JEWISH PERSECUTION,
Tool of the International Zionists' Plan for World Dominion
Source: Sweet Liberty [with: Jackie Patru]

Chapter 11.

Along with the dissolution of Christianity by way of its being merged with Talmudism, equally ominous is the fact that Constitutional law is quickly being chewed up and spit out as Talmudic law. The 'Law' of the Pharisees.

On January 12, 2000, Stephen Ames, Jr., a guest on the Sweet Liberty broadcast, read to us from a book written by Menachem Elon, Deputy President, Supreme Court of Israel. (Remember the author's name - Menachem Elon. It appears in a news article following, although the newspaper spelled his first name without the 'c' -- 'Menahem'.)

Published by The Jewish Publication Society, Philadelphia Jerusalem 5754 / 1994, Elon's book is titled: JEWISH LAW; HISTORY, SOURCES, PRINCIPLES; Ha-Mishpat Ha-Ivri; Volume 1. On pages 1144-1145 the author is discussing the codification of law in Europe and the U.S. in comparison with codification of Jewish Law. Elon says of Maimonides:

"This quality of Jewish law is axiomatic and beyond dispute. Not even Maimonides, who compiled the greatest and most nearly perfect halakhic code of all, sought to establish his work as the source of halakhic authority... Nor did Maimonides entertain even the slightest idea of introducing any change in the law through his work. He then concluded: [referring to Maimonides introduction to his code book]

"Everything in the Babylonian Talmud is binding on all Israel. Every town and country must follow all the customs, give effect to the decrees, and carry out the enactments of the Talmudic Sages because the entire Jewish people accepted everything contained in the Talmud ..."

'Every town and country must . . . give effect to the decrees, and carry out the enactments of the Talmudic Sages. . . '  My casual and somewhat sarcastic remark was, "who cares what a former Israeli Supreme Court Justice says. That doesn't affect us." Next day -- as if in direct response to that conversation -- the Newark, New Jersey Star Ledger, 1-13-00, carried two articles on Talmudic law in the U.S. (emphasis added) The first headline boasted:

The Talmud confronts Florida's electric chair

By Amy Ellis Nutt; Star-Ledger Staff:

Evidence of the increased interest in Jewish legal studies at American law schools can be found in the fact that more than three dozen schools now teach the subject; that the American Association of Law School Professors has its own Jewish law section; and that there is now a Jewish law casebook being used as a reference tool in courses on the subject.

But the most profound evidence may well be found right now at the highest level of American Justice. Last month, a brief was filed before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding Florida's use of the electric chair and whether it constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, prohibited by the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution.

What makes this brief unique is that it does not rely on a single tenet of American law, but rather solely on the Talmud.

According to the two lawyers who filed the brief, Nathan Lewin and former Israel Supreme Court Justice Menahem Elon, the Talmud can provide an important way for evaluating the fair implementation of the death penalty.

"What we're saying is that under Jewish law three principles apply", Lewin told the Jerusalem Post. "That you should (execute) as painlessly as possible, as quickly as possible, and with the least mutilation of the body as possible. Those all derive from the principles that were in the Talmud 2,000 years ago". They are consistent, as well, with the Eighth Amendment. . .

"I would consider it a substantial contribution", Lewin said, "if in either a majority or concurring or some opinion, the court says,

'Look, our conclusion that this is cruel and unusual punishment is buttressed, is informed, is supported by the fact that 2,000 years ago the rabbis in the Talmud said it would be impermissible to actually burn somebody at the stake, because that would be a death that would disfigure and would cause pain over an extended period of time'.

"That would engender respect in the world at large for a body of law that we study all the time and believe is divinely inspired and worth our time and attention."

Think about what you've just read! The U.S. Supreme Court accepted a brief based solely on Talmudic Law and which did 'not rely on a single tenet of American law'. Do bear in mind that the U.S. Supreme Court was established to decide cases where the constitutionality of laws come into dispute. The U.S. Supreme Court was created by the states as a branch of the federal government under the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court is not the supreme law of this land, nor are decisions made by Supreme Court justices when those decisions effectively amend the Constitution!

