Connect the dots… Mark Lane, a CIA lawyer, is with Jim Jones at Jonestown…

SHUT UP ABOUT ISRAEL!

Connect the dots… Mark Lane, a CIA lawyer, is with Jim Jones at JonestownMark Lane (who wrote the first book exposing the JFK murder conspiracy) goes to work at The Spotlight on Capitol Hill in Washington… Timothy McVeigh takes out an ad in The Spotlight…. the ADL tells the media this after the OKC bombing…. the Spotlight is sued, loses, and changes its name to the American Free Press, with Michael Collins Piper, which he has been with for 30 years (= Jonestown/Iran-Contra)… Christopher Bollyn is one of the first AFP

Mark Glenn – Fake Catholic, anti-Zionist DoD, CIA disinformation propagandist?

…”Israel did 9/11″ writers and activists on the 911 Truth scene, immediately following the events of 9/11, followed by Eric Hufschmid, and, eventually, AFP‘s Mark Glenn, of The Ugly Truth Radio Network. Mark Glenn (et al) are now furious with me for having exposed them and for fighting against the military-industrial-academic complex… and they aim to destroy me for doing so. Unfortunately for them, we – the good people of America and the world, who want peace and a sustainable future – are beating their sorry asses with the TRUTH!

See: http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/video/Holocaust-Zundel-Rivero.wmv – http://www.documentarywire.com/jonestown-the-life-and-death-of-peoples-temple

See: https://ajmacdonaldjr.wordpress.com/2012/09/01/whats-up-with-shoah-org-uk-and-the-ugly-truth-radio-network/

See: https://ajmacdonaldjr.wordpress.com/2012/09/16/many-others-had-been-shot/

“A lawyer working for Jones in Jonestown named Mark Lane postured himself as a left-winger and someone who believed in Jones’ version of Apostolic Socialism. He also wrote a book about Jonestown called The Strongest Poison. Was Mark Lane an opportunist lawyer whose book stretched the truth and omitted important information? That is what the reviewers say. I am not saying that. Could he be an actual tool of the CIA as he makes his living appearing to attack them? I am not saying that Mark Lane is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. However I will tell you this: Mark Lane walked out of Jonestown that fateful day and later became the lawyer for the very same people in charge of killing the Jonestown survivors – Bo Gritz and the Liberty Lobby and Company. Gritz is an avowed right-winger who postures himself to be against big government, military profiteering, CIA involvement with drugs and other left-wing issues. Gritz and the Liberty Lobby are both anti-Jew pro-Hitler advocates of revisionist attempts to rewrite history and say that the Holocaust was not so bad or maybe did not really occur at all. It is a great irony that Mark Lane himself is Jewish. This subject matter is not short on ironies. Gritz, possibly envious of the Jonestown he was partly in charge of destroying, later started a community of right-wing survivalists he named “Almost Heaven.”

“Jonestown, the CIA and the Mystery Tape” by David Parker Wise – http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/AboutJonestown/JonestownReport/Volume7/wise875.htm

“Mark Lane took over the assets of the Liberty Lobby in or around 1993, when the lobby was on the verge of bankruptcy.  This information came directly from L.T. Patterson, the publisher of Criminal Politics, who was sued by Lane in 1994 for some $10 million.  Patterson was able to fend off Lane, a Zionist wolf in sheep’s clothing, and learned that Lane owned the lobby during the legal process.  When I asked Willis A. Carto if this was true, he swore at me on the phone and slammed down the receiver.  Since my office at the lobby/newspaper was connected to Willis Carto’s (from the summer of 2000) and having seen Lane, Carto, and Piper together on many occasions, I don’t doubt for a minute that Patterson’s information is true.  I have never seen anything that would contradict it.  This would mean that the so-called right-wing patriotic and anti-Semitic publications of the Liberty Lobby, such as the Spotlight and American Free Press, are actually controlled-opposition outfits controlled by the Zionist Jew, Mark Lane.”

See: http://www.whale.to/b/mark_lane.html

“During the summer of 1978, Jones hired JFK assassination conspiracy theorists Mark Lane and Donald Freed to help make the case of a “grand conspiracy” by intelligence agencies against the Peoples Temple.[88] Jones told Lane he wanted to “pull an Eldridge Cleaver”, referring to a fugitive Black Panther who was able to return to the United States after repairing his reputation.[88] In September 1978, Lane spoke to the residents of Jonestown, providing support for Jones’ theories and drawing parallels between Martin Luther King, Jr. and Jim Jones.[88] Lane then held press conferences stating that “none of the charges” against the Temple “are accurate or true” and that there was a “massive conspiracy” against the Temple by “intelligence organizations,” naming the CIA, FBI, FCC and even the U.S. Post Office.[88] Though Lane represented himself as disinterested, Jones was actually paying him $6,000 per month to generate such theories.[89]”

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown

AFP (645 Penn Ave SE)

AFP 645 Penn Ave SE – The very shady offices of the token anti-semitic rag on Capitol Hill: American Free Press, or AFP, which used to be called the Spotlight, back in the day, until they were sued and lost. Perhaps AFP should be called the ADL instead? LOL Their office is located between the liquor store and the check cashing place, has a fake name on the locked door, and darkly tinted windows.

