Understanding the Jews,
by Hervé Ryssen
Paris, April 2012
[Translated from French by Carlos Whitlock Porter]
Table of Contents
Preliminary Remarks…………………………………………………….. 4
I. The Jewish Identity……………………………………………………. 5
“Perfectly Well Integrated”
Assimilation or Dissimulation?
A Community Closed upon Itself
The Jewish Mission
The Jews and “Humanity”
II. Cosmopolitan Propaganda……………………………………….. 13
The Advocacy of Race-Mixing and the “Open Society”
Making Whites Feel Guilty
Destroy the Local Elites
The Blacks Are Going to Save Humanity
The Races Do Not Exist
Your Lying Eyes
III. The New World Order…………………………………………….. 24
High Finance in the Service of Democracy
War Against Islam
Wars of Liberation
IV. Historical Traumas…………………………………………………. 31
The Trauma of the “Shoa”
The Whole World is Guilty
The Spirit of Vengeance
Communism under Lenin
Communism under Stalin
V. Anti-Semitism…………………………………………………………. 43
An “Inexplicable Phenomenon”
The Scapegoat Theory
Denying the Evidence
The Inversion of Reality
The Good Deeds of the Jews
The Jealousy of the Anti-Semites
Anti-Semitism: An Illness
The Madness of Men
Hatred of Humanity
VI. The Mafia……………………………………………………………… 55
The Great Swindles
The Organ Traffic
VII. The Destruction of the Traditional Family……………….. 66
The Defense of Homosexuality
Cross-Dressers and Transsexuals
The Destruction of All Patriarchy
VIII. The Psychopathology of “Anti-Semitism”………………. 72
Rapists and Psychos
Sexual Crimes Against Children
IX. At Last: Psychoanalysis Explained…………………………… 75
The Myth of the Oedipus Complex
X. The Hysterical Sect…………………………………………………. 81
Need for Love
The Jewish Prison
The Symptoms of Insanity
The Suicidal Jew
The following text is a summary of six books  written by Hervé Ryssen , published between 2005 and 2010, constituting the most important study on the Jewish mind ever published. All the quotations that you are about to read are precisely referenced in at least one of these books.
The present booklet consists for the most part of quotations from famous authors, with particular emphasis on well-known films. The number of references is nevertheless sufficient to enable the reader to observe the extraordinary homogeneity of Jewish cosmopolitan thought, over the centuries and across all borders.
The Jewish Identity
The Jews are scattered over all the countries of the world, on all five continents, but they reside principally in ethnically European countries. Most of them are of “Ashkenazi” origin, that is, from Central and Eastern Europe, which they left in successive waves starting at the end of the 19th century. A minority, also scattered over the entire surface of the globe, come from the Mediterranean basin: these are the so-called “Sephardic” Jews. But there are also a few black Jews in Ethiopia, called “Fallashas”, as well as Jews in India and China, for example, who claim to be “perfectly well integrated”. The Jews are not, therefore, a race.
Judaism is not only not a religion — or not only — since many Jews declare themselves atheists; and are nonetheless no less “Jewish” for it. Marxist Jews in particular, who form the ruling elite in Western countries, are fanatical militants for atheism, according to the doctrines invented by one of their own: Karl Marx.
What, then, is Judaism? Let us ask Nahum Goldman, founder of the World Jewish Congress. From 1956 to 1968, Nahum Goldman was both President of the World Jewish Congress and President of the World Zionist Organisation. In 1976, he published a book entitled The Jewish Paradox. When someone asked him for his definition of Judaism, Nahum Goldman replied:
“There is no entirely satisfactory definition… I remember having spoken at a conference when I was a student, during which I proposed more than twenty definitions: Judaism is a religion, a people, a nation, a cultural community, etc. No one definition is absolutely correct.”
All the Jewish intellectuals who have approached the problem respond in the same way: Judaism, they invariably say, is an “enigma”, a “mystery”. These terms reappear regularly in nearly all Jewish writings. “The Jewish people do not know what they are”, wrote the philosopher Alain Finkelkraut (The Imaginary Jew). They are “an enigma to the contemporary mind” (Bernard-Henry Levy); they are a “mystery”, a “deeply distressing phenomenon” (Jean Daniel);
“The Jews have been a living question mark to their surroundings for two thousand years” (André Glucksmann).
And all this — they think — despite the fact that they are supposed to be “God’s Chosen People”. While this doesn’t mean a lot to a goy, it is of utmost importance to a Jew.
“Perfectly Well Integrated”
Jews almost always claim to be “perfectly well integrated” into the countries in which they live, and they usually declare themselves to be “patriots”. Their own statements nevertheless indicate that, behind a facade of national identity, they continue to feel very Jewish, profoundly concerned with the interests of the Jewish community and the State of Israel.
In 1968, Bernard-Henry Levy, a well-known “French” philosopher who is very fond of media hype, declared, with regards to his book entitled The French Ideology — which was intended to make the French feel guilty — that:
“I am a ‘Frenchman and, as a Frenchman, like no other French philosopher, I took the risk of conducting this inquiry into black France.’”
Twenty years later, in another book entitled “Recidivists”, published in 2004, he wrote that he felt;
“an extreme attachment to Israel… I am a Jew, of course, through my link to Israel. I am a Jew when, like all the world’s Jews, my heart beats in unison with those of the threatened Israelis”.