It would be worthwhile to read again (from Doug Reed's book) Dr. Kastein's explanation of how the scribes translated / wrote the Talmud, along with their peculiar interpretations and interpolations:

". . . with a definite object in view, that of making it comprehensible to the Greeks; this led to the distortion and twisting of words, changes of meaning, and the frequent substitution of general terms and ideas for those that were purely local and national".

In essence then, the Talmud is a compilation of the distortions, twisted words, changed meanings, and frequent substitution by the priesthood, of the true Law of Creator. The Talmud, as Jesus charged, is man's law -- an evil and perverted law, as opposed to the immutable, changeless Laws of Creation as Jesus taught . . . to simply do unto others as you would have others do unto you, and that -- in perfect justice -- we are allowed to reap what we sow. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, because the 'knowledge of good and evil' -- knowing right from wrong -- is a knowing within each and every one of us.  

Talmudic law allows and encourages homosexuality, pedophilia, sodomy, and bestiality. Talmudic law commands its adherents to charge usury to all gentiles, while forbidding lending with interest to Talmudists (Jews). In fact, in the Old Testament we find specifically the commandment of Jehovah in Deut. 15: 6 that:

"... and thou shalt lend unto many nations, but thou shalt not borrow; and thou shalt reign over many nations, but they shall not reign over thee".

Talmudic law commands the killing of all gentiles, especially Christians, since they are 'heretics' and 'blasphemers'. Jews who have fallen for the lies of the Talmud, and Christian Zionists who have fallen for the lies of their particular brand of 'Christianity' are truly people of the damned.

It appears that the Talmud prevailed before the U.S. Supreme Court, since Old Sparky has been cast out of use. Mr. Lewin's assertion that the Talmud would not permit burning at the stake because "that would be a death that would disfigure and cause pain over an extended period of time", is a lie. It belies the words and commands of their god, Jehovah, as well as the Talmudic Law itself, as stated in Sanhedrin, 64a:

"He who gives of his seed to Moloch incurs no punishment."

Moloch was an Ammorite god of the Old Testament. He who 'gave his seed' to Moloch did so by throwing his newborn baby into a fire, burning the infant alive - a human sacrifice. The Talmudic sages decreed that the act of burning a live infant as a sacrifice to Moloch incurred no punishment. Another name for Moloch could be Jehovah, as we read in Exodus 13: 1,2:

"And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast; it is mine."

In Ezekiel 20: 25-26, because Jehovah was ticked off when his 'peculiar and special' people had not obeyed all his statutes and judgments, he said:

"Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live;

And I polluted them in their own gifts, in that they caused to pass through the fire all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I am the Lord."

And Jesus said:

"But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." Matt: 18:6

The second article featured in the Star-Ledger on 1-13-2000 is a lengthy discourse on why Talmudic law is being taught in American law colleges. We will excerpt from this one. Above a photo of Rutgers-Camden Talmudic law professor, Steve Friedell, reading the Talmud in his office is the caption:

"A professor finds his calling in teaching Jewish law at Rutgers".

Using the phrase 'Jewish Law' throws the reader off track. There is no such thing as 'Jewish Law'! Jewish law is Talmudic Law. Another small photo gives a close-up shot of a book which caption states:

"Below, Friedell holds a copy of the Talmud".

What is not explained to the readers of the article is that Friedell is holding up only one volume of the 63-volume set. Instead, the Talmud is presented as 'a' book and described as:

"... the 2,000 year old book of Jewish law... a towering collection of writings, 5,422 pages long, without vowels and punctuation."

Another glaringly omitted fact is the existence of the oral law, non-written to ensure that no gentile could ever discover its content. The headline on this second article (emphasis added) reads:

He answers to a higher authority

"Friedell is a professor at Rutgers University Law School-Camden, and is one of just a handful of law school academia in the country specializing in the teaching of Jewish law. For hundreds of years in this country, law students and legal scholars have relied on American casebook law to illuminate the intricacies of our legal system.

But with globalization taking place in every area of life -- from politics to economics to art and entertainment -- law schools are now recognizing the importance of studying non-Anglo-American legal systems and incorporating such courses as Jewish law into their curricula.

