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

Report from Planet Mammon

Expand Messages
  • World View
    A Report from Planet Mammon by E. Michael Jonesþ Tue 12/16/08 shamireaders@yahoogroups.com In September, Mike Jones, the editor of the Culture Wars and Israel
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 1, 2009
      A Report from Planet Mammon
      by E. Michael Jonesþ
      Tue 12/16/08

      In September, Mike Jones, the editor of the Culture Wars and Israel
      Shamir appeared together in London and Tallinn (in a Good Cop - Bad
      Cop routine, Mike said). Here are excepts from Jones' personal report
      of the events, while the full version is available on

      ...Which brings us back to our day and age and me sitting on a train
      bound for London with the gnawing sense of trepidation I usually feel
      these days whenever a talk is approaching. It's not that I'm nervous
      about speaking. It's not that I fear Jews particularly. What I fear
      is fellow Catholics. I'm wondering if I'm going to be stabbed in the
      back by a fellow Catholic who has just received an intimidating phone
      call. Will the Catholics who invited me to speak stand by their word
      when the inevitable counterattack from the thought police occurs?

      The situation this time was compounded by the fact that I was not the
      only speaker. In fact, it was debatable whether I was even the most
      controversial speaker since I shared the bill with the redoubtable
      Israel Shamir.

      Shamir was born in Novosibirsk in the Soviet Union in 1947. In 1968
      he converted to Zionism and emigrated to Israel, where he joined the
      IDF and fought in the 1973 war. Stationed in Sinai during a fierce
      battle whose point he failed to understand, Shamir used that war as a
      symbol of what it meant to be a Jew. Being a Jew provided no help in
      understanding what Jews want from themselves and from bewildered
      mankind, "just as belonging to the elite troops does not help you
      with an understanding of the general staff" (Cabbala of Power, p.
      12). When it comes to understanding the principle of unity among
      Jews, we are confronted with the opposite problem from the one we
      encountered with Catholics. Catholics have the prinicple of unity in
      Christ but no practical unity. Jews, on the other hand, have no
      principle of unity but, as Shamir says, like the locusts mentioned in
      the book of Proverbs, they "`have no king, but they attack in
      formation' and devastate whole countries as if by plan."

      In 1975, after studying law at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem,
      Shamir moved to London where he worked for the BBC. From 1977 to 1979
      he worked in radio in Japan. By this point, some ten years after he
      had left Russia, Shamir had become disillusioned with Zionism because
      of the way the Israeli government discriminated against non-Jews.
      From 1989 to 1993 Shamir returned to Russia where he worked as the
      Moscow correspondent for Ha'aretz. In 1993 he returned to Israel and
      settled in Jaffa, where he lives today.

      At some point during the middle of the first decade of the 21st
      century, Shamir became a presence on the Internet and at around the
      same time he became a Christian. The connection between the two
      events was more than coincidence because, as Shamir himself put it,
      getting baptized by the Palestinian priest, Archbishop Theodosius
      Attalla Hanna "helped me sort out the question of identity."

      If there were ever a sign of contradiction for the age of irenic
      interreligious dialogue inaugurated by the Second Vatican Council, it
      is Israel Shamir. Shamir's conversion to Christianity was a sign that
      the repressed had returned just in time to save the Church from total
      apostasy on the Jewish question. Shamir, the Jewish convert, saw Jews
      not as our "elder brothers" but as St. Paul saw them, which is to
      say, as "the enemy of mankind." In accepting baptism, Shamir joined a
      long line of "Jews by birth who denounced the Judaic cult of Death
      and accepted the Living Christ." For Shamir, the crucial "sieve"
      which separated good from evil in the great struggle of his day was
      the "relationship to the Palestinian suffering"; "whoever disregarded
      it followed Antichrist; whoever denounced it began his way to Christ."

      Like St. Paul, Shamir has become a latter day apostle to the Gentiles
      and a reproach to all those who would ignore the warning of the
      Gospels and urge upon Christians a quasi-Masonic brotherhood with
      their enemies which leads to their mental evisceration and moral
      ruin. "The point," as Shamir says, is not pointless dialogue of the
      sort that is in reality nothing more that a covert form of cultural
      warfare, "The point is to liberate Jews from Jewishness, which is the
      enemy of mankind."

