Xmas8.gif (3233 bytes)


90% of the world's jews are Ashkenazi jews


112 genetic defects in Ashkenazi jews prove they're a race of mongrels [read: mamzers]


The genealogy of the Ashkenazi

bullet Horst Wessel develops a similar graph from Scripture.


noah5.gif (113988 bytes)


(Gen 5:32) And Noah was five hundred years old. And Noah fathered Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

(Gen 10:6) And Ham's sons were Cush, and Mizraim, and Put, and Canaan.

(Gen 9:18) And the sons of Noah that went out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And Ham is the father of Canaan.

(Jer 36:14) And all the rulers sent Jehudi, the son of Nethaniah, the son of Shelemiah, the son of Cushi, to Baruch, saying, Take the scroll in your hand, in which you have read in the ears of the people, and come. So Baruch, the son of Neriah, took the scroll in his hand and came to them.


(Gen 10:2) The sons of Japheth: Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.

(Gen 10:3) And Gomer's sons were Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah.



(Gen 10:21-22) And to Shem was born, even to him, the father of all the sons of Eber, the brother of Japheth the elder.  The sons of Shem were Elam, and Asshur, and Arpachshad, and Lud, and Aram.

(Gen 10:24) And Arpachshad fathered Salah; and Salah fathered Eber.

(Gen 10:25) And two sons were born to Eber; the name of the one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided; and his brother's name was Joktan.

(Gen 11:18) And Peleg lived thirty years and fathered Reu.

(Gen 11:20) And Reu lived thirty two years and fathered Serug.

(Gen 11:22) And Serug lived thirty years and fathered Nahor.

(Gen 11:24) And Nahor lived twenty nine years and fathered Terah.

(Gen 11:26) And Terah lived seventy years and fathered Abram, Nahor, and Haran.

(Gen 21:3) And Abraham called the name of the son who was born to him, whom Sarah had borne to him, Isaac.

(Gen 25:26) And afterward his brother came out, and his hand was holding to the heel of Esau; and his name was called Jacob. And Isaac was a son of sixty years when she bore them.


(Rom 9:13) even as it has been written, "I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau." Mal. 1:2, 3


(Gen 36:2) Esau took his wives from the daughters of Canaan: Adah, the daughter of Elon the Hittite; and Oholibamah, the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon the Hivite;

(Gen 36:6) And Esau took his wives, and his sons, and his daughters, and all the souls of his house, and his livestock, and all the beasts of burden, and all his property which he had gained in Canaan, and he went to a land away from his brother Jacob.


All of Jacob's [read: Israel's] descendants are Israelites.  Ten Tribes of Israel were founded by his ten sons, and two of them were founded by two of his grand sons:

(Gen 37:3) And Israel loved Joseph more than all his sons, because he was a son of old age to him. And he made a robe reaching to the soles of his feet.

(Gen 48:1) And after these things it happened, one said to Joseph, Behold, your father is sick. And he took his two sons with him, Manasseh and Ephraim.


(Gen 42:4) And Jacob did not send Benjamin, Joseph's brother, with his brothers, for he said, Lest harm meet with him.




Modern Israel is also known as Zion, though the true heirs of Zion are descendants of Shem, whereas 90-95% of today's "jews" claim to be Ashkenazi "jews", some of whom are descendants of Ashkenaz who was a descendant of Japeth, and not of Shem, Eber, nor Jacob.  The term "jew" at the time of Christ's birth referred only to citizens of Judaea, but today it refers to descendants of both Ashkenaz and Esau/Edom.  Only the Sephardic "jews", who are 5-10% of the world's jews, and who are descendants of Esau/Edom, who were brothers of Jacob.  Thus they are Semites [read: descendants of Shem], and Hebrews [read: descendants of Eber], but they are not Israelites [read: Chileren of Israel, or descendants of Jacob].  Most of the "jews" who claim that they own Israel are descendants of  the Khazars who are not even descendants of Ashkenaz, so they are not even Semites, Hebrews, Israelites, Ashkenazis, nor Judaeans.  They became "jews" between 750-850 AD by edict from their king, so they weren't even genetically linked to Judaeans.   The most likely link between the majority of today's "jews" and the Judaeans who were referred to as "jews" in the Holy Bible is not genetic, but through the Talmud, which all jews worldwide come under the authority of.