. . . If a Talmudist is an expert in the Talmud, he is surely a humble one -- it is a book, says the slightly graying professor, that constantly challenges, constantly encourages debate, and leaves the student always looking for new insights.

. . . In a 1992 article he wrote for the Indiana Law Journal, Friedell quoted a character from Herman Wouk's novel, Inside, Outside:

"Under the opaque Aramaic surface of the Talmud is a magnificent structure of subtle legal brilliancies, all interwoven with legend, mysticism, the color of ancient times, and the cut-and-thrust of powerful minds in sharp clash. I can't get enough of it, and I've been at it for decades."

Clearly Friedell feels likewise.

. . . Rayman Solomon, the dean of Rutgers-Camden Law School is a big supporter of Friedell. "There has been a real renaissance in the study of Jewish law", says Solomon, "and a renewed interest in comparative law in general: Roman law, Greek law, Jewish law.."

. . . Friedell, who says that more than half of his Jewish law classes are composed of non-Jewish students, holds his specialized seminar every other year at the Law School in Camden. When he is not teaching the course in Camden, he is teaching it as an undergraduate course in New Brunswick -- but using Hebrew texts.

. . . Says Friedell: "The Talmud isn't studied for any particular reason, it's studied just as an end in itself. It's a boundless sea. . . And I've just scratched the surface".

So there it is... 'with globalization taking place in every area of life', why should we rely only on the U.S. Constitution as our basis of law? Our option, of course, would be to obey the 'law of nations' via the International Criminal Court, founded on Talmudic Law. The Talmud 'constantly challenges, constantly encourages debate, and leaves the student always looking for new insights'. Those 'new insights' are nothing more than interpretations of vaguely written laws -- vaguely written to invite interpretation, depending upon the circumstances and the individuals concerned.

To illustrate that the interpretation does indeed depend upon the individuals and circumstances involved: In 1979, three Jewish legislators, Elizabeth Holtzman, Joshua Eilberg and William Lehman, heavily supported by major Jewish organizations, successfully lobbied for passage of the 'Holtzman Amendment'. This new law created the OSI (Office of Special Investigations of the Justice Department) to ferret out alleged 'Nazi war criminals' living in the U.S.

Over its twenty-year history, at a cost of $60,000,000, fifty octogenarians have been deported as a result of the mostly-Jewish staffed OSI's 'ferreting'. Two fairly recent example of their activities and double standards were found first in a 11-4-1998 Chicago Sun Times article (excerpted):

"Jewish community leaders applauded an immigration judge's decision to deport (Bronislaw Hajda, 74) who served as a guard in a Nazi labor camp in WWII."

One of the Jews said that, 'a measure of justice is achieved'. So, fifty-three years after the war, a former soldier (who was 21 years old at the time of his alleged 'crime') was deported, forever separated from family, friends, and his home of more than half a century, in spite of the fact that absolutely no crime could be proven against him. On the other side of the coin, just one month later, an Associated Press article that appeared in several major papers on 12-9-1998 stated:

"Warsaw -- Israel has refused to extradite a Jew accused of atrocities against German prisoners in Poland after WWII, the Polish Justice Ministry said yesterday. Solomon Morel, who commanded the Swietochlowice camp for Germans in southern Poland from February to November 1945, allegedly tortured inmates and is considered responsible for at least 1,538 deaths.

Israel refused Poland's request for extradition, saying the statute of limitations had run out".  from: End Times - End Games by Hans Schmidt

Where Jewish revenge is concerned, there is no statute of limitations, even when no crime has been proven against an individual. Yet, when a Jew commits genocide against gentiles, Israel refuses to extradite on grounds that the statute of limitations ran out. The OSI is funded by Americans (98% gentiles according to census figures).

Now comes the International Criminal Court (ICC), as part and parcel of the globalization of law. Not a new idea, the ICC was first dubbed the International Court of Justice less than a year after the U.S. signed Americans up as members of the United Nations Organization, to keep the peace, mind you. As reported in U.S. Department of State Publication 2808, 1947, on page 2 we read:

The Acting United States Representative to the United Nations to the

Secretary General of the United Nations

United States Delegation to the United Nations

August 26, 1946

"EXCELLENCY: I have the honor to transmit herewith, under cover of a note dated August 16, 1946. . . a Declaration by the president of the United States of America [Harry S. Truman] recognizing, on behalf of the United States of America, the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice under Article 36 of the Statute of the Court.