And he continues:
“I am a Jew, I am a Jew through every fibre of my being. I am a Jew through my slips of the tongue. I am a Jew for the alimentary rules which I have imposed upon myself … I am a Jew through my writing style … I am a Jew through this invisible pact which links me to the Jews of the whole world … I am a Jew through my Messianic patience.”
Examples of this kind are not hard to find, since nearly all Jewish intellectuals have expressed this same paradox in the same terms. The word “paradox” reappears regularly in the writings of all Jewish intellectuals, all over the world, throughout all history: this is not an accident.
Assimilation or Dissimulation?
The Jews have long been accustomed to adopt the dress of the people amongst whom they live. They speak the language of the country without foreign accent; they appear to adopt the local mores and customs. But they live in a world of their own, cut off from the world of goyim — “cattle”, “non-Jews”. They conceal themselves beneath borrowed identities for centuries, wearing the identity of their host peoples by day and becoming Jews again at night.
Many Jews change their names or transform their original family names, mimicking the local language. Thus, “Minkowski” becomes “Minc”; “Shapiro” becomes “Chapiraud” or “Chapier”. The make-up job may be exaggerated to a greater or lesser degree: “Aaron” becomes “Nora”, “Nussenbaum” becomes “Rochebrune”.
The actor Kirk Douglas (“Demsky”) preferred a Scottish name. The head of the French diplomatic service under President Sarkozy, Jean-David Levitt, is obviously a “Levi”.
The Jews exhibit an instinctive solidarity with their own people. This inclination is easily verified in the praises heaped by journalists upon Jewish artists and writers, whom they never hesitate to describe as “a genius”, their work as “sublime”, “incomparable”, etc. We are all, in fact, well aware of the tendency of Jewish intellectuals to cry “genius!” upon the discovery of almost any work by a fellow Jew.
Thus it is that second-rate writers like Philip Roth, Imre Kertesz, Yasmira Reza or Jonathan Littell are elevated to the rank of “geniuses of humanity”, raking in literary prizes in the process. Kafka, of course, becomes “the greatest writer in German history”, while Vassili Grossman becomes “the Tolstoy of the twentieth century”. Ironically, it is precisely through this very tendency to heap exaggerated praise on each other that we infallibly recognise Jewish journalists behind their pilfered cognomens.
The famous writer Elie Wiesel heartily confirms the notion that the Jews are a nation apart, and that it is correct to consider them “strangers” living amongst “other peoples”. In his book, Testament of a Murdered Jewish Poet (1980), he writes explicitly:
“Between a Moroccan businessman and a chemist from Chicago, a rag dealer from Lodz, and an industrialist from Lyon, a kabbalist from Safed and an intellectual from Minsk, there is a deeper, more substantial blood relationship than between two citizens of the same country, the same city and the same profession. A Jew is never alone”.
A Community Closed Upon Itself
The Jews have always avoided mixing with the goyim. This is how they have always managed to survive over the centuries and persist where other civilizations have disappeared forever. The struggle against mixed marriages, in particular, is a constant priority. The Prime Minister of Israel, Golda Meir, declared:
“The greatest danger threatening Jewish life comes not from anti-Semitism or persecution, but from assimilation and mixed marriages”.
Jewish intellectuals often repeat this slogan: the number of mixed marriages each year amounts to “several trainloads departing for Auschwitz”. Rabbis never tire of warning young Jews against this plague, while attempting to obtain from them the solemn promise to marry only another Jew.
On the other hand, it is very difficult for a goy to convert to Judaism. When a non-Jew wants to convert, it is the custom to discourage him, snub him, make him feel unwelcome. It is always simpler for a goyische woman to marry a Jew.
Jews live in the constant shadow of their own ghetto, associating with fellow Jews almost exclusively.
“The ghetto is historically a Jewish invention”, writes Nahum Goldman. “It is incorrect to say that the goyim forced the Jews to separate themselves from their societies. By the time the Christians even noticed the existence of the ghettoes, the Jews were already living there.” This same truth has been expressed by many other Jews as well (see our History of Anti-Semitism, 2010).
In a book published in 1982 and prefaced by the Grand Rabbi of France, Ernest Gugenheim expresses this feeling of belonging: “Israel forms a united body into which its members are firmly welded”. Nahum Goldman cites the famous verse from the Talmud: “One single Jew is like all of Judaism”. This is why Jewish intellectuals often write “the Jew” to speak of the Jews.
Endogamous marriage is one reason for the amazing similarity in the facial characteristics of Jews all over the world. The very influential Alain Minc, for example, bears a very close resemblance to Paul Wolfowitz, one of the “hawks” in the American government during the Second Iraq War (2003). Elie Wiesel father bore an extraordinary resemblance to that of Bela Kun (Cohen), the leader of the Communist Revolution in Hungary in 1919. This explains the clichés observable in all “anti-Semitic cartoons” — particularly, cartoons published before WWII, when there was no plastic surgery and mixed marriages were less common.
In actual fact, however, the lugubrious warnings against mixed marriages issued by Jewish leaders the world over fail to prevent a significant number of Jews from marrying goyim. Sometimes their children are as Jewish as their parents, at least in spirit; but sometimes their Jewishness is lost, sometimes in the very first generation, if not later — a fact which fills the rabbis with anguish.
