British revolution, French revolution, Russian revolution all part of an ongoing jewish-zionist war against Christian civilization
|
|
Thread rating:  |
YTR - 03 Nov 2007 12:12 GMT Archibald Maule Ramsay, 'The Nameless War'.
Archibald Maule Ramsay wrote the true history of events leading up to the Second World War. For this he was imprisoned for several years. Read his book The Nameless War to learn more.
Read his short 120 page book, The Nameless War. http://iamthewitness.com/books/Archibald.Maule.Ramsay/The.Nameless.War/00.Introd uction.htm
Captain Archibald Maule Ramsay was educated at Eton and the Royal Military College, Sandhurst, and served with the 2nd Battalion Coldstream Guards in the First World War until he was severely wounded in 1916 - thereafter at Regimental H.Q. and the War Office and the British War Mission in Paris until the end of the war.
>From 1920 he became a Member of H.M. Scottish Bodyguard. In 1931 he was elected a Member of Parliament for Midlothian and Peeblesshire.
Arrested under Regulation 18b on the 23rd May, 1940, he was detained, without charge or trial, in a cell in Brixton Prison until the 26th September, 1944. On the following morning he resumed his seat in the House of Commons and remained there until the end of that Parliament in 1945. THE NAMELESS WAR
Here is the story that people have said would never be written in our time - the true history of events leading up to the Second World War, told by one who enjoyed the friendship and confidence of Mr. Neville Chamberlain during the critical months between Munich and September, 1939.
There has long been an unofficial ban on books dealing with what Captain Ramsay calls "The Nameless War", the conflict which has been waged from behind the political scene for centuries, which is still being waged and of which very few are aware.
The publishers of "The Nameless War" believe this latest exposure will do more than any previous attempt to break the conspiracy of silence.
The present work, with much additional evidence and a fuller historical background, is the outcome of the personal experiences of a public figure who in the course of duty has discovered at first-hand the existence of a centuries old conspiracy against Britain, Europe, and the whole of Christendom.
"The Nameless War" reveals an unsuspected link between all the major revolutions in Europe - from King Charles I's time to the abortive attempt against Spain in 1936. One source of inspiration, design and supply is shown to be common to all of them. These revolutions and the World War of 1939 are seen to be integral parts of one and the same master plan.
After a brief review of the forces behind the declaration of war and the world wide arrests of many who endeavoured to oppose them, the author describes the anatomy of the Revolutionary International machine - the machine which today continues the plan for supranational world power, the age-old Messianic dream of International Jewry.
It is the author's belief that the machine would break down without the support of its unwilling Jews and unsuspecting Gentiles and he puts forward suggestions for detaching these elements.
Christians say . . .
"Captain Ramsay, a Christian gentleman of unflagging courage, believed that the war with Germany was not conceived in the interests of Britain and could lead only to the extension of Communist and Jewish power. Because he warned his fellow countrymen of the forces at work, he was put in prison without trial for four and a half years, for 'reasons' so preposterous that those who framed them dared not submit them to a court of law." Truth
"For years Captain Ramsay had been a member of the British Parliament. His book is an analysis of the Jewish-Zionist war against Christian civilization." The Cross and the Flag
Jews say . . .
"There is no limit to the depths of human depravity, Captain Maule Ramsay . . . seems to have made a very determined attempt to plumb those depths." The Jewish Chronicle
"The publication of such a book, at this time, underlines the urgent need for the law to be reformed so as to make it a crime to preach racial hatred or publish libels on groups in the community." The Daily Worker
Copyright 1952; First Edition October 1952; Second Popular Edition 1956; Third Popular Edition 1956; Fourth Popular Edition 1962;
Made and Printed in Great Britain by The B.P.S. Printing Co. and Published by the Britons Publishing Company 111a Westbourne Grove, London, W.2
CONTENTS
1. The British Revolution - http://tinyurl.com/2m3trm 2. The French Revolution - http://tinyurl.com/2qagh2 3. The Russian Revolution - http://tinyurl.com/3bx23m 4. Development of Revolutionary Technique - http://tinyurl.com/3yt5dm 5. Germany Bells The Cat - http://tinyurl.com/382dzt 6. 1933: Jewry Declares War - http://tinyurl.com/3xzd34 7. "Phoney War" Ended by Civilian Bombing - http://tinyurl.com/35sfca 8. Dunkirk and After - http://tinyurl.com/2nredq 9. The Shape of Things to Come - http://tinyurl.com/3xb3cc 10. President Roosevelt's Role - http://tinyurl.com/3av7uo 11. Regulation 18b - http://tinyurl.com/3y798d 12. Who Dares? - http://tinyurl.com/2lrpuw 13. Epilogue - http://tinyurl.com/2jkrod
(There are now only five nations on the world left without a Rothschild owned central bank: Iran; North Korea; Sudan; Cuba; and Libya.)
