Tag Archives: Charles the Martyr

BANNING THE CONFEDERATE FLAG & MONUMENTS IS GENOCIDE BY DESTRUCTION OF SYMBOLS: IRELAND 1652, SCOTLAND 1748, IRELAND 1798, GERMANY 1918, GERMANY 1945, SOUTHERN USA 2015

The United States is currently engaged in a disgusting orgy of destruction which is going to be very difficult to recover from.  It is destruction of symbols with genocidal intent which, if successful, will destroy everything good about America.  No joke: everything.  The Confederate States of America was the last gasp of the original “Spirit of ’76” and once we destroy the symbols of the old South—it’s not long until we will be destroying all the symbols of the American Revolution—-because the two events were conceptually and strategically almost identical, and George Washington and Robert E. Lee’s father were not only neighbors along the Virginia side of the Potomac (Stafford, Mount Vernon, and Arlington) but cousins by marriage….

Destruction of Symbols sounds so very benign, when you say it unthinkingly, it sounds so sterile and academic, so far removed from physical harm.  Until you think of Leslie A. White’s definition of culture, which has pretty much become the primary accepted definition in anthropology: “Culture is Man’s extrasomatic adaptation to the Environment, DEPENDENT UPON SYMBOLLING.”

All of modern anthropology, linguistics, and social psychology focuses on the elementary nature and importance of symbols in the definition of social identity and social relations.

What the Obama administration and the wholly controlled “Mainstream Media” in the United States are doing is closely analogous to other monstrous events in Anglo-American history, the oldest of which are universally agreed to have been monstrous—although those more recent in time are still cherished by “the powers that be.”

1652—the Cromwellian “Act for the Settlement of Ireland” effectively abolished and destroyed, by outlawing its institutions and symbols (along with mass murder and slavery) all and everything that remained of traditional Ireland (medieval, primitive Christian with strong pagan syncretic elements).   Ostensibly, the reason was political conspiracy against his anti-monarchist “Commonwealth”. Cromwell attacked the (to modern American ears quite) ironically named “Confederate Royalists” of Ireland and systematically destroyed them as supporters of the late King Charles I Stuart and his sons Charles II and James II Stuart. What Cromwell did was to uproot an disperse all supporters of the “Confederate Royalists” who were the ethnic and cultural heirs the Celtic Ireland of the Four Kingdoms and the High Kingship of Tara.

This old Celtic Ireland was a land of poetic schools and wandering minstrels, in essence, the last relics and still active, vital, splendid cultural remnant of early Indo-European (etymologically Sanskrit “Aryan” = each of “Irish” and “Iranian” and [German] “Ehre” = “Noble”) Culture.  Both of my dear departed Irish-thinking friends in comparative linguistics, namely my graduate professor in that subject at Harvard, Dr. Calvert Watkins (1933-2013), and my dear friend and mentor (and fellow Harvard graduate in Anthropology from the Peabody Museum of Archaeology & Ethnology), Dr. David Humiston Kelley (1924-2011), one of the greatest under-appreciated and under-published Anthropologists of the Twentieth Century, considered pre-Cromwellian Ireland a golden age of cultural purity, whose loss and destruction at Cromwell’s hands was reason enough to hate him, even if he had not been one of Europe’s earliest modern Genocidal mass murders.

SCOTLAND AFTER THE ’45—THE 1746-8 DESTRUCTION OF THE CLANS AFTER BONNIE PRINCE CHARLIE’S NEARLY SUCCESSFUL INVASION AND RECONQUEST OF BRITAIN-–almost exactly 100 years later, in a continuation of exactly the same confrontation of the Catholic Leaning Stuart Dynasty and the more “Radical Protestant” elements of the English Church, Scotland’s Gaelic (indigenous, insular Celtic) culture was laid waste in an episode of extreme symbolic genocide in the mid-18th century.

