SMYRNA
E-MAIL: JereM541@aol.com
To be just in all our dealings simply requires that we be honest, faithful, merciful, and consistent with others. Our God possesses such a character, and in the Bible it is often translated "righteousness".
The following article deals with this issue. Hopefully, it will point up the astounding lack of justice as a motivating factor in the minds of O.J. Simpson's lawyers. We urge our readers to carefully consider it because it isn't about O.J. Simpson's case per se, but about justice.]
We all recall the famous lawyer F. Lee Bailey's cross examination of Detective Mark Fuhrman and Bailey's accusation that Fuhrman had planted the bloody glove on Simpson's property. What most people don't know is why Simpson's defense team chose to accuse Fuhrman of such a dastardly deed (a capital offense). Where did they get such a notion? What kind of evidence did they have to back up their charge?
It all started soon after Robert Shapiro took Simpson's case. A plan of defense was necessary, and a major decision was made regarding that plan. According to Jeffrey Toobin's article An Incendiary Defense in The New Yorker magazine of July 25, 1994, "...leading members of Simpson's defense team floated this new and provocative theory as part of both the public-relations war surrounding the case and their continuing effort to keep the prosecution off balance. Those conversations revealed that they plan to portray the detective as a rogue cop who, rather than solving the crime, framed an innocent man." That "theory" as they and the media so flippantly and consistently call it, violates every element in a true concept of justice.
To get right at the heart of the mind-set of Alan Dershowitz and Robert Shapiro - to demonstrate exactly how immoral (unjust) they really are - let us look at the ending of Toobin's article in The New Yorker: The race card, says Toobin, "...may be the only one in Simpson's hand. But it appears that his defense team will be playing it, even if it means that helping 0.J. Simpson threatens the tender peace of the city of Los Angeles. To Alan Dershowitz, one of Simpson's legal strategists, such a tradeoff may well be worth making." This statement is incredible! It offends the moral sensibilities of all decent people. Alan Dershowitz is willing to embroil Los Angeles in riots again in order to get his client off. It doesn't matter if Simpson brutally murdered Nicole and Goldman; winning the case is all-important. Note what Dershowitz stated in his book, The Best Defense, according to Toobin:
This statement by a militant Jewish activist who was once a Nazi youth is not surprising, even though it is repugnant. But it is also contradictory. Instead of including the word "fair", he should have included only the word "legal", because it is impossible to be fair and careless of consequences simultaneously. And it is obvious now that Dershowitz, Shapiro, Cochran and Bailey are devoid of the quality of being fair. Having accused Mark Fuhrman of the capital crime of planting evidence against Simpson (they are now including several Los Angeles police officers and forensics employees of a conspiracy), and being willing to catapult the city into riots where human life and property are endangered, they have shown their abandon to immorality, and, we believe their acts should also be unlawful.
Many fair-minded citizens across the country believe that the "Dream Team" (which should be changed to the "Mean Team") is simply trying to confuse the jury so that either a hung jury or a mistrial will be the outcome. This tactic is itself immoral (unjust, unrighteous) and is an integral part of their callous natures.
It is interesting to note that, in comparison, several lawyers in Oklahoma have refused to represent Timothy McVeigh, accused of being one of the bombers of the federal building in Oklahoma City April 19, 1995, because their personal feelings will not let them practice the "sacred" tenet of "everyone is entitled to a fair trial." It seems that some crimes are more revolting than others, and also that some people, being rich and famous, wield more clout with the "ideologues". If Simpson murdered Nicole and Goldman (having nearly severed their heads and stabbed Goldman 30 or 40 times), isn't that sufficiently brutal to make some lawyers not want to represent him? What hypocrites we mortals be! "Justice" - a noble word for noble characters - must be very lonely in this world, especially in the hearts of Alan Dershowitz, Robert Shapiro, Johnnie Cochran, F. Lee Bailey, Jeffrey Toobin and the publishers of The New Yorker.
Turning our attention now to the mechanics of playing the race card in the Simpson case, it is important that we mark the involvement of The New Yorker and Jeffrey Toobin, for they were the first to plant the seeds of suspicion against Detective Mark Fuhrman in the minds of the public. Just seven days after their article appeared, Jet magazine, a periodical for the black community, picked up Toobin's story and passed it on. This is how it's done in propaganda circles. Once the seeds are planted they grow and spread like wildfire. There is little wonder that Jeanette Harris, the black juror dismissed recently, was so favorable to O.J. Simpson, because the propaganda mill had added more fuel to her already smouldering racism. So The New Yorker and Jet are culpable in this scenario of unrighteousness (injustice).