PROLOGUE
Edward I banished the Jews from England for many grave offences endangering the welfare of his realm and lieges, which were to a great extent indicated in the Statutes of Jewry*, enacted by his Parliament in 1290, the Commons playing a prominent part.
* See Appendix 2 (Appendices follow the last chapter)
The King of France very shortly followed suit, as did other Rulers in Christian Europe. So grave did the situation for the Jews in Europe become, that an urgent appeal for help and advice was addressed by them to the Sanhedrin, then located at Constantinople.
This appeal was sent over the signature of Chemor, Rabbi of Arles in Provence, on the 13th January, 1489. The reply came in November, 1489, which was issued over the signature of V.S.S. V.F.F. Prince of the Jews.
It advised the Jews of Europe to adopt the tactics of the Trojan Horse; to make their sons Christian priests, lawyers, doctors, etc., and work to destroy the Christian structure from within.
The first notable repercussion to this advice occurred in Spain in the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella. Many Jews were by then enrolled as Christians, but remaining secretly Jews were working to destroy the Christian church in Spain.
So grave became the menace finally, that the Inquisition was instituted in an endeavour to cleanse the country from these conspirators. Once again the Jews were compelled to commence an exodus from yet another country, whose hospitality they had abused.
Trekking eastwards, these Jews joined other Jewish communities in western Europe; considerable numbers flowed on to Holland and Switzerland.
From now on these two countries were to become active centres of Jewish intrigue. Jewry, however, has always needed a powerful seafaring nation to which to attach itself.
Great Britain, newly united under James I, was a rising naval power, which was already beginning to sway the four corners of the discovered world. Here also there existed a wonderful field for disruptive criticism; for although it was a Christian kingdom, yet it was one most sharply divided as between Protestant and Catholic.
A campaign for exploiting this division and fanning hatreds between the Christian communities was soon in process of organization. How well the Jews succeeded in this campaign in Britain may be judged from the fact that one of the earliest acts of their creature and hireling Oliver Cromwell - after executing the King according to plan - was to allow the Jews free access to England once more.
Robert Cohen - 03 Nov 2007 16:38 GMT > Archibald Maule Ramsay, 'The Nameless War'. > [quoted text clipped - 165 lines] > hireling Oliver Cromwell - after executing the King according to plan > - was to allow the Jews free access to England once more. A small clue for today's usually leftist-liberal anti-zionist scoffers (Jew and non-Jew) why an early 20th century European journalist Theodore Herzl, a non-religious ethnic Jew, founded what's generally now called "modern zionism."
These contortions of reality are (imho) unhappily part & parcel of traditional "folk wisdom" culture perhaps originally eminating from NEW TESTAMNENT doctrine.
The Christian religion was founded by anti-establishment types, and these politico-religio reformers-activists except for Alexander were all apparetly Jews.
1900 years later, after the dark ages, feudalism, the middle ages, the renaissance, the reformation, the begining of the industrial revolution:
Herzl saw the infamous Colonel Alfred Dreyfus court martial (for spying for Germany) case in then relatively progressive-tolerant- liberalistic France as indicative of even the most secularized of Jews ultimate alien (l'estranger) status in the gentile world.
Nevermind, Marcel Proust, whose parents were a Jew and a Caholic.
A folk culture(s) is from whence/where everybody, including academics, is originally basically primarily imprinted-enculturated.
I had not previously seen that backhand compliment about the Jews also as responsible for the "British Revolution," but ...uh...the subversive Magna Carta aka great card or menu from the delicatessan in London's merchant place where the elders of zion plotted to take power from the divine right monarchy,
Now, if true, wouldn't that be something for the Jews as the actual inspirers-founders of the model government of western and world civilizations.