My family tree is mostly English with an admixture of French, Prussian, and Southern German [Alsatian and Austrian] heritage, and no known (insular) Celtic antecedents or traceable ancestors.  But my father was an Anglo-Catholic and a member of the Society of King Charles the Martyr, while my mother was a hopeless romantic and lover of lost causes, especially lost languages and cultural variants in Europe.  And so as their child I have always been deeply moved by the poetry of the Scots Gaelic language, the legacy of the clans and tartans of Scotland, and in particular of the story of “the Old Pretender” (James III’s) and “the Young Pretender” (Charles III’s) efforts to retake the throne of Britain for the Stuart Family in 1715 and 1745.  Bonnie Prince Charlie (aka “the Young Pretender” entombed in Rome as “Charles III King of England”) was “almost a winner.”  The voluntarily abortive story of his reconquest of England (George II was already packing to leave London for Hanover what Charles III turned back, despite being greeted by cheering crowds of Englishmen and women as far south as Derby) is strange, but irrelevant to the point here.

Marshal George Wade is hardly a household name, either in England or America, but he was the commander of the English forces who suppressed the Jacobites and destroyed the clans of Scotland.  Wade’s name was, in the 1740s, very well known because there was an extremely popular prayerful “hymn” about him, as he marched northward to Scotland to do the Hanoverian dirty work of Genocide with Cromwellian brutality and efficiency—that hymn was later rewritten to become “God Save the King” (a non-0fficial national anthem of England and pre-1965 Canada and Australia, and “My Country ’tis of Thee” in the United States.) 

Marshall Wade’s policy of Scottish Genocide focused on the destruction of the Celtic Clan system, and the destruction of the Highland Scottish nobility, just as Cromwell had focused on the extermination of the “Confederate Irish” nobility of the Emerald Isle in 1649-53.

The wearing of the kilt and tartan were among the cruelest and most tortuous aspects of the Suppression of Scotland in 1747-48.  It was made a capital offense, punishable by hanging, to wear a kilt or tartan, and these prohibitions alone were sufficient to destroy the clan system, although the confiscation of all Jacobite lands certainly would have done substantial damage. 

WITHOUT THEIR SYMBOLS, A PEOPLE CANNOT EXIST.  Just as Christianity could not survive a prohibition on the Cross, the Lord’s prayer, and Sunday Church worship, the clans, at least as socio-politicaly cohesive and viable entities with power, could not survive the abolition of their symbols.

1798—They’re Hanging Men and Women for the Wearing of the Green. A mere 50 years later (after Marshal Wade had finished with Scotland, and ten years after the ban on the wearing of Kilts and Tartans had been lifted to a population, only the oldest and feeblest of whom could even remember having worn them before 1748), the Hanoverians (this time under “Mad King George” III) were at it again, this time suppressing a French-Revolutionary inspired “Bonapartist” uprising in Ireland.

And once again the British treatment of Ireland was brutal and genocidal.  It is a tribute to the strength of the Irish people that there are any of them left speaking Gaelic or remembering St. Patrick (whose veneration was also banned in 1798). In 1798, the British banned “the wearing of the Green”, even of Shamrocks, thus giving rise to the woeful Irish Ballad “They’re Hanging Men and Women for the Wearing of the Green.”  Irish identity survived, but it was a miracle that it did.  And all remnants of traditional Irish culture, except on the farthest and rockiest Western Atlantic Coastal shore islands, have been destroyed completely.

Historical Notes for January 17, 2013

Today, January 17, 2013 is a day with historical relevance to many schisms. In A.D. 395, the Emperor Theodosius died in Milan (then known as Mediolanum). His two sons Arcadius and Honorius split the Roman Empire (whose capital was no longer “Rome” but Milan and Constantinople). Then on this day in 1377, almost a thousand years after the division of the Eastern and Western Empires), Pope Gregory XI moved the seat of the papacy back from Avignon to Rome. In 1648, the Roundheads in the Long Parliament voted to terminate negotiations with Charles I, leading to the English Civil War, and one year later, on January of 1649, the execution of King Charles “the Martyr” Stuart. Finally, today is two days before Robert E. Lee’s 206th birthday (January 19, 1807). When Robert E. Lee was my age, 52, he had not yet arrested John Brown or gone to Texas to command Fort Mason, which was to be his last active post as an officer of the United States Army before his major role in history really began after the secession of his native Virginia.
Today is also a day of infamy in two regards: on this day in 1946 the United Nations Security Council held its first session, building towards the establishment of World Government with effective force and power. In a not entirely unrelated event, 45 years later in 1991, President George H.W. Bush, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and head of the C.I.A., falsely elected Vice-President with Ronald W. Reagan who had promised to get the U.S. out of the United Nations in 1980, launched what H.M. King George Bush I had expressly designed as a “New World Order” War with United Nations approval: the Gulf War Desert Storm in Iraq. I was totally opposed to that war and remain totally opposed to all its results and derivatives over the past 23 years of U.S. Empire Building in Western and Central Asia.