The Jewish Mission
The Jewish people consider themselves the bearers of a project governing humanity as a whole, a grandiose project which they have pursued for centuries, through and despite everything: the instauration on earth of universal and lasting peace. The notion of “peace”, in fact, lies at the very heart of Judaism: it is not by chance that this one word (“shalom”, in Hebrew) appears so frequently in the speech of all Jews, all over the world. It is not just a religious concept — one of a belief in God’s work in a distant future — but of a guiding principle which determines the commitments of Jews on a daily basis. It is in fact the Jews themselves, who, through their work, their actions, their involvement in politics, work each day for the construction of this “peace”.
In the perfect world which they believe they are creating, all conflict will have completely vanished from the face of the earth — particularly, conflict between nations. That is why, wherever they settle, Jews militate ceaselessly and untiringly for the elimination of all borders and the breakdown of all national identity. Nation states are the cause of war and disorder; they must, therefore, be hollowed out from within and without, and — in the long run — eliminated entirely, replaced by World Government, solely capable of bringing about the reign of human felicity and endless prosperity on Earth.
The aim is to unify the world by all means possible, levelling all cultural differences, which are believed to be the source of conflict. Jewish intellectuals, all over the world, work without letup for this ideal. Whether Left or Right, Marxist or liberal, believers or atheists, Zionists or “perfectly integrated”, Jews are the world’s most fervent advocates of this messianic global empire.
Judaism is, therefore, essentially a universalist political project, the objective of which is the unification of the world, as the prelude to global pacification. It is a long, difficult job, they admit, but the Jews are absolutely convinced that they can succeed in achieving this aim, obsessed, as they are, with the “Mission” entrusted to them by God. Or as the prophet Isaiah puts it:
“The wolf will live with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child will lead them…” (Isaiah, XI, 6-9).
Contrary to Christianity or Islam, the Jews do not intend to convert others to Judaism; rather, the intend simply to persuade them to renounce their religion, their race, their identity, their family and all their traditions, in the name of “Humanity”, and “Human Rights”. This Global Empire, in fact, can only be built upon the ruins of great civilizations, using the human detritus produced by so-called “democratic societies” and the capitalist system.
“Cosmopolitan” (i.e., Jewish) propaganda always aims at the dissolution of all ancestral values and identities, so as to eliminate the supposed “sources of conflict between men”. The Jews militate continually towards this goal. The Jews are a people of propagandists. It is not an accident that they have been highly successful in all of our contemporary media-obsessed “democratic” societies. When only the remaining Jews on Earth shall have preserved their faith and traditions, only then will they be finally recognised by all as “God’s Chosen People”. Only then will their long-awaited Messiah finally arrive and re-establish “the Kingdom of David”.
This Messianic “Waiting for Godeau” is the driving force of Judaism, since it obliges every Jew to struggle actively to “hasten the coming of the Messiah” (this is a very common expression). It is from this Messianic tension that the Jews derive their strength and energy. It is in fact the Jews themselves who, through heir militancy, their untiring egalitarian propaganda in favour of a “world without borders”, are fated to establish the world of “peace” to hasten the arrival of the Messiah.
The concept of “Human Rights” is a very effective weapon in advancing the idea of “world unification”. The “father” of the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, in 1948, was a certain René Cassin. It was he who was responsible for establishing the Constitution of the French Fifth Republic after the return of Charles de Gaulle in 1958. René Cassin was the President of the European Court of Human Rights, and was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1968. He was also a doctor honoris causa of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and President of the Universal Israelite Alliance from 1943 until his death in 1976. “Human Rights”, he said, are a “laicisation of the principles of Judaism”. This was confirmed by Grand Rabbi Jacob Kaplan:
“To find the seminal sources of [the French Revolution of] 1789, one must go back beyond classical antiquity, to the Bible, the Torah and the prophets”. Rene Cassin also envisaged a sort of “Universal Ministry of Education”.
These projects were only concretised after the war, through the creation of UNESCO.
The Jews and “Humanity”
It is interesting to note that Jewish intellectuals — who are always talking about “Humanity” — instinctively confuse themselves — the Jews — with “Humanity”.
Elie Wiesel writes as follows:
“To save our people, we must save all of humanity”.
“Whosoever strikes a Jew knocks all of humanity to the ground”.
Nahum Goldman expressed the same idea this way:
“It is in the interests of all of humanity that the Jewish people must not disappear”, he said, since the Jews are the bearer of “values which concern all of humanity”.
In his book Five New Lectures on the Talmud (1977) the philosopher Emmanuel Levinas projects Jewish singularity onto a universal level, and speaks of, “the suffering of Israel as universal suffering”.
Jacques Attali says the same thing in The Jews, The World and Money (2002):
“A misfortune for the Jewish people is a misfortune for all men”, taking the same logic even further:
“The disappearance of the Temple was also a tragedy for all non-Jews, since the Hebrews prayed for them: they know not what they have lost”.
Elie Wiesel was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in late 1986. In his “Oslo Speech”, pronounced on this occasion, he spoke — as was his custom — of “Hope”, of “Humanity” and “Peace” on Earth:
“Jewish suffering should be of concern to all of humanity. The day will come when crimes against the Jews will be considered crimes against humanity, and crimes against humanity as crimes against the Jewish people”.