If Jesus had been a "jew", how likely do you think it is that He would have called his own people the sons of "the devil", "a liar", and the "father of lies"? Even if you accepted the loose translation that a "jew" in Jesus' time was anybody from Judaea, Jesus was STILL not a "jew", because He was from Nazareth in Galilee, and not from Judaea:

"You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies", John 8:44

The Jews answered him, "Aren't we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?", John 8:48



judiaca.jpg (19410 bytes)

judaica2.jpg (20841 bytes)

judaica3.jpg (5780 bytes)

judaica4.jpg (30557 bytes)

Of the 12 Tribes of Israel [read: descendants of Jacob], only the tribe of Judah, the Levites, and part of the tribe of Benjamin lived in Judaea. Since part of the Tribe of Benjamin was in Judaea, maybe they too were called "jews" rather than Benjamites, but the ten northern tribes separated from Judah both geographically and philosophically in the 10th Century BC and thus were not called "jews" or "Judaeans", or at least haven't been for a long, long time.

It is proper to call them Israelites, because all descendants of Jacob are Israelites, including the Tribe of Judah. It is proper to call the residents of Judaea "Judaeans" or "jews". But it is not proper to call the tribes which didn't even live in Judaea or trust the Judaeans "jews" or "Judaeans".

It's not clear who is using the term "Judahite", so it's up to them to define what this means.

The Ashkenazis were not one of the 12 Tribes of Israel. They were (and are) descendants of Japeth. It is Ashkenazis today who rigorously practice the screed from the Talmud, and it was the "traditions" [read: unwritten man's law] of the Pharisees which became the written Talmud, so, at best, Ashkenazis were descendants of the Pharisees were   who lived in Judaea amongst Israelites.

The Pharisees were "jews", but the biggest problem is that they were Talmudites.

Pharisees were Talmudites, jews, Judaeans, and forefathers of Ashkenazis, but NOT Israelites.

The descendants of Jacob living in Judaea were Judaeans, jews, AND Israelites, and most were not Talmudites.

The descendants of Jacob not living in Judaea were not Judaeans, they were not jews, they were not Talmudites, but they WERE Israelites, and they were the "lost sheep of Israel".

The Talmudites who are now settling Israel, who are creating huge problems in the Middle East because of their outright hatred of Arabs (AND Christians--whom they believe "prefer sex with cows"), and every other group they can come into contact with, have the least claim of any group to that holy land.

Paul said he was from Tarsus, which was in Cilicia, which is now Turkey.   Strong's Concordance claims that a "jew" is a "Judaean".   Obviously Paul was not from Judaea and didn't claim to be when he was arrested and brought into the castle, followed by a crowd which was screaming "away with him".  Paul was asking for a translator who spoke Greek, probably because he didn't speak Hebrew well enough to get the Judaeans following him to back down.

Once he got the crowd quieted down, he explained to them in Hebrew that, even though he was not from Judaea, he had been brought up by Gamaliel who WAS a Pharisee or "doctor of the law" and who was from Judaea, and that *at one time* he was just as "zealous toward God" as they are.

Did this make Paul a literal Judaean?  No, he was a Cilician whose previous name was Saul, and who was bringing Cilicians who refused to follow the Pharisees [read: Talmudites] to Jerusalem to be punished, and/or put to death.  He met Jesus Christ in a vision and converted to Christianity and changed his name to Paul

Obviously the Judaeans didn't back down just because they thought he was a Judaean, but only because he managed to prove, with letters, that he was doing the evil deed for a known Pharisee [read: Talmudite]. 

Obviously, also, Saul's conversion from a flunky working for a Pharisee to Paul and Christianity was no minor undertaking, since they were prepared to stone him just because he wasn't a Judaean [read: jew].  If he hadn't shown them the letters from the Pharisees to prove that this was his job, that's what would have happened.

It must have been a funny story about how Paul convinced the dumb as salt Talmudites that he too was a "Judaean" even though he was a completely different RACE from Cilicia.

What is the point? 

This is the CENTRAL point of the crucification of Jesus Christ, and it is misleading to claim that:

>   Jesus Christ said, "Salvation is of the Jews" and "I came only to find the
>   lost sheep of Israel". The words "Jews" and "Israelites" are used pretty
>   well interchangeably. The people who call themselves "THE Jews" today,
>   however, are as you say, Talmudists.