Robert Cohen - 03 Nov 2007 18:15 GMT > > Archibald Maule Ramsay, 'The Nameless War'. > [quoted text clipped - 204 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Oops, his "British Revolution" is about the Jews apparent underhanded control of Oliver Cromwell.
I shan't read the guy's links to an alternate history, as such wiil raise blood pressure, though I discourage others from being as stupid to critique contrived crape that this schnook didn't even read.
The usual way to deal with this stuff is to concede/agree where there is conventional consensus, and to try to take apart what is being claimed as cover-up, I suppose.
Anyhow: please have at it, because imho it's important to acknowlege (& always to question) established truths and to outright refute (or at least question harshly) apparent malicious slanders and innuendo.
Robert Cohen - 04 Nov 2007 02:03 GMT > > > Archibald Maule Ramsay, 'The Nameless War'. > [quoted text clipped - 206 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Re: France's Revolution finance/encouraged by the Jews
One thing about Voltaire: he really luvs the stubborn Jews....not.
As for the Rothschild's etal: I have not yet read the WIIKIPEDIA take; though I betcha w/o looking at the usuallly informative articles that the rich investment bankers were backing/funding opposing polticians & causes, just as they seem to do contemporaneously--for instance, Soros vs Mellon now.
Such reality should not be shocking news.
I suppose similar for the U.S.'s infamous "robber barons."
"Money is the mother's milk of politics," as Boss Tweed, Tip O'Neil, etal may candidly affirm.
Hmm: Why do Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, Senior, seem to often agree with Democrats instead of Republicans about taxing ?
Perhaps, because very rich human beings are after all sometimes divergent thinking mortal humans too.
David Morgan (MAMS) - 04 Nov 2007 03:20 GMT "Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in
> As for the Rothschild's etal: I have not yet read the WIIKIPEDIA take; The public would be better off banning WikiPedia. Any publicly editable data base is not to be trusted.
"Wikipedia isn’t supposed to be the same thing as an encyclopedia: it’s an experiment to see if accuracy can be arrived at through consensus."
... And it isn't working very well. http://www.aetherometry.com/antiwikipedia/Section_I.html
Because of the massive number of lawsuits against Wikipedia, an enormous number of pages have been forced to carry the heading, "This page is currently under dispute over it's content accuracy". "This Article or section may require cleanup", and other disclaimers. It's becoming a real sore on every teacher's a.s in the country for a few years now - that being a publicly editable database, Wikipedia is subject to containing completely falsified or highly biased and/or misleading information.
http://courseblog.cs.princeton.edu/spring06/wws528f/?p=68
The problem is so blatant, that various Wikipedia foreign sites are being shut down by the respective governments to prevent the imparting of fraudulent information to the public.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060119-6013.html
http://www.israelnewsagency.com/wikipedianewsisraelcensorship48480706.html
The big problem, is that students (and other inquisitive minds) are also generally too lazy to find a library or other printed reference materials as sources, so they sit behind their computers and take the easy way out... believing that what they read in 'the 'pedia' is the truth. In the US, a great number of teachers are currently refusing to accept Wiki as a reference on research papers. It's a known issue that it contains false information as a result of being publicly editable.
It's so easy to commit fraud on Wikipedia, that it's often the brunt of practical jokes... http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?ch=infotech&sc=&id=16057&pg=2 <same story> http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/roush/posts.aspx?id=15974
Wkipedia proponents like to use the total number of "errors" or average "accuracy" in relation to other sources like Britannica... but they aren't staying aligned with the truth by admitting that we aren't talking about spelling, punctuation and grammatical errors here... we're talking about complete fraud.
http://emacsmood.livejournal.com/101766.html
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20051212.html
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1900708,00.asp
http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/print/brandt01212006/ Saturday, January 21, 2006
"There is a problem with the structure of Wikipedia. The basic problem is that no one, neither the Trustees of Wikimedia Foundation, nor the volunteers who are connected with Wikipedia, consider themselves responsible for the content. If you don’t believe me, then carefully read Wikipedia’s disclaimer." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer
Want a sample of this crappola that people could actually, though unintentionally, buy into without checking other sources?