      Like Nicholas Donin and Joseph Pfefferkorn before him, Shamir is
      Lazarus returned from the realm of the dead. In addition to being
      reborn out of the Judaic culture of death, Shamir rose from the realm
      of what everyone had presumed was a dead idea, namely, that Jews need
      to accept Christ as their savior. Shamir was "granted the grace of
      Christ" and therefore "reborn in His glory." He has come back to life
      to tell us all that he is "daily grateful to Christ who saved me from
      the Judaic paranoia of hating and being hated and brought me into the
      world of loving and being loved" and that "every Jew who has come to
      Christ by the way of rejecting the Judaic ideas, by upholding love
      for the nations, is a portent of Salvation" (Cabbala, p. 310). Like
      Nicholas Donin and Joseph Pfefferkorn before him, Shamir did not come
      back from the dead to become Eugene Fisher's successor at the USCC.
      Shamir came back from the dead on fire with zeal to liberate Jews
      from the bondage of Judaism.

      To do that, Shamir must first explain what it means to be a Jew:

      a Jew must first understand himself and war against himself. Only
      steady resolution, united to the highest self-respect, can free the
      Jew from Jewishness. Therefore the Jewish question can only be solved
      individually; every Jew must try to solve it in his proper person"—by
      discovering God's presence in the world, that is Christ (p. 19).

      Like Joseph Pfefferkorn, Shamir has had to deal with the polite
      racism of the Left which associates Jews with some ineradicable
      racial destiny. Like Joseph Pfefferkorn, whom the humanist elite,
      including Erasmus, referred to as a "tauf Jud," a baptized Jew,
      Shamir has been described as "an ethnic Jew who defines himself as a
      Christian." Liberal Swedish journalists are a lot like Adolf Hitler
      in Shamir's mind because they think "`once a Jew, always a Jew';
      baptism notwithstanding, Shamir can only `define himself as' a

      Jews collaborate in the promotion of this sort of racism because it
      keeps Jews in line. Instead of distinguishing between racism, which
      is bad, and anti-Judaic principles, which are required of every
      Christian, Jews try to portray the anti-Judaism that is part and
      parcel of Christianity as a form of racism. Jews, in other words,
      manipulate the term "anti-Semitism" for their own political

      Anti-Judaic thought is part of the foundation of Christianity and
      Communism, to mention just two of the most important ideologies. Jews
      try to present the anti-Judaic line as racism. Though anti-Judaic
      thought has existed for hundreds of years, Jews insist on using the
      name of "anti-Semitism," a rather short lived racial theory of the
      19th century. For the anti-Semite, a Jew has inherent and
      unchangeable inborn qualities, while anti-Jewish thought analyses and
      fights Judaic tendency.

      Instead of admitting that there is something wrong with being Jewish
      because the Jewish rejection of Logos disposes Jews to act in a way
      that antagonizes everyone they come in contact with, the Jews fall
      back on outdated theories of racism as a way of exculpating bad
      behavior. "It is because of what we are, not of what we do," a slogan
      recently appropriated by President Bush, has become the mantra that
      excuses bad behavior and hides from Jews the core of their
      essentially negative identity and why they have faced antagonism
      among every group they have lived with throughout history.

      There has never been a "paradisus Iudeorum" that has not ended in
      catastrophe for the Jews, and there has never been a catastrophe that
      has not been rationalized into one more link in a long chain of anti-
      Semitism by Jewish apologists determined to ignore the toxic effect
      of Jewish behavior on native populations and the inevitable reaction
      which it brings forth from them. Shamir cites the Jewish delight in
      using terms like "hook-nosed" as "a clear sign of the Jewish effort
      to turn anti-Zionist or anti-Judaic polemics into racist ones."
      Racism is the simplest way to deflect attention from the source of
      the problem. Hence, the Jewish delight in discovering racism even
      where none exists. "Anti-Semitism," Shamir points out, "was a short-
      lived racial theory of late 19th century claiming that . . . Jews are
      what they are; that they possess some racial qualities making them an
      inherent enemy of the Nordic race, like a wolf is an enemy of a
      rabbit." This was never the position of the Church, which always
      maintained that the problem between Jews and Gentiles was religious
      in nature and solved by conversion. If there were ever a time
      when "hatred of Jews for what they are" was an issue, Shamir
      claims "such a phenomenon vanished completely. There are people who
      object to policies of Jews, but none to Jews per se." The fact that
      Jews insist on obscuring the issue means that only Christians can
      frame the issue properly, and yet this is precisely what the Church
      has refused to do for the past 40 some years. Making the proper
      distinctions would pave the way for the solution to the problem, but
      this is precisely what Jews want to avoid, because it would mean the
      end of their hegemony over discourse. If Mel Gibson had had the
      benefit of understanding the distinctions which Shamir made, he could
      have shrugged off the charges of anti-Semitism by claiming what every
      Christian should be able to claim, namely, "I am anti-Judaic, just
      like Christ."