Now let us take this unsavory conspiracy a bit further. Let us "theorize" about a possible connection between Dershowitz, Shapiro and a secretive organization well known to us as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B'nai B'rith. We have written many times about this Jewish organization that wields great influence. It is so influential that many people believe that it virtually controls the Special Investigations unit of the Justice Department. It also undoubtedly furnishes intelligence information to the FBI, the ATF and other government agencies, for it is not restricted by law in the gathering of intelligence data. In fact, it has purloined information from police files in San Francisco. It is also close to the Cult Awareness Network (CAN - see below). It has its "spies" everywhere, and we believe that Alan Dershowitz is either directly or indirectly linked to it. And since Robert Shapiro is Jewish, he, too, may benefit from ADL's intelligence. If Dershowitz and Shapiro obtained information from Detective Mark Fuhrman's personnel files, it could have been ADL agents who did it.
Is Jeffrey Toobin, staff writer for The New Yorker, also Jewish? Would he cooperate in a plot to fan the flames of racism and accuse Fuhrman of a capital crime? This writer talked to him by telephone on April 26th and asked him these questions: "Which Simpson lawyers did you speak to?" He said, "No comment." I asked, "Which lawyer described Fuhrman as a 'bad cop' "? "No comment." "Did you talk to Dr. Ronald Koegler and Dr. John Hochman?"(1) He didn't know who they were at first, but then said that their reports were included in the lawsuit filed by Fuhrman against L.A. "Did you go to L. A. for your research?" "No comment." "Was Fuhrman ever sued for a civil rights violation?" "Yes, but unsuccessfully." "Are you Jewish?" At this he nearly exploded. "Why would you ever ask a question like that?" I said I wanted background information on him. He said, "Absolutely no comment!"
(1) Two psychiatrists or psychologists who allegedly evaluated Fuhrman during his suit against the city.
To recapitulate, we see a chain of events in the O.J. Simpson case that implicate Alan Dershowitz, Robert Shapiro, Jeffrey Toobin and The New Yorker in a conspiracy to "play the race card" and accuse Detective Mark Fuhrman of a capital crime. Playing the race card also ran the risk of race riots in Los Angeles, a risk they were willing to take. This behavior, in Smyrna's opinion, is grossly immoral and should be unlawful.
As for our "theory" that these Jewish lawyers and the Jewish influenced magazine The New Yorker had help from the Anti-Defamation League in framing Mark Fuhrman, it makes more sense than the Dream Team's postulate that several police officers and the forensics department of Los Angeles conspired to frame Simpson. What's sauce for the goose...
THE INCENDIARY CONNECTION
[As a Christian-based publication, Smyrna's primary reason for existence has always been to bring the truth of important issues to its readers as fully as its capabilities and resources would allow. We believe that our Creator has commanded all people everywhere to practice justice, and in former articles we have stated that the Bible equates justice with righteousness. Too many have been spooked by the word "righteousness" because it sounds so religious and unattainable. However, when we realize that it is the same as justice, it immediately takes on a more understandable connotation.
" 'Once I decide to take a case, I have only one agenda: I want to win. I will try, by every fair and legal means, to get my client off - without regard to the consequences' "
Return to Table of Contents
Enter the Cult Awareness Network, a "clearing house and information central about cult activities", according to an AP release. C.A.N. is run by Cynthia Kisser from a suburban Chicago office. According to Marty Butz in their office, C.A.N. has 20 branch offices across the country. Four organizations that he mentioned as board members or participants were: the Jewish Board of Family and Children's Services; the Commission on Cults & Missionaries, a part of which are the Jewish Federation Council of Greater Los Angeles and the Greater Miami Jewish Federation.
It is easy to see that C.A.N., a 501(c)3 organization, is really a Jewish front. This explains why B'nai B'rith and its ADL are so bound up with its operation. In fact, some believe that C.A.N. was begun and is controlled by the ADL, but that matters little. The fact that it is a Jewish front is enough to know that when it targets a "cult", it is because the destruction of the target group would serve the purposes of the Talmudic-Kabbalistic-Israeli complex, and ultimately the New World Order.