June 02, 2006 http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060602/BUSINESS/606020422/1 003/rss03
" Popular Wikipedia entries, such as on President Bush, are continually vandalized. An entry on Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales once was falsified with a reference that had him being shot dead.
In 2005, oil giant ExxonMobil's entry was altered by a disgruntled Internet user who changed the corporate slogan to "Robbing you blind" and the name of the company chairman to "J.R. Ewing."
This (Wikipedia) will never be a reliable source until someone takes responsibility for it's accuracy.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1900708,00.asp
Almond - 04 Nov 2007 03:36 GMT >"Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in > >> As for the Rothschild's etal: I have not yet read the WIIKIPEDIA take; > >The public would be better off banning WikiPedia. Any publicly editable >data base is not to be trusted.
> "Wikipedia isn’t supposed to be the same thing as an encyclopedia: it’s > an experiment to see if accuracy can be arrived at through consensus."
>.... And it isn't working very well. >http://www.aetherometry.com/antiwikipedia/Section_I.html
>Because of the massive number of lawsuits against Wikipedia, an enormous >number of pages have been forced to carry the heading, "This page is currently [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Wikipedia is subject to containing completely falsified or highly biased and/or >misleading information. Correct. And you can not find some of the most outstanding material by the people of highest caliber unless it aligns with this NWO agenda.
Wikipedia is a global project to collect massive amounts of information on individuals and their views so that they could be "taken care of" need be.
>http://courseblog.cs.princeton.edu/spring06/wws528f/?p=68 >The problem is so blatant, that various Wikipedia foreign sites are being shut [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?ch=infotech&sc=&id=16057&pg=2 ><same story> http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/roush/posts.aspx?id=15974
>Wkipedia proponents like to use the total number of "errors" or average >"accuracy" in relation to other sources like Britannica... but they aren't [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1900708,00.asp
>http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/print/brandt01212006/ >Saturday, January 21, 2006 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > me, then carefully read Wikipedia’s disclaimer." > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer
>Want a sample of this crappola that people could actually, though >unintentionally, buy into without checking other sources? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >This (Wikipedia) will never be a reliable source until someone takes >responsibility for it's accuracy.
>http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1900708,00.asp It isn't a source of anything. I visited it for a couple of time and simply could not believe my eyes. Looks like some propaganda machine of global proportions.
Utterly useless.
 Signature The most powerful Usenet tool you have ever heard of. NewsMaestro v. 4.0.6 - Dictionary Update/Expert Mode has been released.
* Significant improvement in symbol substitution mechanism for verb tense and plurals. * Expert mode. * Miscellaneous improvements and bug fixes. * Templates generator improvements. * Multi-job support.
Note: In some previous releases some class files were missing. As a result, the program would not run. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Web page: http://newsmaestro.sourceforge.net/
Download page: http://newsmaestro.sourceforge.net/Download_Information.htm
Send any feedback, ideas, suggestions, test results to newsmaestroinfo \at/ mail.ru.
Your personal info will not be released and your privacy will be honored.
Robert Cohen - 04 Nov 2007 03:54 GMT > >"Robert Cohen" <robtco...@msn.com> wrote in > [quoted text clipped - 119 lines] > > - Show quoted text - After we're too old or dead, i hereaby predict & hope Wikipedia, as constantly corrected/reformed/revised, will be flourishing, and despite lawsuits and f-ups.
Competitors and copycats with better mice catchers are welcome, available space is seemingly infinite.
David Morgan (MAMS) - 04 Nov 2007 04:06 GMT "Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in message
> Competitors and copycats with better mice catchers are welcome, > available space is seemingly infinite. Encyclopædia Britannica will do quite nicely, and shelf space hasn't reached a premium quite yet. ;-)
http://www.britannica.com/ Of course, on-line, you have to sign up and log in, so they can see what you're searching for as well.
Robert Cohen - 04 Nov 2007 04:40 GMT On Nov 4, 12:06 am, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)" <fin...@m-a-m-s.comC/Odm> wrote:
> "Robert Cohen" <robtco...@msn.com> wrote in message > > Competitors and copycats with better mice catchers are welcome, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > sign up and log in, so they can see what you're searching for > as well. They do not get a fee nor a prospect they can call-on from free registration?
