The Breggins & Semitism

a loving response

On their recent podcast, Ginger and Peter Breggin expressed the “dismaying and disillusioning experiences [they] had with two different people whom we have respected and admired and one of whom we thought we were developing a real friendship.” In their broadcast they mentioned that they’d grown quite fond of this woman, who they felt was a good person. So it has been upsetting, particularly to Peter as an Eastern European Jew, when she’s written about Israel in anti-Semitic terms, and even posted a picture of the Protocols of Zion.

Antisemitism becomes personal to the Breggins

I feel this person might be me, primarily because the feelings of affection and respect are mutual. I love Peter and Ginger! They are kind, good people who have tremendous integrity. Although I’m sorry for their ordeal with the Malone lawsuit, I treasure the opportunity it gave me to get to know them.

In particular, I admire the compassion they showed to those who were taken in by the Covid psyop. They didn’t call them sheep or normies. The gist of their argument against the theory of mass psychosis was recognizing the trauma that had been inflicted on people to get them to comply.

Mattias Desmet and Robert Malone took a position of superiority, seeing themselves as smarter, better people. That was very popular with other people who saw themselves as smarter and better. But the Breggins looked on people who’d been taken in by the ‘vaccine’ with compassion. They saw compliance as situational rather than a mark of inferior character.

And this cost them with the ordeal of the lawsuit. They refused to put friendship ahead of their convictions. Seven out of ten statements cited in the lawsuit were about this dispute, not about Malone at all. I admired them standing up for those who were on the other side of the vaccine, even though these were people who might shun and insult them. To me, that was and is a sign of character.

---

the crux of the debate

I don’t need to agree with my friends on everything, or I would have no friends. I also don’t need to always make a statement when I disagree—although it may not seem that way ;-) In this case, the mutual goodwill seemed like solid ground for a respectful argument, a term I use as a process for reaching agreement. My realization that it was my articles that dismayed them also led me to want to change that disturbance and conflict. But I probably wouldn’t have responded without their censorship of Nefahotep.

I’m not against blocking commenters and deleting comments. I have very strict censorship rules in my stack—I don’t allow name-calling or insults of groups or individuals, including myself. I encourage the critique of words and actions but not character attacks or generalizations. I’ve been known to block and ban permanently.

But I can’t imagine Nef doing that. And sure enough, when he sent me the deleted posts, they were factual and full of citations from verifiable sources with statistics that showed what was done to the Germans after the War. I’ll be getting into the specifics of that later. First I wanted to state the basis from which I’m arguing, which is my dogma. We don’t need to agree on this but it’s the foundation for my position:

All people are morally equal, equally beloved of God, if there is a God. They are equally valuable to the world. We are all inherently good and when we behave badly, stories and systems are to blame. Stories and systems can be changed.

Ethics is consistency with your own dogma. An ethical statement can contain no proper nouns. Like the formula around an equal sign, all values that substitute for the variables need to still be true when reversed. Questions need to be defined along with the terms in them and why the question matters.

Here are the ones I think matter most from distilling my position and the Breggins:

1. Does the morality of our ancestors determine who we are? Should it be a source of pride or shame? Is it a reflection on us?

2. Do some ancestors matter more than others?

3. How do we know if we’ve been lied to?

4. How can the rights of Israel be expressed within the rules stated above?

In the lawsuit with Malone, he made the earlier statement that it was legitimate to ask if he was controlled opposition, but that seemed only if the Breggins came to the right answer. I’ll end by asking if the questions are legitimate on the back cover of their book, Covid-19 and the Global Predators, even if we don’t come to the same answers. These questions are:

1. Who are ‘they’—these Global Predators?

2. What are their motives and their plans for us?

3. How can we defend against them?

Let’s begin.

---

do our ancestors reflect us?

This is, I think, the dangerous misconception that gives false stories their power. What would history matter if it said nothing about our innate character, bad, good, better, best? We would see the truth of history as a lesson for what systems worked and what didn’t, having nothing to do with the higher or lesser morality of those peoples.

In the podcast, Peter said that he felt being the chosen people meant that they’d been held to a higher moral standard. By whom? How is that standard defined? And with what consequences? Much of my writing has been to look at the morality of the Torah and see what it says god enforces—sometimes genocide down to the suckling babe—and what he forbids, mainly intermarriage.