      Shamir's conversion is clearly a scandal and a reproach to the entire
      era of post-Vatican II inter-religious dialogue. Shamir became a
      Christian during the period when the Catholic Church had all but
      officially called for a moratorium on Jewish conversion. One of the
      most painful events in the time of his life surrounding his
      conversion came in 2002, when the bishops of the United States issued
      their document "Reflections on Covenant," which in effect said that
      Jews did not have to accept Christ in order to be saved. Shamir
      described "Reflections" as "an act of cruelty to the Jews" which came
      perilously close to the denial of Christ and apostasy of the Church
      that the faithful would experience in the last days. According to

      The Catholic Church after Vatican II accepted the unacceptable
      demands of the Jews and agreed to the conditions once rejected by St.
      Paul. They agreed to the idea of two covenants, as if the Old
      Covenant is not the same as the New Covenant. Thus they came to the
      weird idea of two Chosen Peoples—Israel of the flesh and the Church.
      The Orthodox Church is still safe from this dangerous heresy. Only
      the Orthodox Church can offer true salvation to the Jews escaping
      their supremacist creed. And now, when thousands of Jews try to come
      to Christ, the Orthodox Church of Jerusalem does not make a
      sufficient effort to bring them in.

      Shamir has similarly frank things to say about the doctrine of two
      covenants, which he mistakenly ascribes to the Vatican II document
      Nostra Aetate, which affirms the fact that the Church is the New
      Israel. The notion that the Jewish covenant is still
      valid "undermines the very meaning of Christ's sacrifice. ... Since
      Christ had opened the Covenant for all, the Christian Church became
      the True Israel, and the Jews that rejected Christ do not belong to
      the True Israel anymore, nor do divine prophecies pertain to them
      anymore…. The Church should attract and baptize Jews, but without
      giving them special status. Otherwise, the church, the most powerful
      defense against the ongoing Jewish offensive, will be subjugated."

      Unlike most Catholics, who were mesmerized by the pronouncements of
      Jewish-appointed leaders like Richard John Neuhaus at the time,
      Shamir was perceptive enough to see that the Iraq invasion of 2003
      was preceded by a media barrage aimed at the Catholic Church,
      designed to take the Bush Administration's most formidable foreign
      policy enemy out of action. Shamir sees parallels between what Rod
      Dreher was writing for National Review and what Alfred Rosenberg was
      writing in the Voelkische Beobachter and Der Stuermer:

      Whenever the forces of darkness prepare a new attack on mankind, they
      use their considerable artillery to shut up the potential resistance
      forces, starting with their new enemy, the Church. . . . This was the
      practice of the Third Reich as well: before starting the war, they
      began their campaign of "priests as sex fiends" to force the church's
      silence. Now this is the turn of the Fourth Reich: the Church was
      against the war in Iraq; the Church was steadfast in her defense of
      Palestine, the Church is certainly against the impending attack on
      Iran, so she has to be put on defense. The same people who control
      the US media call for war with Iran, and they are behind this
      campaign against the Church.

      The Jewish-American empire sees the Church as its main adversary,
      according to Shamir, because it is in reality a competing
      church, "the church of darkness."

      We can't remain indifferent to the travail of the church for she has
      a potential to change the US from the predatory neo-Judaic state it
      is today into a peace-loving Christian one. Her bishops went too far
      trying to accommodate their enemy, but they have discovered now that
      his way leads to perdition. Next time they may be braver, if there
      ever is a next time.

      Another word for the same enemy is "Masters of Discourse," the title
      of Shamir's most recent book. The Masters of Discourse "are trying to
      create a pseudo-Judaic universe on a planetary scale." They want "to
      destroy Iran and cripple Russian for these lands did not forget God."