“The Holocaust became the new Western religion”—

I had come to this exact same conclusion by 1998-1999, during the David Irving Libel Suit against Deborah Lipstadt.  In particular, I concluded and formed the very strong and precise opinion “the Holocaust” had become the basis of the religion of the New World Order of the United Nations, just as the Trojan War was the religion of Ancient Greece, the Punic, Gallic, and Civil Wars the Religion of Pre-Christian Rome, the Crusades the Religion of Mediaeval Europe, Charles the Martyr became the chief subject of Episcopal Sermons during the years 1660-1789, and lastly, just as the “Civil” War of 1861-65 became the “Constitutional” Religion of the United States after 1865-1877.  I never at that time would have dared to articulate or publish this conclusion, especially since in 1998-1999 I was under direct assault for my own involvement in “revisionist civil rights” activism in Texas, asserting that the Civil Rights Laws of the United States applied equally to White people as to people of color, which campaign ultimately led to my disbarment.  I am now happy and grateful to see and share that Gilad Atzmon, a Jewish artist and Historian from Israel, living in Great Britain, has now finally published this precise statement!  It is quite gratifying to see that even a Jew who questions the Global state religion of the Holocaust is accused of Anti-Semitism!
 What will happen if Gilad visits Austria?  Will he be arrested and charged with the same crimes as David Irving?  Will he be put on trial and imprisoned?  Or will he be declared mentally unsound and threatened with psychiatric confinement and threatened with “attainder” of his civil rights for life, just as Jane Burgermeister is facing in Austria this month?  In certain sectors they call me stupid or insane?  Is there any reason why YOU are not eligible for similar treatment?  If you support animal rights?  If you oppose Obama-care?  If you either oppose OR support one hypothesis or another about climate change and global warming?  Only a country which guarantees freedom of thought and expression and debate is truly free…..God Bless Gilad Atzmon, Jane Burgermeister, David Irving, Janet Claire Phelan, Nancy Jo Grant, and everyone like them who dare to speak out against “established truth” in history or science!

Truth, History and Integrity by Gilad Atzmon

Saturday, March 13, 2010 at 2:02PM
Gilad Atzmon

Back in 2007 the notorious American Jewish right-wing organization, the ADL (Anti-Defamation League) announced that it recognised the events in which an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were massacred as “genocide.” The ADL’s national director, Abraham Foxman, insisted that he made the decision after discussing the matter with ‘historians’. For some reason he failed to mention who the historians were, nor did he refer to their credibility or field of scholarship. However, Foxman also consulted with one holocaust survivor who supported the decision.  It was Elie Wiesel, not known for being a leading world expert on the Armenian ordeal.

The idea of a Zionist organization being genuinely concerned, or even slightly moved, by other people’s suffering could truly be a monumental transforming moment in Jewish history. However, this week we learned that the ADL is once again engaged in the dilemma of Armenian suffering. It is not convinced anymore that the Armenians suffered that much. It is now lobbying the American congress not to recognize the killings of Armenians as ‘genocide. This week saw the ADL “speaking out against Congressional acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide, and is, instead, advocating Turkey’s call for a historical commission to study the events.”

How is it that an event that took place a century ago is causing such a furor? One day it is generally classified as ‘genocide’, the next, it is demoted to an ordinary instance of one man killing another. Was it an ‘historical document’ that, out of nowhere, popped out on Abe Foxman’s desk? Are there some new factual revelations that led to such a dramatic historical shift? l don’t think so.