VIDEO – Jim Jones & Monkeys – http://youtu.be/TD1aNEAfkrk

About ajmacdonaldjr

writer, author, blogger
This entry was posted in Activism, Crime, Ethics, Government, history, Law, Politics, propaganda, Terrorism, Violence and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Connect the dots… Mark Lane, a CIA lawyer, is with Jim Jones at Jonestown…

  1. Pingback: Coward Ken O’Keefe and his pathetic minions | A. J. MacDonald, Jr.

  2. Pingback: Uk Zionist Ambassador A. J. MacDonald, Jr. Dirty Propaganda |  SHOAH

  3. Has C. says:

    A very poor “research”. This site is a loss of time.

  4. read page says:

    My brother suggested I may like this web site.
    He used to be entirely right. This post truly made my day.

    You can not imagine simply how much time I had spent for this information!
    Thanks!

  5. Wow! At last I got a website from where I be capable of
    actually get useful data regarding my study and knowledge.

  6. This is a great tip especially to those fresh to the blogosphere.
    Brief but very precise information… Thank you for sharing this one.
    A must read post!

  7. NO BRAG- JUST FACTS!
    “TO SEE WHAT IS IN FRONT OF ONE’S NOSE REQUIRES A CONSTANT STRUGGLE.”
    — George Orwell, 1946

    “THERE IS NOTHING MORE FRIGHTENING THAN ACTIVE IGNORANCE.”
    — Goethe

    GOYOPHOBIA:
    THE HATRED OF GOYIM/GENTILES BY JEWS

    ALL NON JEWS ARE ANIMALS:
    GENTILES IN HALACHA
    Foreword — Daat Emet

    For a long time we have been considering the necessity of informing our readers about Halacha’s real attitude towards non-Jews. Many untrue things are publicized on this issue and the facts should be made clear. But recently, we were presented with a diligently written article on the subject, authored by a scholar from the Merkaz HaRav yeshiva — so our job was done by others (though we have already discussed some aspects of this issue in the weekly portions of Balak and Matot). Since there is almost no disagreement between us and the author of the article on this issue, we have chosen to bring the article “Jews Are Called ‘Men'” by R’ David Bar-Chayim (in Hebrew) so that the reader will be able to study and understand the attitude of the Halacha towards non-Jews.

    In this article R’ Bar-Chayim discusses the attitude towards “Gentiles” in the Torah and in the Halacha and comes to an unambiguous conclusion:

    “The Torah of Israel makes a clear distinction between a Jew, who is defined as ‘man,’ and a Gentile.”

    That is to say, any notion of equality between human beings is irrelevant to the Halacha. R’ Bar-Chayim’s work is comprehensive, written with intellectual honesty, and deals with almost all the aspects of Halachic treatment of non-Jews. It also refutes the statements of those rabbis who speak out of wishful thinking and, influenced by concepts of modern society, claim that Judaism does not discriminate against people on religious grounds. R’ Bar-Chayim shows that all these people base their constructs NOT on the Torah but solely on the inclinations of their own hearts. He also shows that there are even rabbis who intentionally distort the Halachic attitude to Gentiles, misleading both themselves and the general public.

    For the English readers’ convenience we will briefly mention the topics dealt with in R’ Bar-Chayim’s article:

    Laws in regard to murder, which clearly state that there is Halachic difference between murder of a Jew and of a Gentile (the latter is considered a far less severe crime).
    A ban on desecrating the Sabbath to save the life of a Gentile.
    A Jew’s exemption from liability if his property (e. g. ox) causes damage to a Gentile’s property. But if a Gentile’s property causes damage to a Jew’s property, the Gentile is liable.
    The question of whether robbery of a Gentile is forbidden by the Torah’s law or only by a Rabbinic decree.
    A ban on returning a lost item to a Gentile if the reason for returning it is one’s sympathy towards the Gentile and compassion for him.
    The sum which a Gentile overpays in a business transaction due to his own error is forfeit; whether a Jew is permitted to intentionally deceive a Gentile is also discussed.
    One who kidnaps a Jew is liable to death, but one who kidnaps a Gentile is exempt.
    A Jew who hurts or injures a Gentile is not liable for compensation of damage, but a Gentile who hurts a Jew is liable to death.
    One who overcharges a Gentile ought not return him the sum that the Gentile overpaid.
    A Gentile — or even a convert to Judaism — may not be appointed king or public official of any sort (e. g. a cabinet minister).
    One who defames a female proselyte (claiming that she was not virgin at the time of her marriage) is liable to neither lashes nor fine.
    The prohibition to hate applies only to Jews; one may hate a Gentile.
    One may take revenge against or bear a grudge towards Gentiles; likewise, the commandment “love your neighbour” applies only to Jews, not to Gentiles.
    One who sees Gentile graveyards should curse: “Your mother shall be greatly ashamed…”
    Gentiles are likened to animals.
    If an ox damaged a Gentile maidservant, it should be considered as though the ox damaged a she-ass.