If so, then I'll be trying 'em too.
Hope it's written more in 6th grade newspaper level lingo, rather than the expected esoteric boring academic language that is a turn-off particularly to my 50-60-70 percentile mind.
The articles in hard copy BRITTANICA were usually credited-signed, which is seemingly preferable to anonimity, and thus implies professional responsibility.
So, Hooray for us and to them adapting.
I can't mind ads should they hawk 'em, so long as the damne ads do not interfere/influence content.
Robert Cohen - 04 Nov 2007 04:57 GMT > On Nov 4, 12:06 am, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)" <fin...@m-a-m-s.comC/Odm> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > I can't mind ads should they hawk 'em, so long as the damne ads do not > interfere/influence content. They get $70 a year after a free trial.
I've subscribed to fee services: here's for instances two:
THE NEW YORK TIMES and SLATE which are both now free.
Do you think fee-based BRITANNICA will stay afloat and triumph in superiority over freebie WIKI ?
Here in the shittey real world, "free" has its inevitable way of getting beaucoup subscribers, despite the usual annoying ads.
If I can't even yet motivate myself to subscribe to britannica, then i have doubts about Brittanica's survival and influence.
Sorry and unfortunately true confession, c'est la vie.
David Morgan (MAMS) - 04 Nov 2007 05:15 GMT "Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in
> They get $70 a year after a free trial. Holy fecal matter !!! I had no idea that this would be a 'fee' service.
http://www.reference.com/ is free, and they have a small but modest data base... (which may also be subject to spontaneous alteration, I can't tell yet).
> Do you think fee-based BRITANNICA will stay afloat and triumph in > superiority over freebie WIKI ? Advertisers will keep it afloat, even if the subscribers fail. But that's a rather healthy sum of money by my standards. Google gets me free access to foreign sources... more reading and more deciding, but more information is better, IMHO.
> If I can't even yet motivate myself to subscribe to britannica, > then i have doubts about Brittanica's survival and influence. It's not just a matter of 'motivation' for me... it's the bank account.
David Morgan (MAMS) - 04 Nov 2007 05:05 GMT "Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in message...
> They do not get a fee nor a prospect they can call-on from free > registration? Their advertisers get to plant malicious cookies in your browser cache. Be sure to empty your temp files and delete cookies when you leave the site (as with most sites these days). They just love to phone home and order mal-ware or report on your goings when you boot up the next time.
> Hope it's written more in 6th grade newspaper level lingo, rather than > the expected esoteric boring academic language that is a turn-off > particularly to my 50-60-70 percentile mind. Hey.... my grades weren't that good either... but the IQ seems to float slightly above the grade point. ;-)
> So, Hooray for us and to them adapting. We have to resolve ourselves to the ungracious truth... If it's on line, it can be tampered with, or it can tamper with us.
> I can't mind ads should they hawk 'em, so long as the damne > ads do not interfere/influence content. You mean if I buy an ad, I can get my product reviewed ?!?!?!
Cheers,
David Morgan (MAMS) - 04 Nov 2007 04:02 GMT "Almond" <almond@brothers.orgy> wrote in message...
> "David Morgan \(MAMS\)" <findme@m-a-m-s.comC/Odm> wrote:
> >This (Wikipedia) will never be a reliable source until someone takes > >responsibility for it's accuracy. > > > >http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1900708,00.asp
> It isn't a source of anything. I visited it for a couple of time > and simply could not believe my eyes. Looks like some propaganda > machine of global proportions. It is when it comes to "sensitive" subject matter... like 9/11, global warming, the phony War On Terror, the Zionist issue, etc., etc..
> Utterly useless. You can find information... the problem is, you have to both 'source' it and triple check it.