The Talmudites/Talmudists/jews of today would like the whole world to belive this, but these passages, which are incredibly easy to follow, don't concur.   "Salvation is of the Jews" means that the Samaritan woman who was being tormented by the Pharisees [read:Judaeans, or jews] will be saved from their torment and in fact wouldn't even have to continue to worship in the Temple of Jerusalem.   Samaritans, Galileeans (which Jesus was), Cilicians (which Paul was), were all the "lost sheep of Israel", but the Judaeans were not because "Israelites" were ONLY the descendants of Jacob, from whom Moses (and Manasseh and Ephraim, and now if this is correct, Americans and English) were descended, but from whom Ashkenazis were not.  It was their control of the Temple which the "sons of Israel" were upset about.

Why were they "lost"?  The Samaritan woman is just one of many examples of the conflict between Pharisees/Judaeans/jews and ALL of the "lost sheep" which Jesus stepped into the middle of, and the reason the Pharisees demanded that Pilate crucify Him.

Each of these words have separate meanings which can now be traced directly to their Hebrew, Greek or Aramic roots.  There is absolutely no question about their meanings and that they are not interchangeable.

----- Original Message -----
From: Franklin Wayne Poley
To: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: [LIFE-GAZETTE] Tomorrow's World



I don't have a clue what your argument is below. Since my IQ is a few
clicks above average I think you have a communication problem or do others
understand this? In any case, you might want to polish up the argument a
bit before sending it to a dozen other lists. Succintly, what are you
trying to say the word "Jew" mean in the NT? For example, when Paul called
himself "The Jew of Tarsus" what did he mean?

On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Christian Party wrote:

>   Franklin Wayne Poley wrote:
>   Jesus Christ said, "Salvation is of the Jews"
> You base a lot of your argument on the above statement which implies that the jews were going to offer "salvation" to people like the Samaritan woman to whom Jesus was speaking when he said that.  This needs to be corrected.
>   The Samaritan woman said to him, "You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?" (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans. [1] )
> If this passage is accurate, then there was an obvious disagreement between "jews" from Judaea and Samaritans from Samaria. The rest of this passage suggests that the disagreement was based more on religious factors than merely geographical factors. Clearly she didn't know Jesus was a Galileean from Galilee and not from Judaea, because she assumed he was a "Jew", which Jesus didn't claim to be.  Instead, when she complained about the "Jews" requiring Samaritans to worship in Jerusalem rather than on "this mountain", Jesus gave her the good news that she didn't have to bother to go to either place any longer to "worship the Father":
>   20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem."
>   21 Jesus declared, "Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem
> Putting this in context, when Jesus said "salvation is from the Jews", he clearly meant that she wasn't going to have to worry about going to Jerusalem to "worship the Father", not that the Jews, after four centuries of cramming the obscene principles of the Talmud down the throats of both Samaritans and Galileeans, were going to offer her some "salvation" of some kind:
>   22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews.
> Some translations say "for salvation is OF the Jews", like the one you cited.  This gets a bit confusing but it still doesn't change the meaning of the phrase.  Here is the entire passage:
> John 4
>   1
>   The Pharisees heard that Jesus was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John,
>   2
>   although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples.
>   3
>   When the Lord learned of this, he left Judea and went back once more to Galilee.
>   4
>   Now he had to go through Samaria.
>   5
>   So he came to a town in Samaria called Sychar, near the plot of ground Jacob had given to his son Joseph.
>   6
>   Jacob's well was there, and Jesus, tired as he was from the journey, sat down by the well. It was about the sixth hour.
>   7
>   When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, "Will you give me a drink?"
>   8
>   (His disciples had gone into the town to buy food.)
>   9
>   The Samaritan woman said to him, "You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?" (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans. [1] )
>   10
>   Jesus answered her, "If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water."
>   11
>   "Sir," the woman said, "you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water?
>   12
>   Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his flocks and herds?"
>   13
>   Jesus answered, "Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again,
>   14
>   but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life."
>   15
>   The woman said to him, "Sir, give me this water so that I won't get thirsty and have to keep coming here to draw water."
>   16
>   He told her, "Go, call your husband and come back."
>   17
>   "I have no husband," she replied. Jesus said to her, "You are right when you say you have no husband.
>   18
>   The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true."
>   19
>   "Sir," the woman said, "I can see that you are a prophet.
>   20
>   Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem."
>   21
>   Jesus declared, "Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem.
>   22
>   You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews.
>   23
>   Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks.
>   24
>   God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."
>   25
>   The woman said, "I know that Messiah" (called Christ) "is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us."
>   26
>   Then Jesus declared, "I who speak to you am he."
> Jesus, a Galileean, was crucified because he was preaching against, not just the "Jews" [read: Judaeans], but because he was preaching against the Pharisees *from* Judaea whose "traditions" became the written Talmud several centuries later.
> At best, today's Talmudites are no more closely related to Judaea than the descendants of Ephraim and Manasseh whom Roderick C. Meredith claims are now in Britain and the US.
> John Knight
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Franklin Wayne Poley
>   To: [email protected]
>   Cc: Willie Martin ; ccnn ccnn ; cinds cinds ; The Grip (E) ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; ChristianPatriot ; [email protected] ; Christian Nationalist ; theseries ; [email protected] ; [email protected]
>   Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 1:38 PM
>   Subject: Re: [LIFE-GAZETTE] Tomorrow's World
>        My Groups | LIFE-GAZETTE Main Page | Start a new group! 
>   On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Christian Party wrote:
>   > Roderick Meredith should point out that before Jesus Christ' time, "jewish people" referred to people from Judaea, which was one of the three divisions of Palestine.  Today's "jews" are obviously not from Judaea.
>   >
>   > People from Galilee, which is where Jesus is from, and Samaria, which is in the center of Palestine, were not called "jews", and in fact the Samaritan woman Jesus met had a clear dislike for them.
>   >
>   > It is not correct, and in fact it is intentionally misleading, for today's Talmudites to refer to themselves as "jews".  They are descended from Ashkenaz, who is descended from Magog, who is descended from Japeth.  It is the descendants of Japeth's brother Shem who are "semites" and the "Hebrews" [read: descendants of Eber] whom Moses led out of Egypt.  If Meredith is correct, then it would be more correct to call all British and all Americans "jews". 
>   >
>   > The descendants of Shem lived in Chaldea on the Persian Gulf and in Haran which is now in Turkey.
>   >
>   > The descendants of Japeth lived in Shinar in Babylon.
>   There is also the matter of Jacob (The first Israelite) and Esua, his twin
>   brother (and first Edomite). The Israelites and Edomites lived side by
>   side for centuries and Tyndale Bible Dictionary tells us how the Edomites
>   infiltrated and dominated the Israelites in time (so that the
>   Herod-Edomite clan even ruled over them). The Edomites converted to
>   Judaism as Tyndale tells us though some may have questions about whether
>   this was the Judaism of the Israelites. Can anyone today prove
>   that those claiming Israel as the land of their ancestors are more the
>   biological descendents of Jacob than of Esau? NO THEY CAN'T! Geneology has
>   been blurred so much by time that it becomes a guessing game. That
>   guessing game causes us to focus on SPIRITUAL identity which is
>   here-and-now rather than BIOLOGICAL identity.
>   > Regardless, those who now believe in and support the Talmud are not the friends of Christians, no matter where they came from.
>   Jesus Christ said, "Salvation is of the Jews" and "I came only to find the
>   lost sheep of Israel". The words "Jews" and "Israelites" are used pretty
>   well interchangeably. The people who call themselves "THE Jews" today,
>   however, are as you say, Talmudists. The full-length Steinsaltz edition
>   Talmud in the Vancouver Public Library says this is the foundation of all
>   Jewish law and practice. However, a number of passages refer to Jesus as
>   the bastard son of a loose woman, Mary, by a union with a Roman
>   soldier. Some of these passages are quoted in the Josh McDowell/Campus
>   Crusade for Christ classic (and 6 m. copy best-seller) "Evidence That
>   Demands A Verdict". The bottom line is that to this Anti-Christ cabal,
>   "Jesus is in hell being boiled in hot excrement" (Talmud Tractate Gittin
>   57a).
>      Given that Christians are those lost sheep of Israel found by Jesus,
>   Meredith has a point about "Identity" re Ephraim and Manasseh which may
>   have some validity. "I came only to find the lost sheep of Israel". So
>   today's Christians would be THE ISRAELITES or "lost sheep of Israel",
>   IRRESPECTIVE OF RACE although tribal identity as he attempts is very
>   speculative.
>      For certain, to call "THE Jews" the 'found' sheep of Israel is to call
>   Jesus Christ a liar! Paul was one of those found sheep of Israel and he
>   identified himself as "The Jew of Tarsus" and "an Israelite of the Tribe
>   of Benjamin" (Benjamin being part of the former Kingdom of Judah). Thus
>   when Jesus said He came to find lost Israel that included lost
>   Judah. Jesus Christ was/is THE LION OF JUDAH by both earthly geneology (as
>   given in Matthew) and spiritual identity. FOLLOWERS OF JESUS CHRIST ARE
>      The Talmudists could also be lost sheep sought by Jesus in the sense
>   that The Great Commission applies to all peoples. So all races and creeds
>   are potentially 'found' sheep of Israel. In that sense Meredith could be
>   proven correct in due course.
>   FWP
>   >   ----- Original Message -----
>   >   From: Franklin Wayne Poley
>   >   To: Willie Martin
>   >   Cc: [email protected] ; [email protected]
>   >   Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 5:10 PM
>   >   Subject: [LIFE-GAZETTE] Tomorrow's World
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >   According to Editor Roderick C. Meredith, writing in "Tomorrow's
>   >   World" magazine, Sept-Oct/00, p. 6:
>   >
>   >   "Most Bible students know that Judah indicates the Jewish people, but many
>   >   do not realize that Ephraim and Manasseh are today's British and American
>   >   peoples."
>   >
>   >   Comments, Cyberpreacher Willie?
>   >
>   >   FWP
>   >