      Because of the essentially theological basis of his political
      critique, Shamir finds himself cut off from his natural allies. He
      can't talk politics to Catholics because so many Catholics identify
      with the regime that oppresses them, and he can't talk theology to
      the Left, the de facto basis of the antiwar movement, because the
      Left has no use for God. "In Counterpunch," he writes at one
      point, "one can't say a good word about the Church."

      As a result of this schism, the Church finds herself defenseless
      against her enemies, largely because Church leaders have convinced
      themselves that they don't have any enemies anymore in the age of
      interreligious dialogue. The enemies of all mankind whom St. Paul
      talks about in his epistle to the Thesselonians have been
      miraculously turned into "elder brothers" in a act of wishful
      thinking that becomes more determined in the face of every Jewish-led
      assault on the Church. The most recent example of this came in
      October when the synod of bishops invited a rabbi to address that
      august body for the first time in history. The rabbi promptly took
      this historical moment as an opportunity to harangue the bishops for
      being insufficiently zealous in their support of Israel. At a press
      conference after his speech, the same rabbi used the forum which the
      bishops had provided him to attack the memory of Pope Pius XII. By
      now this sort of "dialogue" has become depressingly familiar. So
      familiar that one has to wonder just what the bishops were thinking
      when they extended the invitation. Weren't they paying attention
      during the "celebrations" of the 40th anniversary of Nostra Aetate a
      few years back when the chief rabbi of Israel, Yona Metzger, laid the
      responsibility for the Holocaust at the feet of the Catholic Church
      and its "2000-year history of anti-Semitism?"

      Shamir is the man of his age precisely because, as a Jew who has
      liberated himself from the bondage of Judaism, he can name the evil
      of this age without hesitation or circumlocution, at a time when the
      Church, which should be the enemy of Jewish pretension and
      subversion, is silent, impotent, and bound hand and foot with chains
      forged under the false presuppositions of another age. This paralysis
      of mind and will on the part of the Church has led to dire
      consequences for all of mankind, because as Shamir puts it, "When the
      Church is subjugated, Jews triumph and when Jews triumph mankind
      suffers." What was true of Europe under Communism is true of America
      under the hegemony of the neoconservatives. "The Jewish universe,"
      Shamir continues,

      is good for the Jews. It is a curse for the others. . . . In Eastern
      Europe, times of Jewish dominance were the worst experienced by the
      ordinary people. . . . The Jews lost their high position in the
      Communist Church by 1934, and the life of ordinary Russians improved
      greatly. After 1991, the Judeo-Mammonites enforced their paradigm
      upon Russia, and the life of ordinary Russians was degraded while the
      new elites prospered. . . . In Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary,
      the years of Jewish dominance (1945-1956) were the most harsh and
      unpleasant. In Germany, Jewish pre-eminence in 1920s coincided with
      terrible inflation and unemployment for Germans, and the growth of
      Jewish wealth and influence. . . . In the US, as Jewish influence has
      grown steadily since 1968, the lives of ordinary people has [sic]
      worsened. . . . A good time for the Jews is not a good time for
      mankind. . . . The blessing of the Jews is a curse for others. . . .
      The regimes that are "good for Jews" are rarely good for anybody

      If Shamir is a prophet, his main prophecy in the political sphere is
      that the war of left and right belongs to the past. "The struggle of
      Left and Right has become obsolete in the face of the new dichotomy,"
      which is the Jewish American Empire vs. the rest of the world.
      Because this is an essentially theological struggle between the
      Church and the Synagogue of Satan, the secular categories which have
      dominated political life in Europe since the French Revolution are no
      longer relevant. Fighting the current war with the weapons forged by
      the Enlightenment is like trying to bring down an F-16 with a musket.
      As a result of their residual Enlightenment-based suspicion (if not
      hatred) of religion, countries like England and Germany (and now
      France) have become curious political backwaters, locked in
      irrelevant battles over race and sexuality but all the while
      incapable of effectively saying no to supporting American imperialism
      because of the implicit blackmail threat which Jews exert over
      them. "Germans," Shamir notes, "go into collective toxic shock
      whenever the word `Jew' is pronounced." The Germans have not only
      handed billions of dollars over to the world's major Jewish
      organizations (money which will be used to mold public opinion
      against them and extort still more money), they have also provided
      Israel with two nuclear-capable Dolphin class submarines which can
      now target German cities and, therefore, enhance the threat and,
      thereby, extort still more money.