David Morgan (MAMS) - 04 Nov 2007 03:22 GMT "Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in
> As for the Rothschild's etal: I have not yet read the WIIKIPEDIA take; Wiki-surfing is not research, children. For more on Wikipedia, see Daniel Brandt's Wikipedia-watch at http://www.wikipedia-watch.org
See also, among numerous other stories in NY Transfer's archive:
"Wikipedia and Negotiable Reality" - Mar 18, 2006 http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/Week-of-Mon-20060313/033810.html
"Congress Caught Making False Entries in Wikipedia" - Jan 31, 2006 http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/Week-of-Mon-20060130/031451.html
"Science Journal Says Wikipedia Is 'Fairly' Accurate" - Dec 15, 2005 http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/Week-of-Mon-20051212/028561.html
"Cuba and Crappy Wikipedia," - May 5, 2006 http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/Week-of-Mon-20060501/037264.html
The Sunday Times (London) June 25, 2006 http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,19510-2241865,00.html
Talking point: Wikipedia may be fallible, but we'd be crazy to stop consulting it.
Wise words to gullible students
by Robbie Hudson
Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia anyone can edit. It contains more than 4m entries, and you could add another one right now. Last week, speaking at a conference in Pennsylvania, the site's co-founder, Jimmy Wales, said he receives 10 e-mails a week from college students complaining: "Please help me. I got an F on my paper because I cited Wikipedia." His disarming response was: "For God's sake, don't cite the encyclopedia."
This is the latest in a slew of stories about the website's reliability, with fans and detractors baying at each other. Why can't people get a grip?
I want to have no sympathy for these students, because anyone quoting a website written by the public has no place in further education, but some blame lies with Wales. The site's lofty guidelines for contributors talk about neutrality and fact-checking. Wikipedia has been puffed by respected journals such as Nature, which, late in 2005, ran an irresponsible feature implying that Wikipedia was nearly as reliable on scientific matters as Encyclopaedia Britannica. Journalists leapt on this because it was a great story.
Britannica's extensive rebuttal skewered the "careless" way Nature had assembled its evidence - sending out partial entries, claiming differences of opinion were errors, quoting from Britannica publications other than the full encyclopedia - yet the rebuttal prompted nowhere near the coverage of the original claim.
The Nature article came at a good time for Wikipedia, which was under siege over a libellous fake biography that sat on the site for four months last year before being discovered. John Seigenthaler was Robert Kennedy's administrative assistant in the early 1960s; the biography falsely claimed that he was thought to be involved in both Kennedy assassinations. The libel, posted as a prank, was not verified by the site's editors.
It is obvious that anyone can post anonymous defamation on the web. Wikipedia gives them a forum within which they might be believed. John Seigenthaler's case created a storm because Wikipedia calls itself an encyclopedia, and ranks high in Google searches. This gives it, says Daniel Brandt, a long-time critic who runs http://www.wikipedia-watch.org, "a massive, unearned influence on what passes for reliable information".
Seigenthaler said that "while Wikipedia may provide a great deal of factual information, it also is a flawed and irresponsible research tool". He also quoted a high-school teacher who told him: "Wikipedia is intellectual democracy. My students love it. They can contribute articles and it can give them quick facts."
As well as all the mistakes and pranks and frequent vandalism, there have been well-publicised cases of politicians editing and bowdlerising their entries. Well, durrr! Of course they do. I don't want to vote for a politician too dim to be able to maintain a flattering biography. Screaming about these "abuses" of Wikipedia generates headlines, but it's shooting a whale in a barrel.
Wikipedia is a generally accurate first port of call for information. It's especially good on tech subjects and pop culture, and it's decent on most other topics. We'd be mad to trust it as a definitive resource, but its unreliability is the price it pays for grand ideals, which bring the benefit of a range and immediacy no other enyclopedia can match.
The world is full of people who uncritically believe what they read. I recently sat next to someone in a cinema who claimed that The Da Vinci Code movie received bad reviews because "the Catholic church controls the media". Online, fact and fiction look the same, especially on a site such as Wikipedia, which has become an Aunt Sally in the debate over dumbing down. This problem lies not with Wikipedia, but our society's criminal lack of media literacy. We are failing our children if they are so ignorant that they take Wikipedia on trust.
*
Dr. Barry Worthington - 28 Nov 2007 19:08 GMT > Archibald Maule Ramsay, 'The Nameless War'. > > Archibald Maule Ramsay wrote the true history of events leading up to > the Second World War. For this he was imprisoned for several years. He was imprisoned /detained under emergency powers in 1940 as a suspected 'fifth columnist'. He was seen as a potential traitor. So don't lie!