FIRST, this is an admission that the ADL spies on anyone or any group that it thinks needs to be tracked. SECOND, it implies that the ADL is in league with law enforcement agencies, either directly or indirectly (see our article later on in this newsletter). It would surprise us if the ADL had not been tracking Mark Fuhrman. THIRD, if one wishes to really stretch the mind, one could see long term benefits accruing to the ADL and its associates from the Oklahoma tragedy. It is now obvious that a "right-wing" movement in America corresponds to the "right-wing" in Russia, and the most prominent common denominator is that "anti-Semitism" is attributed to both. Remember, "anti-Semitism" is necessary for Talmudists-Cabbalists-Zionists to succeed. Class struggle, which results from the Marxist strategy of thesis, antithesis and synthesis, is their game plan, and it has been working well for many years.
Frank Rich, in an article in the New York Times (3/9/95 p.A15) entitled, The Jew World Order, teamed up with Ron Chernow to attack with alacrity the followers of the hated Nazarene, more commonly known as Christians. Conversely, Frankie would have us join him in lauding all Jews and all things Jewish. Mr. Rich and others are this nation's leading historical revisionists and are determined to disallow any attempt at involving the Warburgs, Rothschilds, Schiffs, and others in the enormously successful conspiracy known as the Federal Reserve. Rich did a masterful job in this piece of linking Louis Farrakhan and Pat Robertson. How cruel and demeaning. Mr. Rich should apologize to Minister Farrakhan immediately.
The flap is about what the protestors of Jewish sensitivities call "thinly veiled anti-Semitism". Obviously, Rich and other champions of the Encyclopedia Judaica's version of history vehemently resent even the mildest exposure of the international bankers and their goyim cohorts. Pat Robertson's nonsensical scribblings which he called The New World Order was in the main inert and unrevealing, yet to zealots like Rich, Rev. Pat committed the unpardonable sin. Puckering Pat lost no time in expressing shock that anyone could possibly think that his description of international bankers referred to Jews. Well, Mr. Robertson, who the heck did you think they were - Hawaiians? Did you think their money came from pineapple juice?
So, Frank Rich and Ron Chernow forced Preacher Pat to bow down and grovel. All because Pat called a pack of thieving conspirators "international bankers", and because Mr. Rich and Mr. Chernow believed they could lie with impunity. So they lied big time.
So we see Chernow painting Paul Warburg as two different characters: as MORBIDLY SHY, DEPRESSED, INCAPABLE OF CONSPIRACY, NO KING-PIN, and also as A CO CONSPIRATOR, FORCEFUL, TENACIOUS, FANATICAL, AGGRESSIVE and DARING.
Let us put some foot-wear on the truth. Were it not for the vulgar dominance of our media by this "chosen" group, this writer would buy the truth a shoe store, and the American people would be the beneficiaries.
(Mr. Floyd is a radio talk-show-host-turned-writer. He no longer works for radio station WAJF (1490 & 860 AM) in Decatur. Alabama because Morley Denbro, wealthy owner of Denbro Iron & Metal co. in Decatur is a Jewish activist who threatened to blow up the station and squash Mr. Floyd like a bug. A complaint by Floyd and the station owner to the FBI and U.S. Attorney has thus far produced no fruit.
Smyrna doesn't necessarily endorse all that Mr. Floyd writes and speaks. but we believe his views are entitled to a wide audience. He is solely responsible for the accuracy of his information.)
WILL THE REAL PAUL WARBURG PLEASE STAND UP?
The New York Times article has Ron Chernow telling us that Paul Warburg was "depressed", "morbidly shy", and "to single out Paul Warburg as the kingpin of a conspiracy is absurd." But this writer read Ronnie's boring book. On page 133 he uses the term "Paul and his coconspirators", and in the last paragraph of the same page Warburg is called 'forceful" and "tenacious" Warburg "dubbed himself a fanatic about the banking scheme" And in the center of page 134 Ronnie Chernow singles out Paul Warburg as "playing an aggressive role, for a foreign Jew... especially in matters of money - was daring and courageous."
Return to Table of Contents
I used to ask God to help me. Then I asked if I might help him. I ended up by asking him to do his work through me. --Hudson Taylor
There is an enmity between what is of God and what is of man. --Tertullian
But even that is not all. He commended George Jochnowitz who, he said, "...demolishes the theory that Eastern and Central European Jews are not Semites..." Jochnowitz had written a review essay of Paul Wexler's The Ashkenazic Jews: A Slavo-Turkic People in the Oct. 1994 issue of Midstream. So - it is obvious that there is controversy in the Jewish community over the origin of Ashkenazim Jews. Smyrna has referenced three sources in the past for information on the non-Semitic background of Eastern European Jews: D.M. Dunlop's The History of the Jewish Khazars, Arthur Koestler's The Thirteenth Tribe, and Alfred Lilienthal's What Price Israel and The Zionist Connection II Koestler and Lilienthal were Jews, and Dunlop was Professor of Middle Eastern History at Columbia University. While it would be difficult for us to discount the opinions of the above trio since their evidence is very strong, we also acknowledge the capabilities of Ralph de Toledano. Let us, therefore, approach the problem from another perspective, one that essentially concludes that it doesn't make any real difference.