Mark Alexander reminded me about a really good website called Skeptic’s Annotated Bible. In a section called "Drunk With Blood: God's Killings in the Bible,” they find over 2.8M countable victims. The flood they deemed not countable, although hard to beat, since God killed everything. Their count start with Lot’s wife where god enforces his morality: don’t look back when your home, neighbors and everything you know is destroyed. Be righteous like your husband and enable his rape of your daughters.

You may be cringing and wondering, “Why is she saying this when her point is NOT to offend Peter?” Let’s examine that. Why would this offend Peter, who would never dream of doing such a horrendous thing? My guess is that you don’t see Lot’s actions as any reflection on Peter but you assume that Peter does.

When I write about the figures in the Bible not being real, not being ancestors, and not being good people, why would it offend anyone? It would only offend someone who saw their own value and worth as greater because of their bloodline connection to these figures. Once they see these ancestors as a source of pride, criticism of them becomes personal. But only if they first swallow the poison pill of superiority.

I’ve noticed that #chosenones is trending with videos like Why are Chosen Ones alone with no friends and no relationship? “When you are authentic and you are so bright, people who aren’t who they say … run away from you. … The darkness inside them can’t stand it.” Let’s hope the rapture siphons up this guy soon with his fucking arrogance.

---

whose ancestors matter?

Let’s assume, though, that ancestors do matter. If people of your ethnic origin were said to do terrible things, that’s an insult to your character, especially if they didn’t do them. If millions of people of your ethnicity were killed or enslaved, that’s a horror that should never be covered up. It’s a shocking offense that anyone would speak ill of your people because they’re the victims.

Are the Breggins with me so far? Let’s look at what Nefahotep posted on their thread, that was deleted and blocked:

The Morgenthau Plan for Germany ... became part of the Potsdam Agreement, a solemn declaration of policy and undertaking for action ... signed by the United States of America, Great Britain and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Besides dividing Germany in a West and East part, in July and August 1945 the occupying armies took 25% of Germany's most fertile land and placed it under Russian and Polish control, forcibly expelling about 16 million people, according to British writer Victor Gollancz "with the very maximum of brutality". The Allies forbade emigration and kept millions of prisoners in forced-labour camps.

Some 4.16M Germans were forced to slave labour outside Germany: 

3,000,000 in Russia, 750,000 in France, 400,000 in Britain and 10,000 in Belgium. 

General Dwight D. Eisenhower labelled them Disarmed Enemy Forces to violate the Geneva Convention. 

Some 1.4 million died in the Allied concentration camps, [like Rhine Meadows] of which according to the Soviets 450,600 in their camps. 

Nef goes on to present census data showing that in the years immediately after the end of WWII, there were 5.7M excess deaths for Germans. He wonders if this is where the 6M number comes from for Jews killed, which is also refuted by census numbers. The 1933 article posted by international Jews, entitled “Judea Declares War on Germany,” stated that only 600,000 Jews lived in Germany before the war. So 6M killed is impossible by a factor of 1000%.

My maiden name is Zembower and my mother is Martz, so German on both sides with my grandmother speaking the language. If my dad had been born in Germany, I stood a 94% chance of not being born, since only 6% of German men born in 1922 survived. My whole life I’ve been taught that my ancestors are sadistic killers or sheep who went along with it, hate-filled people who voted in a monster to do their dirty work then looked the other way when their neighbors were dragged off.

Like Peter, I grew up watching trailers of German atrocities. Like Ginger, my adolescence was steeped in the holocaust, reading Night and The Diary of Anne Frank. When we were shown the film Night and Fog, I went into the bathroom and fainted, hitting my head on the radiator. Like Peter and Ginger, I was a sensitive soul, tormented by what people could do to each other. Except that I was the villain. Through my veins ran the same bloodline that herded naked prisoners into showers and turned on the gas.

Now, after 67 years of me living with that ethnic guilt, Nefahotep presents them with evidence that my ancestors were victims, and they delete it. Sixteen million of my people harshly expelled from their lands, and they don’t want to hear about it. Four million forced into slavery and they don’t want to know. Almost six million killed, some in concentration camps, after the war is over, and the post is blocked as a nuisance.

Is my outrage over this not justified? Why are my people assumed to be vicious and bloodthirsty perpetrators, while presenting any evidence for their innocence is a crime punishable by prison? If remembering victims is important, how can 26M exiled, enslaved, starved or killed, be swept under the rug?