The ADL’s behaviour is a glimpse into the notion of Jewish history and the Jewish understanding of the past.  For the nationalist and political Jew, history is a pragmatic tale, it is an elastic account. It is foreign to any scientific or academic method.  Jewish history transcends itself beyond factuality,  truthfulness or  correspondence rules with any given vision of reality. It also repels integrity or ethics. It by far prefers total submission, instead of creative and critical thinking. Jewish history is a phantasmic tale that is there to make the Jews happy and the Goyim behave themselves. It is there to serve the interests of one tribe and that tribe only. In practice, from a Jewish perspective,  the decision whether there was an Armenian genocide or not is subject to Jewish interests: is it good for the Jews or is it good for Israel.

Interestingly enough, history is not a particularly ‘Jewish thing’. It is an established fact that not a single Jewish historical text has been written between the 1st century (Josephus Flavius) and early 19th century (Isaak Markus Jost). For almost 2 thousand years Jews were not interested in their own or anyone else’s past, at least not enough to chronicle it. As a matter of convenience, an adequate scrutiny of the past was never a primary concern within the Rabbinical tradition. One of the reasons is probably that there was no need for such a methodical effort. For the Jew who lived during ancient times and the Middle Ages, there was enough in the Bible to answer the most relevant questions to do with day-to-day life, Jewish meaning and fate. As Israeli historian Shlomo Sand puts it, “a secular chronological time was foreign to the ‘Diaspora time’ that was shaped by the anticipation for the coming of the Messiah.”

However, in the mid 19th century, in the light of secularisation, urbanisation, emancipation and due to the decreasing authority of the Rabbinical leaders, an emerging need of an alternative cause rose amongst the awakening European Jews. All of a sudden, the emancipated Jew had to decide who he was and where he came from. He also started to speculate what his role might be within the rapidly opening Western society.

This is where Jewish history in its modern form was invented. This is also where Judaism was transformed from a world religion into a ‘land registry’ with some clearly devastating racially orientated and expansionist implications. As we know, Shlomo Sand’s account of the ‘Jewish Nation’ as a fictional invention is yet to be challenged academically. However, the dismissal of factuality or commitment to truthfulness is actually symptomatic of any form of contemporary Jewish collective ideology and identity politics. The ADL’s treatment of the Armenian topic is just one example. The Zionist’s dismissal of a Palestinian past and heritage is just another example. But in fact any Jewish collective vision of the past is inherently Judeo-centric and  oblivious to any academic or scientific procedure.

When I was Young

When I was young and naïve I regarded history as a serious academic matter. As I understood it, history had something to do with truth seeking, documents, chronology and facts. I was convinced that history aimed to convey a sensible account of the past based on methodical research. I also believed that it was premised on the assumption that understanding the past may throw some light over our present and even help us to shape a prospect of a better future.  I grew up in the Jewish state and it took me quite a while to understand that the Jewish historical narrative is very different. In the Jewish intellectual ghetto, one decides what the future ought to be, then one constructs ‘a past’ accordingly. Interestingly enough, this exact method is also prevalent amongst Marxists. They shape the past so it fits nicely into their vision of the future. As the old Russian joke says, “when the facts do not conform with the Marxist ideology, the Communist social scientists amend the facts (rather than revise the theory)”.

When I was young, I didn’t think that history was a matter of political decisions or agreements between a rabid Zionist lobby and its favorite holocaust survivor. I regarded historians as scholars who engaged in adequate research following some strict procedures. When I was young I even considered becoming an historian.

When I was young and naive I was also somehow convinced that what they told us about our ‘collective’ Jewish past really happened. I believed it all, the Kingdom of David, Massada, and then the Holocaust: the soap, the lampshade*, the death march, the six million.