If Ashkenazim Jews originated from Turko-Slavic peoples, they would not be of Semitic stock, therefore "anti-Semitism" would be a practically meaningless term because 90% (or more) of the world's Jews are Ashkenazim. However, let's assume for the moment that they are descended from Shem (son of Noah), and let's even grant that they are genealogically pure, which is impossible. Allowed all these arguments beneficial to their cause, there remain fundamental problems with Jewry and its claim to ancient promises made by God to Israel.
Not all Jews believe that the political-religious state of Israel' is legitimate, but they are in a small minority. Furthermore, Smyrna is not concerned about Jews who support or do not support "Israel". We are interested in the reasons why so many Christians support her, and we limit our discussion to evangelicals and fundamentalists whose support is based on erroneous interpretations of prophecy.
There are so many Biblical evidences to demonstrate that Israel was terminated as a religious and political entity in A.D. 70 that much space would be needed to elaborate on them. But let us mention only one that should be sufficient to prove our case. When Jesus was crucified the thick curtain that separated the Holy of Holies room from the larger room Holy Place (see diagram) [in original "hard copy" --BeWISE] was torn from top to bottom. This curtain, or veil, was 60 ft. high, 30 ft. wide, and extremely thick. It was so heavy that (Edersheim says that in the exaggerated language of the time) 300 priests were required to manipulate it. In other words, a supernatural force was required to rend it. There were other supernatural events that occurred at the crucifixion, but we shall limit our discussion to the tearing of the veil.
Why did such an enormous curtain separate the Holy of Holies from the rest of the temple? This was where God's shekinah (His manifest presence) stayed. The high priest entered this sanctuary once a year as confessor of his and the people's sins. He sprinkled the blood of a sacrificed animal on the mercy seat. No one else was allowed in that Holy of Holies. This was the method dictated by God to Moses whereby the people could obtain forgiveness for their sins. The high priest was an imperfect, temporary mediator between the people and God Almighty. Therefore, entering the Holy of Holies meant entering into the very presence of God Himself. This fact made it impossible for Israelites to practice their faith and rituals (their religion) without the temple. This is why, when they were taken into captivity to Assyria and later Babylonia, they developed a new religion-Judaism. The synagogue came into being.
The fundamental question now arises: What was the significance of the veil being torn when Jesus was crucified? It meant that God's presence was no longer in the Holy of Holies room, no longer in the temple - He was no longer available there to grant mercy and forgiveness to the people. That was an awful, frightening prospect! No way to receive forgiveness for sin? Eternally damned forever? We shudder at the very thought! God was no longer present with Israel. How, then, would anyone approach the Almighty? It would not be in the temple. Furthermore, some forty years later it was totally destroyed, anyway. Israel, as a nation formed by God, having been created with the tabernacle and later the temple as the center of its very existence, was gone. Vanished.
[And yet BeWISE wonders how we can explain away the fact that Yahweh Himself promised that Israel shall be His forever: Gen 17:7, I Sam 12:22, II Sam 7:24, Isaiah 45:17, etc...and this has been confirmed well into the New Testement: Rom 11:1-2, Heb 8:8, Jer 31:35-36, etc...and we wonder how we can explain away the fact that Jesus Himself clearly stated in Matt 15:24: But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. How is this possible if there is no more Israel? --BeWISE]
But praise be to God! A new and better way was now available for approaching the Unapproachable Almighty. The One crucified, whose death permanently replaced the yearly sacrifice of animals, became the perfect mediator between humankind and God. He is the high priest who entered into the presence of God once and for all time. He replaced the human high priest and now sits in the very presence of the Almighty, not just in His manifested presence in the temple. The people - you and I - may now enter into God's presence through the mediating authority of Jesus Christ! He alone can be our advocate; there is no other way, just as there was no other way for the Israelites except through the high priest and the animal sacrifice once a year in the temple.