Under these conditions, “anti-Semitism” is not just a “Jewish matter”: it is a matter of concern to “Everyone”.
[Image] Elie Wiesel gives a speech after the Nobel awarding ceremonies on December 11, 1986.
The elimination of borders is an ideal to be attained, but the “open” society will only be viable on the condition of the annihilation of all instincts of race and local characteristics. The “pure races” must be “mixed” to dissolve all feeling of identity, which is considered likely to engender the resurgence of “Nationalism”. Languages themselves must disappear, to the benefit of one single common language.
This was the great ambition of Louis Lazaré Zamenhof. A young man descended from the Jewish aristocracy of Poland, his entire life was dedicated, from a very early age, to the invention of a language which was to be understood by everyone, based on common roots from most of the wide-spread languages.
[Image] Esperanto: 150th anniversary of its creator Lazarus Zamenhof, December 16, 2009
This dream led to the publication of the founding work of Esperanto, Fundamento de Esperanto in 1887. Zamenhof explained:
“If I were not a Jew from the ghetto, the idea of uniting humanity either would never have entered my mind, or would not have obsessed me so obstinately throughout my entire life”.
And he repeated:
“My Jewishness was the principal cause for which I dedicated myself to one idea and to an essential dream, from my youngest childhood, the dream of uniting humanity.”
There are different ways to “pacify” men and nations. Carpet bombing, or Soviet totalitarianism, is one way. But “liberal democracy” and the “consumer society” work much better.
The Advocacy of Race-Mixing and the “Open Society”
Jews have always encouraged immigration into all the countries in which they have ever settled, not just because a multicultural society corresponds to their politico-religious plans, but also because the resulting dissolution of national identity protects them from any “nationalistic” upheavals. All Jewish intellectuals — absolutely without exception — are focused on this question of the “plural” society and are obsessed with ceaseless “anti-racist vigilance”, regardless of any other political differences. Immigration from the Third World is thus presented as “an economic necessity”, an “indispensable contribution”, an “extraordinary enrichment”, etc.
Jewish intellectuals exhibit a certain characteristic inclination towards enormous untruths.
They will tell you, for example, that immigration hasn’t really increased at all; on the contrary, it has never been so low! This inclination to treat the goyim like a load of simple-minded fools is called “chutzpah” (pronounced with a German-style guttural “r”). The demographer Gerard Noiriel, the essayist Guy Sorman, the sociologist Edgar Morin (Nahoum), the philosopher Alain Finkelkraut and diplomat Stephane Hessel, for example, became famous for these little exercises.
To the general public, this unceasing, indefatigable, planetary propaganda is most obvious in film production.
All Jewish film producers have released at least one or more films advocating race-mixing and the “multicultural society”.
Just watch the films by Claude Longmann, known as “Berri” (One Stays, The Other Leaves); Matthieu Kassovitz (Café au lait, White Nightmare);
Claude Lelouch (Itinerary of a Spoilt Child; Smic Smac Smoc);
Francois Luciani (The Man Who Came from Somewhere Else);
Edouard Molinaro (The Hearts of Men);
Gerard Oury — at the end of The Adventures of Rabbi Jacob, the Arab Slimane, naturally, marries Pivert’s daughter;
Robert Guédignan (Where the Heart Is).
Guédignan also produced Marius and Jeanette, in which the main character, Jeanette, lives alone in Marseilles with her two children, fathered by two different men. The older daughter has been duped by a cad who deserted her — a white man (naturally) — while her 12-year old is an African half-caste who “works very well at school”, etc.
Renaud Cohen is a small-time producer, but his film Once We Grow Up (2001) is rather eloquent: the main character, Simon Dadoun, is a thirty-year old Jewish journalist. He breaks up with his girl friend (a goy) and meets a Sephardic Jewess, like himself. The French, by contrast, are depicted as much inclined towards race-mixing: Both of Simon Dadoun’s friends, in fact, are interracially married: one to an Asian, the other to a Senegalese. The same film also defends lesbianism — again — in a highly “multicultural” context.
Or just watch the films by Bernard Stora (Another Life);
Giles Pacquet-Brenner (Gomez and Tavares);
Daniel Vignes (Fatou from Mali);
Dominique Baron (The Tress of Aminata);
Cedric Kahn (Too Much Happiness);
Nicolas Ribowski (Perigord Noir), etc.
In The Enchanted Parentheses (1999), by Michael Spinosa, the French are once again depicted as fated to mate with Blacks and Orientals. The producer also depicts adultery, Marxism, feminism, etc., with great indulgence.
“American” Jewish film producers are obsessed with these same things as well. You really must see films like Roland Emmerich’s (The Day After Tomorrow, 2004), or Marc Forster’s (Monster’s Ball).
In Love Field (1993), Jonathan Kaplan tells the story of a beautiful blonde who leaves her idiot of a husband and falls in love with a Black.
In Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner (1967), a young beauty introduces her husband to her parents. Her husband is a Black, likeable, cultured, intelligent. His natural charm and niceness overcome the instinctive and vicious mistrust of her bourgeois white parents. The film, by Stanley Kramer, naturally won ten Oscar nominations.
