Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: An Alternative Conspiracy Theory

Expand Messages
  • Fr. John Whiteford
    ... books ... Ideology ... Keep in mind, I said nothing of what I thought of Rasputin, I only pointed out that two saints clearly disagreed on his character,
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 23, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      --- Nikolaj wrote:

      > The below posting
      > shows exactly the results
      > of the void of serious english language Orthodox
      > about the Protocols - Rasputin - Russian Tsarist
      > and so on.

      Keep in mind, I said nothing of what I thought of
      Rasputin, I only pointed out that two saints clearly
      disagreed on his character, and so the fact that a
      saint had an opinion about something is not proof that
      his opinion was correct.

      Also, it should be noted that quite a bit of the
      original documents regarding the royal family are in
      English... not Russian, because English was the
      language spoken in in the home.

      > Personally I believe more in the blessing of a book
      by St John
      > of Kronstadt than some un-orthodox "analysis", most
      > made by the very people, that feels themselves
      exposed by
      > the Protocols.

      I don't think that we can assume that historians are
      all agents of the Jewish Masonic conspiracy.

      > I must admit that I believe more in the Tsaritsa
      Martyr than in various
      > un-orthodox "sources" saying that the Tsar did not
      > the Protocols. He still read them in Ekaterinburg.

      For what reason would non-Orthodox scholars make up
      the claim that the Tsar thought them fraudulent, when
      the Protocols are already completely discredited, and
      the sloppy historians tend to paint the Tsar as an
      Anti-Semite? In the eyes of most people, pointing out
      that the Tsar did not accept them is a point in his

      That he may have had a copy and read it while in
      Ekaterinburg does not prove that he had a different

      In any case, what people may have thought of the
      Protocols before they were exposed as a plagiarization
      of an earlier work and before Hitler used them to
      justify the slaughter of the Jews, and and what people
      think of it after those two pivotal events are
      entirely different questions.

      In 1918, one might simply have believed that they were
      exactly what they claim to be. In 2001, someone has
      to want to believe that really badly, and has to be
      willing to ignore compelling evidence to the contrary.

      Mind you, I am not suggesting that Masons have never
      conspired or played roles in Revolutions. This would
      also be to ignore the facts. The Masons certainly
      have (as one can see, for example by reading the
      Masonic plaque at the Alamo). I'm sure that there are
      Jewish Masons, just as their are English, Russian,
      Greek, and American Masons. I do not believe that
      there is a specifically "Jewish" Masonic conspiracy,
      and I think trying to build a case for one...
      particularly with the protocols is the surest way to
      be forever dismissed as a kook.

      I refer the readers to Metropolitan Anthony's sermon
      against anti-semitism in general, and Pogroms in


      * Fr. John Whiteford IC -|- XC *
      * ----|---- *
      * St. Jonah of Manchuria Orthodox Mission | *
      * Serving the Spring, Woodlands, \| *
      * and Conroe, Texas area. |\ *
      * http://pages.prodigy.net/frjohnwhiteford/ NI | KA *

      Do You Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices! http://auctions.yahoo.com/
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.