      The problem, according to Shamir, is theological not political. The
      Germans accepted their "second class status" as "children of a lesser
      god" when they "elevated Auschwitz" over Golgotha as the center of
      human history. As the Jesuits wrote in Civilta Cattolica on the
      centenary celebration of the French Revolution in 1890, any country
      which turns away from God will find itself ruled by Jews. In siding
      with Caiaphas against Christ, the Germans allowed themselves to
      become entangled in the tentacles of the "voracious Octopus of
      Judaism," and as long as they continue to structure their lives
      according to the outdated categories of Left and Right, they will
      continue to languish in that embrace, debilitated by sexual licence,
      anomie and guilt, lashing out at Americans without understanding who
      is grinding ordinary Americans under its heel as well. Countries with
      no strong theological foundation will end up, like the Soviet Union,
      in the dustbin of history because "The `struggle against anti-
      Semitism' is a theological concept which entails the adoption of a
      new religion." For Shamir, becoming a Christian meant rejecting the
      current conventional narrative which sees the Holocaust as anti-
      Christianity. Conversely, countries like Germany become absorbed into
      the Jewish-American empire the more they demote Christianity and
      raise up the Holocaust as an idol in its place. According to Shamir,
      the very concept of Holocaust is a concept of Jewish superiority (as
      opposed to the historical event in which Jews and Gentiles were

      Christianity is the denial of Jewish superiority. Whoever believes or
      accepts Jewish superiority denies Christ for He made us equal. The
      French Jewish filmmaker Claude Lanzmann, the creator of "Shoah,"
      said: if you believe in holocaust you can't believe in Christ. We
      can rephrase the words of Lanzmann: belief in a special historical
      meaning of death of Jews is a sign of apostasy. . . . We believe that
      Christ suffered for us and came back to life. The Holocaust believers
      believe that the Jewish people suffered and came back by creating the
      Jewish state. In this competition, the Jews win: as opposed to
      Holocaust, you can deny Crucifixion and Resurrection, and your career
      won't suffer a bit.

      Belief in Jewish superiority, according to Shamir, is the official
      faith of the Pax Americana. Similarly, the Soviet Union eventually
      collapsed because it lacked an adequate theological foundation. This
      fatal flaw is echoed in the "neo-Jewish" American empire. "The Judaic
      paradigm has replaced apostolic Christianity, and now America is
      suffering "in the grip of a New World Order—featuring a dwindling
      middle class, a vast security apparatus, a growing social gap, and a
      general impoverishment of spirit. It is not the first time the Judaic
      paradigm has risen in this world; but, like its predecessors, it will
      inevitably collapse—this type of society lacks broad social support.
      This time the adepts have decided to ensure its survival by making
      their project global . . .this is the logic and pressure behind their
      reckless and desperate expansion."

      Now that the war of Left and Right belongs to the past, the only real
      issue is how to deal with Jewish supremacy and the Pax Americana
      which is its practical implementation. Another way of framing the
      same question is to ask, "Will our society stand on the rock planted
      by Christ, or will it worship the Jewish state?" Those who affirm the
      former proposition will also have to affirm its theological
      ramifications, the most important of which is that the only solution
      to the current world crisis is the conversion of the Jews, a step
      which Shamir has taken and one which he urges on the rest of the
      world, either directly, by asking the world's Jews to convert as well
      or indirectly, by asking the rest of us to pray for their
      conversion: "Let us pray for perfidious Jews that our God and Lord
      will remove the veil from their hearts so that they too may
      acknowledge the light of the truth which is our Lord Jesus Christ and
      be delivered from their darkness." As for the rest of us—Catholics,
      Americans, non-Jews: "The Palestinians have no chance, unless we free
      our souls form Jewish control. And here we may turn to the second J-
      word, more mighty than the first: Jesus. The present subservience of
      the West began with one small step: in the 1960s, Western Churches
      removed from their liturgy the prayer "Oremus et pro perfidis

      Shamir writes that "I believe Lenny Brenner when he argues that young
      Jews are deserting Judaism and Zionism in droves," Shamir writes,
      articulating what may be the fundamental sign of our age. "More and
      more Israelis," he continues, "are coming to their senses." The main
      danger to this movement toward conversion "comes from the extreme
      American Zionists who are ready to fight from their recliners until
      the last Israeli falls."