As it happened, it took me many years to understand that the Holocaust, the core belief of the contemporary Jewish faith, was not at all an historical narrative for historical narratives do not need the protection of the law and politicians. It took me years to grasp that my great-grandmother wasn’t made into a ‘soap’ or a ‘lampshade’*. She probably perished out of exhaustion, typhus or maybe even by mass shooting. This was indeed bad and tragic enough, however not that different from the fate of many millions of Ukrainians who learned what communism meant for real. “Some of the worst mass murderers in history were Jews” writes Zionist Sever Plocker on the Israeli Ynet disclosing the Holodomor and Jewish involvement in this colossal crime, probably the greatest crime of the 20th century. The fate of my great-grandmother was not any different from hundreds of thousands of German civilians who died in an orchestrated indiscriminate bombing, because they were Germans. Similarly, people in Hiroshima died just because they were Japanese. 1 million Vietnamese died just because they were Vietnamese and 1.3 million Iraqis died because they were Iraqis. In short the tragic circumstances of my great grandmother wasn’t that special after all.

It Doesn’t make sense

It took me years to accept that the Holocaust narrative, in its current form, doesn’t make any historical sense. Here is just one little anecdote to elaborate on:

If, for instance, the Nazis wanted the Jews out of their Reich (Judenrein – free of Jews), or even dead, as the Zionist narrative insists, how come they marched hundreds of thousands of them back into the Reich at the end of the war? I have been concerned with this simple question for more than a while. I eventually launched into an historical research of the topic and happened to learn from Israeli holocaust historian professor Israel Gutman that Jewish prisoners actually joined the march voluntarily. Here is a testimony taken from Gutman’s book

One of my friends and relatives in the camp came to me on the night of the evacuation and offered a common hiding place somewhere on the way from the camp to the factory. …The intention was to leave the camp with one of the convoys and to escape near the gate, using the darkness we thought to go a little far from the camp. The temptation was very strong. And yet, after I considered it all  I then decided to join (the march) with all the other inmates and to share their fate “ (Israel Gutman [editor], People and Ashes: Book Auschwitz – Birkenau, Merhavia 1957).

I am left puzzled here, if the Nazis ran a death factory in Auschwitz-Birkenau, why would the Jewish prisoners join them at the end of the war? Why didn’t the Jews wait for their Red liberators?

I think that 65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz, we must be entitled to start to ask the necessary questions. We should ask for some conclusive historical evidence and arguments rather than follow a religious narrative that is sustained by political pressure and laws. We should strip the holocaust of its Judeo-centric exceptional status and treat it as an historical chapter that belongs to a certain time and place

65 years after the liberation of Auschwitz we should reclaim our history and ask why? Why were the Jews hated? Why did European people  stand up against their next door neighbours? Why are the Jews hated in the Middle East, surely they had a chance to open a new page in their troubled history? If they genuinely planned to do so, as the early Zionists claimed, why did they fail? Why did America tighten its immigration laws amid the growing danger to European Jews? We should also ask for what purpose do the holocaust denial laws serve? What is the holocaust religion there to conceal? As long as we fail to ask questions, we will be subjected to Zionists and their Neocons agents’ plots. We will continue killing in the name of Jewish suffering. We will maintain our complicity in Western imperialist crimes against humanity.

As devastating as it may be, at a certain moment in time, a horrible chapter was given an exceptionally meta-historical status. Its ‘factuality’ was sealed by draconian laws and its reasoning was secured by social and political settings. The Holocaust  became the new Western religion.  Unfortunately, it is the most sinister religion known to man. It is a license to kill, to flatten, no nuke, to wipe, to rape, to loot and to ethnically cleanse. It made vengeance and revenge into a Western value. However, far more concerning is the fact that it robs humanity of its heritage, it is there to stop us from looking into our past with dignity. Holocaust religion robs humanity of its humanism. For the sake of peace and future generations, the holocaust must be stripped of its exceptional status immediately. It must be subjected to thorough historical scrutiny. Truth and truth seeking is an elementary human experience. It must prevail.

*During WWII and after it was widely believed that soaps and lampshades were being mass produced from the bodies of Jewish victims. In recent years the Israeli Holocaust museum admitted that there was no truth in any of those accusations.

Article originally appeared on Gilad Atzmon (http://www.gilad.co.uk/).

See website for complete article licensing information.