Let’s forget our little spat and move forward towards our common goal.

I met Dusko Popov once. I thought he was a great spy also but not on the same level as the Druid.

— Robert Faurisson, 8 October 2001

http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.com/2001/10/imaginary-holocaust-may-lead-to-real.html

Peter Myers offers the most thorough refutation (that I have seen) of the “forgery” claim. It is available in three parts at these links:
http://mailstar.net/toolkit.html
http://mailstar.net/toolkit2.html
http://mailstar.net/toolkit3.html

He includes the entire text of Herman Bernstein’s The History of a Lie and Joly’s Dialogue on his website, along with a staggering wealth of other resources. Speaking of Norman Cohn’s claim, from Warrant for Genocide, that two fifths of the text of the Protocols is “clearly based on passages in Joly,” Myers has this to say:

“Cohn’s arithmetic is incorrect. The word-count of the parallel-passages from the Protocols, as listed by Bernstein (at bernstein.zip), is 4,361, while the word-count of the Protocols is 26,496. That is, the parallel passages comprise 16.45% of the Protocols; this is substantial, but still less than one sixth of the total. What Cohn especially omits to mention, is the Protocols’ extensive coverage of the world finance system.

“Even the parallel passages, however, are not the same: the meaning is often quite different, despite the similarity.”
http://mailstar.net/toolkit.html

Denial is the root problem we face among all humanity, imo, but it’s also hard-wired in us as a reaction to sudden knowledge we are unprepared to process at the moment. I’ve experienced denial of that type (as opposed to the long-term chronic type) several times and it is fascinating to look back on, to see how one’s mind comes up with “answers” that are far-fetched and don’t connect, but satisfy one in the moment. Our minds are very helpful to our psychological needs, suggesting that our mind is often the servant of our emotions, or maybe is over-ridden when we are in emotional turmoil. I’m talking about really over-whelming realities and/or feelings. So Denial serves a necessary purpose, but like everything, it has a damaging side too. This will be the subject of my HH program tomorrow night.

>It doesn’t make any difference if you use the word “inclined” or put the word “authentic” in single quote marks – that only raised more confusion as to what you meant.

Well, you’ve just contradicted yourself there. They made a difference to you and made you confused about my meaning.

>What you meant was to misstate my position so that you could make a contrast with your own solution of ‘semi-authentic.’

So you are accusing me of deliberately misstating your position to make a point? Nice one Carolyn. Your sensitivity on this sort of thing is affecting your judgement.

>As I said before, why not just give your opinion/solution without misstating my position?

Why don’t you do the same then? You have been busy with your comments here misrepresenting me.
Summarizing someone’s position is quite normal in a discussion. If it is mistaken then it can be corrected.

> I quoted the comment I made to Hadding (which you did not): “You don’t believe in the Protocols” … which was in the context of discussing their meaning/impact/usefulness, not their origin.

I didn’t quote anyone because I thought it was self evident if you have listened to the Program. I also didn’t think I would be cross examined in an accusatory manner.

>You now say:
It’s not what I would call ‘argument’ and haven’t described it as such.
But then, you wrote:
In other words, arguing about the ‘authenticity’ of the Protocols is a red herring,
You did indeed imply that Hadding and I were arguing about this, which means an argument to me. I think “authenticity” and/or ‘authenticity’ should be clearly defined.

Carolyn, this lawyerball style of discussion is not a good use of our time. I wrote what I did in good faith with no intention to misstate anyone.

The specious value of Protocols derives from its claim to present a comprehensive Jewish plan from the horse’s mouth. The anonymous compiler however, in creating such a total picture of calculated malevolent conspiracy, included claims about the Jews that he couldn’t really know, some of which are inaccurate. Roughly stated, it goes too far, and that renders anyone who relies on it fit for caricature.

It is easy to see why some people were disposed to accept Protocols as genuine, but one can also see that there are hints of inauthenticity (e.g. the inverted expression of Catholic concerns, and the plan for a “Jewish autocrat”) in the text that would have raised doubt if men had been more careful.

We certainly have better roadmaps than Protocols today.

I have long maintained that “1984” was likewise a fictional account of a very real plan, one that can be seen at work today. Eric Blair was invited to join the Fabian Socialist Society. The Fabian’s were created by Sidney and Beatrix Potter, but I suspect they were funded by Rothschild money. The famous author George Bernard Shaw was spokesman for the group, so obviously they courted authors to write positively about their plans for global socialism.

At some point, Blair must have been present when they revealed their future plans to reduce the entire global population to a continual state of war, along with all its privations. Historically, the most profit and power had been gained from war. Thus the plan was to create a tri-regional planet where a globally dominant power would be challenged by another state rising to ascendancy. The recently defeated third state would then be allowed to recover during the war between these powers. The information sources would be totally controlled and manipulated to provide the illusion of an ever-present enemy.

Amid the ongoing anti-Islamic frenzy, who today recalls the threat of the former Soviet Union, a threat that led to fifty years of cold war war military buildup and nuclear weapons development. Having achieved its purpose to advance weapons technology, Big Brother collapsed communism and then wrote it out of the threat category, replacing it with the new threat, Islamic terrorism.

Blair was a socialist/communist until after the war when he visited the Soviet Union where he saw first hand the realities of Communism. The disillusioned communist/socialist then wrote his book reveling this plan for three major regions enmeshed in a continual state of war. Note the book was published in 1948, long before the Trilateral Commission came into existence. Carrol Quigley also wrote about alternative plans to control populations by means of other disasters including invasion by aliens from outer space. However it was ultimately decided that conventional war was the greatest motivator for populations. Presently we find Blair’s “Oceania” (North America) preparing for a war with “East Asia” (China/Russia).

The one point that has continually puzzled me is the apparently universal law that these monstrous cretins must always reveal their plans to the greater masses of people who will suffer from them. Movies like “They Live”, “Terminator” and “The Matrix” are a few cinematic examples of this revealing of present and future realities humanity must suffer. Apparently, we are but a giant Petri Dish experiment for the psychopathic powers ruling this world.