      Shamir is the revenant in our day of famous Jewish converts like
      Joseph Pfefferkorn, Jews who woke up one day and realized that by
      being Jews they were working for the evil empire. Then as now there
      were Christians who hated the idea of Jewish conversion and were more
      comfortable with racial explanations that cut off the Jews from
      Christian society. The Dominicans of Cologne were not part of that
      group. The great question for Christians in our day is whether we are
      as acute as Shamir in discerning the signs of the times. In this
      respect, his conversion story is especially relevant for American
      Catholics, who are still asleep at the switch, drugged by bad
      politics, bad theology, and what seems like a congenital desire to
      appease their oppressors.

      The Talk in London
      As some indication that Shamir was right when he saw the current
      political scene dominated by unacknowledged religious categories, it
      was the English Catholics who ended up sponsoring our talks in
      London, not the pro-Palestinian left. In fact, I ended up back
      addressing the same organization I had spoken to 12 years ago when I
      had spoken on Medjugorje and the sexual revolution.

      The Jews, of course, tried to stop the talks, but in a half-hearted
      way, at least in comparison to how their counterparts work in
      America. The job of stopping the talks was assigned to a freelance
      journalist with connections to a national Jewish newspaper. Under the
      guise of reporting on the talk, he called up everyone he could think
      of--the archdiocese, the Catholic information centre, the nuns who
      owned the building, as well as Pro Fide, the sponsoring organization,
      to panic them into shutting down the talk. Did you know, he asked
      David Foster, who served as moderator of the talks, that Shamir
      thinks the "final solution" to the Jewish problem was conversion?
      That a Jew feels that a Catholic should be shocked by this kind of
      statement gives some indication of the theological chasm separating
      the two groups. In spite of the deliberately inflammatory rhetoric,
      Foster agreed with Shamir's point; Catholic solidarity prevailed, and
      the talks went on.

      There was an attempt to disrupt the talk after it began. A crazy
      Russian Jew who calls himself a performance artist showed up with his
      black leather-clad Austrian girlfriend and, after shouting a few
      comments, stood up and turned the lights out in the room. When the
      lights came back on, he stood up on a chair and encouraged everyone
      to take their clothes off and engage in an orgy, at which point he
      was ejected from the room. Whether this attempt to derail the talk
      was demonic or moronic, it failed, when stood up to. On his way out,
      he shouted that he wanted to hear his friend Shamir. It turns out
      that Shamir did, in fact, know the guy, who used to show up at salons
      in Israel, where he would defecate on the floor of art exhibits. He
      found more fertile ground for his art in Europe, until he was caught
      defacing a work of art in a Dutch museum and was sentenced to six
      months in prison. At one point he told Shamir that he had come to
      England because he felt that the English were more indulgent in
      dealing with things like this.

      The topic of the conference, "Israel, the Church, and Antisemitism,"
      guaranteed a more diverse audience than at my last venue in England.
      Paul Eisen, an English Jew who was one of the organizers of Deir
      Yassin Remembered, was there, as was Martin Webster who had been
      involved with the British National Party, and Lady Michele Renouf,
      who had been prevented from speaking to the party for her radicalism.
      Eisen felt that my talk was "painful, but it was all true." Eisen
      seemed half convinced by the talk. It was not difficult to persuade
      him that the great struggle of his day was "Palestinian suffering."
      According to Shamir's theological calculus--"whoever disregarded
      Palestinian suffering followed Antichrist; whoever denounced it began
      his way to Christ"--Eisen had already taken the first step toward
      Christ by founding Deir Yassin Remembered. In terms of the trajectory
      that Shamir's life had described, Eisen had no trouble condemning the
      Judaic cult of death, but he was having difficulty accepting
      the "Living Christ" as its alternative.

      Eisen was reluctant to give up his identity as a Jew because a Jew,
      in his view, was by nature an iconoclast, someone who smashed idols.
      Since the biggest idol of our day, according to both Eisen and
      Shamir, was the false religion known as the Holocaust (as
      distinguished from the massacres committed by the Nazis), Eisen felt
      called as a Jew to smash that idol, something which he attempted when
      he wrote an article in support of Ernst Zundel, then languishing in a
      German jail, where he faced criminal charges of Holocaust denial. The
      article was pure dynamite; unfortunately, one of the first things
      that went up in smoke when he detonated this bomb was Deir Yassin
      Remembered. Angry letters of resignation followed the publication of
      his article, and he was left to ponder the paradoxes which his Jewish
      iconoclasm had wrought, but unable to take the final step toward
      embracing Logos as Shamir and Gilad Atzmon, the Israeli saxophonist,
      Christian, and "proud self-hating Jew" had done.