You can go much further back than that if you wish:
West Side Story, by Robert Wise (1961), is a musical propaganda film in favour of the “multicultural society”.
In 1950, No Way Out told the story of a black intern in a hospital. It was a plea against “racism” by Joseph Mankiewicz.
Today, early in the 21st century, this propaganda is becoming even more extreme. The television series “Life’s So Sweet” shows young white women mating with Blacks, while young white men are depicted as homosexuals.
All the screen plays for the films listed above were written by Olivier Schulzinger; in fact, any time you see a white woman paired off with a Negro on the screen, you can be very sure that you’re watching something produced by the “Chosen Ones”. As we can easily see, the Jews are totally obsessed with race-mixing and ethnic mixing; but one must, of course, bear in mind that this “line of goods” is intended for “export only”.
Making Whites Feel Guilty
“Cosmopolitan” film producers work untiringly to make Europeans feel profoundly guilty for their past, to make them ashamed of what they are. All these incessant “sensitisation” campaigns on topics like “slavery”, “colonialism”, the “looting of the Third World”, “global warming”, “Auschwitz”, etc., have one object — and one object only — and that is to bring about the advent of world government.
In “cosmopolitan” Jewish cinema, psychopaths and villains are invariably depicted as possessing typically Nordic traits, complete with blonde hair and blue eyes. This is not an accident. In The Crimson Rivers (2000), for example, Matthieu Kassovitz shows us dangerous “neo-Nazis” torturing and massacring innocent people.
Six-Pack (1999) is a film by Alain Berberian: a Parisian commissioner of police is anxious to capture a serial killer who has already killed and mutilated five young women. The “bad guys” (the chief of police, the psychopath) are played by Nordics, while the “good guys” (Commissioner Nathan, Inspector Saul), are, once again, are played by very typical Mediterranean-types.
“American” film directors are animated by all these same hatreds. In Panic Room (2001), by David Fincher, three criminals break into a house. The gang leader is a white man, a very frightening, unpredictable, highly nervous person, who ends up with a bullet in the head. The second criminal — another white man — seems very calm, but is, in reality, an extremely dangerous psychopath and “mad-dog killer”. The third, a Negro, is intelligent and humane.
None of this is by accident.
See Runaway Jury, by Garry Fleder;
The Green Line, by Frank “Darabont”;
Fatal Obsession, by Jonathan Kaplan;
Ragtime, by Milos Forman;
or Barton Fink, by the Cohen Brothers, and you will see that the “bad guys” are systematically depicted as white men, and white men only.
In Cop Land (1995), by the extremely sly James “Mangold” (Goldman), the “bad guys” are all white cops, while on the other side of the river, in New York, the “multiracial” police are portrayed with the greatest sympathy.
In the comedy entitled Addams Family Values (1993) the characters whom the audience initially mistakes for the “bad guys” — real villains — are, in fact, very nice (with very black hair), while the “bad guys” are invariably blonde-haired children. The film is by Barry Sonnenfeld.
Mississippi Burning (1988) by Alan Parker, is an attack on the Ku Klux Klan. In a little village in the southern United States, the whites are all bigoted, racially-prejudiced cowards, narrow-minded, evil, and downright contemptible. The women are depicted as intimidated, bullied into submission, dreaming only of escape.
In Alien 3 (1992), a space ship crashes on a planet where the “Company” once built a penitentiary for dangerous criminals: killers, rapists, and psychopaths. The “bad guys” attempting to rape the heroine are, of course, all white, while the “good guy” who rescues her from this terrifying predicament is a huge Negro, the only mentally-balanced person among the prisoners: he’s the boss. This film was also produced by an “alien”: David Fincher.
In the 1960s, Jewish film makers did everything they could to make White people feel guilty. Just watch films like;
In the Heat of the Night (1967), by Normal Jewison (who won five Oscars for it);
The Cardinal (1963), by Otto Preminger;
or Wild River by Elia Kazan (1960).
In Betrayed (USA, 1989), Constantin Costa-Gavras denounces the paramilitary militia of the American “Extreme Right”: a beautiful young FBI agent, a woman, is ordered to infiltrate them. The main villain, “Gary”, falls quickly in love with her, and reveals his true nature as a dangerous psychopath with blue eyes. The “Right-Wing” militia groups, we learn, are supported by powerful financiers and major political figures!
Harping on this same ridiculous theme of “Fascism in the Service of Big Money” is a characteristic of several other films.
In The Inheritor, by Philippe Labro (France, 1972), the hero (Jean-Paul Belmondo) returns to the USA to inherit an industrial empire. He discovers that his father had been murdered by his father-in-law, the director of an industrial group who is also the financier behind a “neo-Fascist” party. At least that’s what the director — (Jacques Lanzmann) would like to have us to believe…
In A Billion Dollars (France, 1981), a journalist discovers that GT1, a multinational corporation, worked for the Nazis. Since his boss refuses to continue the inquiry, the journalist goes into hiding and the article is published by a small local newspaper. The big newspapers, of course, are entirely controlled by “fascists”. The film is by Henri Verneuil (Achod Malakian), who was not a “fascist”. … This is what is called “accusatory inversion”, i.e., “Freudian projection”.
