued to supply rum and whiskey to the Indians for many years at a very great profit.

REFERENCES DOCUMENTATION
Elizabeth Donnan, 4 Vols. Documents Illustrative of the History of the Slave Trade to America, Washington, D.C., 1930-1935.
"Carnegie Institute of Technology," Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Adventures of an African Slaver, by Malcolm Cowley, 1928. Published by Albert and Charles Bori, New York.
The Story of the Jews in Newport, by Rabbi Morris A. Gutstein.
The Jew Discovem America, by Cthmar Krainz.
The International Jew, by Henry Ford.
The Plot Against the Church, by Maurice Pinay.
Protocol for World Conquest, 1956, by The Central Conference of American Rabbis.
Behind Communism, by Frank L. Britton

We cannot undertake even this brief history of the modern Jew without taking note of a phenomenon which his confounded Gentile societies for twenty centuries. This is the ability of the Jewish people to collectively retain their identity despite centuries of exposure to Christian civilization. To any student of Judaism, or to the Jews themselves, this phenomenon is partly explained by the fact that Judaism is neither mainly a religion, nor mainly a raciai matter, nor yet is it simply a matter of nationality. Rather it is all three, it is a kind of trinity. Judaism is best described as a nationality built on the twin pillars of race and religion. All this is closely related to another aspect of Judaism, namely the persecution myth. Since first appearing in history, we find the Jews propagating the idea that they are an abused and persecuted people, and this idea is, and has always been, central in Jewish thinking. The myth of persecution is the adhesive and cement of Judaism: without it Jews would have long since ceased to exist, their racial-religious nationality notwithstanding.
It is a fact that the Jewish people have suffered numerous hardships in the course of their history, but this is true of other peoples too. The chief difference is that the Jews have kept score. We Must repeat—they have kept score—they have made a tradition of persecution.

A casual slaughter of thousands of Chriestians is remembered by no one in 50 years, but a disability visited upon a few Jews is preserved forever in Jewish histories. And they tell their woes not only to themselves, but to a sympathetic world as well.
End of original essay

The following references are addes by the editor to facilitate your research.
  1. Ref. The International Jew by Henry Ford
  2. Adventures of an African Slaver by Malcolm Cowley, 1928, p.11
  3. Aaron Lopez and his family arrived in Newport around 1750 from New York via Lisbon, Portugal. Lopez arrived in the new world as a member of a "Marrano" family with the Christian name of "Don Duarte Lopez." Lopez immediately dropped his Christian name and took the Hebrew name of Aaron and submitted to ritual circumcision. Within twenty years, Lopez owned or had interests in over 80 sailing vessels. Lopez was also one of the original founders and contributors of Touro Synagogue and by the end of his life was recognized as one of the "Merchant Princes" of early America. His merchant trading interests included rum, molasses, dry goods and African slaves.
  4. Moses Levy and the Moses Seixas families both lived in one of Newport's large colonial mansions at 29 Touro Street. Seixas was a founding member of the nation's oldest Jewish Masonic Lodge (King David in Newport) and Grand Master of the Masonic Order of Rhode Island. Seixas was well known as the Cashier of the Bank of Rhode Island. President (Parnas) of Touro Synagogue at the time of the George Washington visit and letter to the congregation, Seixas also performed the Covenant of Circumcision (B’rith Milah). Prominent merchant and trader Moses Levy of New York and Newport was one of several Ashkenazi Jewish families in Newport at that time. Levy owned the Touro Street Mansion and willed the property to Moses Seixas in 1792.
  5. Moses Seixas petition to Abraham Lincoln"Sir: Permit the children of the stock of Abraham to approach you with the most cordial affection and esteem for your person and merit, and to join with our fellow-citizens in welcoming you to Newport. ...

    Deprived as we hitherto have been of the invaluable rights of free citizens, we now-with a deep sense of gratitude to the Almighty Disposer of all events — behold a government erected by the majesty of the people-a government which to bigotry gives no sanction, to persecution no assistance, but generously affording to all liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship, deeming every one of whatever nation, tongue, or language, equal parts of the great governmental machine.

    This so ample and extensive Federal Union, whose base is philanthropy, mutual confidence and public virtue, we cannot but acknowledge to be the work of the great God, who rules in the armies of the heavens and among the inhabitants of the earth, doing whatever seemeth to Him good.
    For all the blessings of civil and religious liberty which we enjoy under an equal and benign administration, we desire to send up our thanks to the Ancient of days, the great Preserver of men, beseeching Him that the angels who conducted our forefathers through the wilderness into the promised land may graciously conduct you through all the difficulties and dangers of this mortal life; and when, like Joshua, full of days and full of honors, you are gathered to your fathers, may you be admitted into the heavenly paradise to partake of the water of life and the tree of immortality.

    Done and signed by order of the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island, August 17, 1790.
    Moses Seixas, Warden"