      "I enjoy exercising Jewish power," Eisen said to me at one
      point. "The only reason you're talking to me is because I'm a Jew,"
      he said at another.

      There was an element of irony too powerful for the goyishe kop (or at
      least this goyishe kop) in Eisen's discourse. Did he say this out of
      fear that I wouldn't talk to him if he embraced Logos as Shamir and
      Gilad Atzmon had done? If so, wasn't the fact that I shared the bill
      with Shamir evidence to the contrary? Or was his statement subtly
      derogatory of me and my intentions? Did he view me as some sort of
      spiritual opportunist? Did this imply that I viewed Jewish conversion
      as a sort of one-night stand, after which I wouldn't talk to him in
      the morning? Perhaps I wasn't demanding enough. Perhaps, in
      imitation of St. Paul, Eisen's namesake, who claimed he would become
      all things to all people to save souls, I should have adopted the
      persona of the Jew hater to make conversion seem more attractive to
      him. "Think of it, Paul," I might have said, "If you convert, there
      will be one less Jew in the world. Conversion is the final solution."

      Dealing with Lady Michele Renouf, who was gracious enough to invite
      me and Shamir to her posh Kensington flat after the talk, was
      relatively straightforward by comparison. Lady Michele, former ballet
      dancer, and photo model, actress, academic, author, and purveyor,
      via television commercials, of everything from Tokalon Beauty care
      products in Portugal to Three Castles cigarettes in Pakistan, is a
      public defender of David Irving and free speech, as well as a devotee
      of Wagner and Nietzsche, as well as a Hellenist who feels that
      Christianity is too Jewish.

      "Hellenism," Lady Renouf announced after she had served Shamir and me
      a cup of tea, "is what makes our discussion possible." We didn't need
      anything else, certainly not Jewish fairy tales about a vindictive
      God who should be dragged to the Hague and charged with crimes
      against humanity and genocide.

      I replied by reminding Lady Michele that that the most famous convert
      to Hellenism was Julian the Apostate, who thought he could wash the
      effect of baptism from his person with the blood of bulls and ended
      up conniving with the Jews in their attempt to rebuild the Temple.
      Hellenism was another word for magic and mumbo jumbo. Greek
      philosophy, even in its pure state, as when it came from the lips of
      Socrates, Plato and Aristotle was incapable of saving itself from
      decadence. The only thing that had saved Logos as discovered by
      Greeks like Plato and Aristotle was Christianity and its fusion with
      the Hebrew scriptures by thinkers like St. Augustine.

      Thinking that this was a bit too impersonal, I gestured toward
      Shamir, who was sitting next to me on the sofa. "If it weren't for
      Christianity and the waters of baptism, Shamir would still be a Jew.
      Would you prefer that?"

      By this point I was fairly wound up in spite of the late hour.
      Perhaps it was the tea. Feeling that I was already coming across as
      one more American enthusiast frothing at the mouth about religion, I
      decided to embrace my role as the American evangelist and jumped up
      in the middle of Lady Renouf's drawing room and said, "Come to Jesus,

      Shamir is no fan of American Protestant preachers, a group he regards
      as lackeys to American Jews, but no matter how coarsely they were
      expressed, he couldn't disagree with my sentiments. If Christ was
      good for the Jews, then he was equally good for Wagnerian proponents
      of Hellenism.

      The source of our differences lay elsewhere, and they came out in the
      lobby of Shamir's hotel where we met the day after our evening at
      Lady Renouf's flat.

      "You're a revolutionary," Shamir said to me as we shared a pot of tea
      in the lobby of his hotel in London. I could tell by the way he said
      it that Shamir intended the term as a compliment.

      "No, I'm a counter-revolutionary," I replied. "The revolution has
      already taken place. I want to overthrow the revolution."

      I then launched into a discussion of Logos as the objective criterion
      of whether actions are revolutionary or not. Revolutionaries want to
      overturn the rule of Logos; counterrevolutionaries want to restore it.