Destroy the Local Elites
“Cosmopolitan” propaganda is always aimed at destroying all local elites, whatever and wherever they are: encouraging the workers to revolt against their employers, the peasants against the lords. All authority is discredited, ancestral traditions are bespattered and ridiculed, and the “bourgeoisie” and “aristocrats” are always depicted in the darkest colours.
The Dead Poets Society was filmed in 1990. The film shows us an elite boarding school in the USA, an old and noble institution intended for the sons of high society. A literature professor upsets the lives of the students and dynamites the “dusty old values” of these “narrow-minded Christians”. This film, which invites us to reject traditions and norms, was directed by Peter Weir.
This is also the message of a film called School Ties by Robert Mandel (1992): The main character, “David Greene” joins one of the most prestigious preparatory schools in New England. His athletic and intellectual talents naturally make him the star of the institution in a few weeks. But to be accepted by his wealthy schoolmates, filled with anti-Semitic prejudice, and gain the love of a young girl from a good family, he is compelled to hide his Jewishness … until one day the truth explodes. At this moment, we understand that Christians are truly filthy people.
In the same genre, Marin Karmitz’s film, Blow for Blow (1971) is in the same genre: in a confectionary factory, the workers suffer intolerable and infernal working hours and conditions. A wildcat strike breaks out: the boss, kidnapped, humiliated and intimidated, is forced to capitulate. Like many of his fellow-Jews, Marin Karmitz made the transition from “Far-Left” to “Hard” “Liberal Right” early in the 21st century: the only problem now is how to “consolidate” the “multiracial society”.
The aggressiveness of cosmopolitan Jewish directors against the European world finds expression once again in The Servant (1963): a young English aristocrat, full of arrogance, hires a domestic servant in his service. The aristocrat quickly plunges into alcoholism and decadence, while the servant, highly dignified, comes to exercise an increasingly greater domination over his master. This tendency systematically to gravitate towards “inverted values” is very typical of the Hebraic mentality. The film is by Joseph Losey, based on a screenplay by Harold Pinter (Nobel Prize for Literature in 2005), who succeeded his fellow-Jew Elfriede Jelink.
The Middle Ages are always depicted in the darkest colours. We are told that the lords were always wicked and cruel: see The War Lord (USA, 1965). In the 11th century, the local lord notices a young peasant girl while out hunting. She is engaged to be married, and just as they are about to celebrate their nuptials, the lord enforces his jus primae noctis (an invention of French republicans in the 19th century). The film is by Franklin Schaffner.
The producer Rob Cohen manipulates the same story in his way in a “multicultural” sense in the film Medieval (USA, 2009): this is the story of a monk, a knight, a samurai, a Zulu, an Arab, a gypsy and a Viking — all in the Middle Ages!
The same contempt for traditional civilization may also be found in amusing cartoons, like Shrek (USA, 2001), once again. “Shrek” is a gentle, lovable ogre who lives in a remote forest. He confronts a dreadful dragon and rescues a beautiful princess. The king is a stubborn, ridiculous nabob (which is not in the European tradition at all) who wants to marry the princess, too, but Shrek, who has fallen in love with her, saves her from the coerced match in the cathedral in which the marriage is to be celebrated. The smashing of the stained glass window of the cathedral by the dragon, who forces his way inside, interrupting the forced nuptials, is supposed to be “symbolic”. Directed by Ted Elliott.
The Truman Show (USA, 1998) is a typical film: Truman is a man who is unaware that he only the unsuspecting star of a TV show. His surroundings are nothing but a set. All the people around him are actors, and he is the only one who doesn’t know it. The director’s intention was attack the papier maché society which serves as the stage set for Truman’s life: its hypocrisy, its false happiness. This hypocritical society is a WASP [White Anglo Saxon Protestant] society in which there are no drugs, no delinquency, no porn. In escaping from this world which is “closed, fragile, closed on itself”, Truman experiences the joys of indiscriminate sex, drugs and ethnic chaos. One could hardly expect any different from the director of the Dead Poets Society, Peter Weir.
“Cosmopolitan” film makers do not just attack European culture alone. Wherever Jews settle, they set about to undermine, mock, ridicule and attack all local elites so as to replace them.
Here is a “Tamil” film: A Donkey in the Brahmin Ghetto (India, 1977). A donkey sneaks into a village enclave reserved for the superior caste of Brahmins and is adopted as a mascot. The donkey induces miraculous visions in the priests, and the animal quickly becomes an object of veneration. This sarcastic film is signed “John Abraham”, no doubt a pure-blooded “Tamil”.
Or take a look at Ankur [“The Seedling”] (India, 1974): in an Indian village, a peasant woman, servant to a property owner, is seduced by her patron. The patron commits a number of serious crimes against the peasants with impunity, but revolt is brewing … Shyam Benegal, the director, is, of course, a “Hindu”.
Judaism, we see, is a dissolving force in all nations in which it is introduced. The Jews like to “break down barriers”, “shatter taboos”, as they themselves very often say. Nahum Goldman, the founder of the World Jewish Congress, wrote very explicitly:
“This is the way it is: Jews are revolutionaries for other peoples, but not for themselves”.
Jewish worldwide cinema is also characterised by an anti-Christian messages. In television or at the cinema, Christians, and Catholics in particular, are most often depicted as bigots, narrow-minded and intolerant, even rapists and murderers. The Catholic clergy is regularly depicted as a haven for sadists and perverts of all stripes.