My action today in depositing this Declaration, accepting on behalf of the United States the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, is further testimony to the determination of my Government to do all in its power to assure that the United Nations will fulfill the role assigned to it, which is nothing less than the preservation of world peace.

One of the most elemental functions of the United Nations in the preservation of world peace is the development of procedures of pacific settlement. In these procedures, the role and functions of law is clear. We feel that international law is already sufficiently developed to serve as a guide and basis in international relations. We feel further that the best way of assuring its further development, and the only way of enabling it to fulfill its function, is by referring to a responsible international tribunal all disputes properly justiciable by such a tribunal.

We accordingly look forward to a great development of the rule of law in international relations through a broad acceptance of the function of the Court in the spirit of this Charter. Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration. -- Herschel V. Johnson

Harry Truman's declaration on behalf of the United States of America, on August 16, 1946, stated in part the recognition of the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in all legal disputes hereinafter arising concerning the interpretation of a treaty; any question of international law; and the nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation.

In March, 1994, the U.S. Congress passed legislation authorizing the implementation of an International Criminal Court. Professor Cherif Bassiouni, of DePaul University in Chicago -- the leading academic proponent of the ICC, who is world-renowned for his expertise on the subject -- had proposed expanding greatly on the list of crimes under ICC jurisdiction, arguing in favor of the "broadest possible jurisdiction of the court".

He proposed such additional international crimes as environmental offenses, insults to a foreign State and disseminating false or distorted information. The same group who created and controls the UN also owns and controls the media, which consistently disseminates false and distorted information. That won't count of course. The list of crimes isn't complete, by the way, and once the UN's Court is fully recognized we can count on the list ever-expanding as the ICC tests its power.

A report by the Congressional Research Service (August 14, 1990 - Revised: March 9, 1993), authored by Daniel Hill Zafren, had this to say about adding to the list of 'International Crimes': (excerpted):

"Summary: While a complex and controversial subject. . . recent world events have supplied a new impetus for serious study and consideration of such a proposal, along with the possibility of increasing categories of war crimes and, perhaps, even enactment of an international criminal code.

Introduction: ". . . two areas of thought have been receiving increased attention. One is the possible formation of an international criminal court. . . and/or the already established international crimes, as well as taking jurisdiction over any additional crimes that may be established by any future international criminal code.

Some arguments in favor of such a proposal: The United Nations International Law Commission has declared that the establishment of a permanent international criminal court is possible, and has suggested a workable structure for it. . .

It would symbolize the supremacy of law. It would be the start of legal respect for, and making more effective, the construction of an international order. . . "

Recall that the United Nations, a.k.a. the League of Nations, a.k.a. the League to Enforce Peace is "a Jewish idea", as Nahum Sokolow stated at the Carlsbad Congress on 8-24-1922.

The International Criminal Court will serve as the 'keeper of peace' for the world, when the priesthood comes into its full power -- if they succeed. (They've been trying for 3,000 years and haven't succeeded yet). According to Theodore Pike's Israel - Our Duty our Dilemma, the final gathering of Jews won't be only in Israel, for they believe that the whole world will be their playground. From pp. 54-55):

"In legal and business matters, the Gentile also found himself beneath equality with the Jew. This - as the Jewish Encyclopedia explains under 'Gentile' p.620 - was because the Gentiles had been 'outlawed' by God from the beginning:

"The passage in Moses' farewell address: 'The Lord came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from Mount Paran'. . . indicates that the Almighty offered the Torah to the Gentile nations also, but, since they refused to accept it, He withdrew His 'shining' legal protection from them, and transferred their property rights to Israel, who observed His law.