Do you see why the rebuilding of the temple would be a blasphemous slap to God's face - an insult to His infinite wisdom and mercy? It would say to Him, "We don't want your merciful provision for our forgiveness. We want to return to the system of animal sacrifices and high priests and harsh rituals and...!" Incredibly, this is exactly what many Christians want for the Jews, and it has to be the worst kind of "anti-Semitism!" Who in their right minds would want a human father whose forgiveness depended on a series of cold, impersonal acts rather than a loving father who exclaimed, "Son - Daughter - I forgive your disobedience because I love you! That's what God has done by sending His only begotten Son to die in our place. Those of you who believe that Jews have a separate way to God-that His plan of salvation is different for them - are not only ignorant of the Bible, you have abdicated your responsibility and privilege of offering the only way possible to reach God. Your belief in this matter is anti-Semitic!
Returning now to the beginning of this article, we see that it doesn't matter whether Ashkenazim Jews are descended from Turko-Slavic (non-Semitic) stock or not, because all Jews are without a temple and therefore without access to God unless they accept His gracious mercy through Messiah (Christ) Jesus. We hope and pray that they may do so, and we believe that our attitude is far more loving and kind toward them than the Christians who lead them to believe otherwise. We realize, of course, that most Jews resent being asked to believe that Jesus was Messiah; some of them become downright hostile. We regret this but we have no control over their emotions. Shalom.
We posed the question to a lawyer and to a federal law enforcement officer. The lawyer hypothesized that a boiler or gas main could have exploded. The federal law enforcement officer said that it could possibly have been the detonating device. But these would not be equal in strength. Other information coming in indicates that something is terribly amiss. The truth may lie much deeper than this.
Is there any wonder that the police think of all "right wingers" as dangerous? They have been programmed by the liberals and leftists. Note that the article used the term "destructive devices" which could range anywhere from firecrackers to atom bombs! But more than that, Police Marksman condemned survivalist Americans for believing that government has strayed and needs tax and law reform. Imagine that! Why, honey chile - our gub'ment don' need improvin' for hev'ns sake, we gettin long jes fine!
Only liberals/leftists believe that our socialist government is "jes fine". No, we retract that statement - they would like more socialism. And because our schools haven't taught the Constitution correctly for two generations, law enforcement officers are just as ignorant about good government as anyone else.
The liberal media at all levels have away at "right wingers" for many years. When J.F.K was assassinated in 1963, the major news sources immediately blamed right wing extremists. Well, they got egg on their faces because Lee Harvey Oswald was a left wing extremist! It doesn't matter whether you believe he I killed Kennedy or not, the point is that the media jumped on the "right wingers". So - when the federal building was bombed in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, the media had a field day with "right wing extremists". And the masses, including the police, who have been conditioned for years, now hate "right wingers" even more.
But let us distinguish between "right wingers" and "right-wingers". There are those who do not hate anyone - not Jews, not blacks, not anyone. They simply are vigorously opposed to the socialist-fascist agenda. Many of them are Christians and many are not. They abhor violence, except for the right to defend themselves in legitimate circumstances. They support good law enforcement but are unhappy with the influence that the socialists-fascists have on the leadership of law enforcement agencies.
On the other hand, there are those who are identified in the "right-wing" as extreme activists who include some form of violence in their agenda. Smyrna knows little about them, except that some of them apparently are uneducated and rather witless in their actions. We don't know if they are tools of the left-wing or not. Remember, socialist-communist technique calls for its own opposition, even to the point of physical confrontation.
Since the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and since it requires limited government and maximum liberty, it represents a balance between law and freedom. Its adherents should be placed in the center of the political spectrum. These folk today are so-called conservatives and are represented by, for example, Pat Buchanan, Howard Phillips, Bob Dornan and millions of Americans - probably a majority.
On the left of the political spectrum are the socialists, communists, fascists, liberals, leftists, because they believe in social programs by government that require maximum control over the people. Note that communists and fascists are on the same end of the spectrum, which is definitely contrary to popular opimon created by the liberals-leftists.
This model leaves one end of the spectrum empty. Who belongs there? That spot is reserved for the anarchists who want no government at all. That view is unworkable, however, because anarchy is unstable and leads to total government which is tyranny. See the political spectrum line below:
Of course there were not 16 million Jews in the entire world, much less 16 million Jewish children or 4 billion Jews.
[In 1919 former Gov. Glynn of NY claimed that 6 million Jews were in danger of a holocaust. THAT WAS AFTER WORLD WAR I! And they ask us to believe them now?]