Had my great grandparents not left Germany, it would have been my mother raped and left in a ditch, my father sent to die in the prison camps, in the unlikely chance he’d survived the war. They were younger than my daughters are now. Can we even fathom being a slave? My daughters being slaves, bought and whipped if they didn’t please their masters? This is the dehumanization the Breggins won’t look at.

Meanwhile, I’m not supposed to talk about the genocide being currently perpetrated by Jews because that would be offensive. The slaughter of Palestinians is to be ignored because talking about it might trigger bad feelings against the perpetrators. Even Caitlin Johnstone, who threatened to ban me for talking about Jews, now posted that Israeli sniper drones broadcast crying babies to lure women out and shoot them.

Peter might also want to see her article on the hospitals the Israelis turned into mass graves, before he continues to claim they’re hiding Hamas under them.

---

how do we know if we’ve been lied to?

The other unnamed person who dismayed and disillusioned the Breggins was their friend who thought the US should defend Iran against Israel. Peter stated that the goal of Israel was self-defense but the goal of Iran was to take over the world. Ginger remembered the Iran hostage crisis as showing the kind of people they were. Peter noted that it ended the day Reagan took office because Iran feared a strong Republican who they couldn’t push around like Jimmy Carter.

I looked up an AI generated summary of Iran hostage crisis and Reagan:

The Iran hostage crisis, which began on November 4, 1979, with the seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran and the detention of 52 American hostages, was a significant event during Ronald Reagan’s presidential campaign. Political analysts have suggested that the crisis contributed to the decline of President Jimmy Carter’s popularity and his eventual loss in the 1980 presidential election.

Some allegations have surfaced, claiming that the Reagan campaign, through representatives like John Connally and William Casey, made secret deals with Iranian leaders to delay the release of the hostages until after the election. These allegations, known as the “October Surprise” theory, suggest that the Reagan campaign aimed to prevent Carter from pulling off an “October surprise” by resolving the hostage crisis before the election.

The hostages were formally released into U.S. custody on January 20, 1981, just minutes after Ronald Reagan was sworn into office. However, these allegations have not been conclusively proven and remain a topic of debate among historians and political analysts.

In 1985, the Reagan administration became involved in another controversy related to Iran, known as the Iran-Contra affair. This involved secret arms sales to Iran, which was under an arms embargo, in exchange for the release of American hostages held by Hezbollah in Lebanon. The administration initially denied these secret talks, but later admitted to the arms-for-hostages deals.

AI conveniently leaves out the Contra part, that arms sales funded a campaign of terrorism against Nicaraguan civilians in order to induce regime change and install a puppet government. Curiously, the President of Iran during the hostage crisis left right after Reagan was sworn in and the arms smuggling President of Iran started later that year and stayed exactly through both terms.

Timing like that is always a clue you’re being lied to. Operation Cast Lead, a three-week massacre of Palestinians after Christmas 2008, ended the day Obama took office. Once you know beyond a shadow of a doubt you’ve been lied to about one thing, like the Breggins did with Covid, it should always be a question.

---

israel as a variable

Can the rules of ethical discourse be used to express a solution for Israel-Palestine?

An ethical statement can contain no proper nouns. Like the formula around an equal sign, all values that substitute for the variables need to still be true when reversed.

Peter’s statements were that the Jews love their nation, Israel, and that the Arab states are plenty big enough to take in all of the Palestinian refugees.

Substituting other values for the proper nouns, this reads:

Palestinians love their nation, Palestine. The US is plenty big enough to take in all Israeli Jews. Most already have dual citizenship.

Now let’s try formulating a solution with no proper nouns:

All people deserve to live in their place of ethnic origin and expel all people who’ve lived there in the interim. This certainly doesn’t bode well for us (US) colonizers. But according to Hebrew scriptures, all people originated wherever Noah’s boat landed. That seems pretty crowded. The land of Canaan goes back to Canaan, one of the four sons or grandson mentioned by Noah. So the claim by the Canaanites is as old as Shem, Japheth and Ham. It precedes any claims by the subsequent generations of the other sons. The Palestinians are the Canaanites.

Palestinians love their nation.

---

who are the global predators?

First, is this a legitimate question to ask no matter where it leads? I think the Breggins would agree that it is. The fate of our world depends on it.