At 06:59 PM 10/15/2000 -0500, Willie Martin wrote:

>Franklin Wayne Poley wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 Oct 2000, Willie Martin wrote:
>> >    Poley you are the biggest liar on the internet. All your questions
>> > been answered many times, but you either delete them or call them lies.

>> Questions:
>> What was the race of "His own", those referred to in "He came to His own
>> and His own knew Him not"?

> I have answered this with an entire study, I cannot help it if you don't
>understand plain english.

>> What was their religion?
>     It became Christianity.

>> What was their nationality?
>     They were Judeans of the tribe of Judah.

>> How do you reconcile your mindless White Israelite racism with the word
>> "Ashkenaz" meaning "German" according to Encyclopedia Brittannica?
>    How do you reconcile your mindless defense of the antichrist Jews
>and dare to call yourself one of them. When they are the children of
>the devil, therefore one can only conclude that you are also a child
>of the devil.
>    As for the word Asknazi that is the word the Jews put on themselves,
>those from Russia and Eastern Europe. It matters not what the
>Encyclopedia Brattannica says, as I don't have one available for reference
>I suspect that you are only quoting a small part of it. But at any rate
>the word Askhanazi is the Jews word for themselves.

     This line is one which is common amongst the Worldwide Church
of God membership at the time after Herbert Armstrong died in 1986
and Russian Khazars of the Tkach family, Sr., and Jr. took over.

    The Genesis 10:3 lineage by which Ashkenazi 'jews' descended
from the Khazars is routinely gotten around by claiming that that
Ashkenaz is merely the Yiddish word for "Germany."

    Ignored is not only the research concerning the Khazar Empire
and its conversion to Talmudic Jewdism, but the research by Arthur
Koestler as well:


    A minute's thought concerning Poley's khazar lie makes this matter
plain without having to read the Encyclopedia or Koestler's book.

    The Fellatio-Whigger one moment pretends that the Bible is correct
in that there was a worldwide flood one minute and that the Bible is
incorrect the next in naming Ashkenaz as the eldest-born grandson of
Japheth.  If there was a worldwide flood, then there would have been
no "Germany" to name little Ashkenaz after, would there now?  The fact
of the matter is that the geneological name of Ashkenaz was given
to the son of Gomer/Gog and the nephew of Magog, and that Ashkenaz
was the father of the Khazar people long before Abraham was born to
become the grandfather of Jacob/Israel who in turn gave birth to
the Teutonic Peoples, much less before they founded a nation-state
known as "Germany."