A passage in Habaakuk is quoted as confirming this claim: 'God came from Teman, and the Holy One from Mount Paran. . . He stood and measured the earth he beheld, and drove asunder [outlawed] the nations.'. . . the Talmud adds that He had observed how the Gentile nations steadfastly refused to obey the seven moral Noachian precepts, and hence He decided to outlaw them [the Gentile nations]". Baba Kama (38a)

So, according to the Talmud, all land is their land. In an article by J. Zane Walley, of the Paragon Foundation titled "A Lightening Bolt of Reality -- The Forced Relocation of Rural Populations", Walley said:

"I followed that thread into the spool and stumbled on a United Nations website, U.N. Protected Areas in the United States. The website contained 129 fine-print pages of U.N. Protected areas in America! 129! Millions upon millions of acres of our country are listed. Those protected areas are regulated by the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources). When I compared the U.N protected areas to regions that are under fire from federal regulators and environmental takings that force people from the land, I found they are the same.

In researching the IUCN I found that they are the environmental agency of the United Nations, bringing together 76 states, 111 government agencies, 732 NGOs (non-governmental organizations), 36 affiliates, and some 10,000 scientists and experts from 181 countries. Their membership list of signatory American agencies and NGOs has dumbfounded me.

U.S agencies with IUCN membership and providing funding include: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Department of the Interior, National Park Service, U.S. Agency for International Development, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce and Department of State.

Other documents also have severely unnerved me. The United Nations Program of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development produced a how-to manual, The Forced Relocation of Rural Populations, which was distributed in Africa and included the stated mission,

"To foster a more balanced spatial distribution of the population by promoting in an integrated manner equitable and ecologically sustainable development."

Our own government has two publications in print that will raise your hackles: The first, Your Rights and Benefits as a Displaced Person, (Pub. No. FHWA-PD-95-010) states, "Government programs designed to benefit the public often result in acquisition of private property and sometimes in the displacement of people from their residences, businesses, or farms."

The other pamphlet, Acquiring Real Property for Federal and Federal Aid Programs and Projects (Publication No. FHWA-PD-95 -005), spells out how the government can take your land. The U.S Government publications and the U. N. Manual have analogous themes."

For our reader who wants to verify the 'UN Protected Area' program, specifically in the United States, listed by State alphabetically, the direct access URL is:

www.unep-wcmc.org/cgi-bin/pa_un97.p?country=usa%3AUNITED+STATES+OF+AMERICA&list=on

Whose bright ideas do you suppose are the federal, state and local laws, rules, and regulations that have laid claim to hundreds of thousands of square miles of land in these united States? And progressive taxation on private property, so the worker bees lose their homes when the taxes climb beyond their ability to pay? And the tens of thousands of farms lost to the bankers, by hook and by crook?

People (non-lawyers) who have spent years studying law in the U.S. claim there are 6,000,000 laws on the books today. When one takes into account the myriads of ordinances in the thousands of local units of government, combined with state and federal laws, along with bureaucratic rules and regulations that are given force of law, that figure doesn't sound like a stretch.

In our Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the 2001-02 session there are over 600 proposed new laws relating to taxation alone! See what the Protocols say about that:

"From this follows that taxation will best be covered by a progressive tax on property.

The tax upon the poor man is a seed of revolution. . .

A tax increasing in a percentage ratio to capital will give a much larger venue than the present individual or property tax, which is useful to us now for the sole reason that it excites trouble and discontent among the people."  Protocol No. 20

It would not be wise to dismiss this as lightly as I initially dismissed the quote in Menachem Elon's book on Jewish (Talmudic) Law. Could this 'vast and living work' called the Talmud, be the reason why judges in today's court systems are so flagrantly violating Constitutional law in favor of their 'interpretation' of the law? The answer to that can also be found in the Protocols:

"Under our influence the execution of the laws of the goyim has been reduced to a minimum. The prestige of the law has been exploded by the liberal interpretations introduced into this sphere.

In the most important and fundamental affairs and questions judges decide as we dictate to them, see matters in the light wherewith we enfold them for the administration of the goyim, of course, through persons who are our tools though we do not appear to have anything in common with them...

In general, our judges will be elected by us only from among those who thoroughly understand that the part they have to play is to punish and apply laws and not to dream about the manifestations of liberalism at the expense of the educationary scheme of the State, as the goyim in these days imagine it to be."  Protocol No. 15 

Could this be the reason why the laws from both the U.S. Congress and State Legislatures - for that matter from Local Governments too - are written so broadly and vaguely? Of course it is. And under which 'authority' are the laws written? Is that authority the Constitution for the United States of America or the Babylonian Talmud? The answer to that is becoming all too frighteningly clear. 