      Shamir shrugged by way of response. "That's not what the word means.
      If you want to use words, you have to use them in the way that most
      people understand them."

      The unresolved theological question behind Shamir's conversion
      is "What remains?" Shamir is of the opinion that nothing remains when
      the Jew converts. Since a Jew is a rejecter of Christ, rejection of
      the rejection obliterates the Jew. Shamir now considers himself a
      Palestinian orthodox Christian. In his epistle to the Romans (11:28-
      29), however, St. Paul claims that the same Jews who are "enemies of
      God, as regards the Gospel" are "beloved for the sake of the
      forefathers. For the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable." This
      seems to indicate that something Jewish has perdured and will
      perdure, certainly until the Second Coming, but even in a certain
      sense after their conversion. What remains can be bad as well as
      good. The sad story of the converso crisis in Spain is some
      indication that something remained culturally from the time when the
      Spanish converts lived as Jews. In some instances it was preserved by
      bad will and insincere conversion, in others by the sheer weight of
      cultural inertia and insufficient catechesis in the wake of
      conversion. Joseph Pfefferkorn was aware of the pull his former life
      exerted on him and aware as well of the strenuous moral and spiritual
      effort that was needed to prevent a "return to the vomit of
      Judaism." "If I continued to associate with Jews," Pfefferkorn wrote
      after his conversion, "and continued to take usury, what would you
      say other than that I was in serious sin and that I never really
      became a Christian, and everyone would condemn me by saying that the
      blood and suffering of Christ had been lost on me. What help would
      the holy sacrament of baptism have been to me?" (cf., E. Michael
      Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, p. 225 ff).

      The waters of baptism redeem personal history, but they don't
      obliterate it, and part of what Shamir brought into the Church from
      his previous existence as a Jew is a nostalgia for Stalin and the
      Soviet Union, which many of his new found brothers in Christ found
      repugnant. Shamir was six years old when Stalin died and nine years
      old when Nikita Khrushchev denounced Stalin's crimes before the
      Politburo. Unlike Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who was old enough to be
      his father, Shamir never did time in the Gulag. When he thinks about
      the Soviet Union what Shamir remembers is a life free from worry
      where "Everybody lived under more or less the same conditions: safe
      and assured employment, free accommodation, free electricity, free
      telephone, free heating, free public transport" (Cabbala, p. 195).
      The Soviet Union of Shamir's youth was "A society free from worry
      about life's basic necessities," something which Shamir considers "is
      a society well-prepared for spiritual pursuits."

      According to Shamir's version of history, the fall came, not in 1917
      when the Bolsheviks murdered the Czar, but during the 1980s when
      the "de-spiritualized Russian elites of the last decades began to
      lean West" and became "infected by the neo-liberal world-view" of
      Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, which he describes as the
      worship of Mammon. The Soviet Union got hi-jacked by pro-Western
      elites who "embraced the Chicago school of Milton Friedman with
      fervor and despised their own people, their own history, and the
      traditions of their parents" and then handed the country over to an
      orgy of looting in which most of the oligarchs who ended up with
      Russia's wealth were Jews. Former Premier and now Russian President
      Vladimir Putin, in Shamir's view, has shown himself to be
      insufficiently daring in dealing with the Jewish oligarchs. As a
      result, "the Slav Orthodox world is without a rudder in boiling
      rapids." If the Soviet Union had been left alone, the Russian
      Orthodox Church and the Russian Communist Party would have united in
      a Hegelian synthesis based a mutual hatred of Mammon. As if
      conceding for a moment that life under Stalin was not, as Monk
      Seraphim might put it, "hunky-dory," Shamir writes, "It's not that
      the Russians miss the Gulag or industrialization, but Stalin and his
      rule are part and parcel of Russian history" (Cabbala, p. 197). That
      caveat notwithstanding, Joseph Stalin is nonetheless, in Shamir's
      view, "the great man who restored fortunes of Russia, beat off
      western attacks, and united the Ukraine" (Cabbala, p. 208) (elsewhere
      Shamir does concede the mass graves filled by Stalin).



      To subscribe to this group, send an email to:


      Need some good karma? Appreciate the service?
      Please consider donating to WVNS today.
      Email ummyakoub@... for instructions.

      To leave this list, send an email to:
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.