The Protocols of Zion - Debunking the Debunker

June 6, 2012

ue.jpg(left, Umberto Eco, post modernist, atheist, expert in semi-idiotics (cabalistic wordgames.) In his bestselling 2010 novel The Prague Cemetery, he absolves Masonic Jews of any connection to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.)   


Umberto Eco did nothing to discredit the Protocols. Rather he discredited himself.




Migchels: "In short: Protocol 20 offers a unique insight into all the essentials of monetary theory ... it is absolutely impossible that some "forger" could have written this."



by Anthony Migchels
(henrymakow.com)



Umberto Eco's 'The Prague Cemetery' is an obvious attempt to discredit the quickly growing awareness of the Protocols as a blue print for the New World Order. But although Eco is in good form, with good historical and gastronomical detail, he's left looking silly.

The book centers around Simone Simonini, an Italian antisemitic conspirator. He is commissioned by a number of conspiring groups to write the Protocols to defame the Jews. This is the classical explanation for the Protocols, of course.

In an afterthought of the book, Eco 'debunks' the idea that the Protocols are for real with the usual worn out narrative of 'plagiarism' of Maurice Joly's 'Dialogue from Hell'. As Henry Makow has shown, Joly plagiarized the Protocols, not the other way around. 

In the book literally everybody is scheming and conspiring for all sorts of causes. The French Secret Service, the Russians, Freemasons, the famous Mazzini (to whom Pike addressed a famous letter), the Vatican and the Jesuits. Even Weishaupt's Illuminati are featured. They are all vying for political power and all of them are trying to blame the Jews.

The only group that is blameless are the Jews themselves, except for a few self-hating Jews that are trying to implicate their brethren. I'm not kidding, nor am I overstating the case. This is what Eco is doing in this obvious and dimwitted attempt to do away with the Protocols.

Of course, had Eco described the Jews as conspiring like rest, he would have made a much stronger case. Everybody is doing it, so why pick on the Jews?  But treating them like Saints does makes the good professor look rather inadequate.

ARE THE PROTOCOLS GENUINE?

The veracity of its content suggest that they are. And very powerful as well. Just like the Holy Books they remain fresh with every new read, proving a great mind produced them.

As an author focusing on the monetary aspects of the New World Order, I am very impressed by the profundity of Protocol 20, regarding their 'Financial program'. Every advanced student of money should have a closer look at them.

history_wing_assets_room1_elders_of_zion_protocols-12.jpgConsidering the absolutely shallow appreciation of monetary matters in the public mind, as witnessed by both Mainstream Economics and Austrian Economics, clearly a real insider must have written this text. It discusses all the main issues with money with great authority and knowledge. A detailed analysis of this Protocol can be found here.

It explains how destructive interest is, both in terms of cost to the borrower and because it hinders circulation of money, which is very important and little understood.

It mentions Gold as 'the ruin of the Goyim States'.

It explains how the scarcity of Gold hinders full economic activity, while adding 'they' have taken as much Gold out of circulation as possible. Thereby the Protocols openly admit both their domination of Gold and the specie's inadequacy as a means of exchange. And it validates our extensive criticism of Austrian Economics.

It also cogently discusses the issue of the volume of money and how it should be managed. It provides  a powerful appreciation of how things should be, including an interest free money supply and a workable unit of account. They suggest a working man's hourly wage, which, incidentally is the unit of account that LETS circles* use all over the world.

In short: Protocol 20 offers a unique insight into all the essentials of monetary theory and practice. It does so in just a few pages, proving great mastery of the issues.

To my mind, it is absolutely impossible that some "forger" could have written this. I know of nobody that could have created such a text. There is nobody in the Alternative Media, let alone in normal academic circles that could have come up with this.

The fact that this was written more than a hundred years ago makes it even more incredible, although it must be said that political and economic awareness was probably higher back then than it is today.

CONCLUSION

Umberto Eco did nothing to discredit the Protocols. Rather he discredited himself.

Meanwhile, the Protocols remain a timeless witness to the truth: there are a few men out there who know how to manipulate and enslave the human race.

*
Local Exchange Trading System, a simple barter unit that was developed by Michael Linton.

There are hundreds, if not thousands of local networks worldwide with individuals participating to exchange goods and services. They have had a limited, but positive effect on reactivating the unemployed and disenfranchised.


Migchels comments on recent George Soros speech now removed from Soros website

Related:

Boyle: IRELAND: Does 'Protocol 20′ sound familiar?
Makow: Protocols Forgery Argument Flawed
Makow: Protocols of Zion - Damage Control
Migchels: The Protocols on Money

Anthony Migchels is a Dutch monetary reformer . Please visit his blog and support his courageous and selfless work. 








Comments for "The Protocols of Zion - Debunking the Debunker "

Doug said (June 7, 2012):

The protocols are real and obvious to anyone that reads them, this is also true of The Report From Iron Mountain. Back when they were first read they may not have seemed real but history, especially recent history, shows that they authentic in the information they provided.


Al Thompson said (June 5, 2012):

Anthony did a good job on this article. These Protocols are the most vile, filthy, insane, and demented writings I have ever seen. To think that anyone could writes such a piece of trash is unspeakable. It is a blue print for the future enslavement of mankind. And it describes in great detail how they intend to screw the world. And all one has to do is to look back in history for the last 225years and see that they have implemented this evil plot against mankind. If anyone wants to know the source of the evil, just go to the principles of Satan, the oath, and most religions and government.

In the Protocols of Zion, there is a reference to their allegiance to the Hindu god Vishnu. Now, I could never figure out why "Jews" would advocate a completely different god than the one in the Bible. It appears that these "Jews" are completely different than a biblical Jew and that they are more pagans than anything else. Whatever they are, the writer or writers of the Protocols were extremely psycho. They remind me more of the Pharisees.
http://verydumbgovernment.blogspot.com/2012/02/bad-government-and-bad-religion.html


Roberts said (June 5, 2012):

Migchels mentions the famous letter allegedly written by Albert Pike to Mazzini, by which he must mean the 1871
one predicting three future world wars. The second prediction runs as follows: "The Second World War must be
fomented by taking advantage of the differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be
brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be strong enough to institute a sovereign
state of Israel in Palestine." Considering that the terms political Zionism, Fascism and Nazism were unknown in
1871, such a quotation must be regarded as fraudulent.

As for the Protocols, in general it seems conceivable that they could have been compiled for political reasons by, say, an
intelligence agency; e.g., the Czarist secret police, as is sometimes alleged. The problem they pose for those who
would argue this is their seemingly prescient prediction of major developments and events occurring subsequent to
their publication around 1905.


Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at