    Poley, as a jew, wants to first claim to be a Judean because he
is quite aware of the disgust that the White peoples have for 'jews.'
Poley, lies like another 'jew' named Khazarl Worden

    (And Khazarl finally admits to being a racial khazar 'jew' cf.
     although he used to claim to be a "babtised 'jew' and then that it
     was a lie used to reveal myself as a Christian Identity racist:
   http://www2.mo-net.com/~mlindste/khazarlw.html   )

   Since Poley knows that revealing himself as an ethnic khazar 'jew'
would lead to an end of his welcome amongst racially awakened Whites,
Poley is trying to conceal his true racial origins by claiming to be
a Judean while at the same time going along with Pernalenin in claiming
that Jesus was a 'jew' and other various jewdeo-churchianity lies
common to 'jews' and their khazarophile shabbes-goyim whigger supremacist

    I think that this is the longest message that the Fellatio-Whigger
Poley has ever committed to, even given his immense hatred of Willie
Martin as a teacher of the Israelite truth.  Poley has had to keep
giving one-liners before for fear that he would give himself away.  Now
that the truth about his racial origins and true feelings so hostile
to Whites and White Nationalism is coming into the open, Poley can now
snarl like a cornered 'khazar-jew' rat and probably be forced to come
clean, along with Khazarl Worden, just like the bandit state of IsraeLIE
is showing their true colors in murdering the s[h]emitic Palestinian
Arabs to the world.  Their house of lies is crumbling, and the 'jews' now
have no choice but to show their ratlike rabid fangs to the world as
they scurry for cover.

    In any case, Ashkenaz was the name given by Gomer/Gog to his
eldest son, who was the father of the Turkic-Mongollian peoples of
the Turanian Plateau in Central Asia.  They invaded a decaying Roman
Empire in the Third Century as the Huns, and came in a second wave
as the Khazars, of which an offshoot, the Magyars, invaded what is
now called Hungary and Rumania.

    Like the Cainite/Canaanite/Edomite 'jews' who migrated to the
Hispanic penninsula, the Sephardim, 'jews' have never been an inventive
people except for the biggest predators and parasites amongst them
who are called "Rabbi" or "Master" (in defiance of Christ's injunction
to call no man "master") and these parasites created their Talmud
from their "traditions of man" originally founded in Babylon by Nimrod
and Semiramis.  The Separdic 'jews' were unable to keep their own tongue,
and so they bastardized the Spanish language and called their tongue
"Ladino."  The Ashkenazi 'jews' faced a similar inability to keep their
native tongue so they invented a bastardized language from the most
advanced of the White nations they found themselves amongst -- the Germans.
They call this bastardized polyglot "Yiddish."

    And just as Khazar 'jews' call themselves "Cohen" or "king" from
the Khazar title "Kagan" and take the names of the White families that
they found themselves amongst, it was but a matter of time before they
took the name of the Germans and applied it to their ancestor, Ashkenaz.

    In these times, 'jews' like Poley and Yair Davidy wish to claim
that they are of Christian Israel.  Yet when wise Christian Israelites
call them what they really are, these 'jews' reward their unmasking with
a snarl.

    Eventually this Fellatio-Whigger Poley will have to admit that he
is an ashkenazi 'jew' and have nothing to snarl about in khazar glee
except that he got Willie Martin banned from a fool's listserver two
years ago and that as a jew he had so many Israelites, both whiggers
and awakened Whites, at each other's throats for a long, long time.
Poley's enmity against Willie Martin is a racial antipathy dating from
Genesis 3:15.  Poley, as an "[un]learned elder of Zion [khazaristan]"
recognizes Willie Martin as a dangerous racial enemy of the poleykind.
This explains fully F-W Poley's long-lasting endemic hatred of Willie

--Martin Lindstedt
A Defender of the Faith

>> Did St. Paul call himself "The Jew of Tarsus", even as a Christian?
>     Yes he did, but he also said that he was a Benjaminite, and was a Jew
>by religion before he became a Christian. There is quite a difference
>but you will never admit to that.

>> Did Jesus Christ (Book of Rev.) warn us against both false/evil Christians
>> and false/evil Jews?
>     He warned us of those who call themselves Jews; for they were not
>meaning Judeans. And you well know that rabbi.