Who drafts the language for those great numbers of laws, given we know it isn't the legislators themselves? The drafters are the swarms of lawyers (Jesus called them 'scribes') who work for the multitudes of non-governmental organizations and environmentalist groups. And who do you suppose owns the environmentalist movement?

For state and local governments there are (at last count) 56 adjunct organizations created by the Council of State Governments (CSG) mentioned earlier. Proposed state laws are written by the lawyers for these various organizations and heavily lobbied within the halls and offices of government.

To name but a few of these NGOs: National Association of Governors, National Conference of State Legislators, National Association of Counties (affiliated with the state associations, which brag of their 'offices on Capitol Hill in D.C.')... there are associations of Chiefs of Police, Mayors, Township Supervisors, Secretaries of State, Lieutenant Governors, the list is seemingly endless. It could be safely asserted that there is an 'association' for every elected official and appointed bureaucrat.

On the other side of this same coin is the independent ALEC - American Legislative Exchange Council - purportedly established as a 'conservative alternative' to the more liberal NCSL. ALEC was established by Paul Weyrich and became the most powerful lobby in state legislatures during the mid-seventies through the early nineties attempting to dupe the legislators into calling for a Constitutional Convention, in order to finally rid themselves of that pesky instrument (the Constitution for the united States of America). They nearly succeeded.

Before we leave off here we must mention that state legislators today - at least in Pennsylvania - are advised in their various committees by hired Executive Directors. As one researcher was told, their duties are to 'guide and direct the state legislators'.

The Pennsylvania Association of County Commissioners is 'guided and directed' by an executive director who 'works closely with the state legislature in promulgating laws pursuant to the local governments'. The newest fad in Pennsylvania is a bewildering array of Tax Fairness Laws. This brings to mind another statement from the Protocols.

"The administrators, whom we shall choose from among the public, with strict regard to their capacities for servile obedience, will not be persons trained in the art of government, and will therefore easily become pawns in our game in the hands of men of learning and genius who will be their advisers, specialists...  Protocol No. 2

And how, indeed, are the people to perceive the underlying meaning of things when their representatives give the best of their energies to enjoying themselves?"  Protocol No. 10 

For the sake of continuity at this juncture, let us repeat two earlier quotes; the first from Protocol No. 9:

"Above the existing laws without substantially altering them, and by merely twisting them into contradictions of interpretations, we have erected something grandiose in the way of results.

These results found expression first in the fact that the interpretations masked the laws; afterwards they entirely hid them from the eyes of the governments owing to the impossibility of making anything out of the tangled web of legislation"

And from Brian Kennedy's Freemasonic Destruction of Western Civilization:

"The U.S. legal system enshrined the Talmudic practice of building up 'case law' on fine distinctions, and hairsplitting nuances.  Black can be made white or vice-versa, under such a system. It is a made-to-order recipe for tyranny and manipulation by unseen authority...

Of course, this was the intention from the very beginning. Jews have been controlled by their rabbis for two thousand years under the pernicious system."

Here's what the law students in the U.S. are learning today. A book from Penn State University, written by Benjamin Henszey, Barry Myers and Reed Phalan titled Introduction to Basic Legal Principles states:

"The law can be defined, therefore, as a body of rules for human conduct, enforced by a governing power, as the means by which the control of society is achieved.

The term society includes the neighborhood, town, state, nation and to the extent control among nations is achieved through law, the world.

The rules of law that exist today are the result of a process of gradual evolution over centuries of social progress, a process which continues unabated." 

Is there more than one book of law that has survived throughout centuries and is being used globally, including in the U.S. Supreme Court? The people of said 'book' are scattered to the ends of the earth and are bound to obey the laws contained therein. As we've also learned, the elite among the people of the Talmud are advisors to those who occupy - or they themselves occupy - positions of the highest political, economic and judicial power in this country and across the face of this earth. 