    The dead body of a Gentile does not bear ritual impurity, nor does a Gentile who touches the dead body of a Jew become impure — he is considered like an animal who touched a dead body.
    One is forbidden to pour anointing oil on a Jew, but there is no ban on pouring that oil on a Gentile because Gentiles are likened to animals.

    An animal slaughtered by a Gentile is forbidden, even if the ritual slaughter performed was technically correct, because Gentiles are deemed like animals. (Daat Emet does not agree that this is the Halachic reason for invalidating a Gentile’s ritual slaughter — but this is not the place to delve into the subject).

    Their members are like those of asses” — Gentiles are likened to animals.
    Between the Jews and the Gentiles — In the Aggadah, the Kabbalah, and in Jewish Thought
    R’ Bar-Chayim’s arguments and conclusions are clear, Halachically accurate, and supported by almost all the existent major Halachic works. It would be superfluous to say that R’ Bar-Chayim fully embraces this racist Halachic outlook as the word of the Living G-d, as he himself pointed out in the “Conclusion” of his article:

    “It is clear to every Jew who accepts the Torah as G-d’s word from Sinai, obligatory and valid for all generations, that it is impossible to introduce ‘compromises’ or ‘renovations’ into it.”
    On the other hand, we want to make it clear that Daat Emet — as well as any reasonable people who do not embrace Halachic laws as the word of the Living G-d — are repulsed by such evil, racist discrimination.

    In the Hebrew text we have abridged the second part of R’ Bar-Chayim’s article,

    “Between Jews and Gentiles — In the Aggadah, the Kabbalah, and in Jewish Thought,” because, in our view, the Halacha is the law which obligates every religious Jew while concepts of the Aggadah, the Kabbalah, and Jewish thought are not binding on anyone, as our rabbis have already written:

    “And so the Aggadic constructs of the disciples of disciples, such as Rav Tanchuma and Rabbi Oshaya and their like — most are incorrect, and therefore we do not rely on the words of Aggadah” (Sefer HaEshkol, Laws of a Torah Scroll, p. 60a); we have expanded on this issue in the portion of Vayeshev.

    RAMBAM, BLACKS & APES

    Was the great and revered rabbi Moses Ben Maimon (Maimonides) a racist?
    The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion refers to Moses Maimonides, a.k.a. Rambam, as “the symbol of the pure and orthodox faith.” His Guide of the Perplexed is considered the greatest work of Jewish religious philosophy, and his view of Blacks was pure Talmudic:
    1. “[T]he Negroes found in the remote South, and those who resemble them from among them that are with us in these climes. The status of those is like that of irrational animals. To my mind they do not have the rank of men, but have among the beings a rank lower than the rank of man but higher than the rank of apes. For they have the external shape and lineaments of a man and a faculty of discernment that is superior to that of the apes.”
    Several Jewish scholars have translated the “Guide,” interpreting the above passage as referring to Black Africans:
    1. Moses Maimonides (1135-1204), The Guide of the Perplexed, translated and edited by Shlomo Pines; with an introductory essay by Leo Strauss (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963), Chapter 51, pp. 618-19. Moses Maimonides, The Guide to the Perplexed, trans. and ed. Shlomo Pines (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1963), 2:618-19. Other translations use the term “cushites” or “blacks” in place of “Negroes.” See M. Friedlander’s translation (1904; reprint, New York: Dover, 1956), 384.
    2. Moses Maimonides (1135-1204), The Guide of the Perplexed; an abridged edition with introduction and commentary by Julius Guttmann; translated from the Arabic; Dalalat al-ha’irin; English; selections by Chaim Rabin; new introduction by Daniel H. Frank (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, 1995), p. 185.
    3. Moses Maimonides (1135-1204), The Guide of the Perplexed, translated from the original and annotated by M. Friedländer (New York: Hebrew Pub. Co., 1881), pp. 279-80. Here the word “Kushites” is used.
    One might also see Essays on Maimonides; An Octocentennial Volume, edited by Salo Wittmayer Baron (New York: Columbia University Press, 1941). Baron is quite explicit about the attitudes of Maimonides on slavery. On page 239, for instance, he writes, “For Maimuni [Maimonides] a slave is not fully human in matters of sex…”

    HOW TO CHEAT NON JEWS

    “If there was a legal case between a Jew and a Gentile (non-Jew), then the manner of judging between them is as I will explain: if we [i.e., a Jew] will win under their laws, we judge them according to their laws and say to them: this is your law! If it is better that we judge according to our laws, we judge them according to our laws and say to them: this is our law! And do not find it difficult, and don’t be surprised by it, just as one is not surprised about the slaughter of animals even though they have done no harm, for one in whom human characteristics are not complete is not truly a man, and his end purpose is only for ‘man’ [that is to say, the entire raison d’etre of the Gentiles is only for the benefit of the complete man —

    comment by Rabbi Y. Kapach shlita in his edition of Maimonides’s Commentary on the Mishnah], and the discussion on this matter requires a separate book.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s