In Crimson Rivers (2003), a network of dangerous, terribly well organized, “neo-Nazis” has been detected. They set up their general headquarters in a monastery in Lorraine, linked by underground tunnels to the Maginot Line. The monks, who are fighting for a “White Christian Europe”, are in contact with highly placed European personages undermining the established order: they are everywhere, they own everything, but they are invisible. The film is signed Olivier Dahan.
Jean-Jacques Annaud’s beautiful film, The Name of the Rose (France, 1986), is taken from a novel by the world-famous Italian author Umberto Eco: the film is a crime drama set in a monastery in Northern Italy in the early 14th century. The film is littered with medieval clichés: all the monks, without exception, are abnormal. They grease their palms off the peasants who bring them their miserable harvests, while the peasants live in the filth and garbage tossed to them by the monks. The Catholic Church from top to bottom is just a perversion: the monks keep people in servitude and fear of the Devil, while jealously guarding the marvels contained in their Greek books which threaten to destabilise their power.
Of course, it all ends up in torture and the stake.
The film was produced with the collaboration of Jacques Le Goff, an historian of the Marxist school. If anyone cares to take a non-Marxist glimpse at the magnificent epoch which was the Middle Ages, one should read the short book by Regine Permond entitled Pour en Finir avec le Moyen Age (“Finishing Off the Middle Ages”), (1977).
Let us note that at no time during the entire film is there any question of a rose … The title is obviously intended for initiates in the Kabbala; in this regard, we note that the author of this tale, Umberto Eco, in 2005, also wrote the preface to a book entitled Messianic Mystics, in which he establishes a parallel between Hebraic messianism and Marxism.
Among Jewish American directors, anti-Christian hatred is expressed in the same manner. In Seven (1995), a Catholic sex pervert has undertaken to commit seven murders symbolizing his hatred of the seven capital sins: a film by David Fincher.
In The Shawshank Redemption (1994), the prison warden turns out to be the real villain; at the same time, of course, he is a very pious Christian. The film is signed Frank “Darabont”.
In The Favour, the Watch and the Very Big Fish (1991), film maker Ben Lewin displays his disgust with Christianity.
In The Last Temptation of Christ, by Martin Scorsese (1998), Christ begins to dream of what his life could have been like with Mary Magdalene. We see Jesus make love to her. This film is an adaptation of a novel by Niko Kazantzakis.
In Agnes of God, by Norman Jewison (1985), The Verdict, by Sydney Lumet (1982), Papillon, by Franklin Schaffner (1973), Elmer Gantry, by Richard Brooks (1960), the Christian characters, priests and nuns, are regularly portrayed as villains.
Jewish film directors also appear to derive pleasure, in their films, from disrupting Catholic ceremonies. In the comedy In and Out (USA, 1997) for example, a marriage ceremony is taking place. At the very moment when they about to say “Yes” before the entire family and assembled congregation, the groom refuses, and announces in a low tone, with an air of resignation, that he is “gay”. Stupefaction! The ceremony breaks up in an uproar, and the couple quarrel violently in public. The film is directed by Frank Oz.
In Shrek (2001), the marriage ceremony is disrupted by a dragon who enters the church by smashing a stained glass window. In Sacred Union, by Alexander Arcady (France, 1989), a funeral is disrupted. In A Very Curious Girl, by Nelly Kaplan (1969), a Mass is disrupted.
The film Hair (USA, 1979) contains a sacrilegious scene set in a church: a group of long-haired hippies, high on acid, transform a marriage ceremony into a Black Mass, complete with ecstatic dances, as if they were all possessed by the Devil. In actual fact, however, these contortions resemble the ceremonies of Hassidic Jews more than anything else. The film director is the “Czech” Milos Forman.
The Blacks Are Going to Save Humanity
Science fiction stories are always an excuse to glorify the unification of humanity and the intermingling of all races. In Independence Day (USA, 1996), by Roland Emmerich, the planet, attacked by extra-terrestrials, is saved by a Black and a Jew.
In The Fifth Element, a film by Luc Besson (1997), the President of the United States is Black.
In Deep Impact (USA, 1998), a gigantic asteroid is about to crash into the Earth. The planet is saved in extremis by the American President, who is Black.
In Bruce Almighty (USA, 2003), a Black plays the role of God. The film was directed by Tom Shadyac, based on a screenplay by Steve Koren. David Palmer, President of the United States in the TV series 24, is yet again played by a Black actor.
All this propaganda was no doubt intended to pave the way for the forthcoming election, by the American people, in November 2008, of the first Black President of the United States.
The Races Do Not Exist
Now it is much easier to understand why so many “scholars” assure us that “the races do not exist”. The world famous author Primo Levi became the eulogist of race-mixing (for the goyim only, of course). In order to cause the acceptance of the idea more easily, he started with the postulate that we are all racial mixed:
“The Indo-European race is not pure, since nothing proves that it is”.
In February 2001, the Minister of Research, Roger-Gerard Schwartzenberg, stated:
“The races do not exist”.
The September 2001 of the UNESCO Courier (publication of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization), contains lengthy claims in this sense:
“The human genome has been decoded at last. The endpoint of this project invalidates the myth of races. Genetic research has established that we all descend from one same common ancestor, born in Africa.”