>> Given that He did, why would you not brand all Christians as evil, as you
>> brand all Jews as evil?
>     Absolutely not, for Christ said the Jews were the chidlren of the devil,
>not the Christians.

>> etc.
>> Now, answer the questions in a direct and honest manner. And if you should
>> ever get around to asking me some direct and honest questions I will
>> answer them.
>> FWP
>> >  As a rabbi you certainly live up to your billing as Christ said you Jews
>> > are liars (John 8;44) you can fool some people that don't know any
>> > better but you folks are the biggest liars and murderers that have
>> > ever existed. Not only that but you are traitors to every country
>> > you have ever lived in. That and you have been kicked out of every
>> > country on Europe at one time or another because of your lies
>> > and because of your taste for blood, Christian blood.

>> > Franklin Wayne Poley wrote:
>> >
>> There is a place for criticizing the person as well as his arguments. You
>> and Willie Martin "bear false witness". You are serious violators of the
>> Commandments. You are unrepentent. You are LIARS and promulgators of
>> LIES. Repent! Don't imagine that your lies can find their eternal home in
>> hell without you who cling to them. Some "jews" may be criticized as you
>> note below. But you refuse to answer the specific points JP, DS and I have
>> been making about "Identity". We answer your questions. You don't answer
>> ours. Then you slander us (bear false witness again) to cover up. What did
>> Jesus Christ say about those who are "not worth shit" (ie "not fit for the
>> dung hill"). Repent!!!
>> > > FWP
>> > > (Learned Elder of Zion)

    F-W Poley sounds just like the "babtised jew" Khazarl Worden.   They
infiltrait judeo-christianity churches and preach hate against Christian
Israelites who know them for what they are.


    There is nothing for a Christian Israelite to repent about because
a Christian Israelite is aware of his racial heritage and of the racial
heritage of the so-called 'jew' parasites who have claimed the "big lie"
of being descended from Abraham.  Christ knew full well who those who
claimed to be of Abraham's seed were really descended from, and Christ
rebuked their pretentions. John 8:39-47.  Christ said that they were not
of Abraham, but that their father was Satan the Devil.  Christ also
mentioned the blasphemy of such like Khazarl and F-W Poley climing to
be 'jews' -- but how they are not.  Notwithstanding a fraudulent
babtismal dunking -- which has no effect other than of making them wet
lying 'Jews' -- both Khazarl Worden and F-W Poley are of the sinogog
of Satan.  Revelation 3:9

    Both Khazarl Worden and F-W Poley and Jewn Pernalenin sense that
their time is coming to an end.  After a Great Tribulation in which
even genuine Israel shall face torment, Christ will return, and these
children of Satan, not being immortal, shall be cast into a lake of
fire, where they shall have nothing left of them except bad memories
of their lapsed existence.  It is merely their own blasphemies which
make of the LORD to be an eternal torturer like unto the beastly khazars
torturing Palestinian Arabs in an IsraeLIE prison.

    It would seem that I need to do some updates on my Resisitance
Rogues' Gallery concerning answering Khazarl Worden and F-W Poley
and their lies.


--Martin Lindstedt
A Defender of the Faith

>> > On Sun, 15 Oct 2000, Christian Party wrote:
>> >
>> > John [Pernalenin],
>>  It is a characteristic of "jews" that anyone who disagrees with them is
>> "anti-semitic" and anything they say must be believed as a fact just
>> they said it.
>> This is how you presented your argument, which is why you lost.
>> You accused everyone of ad hominems AFTER you issued more ad hominems than
>> anyone else.
>> adhominem.htm  
>> You are correct that this is the sign of a person who already lost the
>> argument.
>> You accused everyone of "spamming" AFTER you spammed every list which will
>> accept your diatribe.  This too is proof that you lost the argument even
>> before you began.
>>  Even if you and Poley aren't "jews", you exhibited all of their traits,
>>  which makes you just as bad if not WORSE than them.
>>  It is nothing less than blasphemy for you to proclaim that Jesus
>> Christ, who called "jews" the sons of the devil, is Himself a "jew". 
>> It is despicable the way you tried to weasel word your way around
>> this undisputable fact.
>> This is even worse than the way the feminists "think".
>> Did you grow up with a father present?
>> John Knight

>>  ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "John Perna" <[email protected]>
>> To: <[email protected]>; "F W Poley" <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2000 8:43 PM
>> If anyone can find a coherant sentence, with a logical point, in Mr.
>> Linddtedt's letter please direct my attention to it.