According to a document from Georgetown University titled the "Law of the Shitar" - being Jewish commercial law as early as 1060 AD in Europe - the Uniform Commercial Code is based on that law of the Shitar. With its adoption by all fifty states, the UCC has become national in nature. This explains the harmonization of Americas' laws with other nations, for the UCC is international law.

For its application in the U.S., the UCC was constructed by a group of lawyers from the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws - a permanent standing sub-committee created by the American Bar Association - which claims the UCC is the single most important document since the Constitution. The NCCUSL is also known as the 'Uniform Law Commission'.  

From its history on the ULC website we read that:

"Most significant was the 1940 Conference decision to attack major commercial problems with comprehensive legal solutions -- a decision that set in motion the project to produce the Uniform Commercial Code in partnership with the American Law Institute. The Code took ten years to complete and another 14 years before it was enacted across the country. It remains the signature product of the Conference. . . "

So, one by one, state legislatures adopted the Uniform Commercial Code. Courts of Justice become courts of commerce, and Americans wonder why their 'Constitutional rights' are being trampled in those seemingly foreign courts. We found confirmation regarding the Law of the Shitar in a most unusual source - the Harper Collins' Atlas Of World History. On pages 102 and 103, titled: The Jewish diaspora - AD 70 to 1497 - we read that:

"For over 2000 years the history of the Jews has been a story of external dispersion and internal cohesion.

From about the 6th century... Jews became identified with international and regional trade."

'International and regional trade' is regulated under the NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and GATT/WTO (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade/World Trade Organization). These agreements control commerce between nations.

Recall the speech of Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, in 1941 proclaiming the end of nationalism and the imperialism of industry and free trade to be commenced after the defeat of Germany. Recall the main points agreed upon by the gathering of churchmen in 1942 declaring a world monetary system, open borders, etc.

Some of the people of the Talmud -- not all mentioned previously --  who wielded control of the U.S. Government, therefore its foreign policy since the early 1900s , under Wilson (WWI) and Roosevelt (WWII) are Supreme Court Justices Louis Brandeis and Felix Frankfurter, Samuel Untermeyer, Col. Edward Mandel House, Bernard Baruch, and the whole gang of international bankers.

When international agreements made by the U.S. Congress prove to be nothing more than instruments of destruction to the manufacturing base, the jobs base, and therefore the very economic structure of our society... state legislators have an oath-bound duty to opt out of those agreements.

NAFTA and GATT/WTO are often referred to as 'treaties'. They are not treaties. Both were passed in Congress by a simple majority of both chambers. Treaties are ratified only by the U.S. Senate by two/thirds of those present and consenting.  

As for the Uniform Commercial Code, the same above mentioned World Atlas has this to say, of the Jews:

"Internal and external factors, including the widespread dispersal of Jews both in Islamic lands and throughout Christian Europe, Jewish group solidarity, facility of linguistic communication, and a uniform system of commercial law based on the Talmud accounted for the changes . . ."

'Facility of linguistic communication' - Hebrew school, so no matter where they live or what the language of their host country, they can always communicate.

'Jewish group solidarity' - a nation within nations.

'A uniform system of commercial law based on the Talmud' - the UCC.

Before we leave the Uniform Commercial Code, let us see what the code itself reveals, again, from the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) website:

U.C.C. - ARTICLE 1- GENERAL PROVISIONS

PART 1. SHORT TITLE, CONSTRUCTION, APPLICATION AND SUBJECT MATTER OF THE ACT

-------------------------------------------------------------------

§ 1-102. Purposes; Rules of Construction; Variation by Agreement.

(1) This Act shall be liberally construed and applied to promote its underlying purposes and policies.

'Liberally construed' like the Talmud, to give the courts broad leeway in their interpretations, to promote its underlying purposes and policies? Think about it.

Earlier we quoted from Ted Pike's book, which transcribed a statement from the Jewish Encyclopedia, to wit:

". . . the Talmud adds that He [Jehovah] had observed how the Gentile nations steadfastly refused to obey the seven moral Noachian precepts, and hence He decided to outlaw them [the Gentile nations]'. Baba Kama (38a)

Before we leave the subject of Talmudic Law, we need to take a serious look at the 'seven moral Noachian precepts', also known as the Noahide (or Noachide) Law. . . from the Talmud, for the Goyim only.