> Read his book The Nameless War to learn more. > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > without charge or trial, in a cell in Brixton Prison until the 26th > September, 1944. He was lucky that Britain was still a democracy. Quite a few British people thought that he should have been shot!
>On the following morning he resumed his seat in the > House of Commons and remained there until the end of that Parliament [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Chamberlain during the critical months between Munich and September, > 1939. Well, that was one of several mistakes on Chamberlain's part....
> There has long been an unofficial ban on books dealing with what > Captain Ramsay calls "The Nameless War", the conflict which has been > waged from behind the political scene for centuries, which is still > being waged and of which very few are aware. What unofficial ban? If Irving's crap can be published, so can his.....assuming that anyone is remotely interested....
> The publishers of "The Nameless War" believe this latest exposure will > do more than any previous attempt to break the conspiracy of silence. (Yawn...)
> The present work, with much additional evidence and a fuller > historical background, is the outcome of the personal experiences of a > public figure who in the course of duty has discovered at first-hand > the existence of a centuries old conspiracy against Britain, Europe, > and the whole of Christendom. Oh, bloody well get on with it!
> "The Nameless War" reveals an unsuspected link between all the major > revolutions in Europe - from King Charles I's time to the abortive > attempt against Spain in 1936. One source of inspiration, design and > supply is shown to be common to all of them. These revolutions and the > World War of 1939 are seen to be integral parts of one and the same > master plan. Hmmm.....it reveals that the author is a nutter...
> After a brief review of the forces behind the declaration of war and > the world wide arrests of many who endeavoured to oppose them, the > author describes the anatomy of the Revolutionary International > machine - the machine which today continues the plan for supranational > world power, the age-old Messianic dream of International Jewry. Well, these jews are taking a hell of a long time to get anywhere....perhaps they are lousy planners.....
> It is the author's belief that the machine would break down without > the support of its unwilling Jews and unsuspecting Gentiles and he > puts forward suggestions for detaching these elements. > > Christians say . . . Anonymously?
> "Captain Ramsay, a Christian gentleman of unflagging courage, > believed that the war with Germany was not conceived in the interests [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > for 'reasons' so preposterous that those who framed them dared not > submit them to a court of law." Truth Well, a kinky right wing clerical fascist might say that.....
> "For years Captain Ramsay had been a member of the British > Parliament. His book is an analysis of the Jewish-Zionist war against > Christian civilization." The Cross and the Flag Yes.....hundreds of nutters can't be wrong, folks!
> Jews say . . . > > "There is no limit to the depths of human depravity, Captain Maule > Ramsay . . . seems to have made a very determined attempt to plumb > those depths." The Jewish Chronicle Indeed.
> "The publication of such a book, at this time, underlines the > urgent need for the law to be reformed so as to make it a crime to > preach racial hatred or publish libels on groups in the community." > The Daily Worker Hardly surprising....
> Copyright 1952; First Edition October 1952; > Second Popular Edition 1956; > Third Popular Edition 1956; > Fourth Popular Edition 1962; That's some conspiracy of silence!
> Made and Printed in Great Britain by The B.P.S. Printing Co. > and Published by the Britons Publishing Company [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > Horse; to make their sons Christian priests, lawyers, doctors, etc., > and work to destroy the Christian structure from within. Or perhaps to just hide!
> The first notable repercussion to this advice occurred in Spain > in the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella. Many Jews were by then [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > hireling Oliver Cromwell - after executing the King according to plan > - was to allow the Jews free access to England once more. Which is a load of boll*cks! The embassy of Mannaseh Ben Israel arose from religious motives. It had nothing to do with politics.
Dr. Barry Worthington
allan connochie - 31 Dec 2007 03:34 GMT > Archibald Maule Ramsay, 'The Nameless War'. > Great Britain, newly united under James I, was a rising naval > power, which was already beginning to sway the four corners of the > discovered world. Great Britain didn't come into existence until over a century after James VI of Scotland succeeded to the English throne as James I. He liked to style himself King of Great Britain but it didn't make it a reality. The 1603 Union of Crowns was a personal union only. That is two seperate countries shared the same monarch just as modern Canada, Australia and the UK etc share a monarch. The Union of 1707 dissolved the Scottish and English kingdoms and created a new entity called Great Britain.
Allan
|
|
|