    Well, Jewn Pernalenin, none of your lies and evasions make any
sense to any of us based simply on your say-so.  Your attention span
is based exclusively upon what lies you wish to tell for the minute.
The Truth is not in your interests because the Truth reveals your
racial origins and the cause for your Genesis 3:15 animus against
the White nations you infest as parasites.
>> "They intimidate opposing opinions by casting personal attacks on anyone
>> who disagrees with them, calling them all "Jews", "brainwashed", and
>>"Jews lap dogs" among a variety of other ad hominems. They are fond of
>> distorting a persons name into some insulting term.

    So?  Haven't I made it clear that I am not fond of ashkenazi-
gogsspawn khazar 'jews' and their khazarophile shabbes goyim whigger
supremacist lap-dogs?  You seem to have found some of what I wrote
understandable as applicable to yourself, Jewn Pernalenin.

>> With anyone else, there are a few points of logic; which when made clear,
>>  will result in the adaptation of rational conduct. This would be simply
>> pointing out that:
>>               Those who have truth on their side can argue with facts=
>> > > >

     The fact of the matter is, Jewn Pernalenin, is that as John Knight
points out you have censorship-banned everyone you can't get to agree
with you from your Bircher listservers, then you get on to White
Nationalist and Christian Israelite listservers, proceed to spam them
with your whining jewry bullshit and about how you are a victim in
having to hear from the people who despise you, yet let you have a
chance to speak your piece, and then you demand that we be banned from
our own listservers.
    You sound like these 'jew' holohoaxers who murdered millions of
Russians, Germans, and other Europeans in Bolshevik Communist Russia
from 1917-1945, and then claim that so many millions of you were
killed by the Germans without a shred of proof other than your say-so.

    Jewn Pernalenin, you may call it "chutzpa" but I call it jewdism
in action.

--Martin Lindstedt
Listserver moderator.





The Origins of Ashkenazi Jewry


The Jews of Eastern Europe are called "Ashkenazi" Jews. The name in itself is revealing, and carries within it the implication that these Jews are not descendants of the 12 Tribes of Israel.

Every Jew wants to think of himself as a Child of Israel, so that he may share in the glory of the restoration of the House of David in the days of the coming of the Messiah. I do not know whether this glory is greater than the glory of not being an "hereditary" member of the House of David in the days of Messiah, but this is nevertheless what Jewish people think they want.

Since the great majority of Jews in the world are Ashkenazi, it is of interest to see exactly who Ashkenaz was in the Bible.

Adam and Eve had three famous sons named Cain, Abel and Seth. The human race today was descended from Seth, Abel having been murdered by Cain, and Cain having been destroyed by the Flood.

According to the Bible, the only survivors of the flood were Noah and his family. Noah had three sons. His son Shem is regarded as the "father" of the Semitic race; the progenitor of all the Hebrew patriarchs, and of the line of David.

A second son, Ham, is regarded, by Biblical ethnologists, as the founder of the black and some of the Arab races.

The third son of Noah, Japheth, is regarded as the founder of the Asian races. This includes the mysterious Magog, whose descendants are characterized in the Bible and in the Quran as fierce and dreaded barbarian enemies of the faith. Another son of Japheth was Gomer, whose two sons Ashkenaz and Togarmah are central to our Khazar story.

The Khazars had their own legendary genealogy, and they traced their descent to Togarmah, the brother of Ashkenaz. Perhaps this is why Eastern European Jews call themselves "Ashkenazi", although this obviously fails to explain why they don't call themselves "Togarmi".

One proposed reason why the Khazars may have come to refer to themselves as "Askenazi" rather than as "Togarmi" may be based on a passage from the book of Jeremiah (51:27), in which God says, through the mouth of the Prophet:


"...call together against her [i.e., Babylon] the kingdoms of Ararat, Minni, and Ashkenaz..."



Perhaps it was the honor of being called upon, by God Himself, to rise up against the apostasy symbolized by Babylon, which lead these people, who held themselves to be sons of Togarmah, to prefer the name of his brother Ashkenaz.