The famous geneticist, Axel Kahn, who was one of the organizers of the World Congress “against racial discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance”, held in September 2001 at Durban, South Africa, confirmed:
“All men are in fact of a great genetic homogeneity, since their common ancestor is very young in terms of the evolution of life; he lived more than 200,000 years ago in Africa.”
You gotta believe it!
Your Lying Eyes
In the film Matrix, by Larry Wachowski (USA, 1999), human beings are entirely controlled by a computer program which dominates all their thoughts and their entire lives. They think that they exist, but in fact they are nothing but the slaves of machines. There remains only one small nest of resistance: Zion! The film is cram-packed with cabbalistic messages: the hero, Neo, is “the Elect”, the mythical liberator of humanity announced by the prophets, who will save “Zion”, as revealed by “The Oracle”. Human beings are depicted in the colours of a multi-racial society, while the “Matrix”, which intends to rule the universe, is represented by white men: three agents, led by one Agent Smith, who are, of course, very wicked, in their suits and ties. Once again, it is the whites who must bear responsibility for the real tyrants, since the matrix “really exists”; it’s the “matrix” that made this film.
Men in Black (USA, 1997) is a film which teaches us to welcome foreigners — all foreigners — even extra-terrestrials. We don’t know it yet, but there are already large numbers of them living among us; they have taken human shape. Members of a special governmental agency are responsible for regulating the flow of this “new kind of immigrant”, and to keep the existence of these extra-terrestrials secret so as to avoid alarming the population. Two super special agents, one Black and one White, are assigned to track down a hostile alien. The film was adapted by Barry Sonnenfeld from a screenplay by Ed Solomon. It was also produced by Steven Spielberg. All these directors and script writers are “extra-terrestrials disguised as human beings” and “agents of the Matrix”.
John Carpenter is the director of They Live (USA, 1988); the hero, Nada, thanks to special eye glasses, discovers that a small proportion of the population are composed of extra-terrestrials who look just like human beings. These aliens form an elite which governs the world through lies and corruption. These special eyeglasses also permit him to read subliminal messages on advertising panels, which order submission of all humans. They are everywhere, they own everything, you just can’t see it!
In Raiders of the Lost Arc (USA, 1980), by Steven Spielberg, we understand that the power of Yahweh is far too tremendous for us even to dream of resisting it.
Paris, April 2012
 Books by Hervé Ryssen. http://herveryssen.over-blog.com/
 Herve Ryssen’s latest book is Les Milliards d’Israël, Escrocs juifs et financiers internationaux [The Billions of Israel, Jews and international financial Crooks]
Les Milliards d’Israël. Escrocs juifs et financiers internationaux
Notre nouveau livre intitulé Les Milliards d’Israël, Escrocs juifs et financiers internationaux (336 pages) sera disponible en librairie le 17 septembre 2014. Le livre pourra être acheté en prévente au mois d’août ou début septembre afin de payer l’imprimeur. Nous vous tiendrons au courant d’ici peu sur la démarche à suivre.
Pour les flics de la pensée et autres censeurs, sachez que le fichier est entre de bonnes mains, et que même s’il devait m’arriver un malheur, le livre serait publié de toute manière. Juifs, si vous avez peur des livres, c’est que vous avez sans doute des choses à vous reprocher !
A très bientôt, chers lecteurs, pour plus d’informations.
PS : Je me demande si je ne vais pas dédier ce livre à Claire Lafoix, la présidente de la 17e chambre correctionnelle de Nanterre, qui m’a condamné le 9 avril 2014 à un mois de prison FERME, pour le simple port d’une bombe lacrymogène.
Il est vrai qu’elle entre en compétition avec les guignols de la 17e chambre correctionnelle de Paris, qui eux, m’ont condamné à deux mois de prison FERME pour une simple blague sur les moeurs de Bertrand Delanoë.
Auront-ils le courage de mettre un écrivain en prison ?
Sont-ils assez crétins pour aller jusque là ?
L’avenir nous le dira !
From Google Translate:
Our new book, The Billions of Israel, Jews and international financial Crooks (336 pages) will be available in bookstores on September 17 2014. The book can be ordered in advance in the month of August or early September via the printer. We will keep you posted shortly on how to proceed.
For the cops and other critics, know that the file is in good hands, and that even if a disaster should happen to me, the book would be published anyway. Jews, if you are afraid of books it is because you probably have something to hide!
See you soon, dear readers, for more information.
PS: I wonder if I’m not going to dedicate the book to Claire Lafoix, the 17th president of the criminal court of Nanterre, who sentenced me April 9, 2014 to one month FARM prison for simply wearing a tear bombs.
True, it competes with the horns of the 17th Criminal Chamber of Paris, who themselves have sentenced me to two months in prison for simple FARM joke about the morals of Bertrand Delanoë.
Will they have the courage to put a writer in prison?
Are they fools enough to go that far?
The future will tell!
PDF of this post. Click to view or download (0.9 MB).
Version 5: Dec 27, 2019 – Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version..
Version 4: Apr 28, 2018 – Improved formatting.
Version 3: May 29, 2015 – Formatting. Added Ver 2 of PDF
Version 2: Jan 19, 2015 – Expanded Table of Contents
Version 1: Published Oct 22, 2014