In his 1992 book, Beyond Conflict, Peter developed 11 traits of the Perpetrator Syndrome, as he called it. They include denying or minimizing the damage they do, rationalization, blaming the victim, no empathy, anger and blame, dehumanizing, use of authority, power and domination, grandiose and self-centered, and alienated.

In applying these to a global predator profile, one of the characteristics the Breggins find in common is opposition to Donald Trump. The Breggins then list 11 companies hostile to Trump and then Anti-Trumpers Ranked Among the Largest Corporations. From these, they derive a list of 14 American billionaire predators.

My perspective is that this has been going on for millennia and is reaching some kind of conclusion. If someone is a face card, it means they’re not the player, whether that’s Bill Gates or Donald Trump.

---

what are their motives and plans?

The Breggins were particularly disturbed that I’d posted a picture of the Protocols of the Wise Elders of Zion. They stated that, next to Mein Kampf, this was the greatest instigator of violence against Jews in Germany. What Dean Henderson states is that the Protocols are not actually even Jewish:

The document, known as the Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion, was obtained by the daughter of a Russian general after she paid a bribe of 2,500 French francs to a member of the Mizraim Freemason Lodge in Paris, which is home to the inner circle of the Knights Templar known as the Priory of Sion.

The Priory of Sion elite believe that Jesus faked his death with the help of certain herbs, then married the administer of those herbs, Mary Magdalene. The Priory believes the couple fled to southern France and had numerous children. During the 5th century, the theory goes, Jesus’ descendants married into the Frank royalty from which France takes its name, thus creating the Merovingian Dynasty. This royal blood or Sangreal is the justification the Crown uses to legitimize its rule over humanity.

… the Protocols authors were not Jewish. Rather, they were Satanists intent on a creating a political movement called Zionism, which seeks to use Israel as its linchpin for City of London global hegemony and as guardian of the vast Rothschild/Rockefeller oil reserves of the Middle East region.

… Its power center has moved from Sumeria to Egypt to Rome and is now in the City of London—a one square mile separate jurisdiction within, but not governed by, London or the United Kingdom.

Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion

Nefahotep has an article that clarifies this:

With respect to the Protocols of Zion; the underlying pretextual party of power being mentioned in the Protocols are the “Jews,” this in and of itself is flat wrong. Those who wrote it and ‘planned’ it are definitely NOT Jewish, they are in fact Sabbatean / Frankists, they are also the administrators of the Sovereign Trusts as Trustees.

The individuals who actually wrote this Protocol, wanted to cause people to get pissed off at the Jewish Community. By being truthful and upfront about the nature of the “plan content,” but making it look like Jews were doing it.

He quotes from the 2nd protocol:

“It is indispensable for our purpose that as far as possible, wars should bring no territorial advantages. This will shift war to an economic footing, and nations will perceive the strength of our superiority in the aid we render.”

The article then goes through all the protocols that were plans and strategies when they were written but have been fully accomplished now:

The No Annexation Principle and why it matters

---

how do we defend against them?

James Corbett, from the Organic Consumers Association’s summary of Mercola’s interview, states:

You introduced this topic with the concept of propaganda and potential uses of large language models for propagandistic purposes. We should go back to the man who wrote the book on propaganda called ‘Propaganda,’ Edward Bernays, who [said]:

‘The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government, which is the true ruling power of our country.’

That was Edward Bernays in 1928. His words are as true today as they were then, perhaps even more so. And the true ruling power of the country, of the world at this point perhaps, are those who can most effectively, consciously and intelligently manipulate the organized habits and opinions of the masses.

---

what do the globalists want?

Peter states that all problems can be solved if you answer the question, “What do the globalists want?” We both agree that it’s not as simple as money, which is a tool, not an end. Peter is finishing a book on banking and says that the Rothschilds don’t show up very much. He thinks that’s another anti-Semitic attack. He says that neither Christians nor Muslims were very interested in money and collecting interest, so the Jews merely stepped into the void and provided that service.

I’ve come to agree that the Rothschilds are high-paid servants, even when the Pope kisses his ring. I suspect they’re not even Jewish—their name was Bauer, same as my maiden name. Zembower is sum-bauer, German for ‘of the farm.’ Not a Jewish name. Rothschild means Red Shield, so who are they shielding?

If you spell Jews with the Hebrew Y for the J, it spells Yews or use. The same would be true for Yews-ury. Perhaps Rothschild took on the identity of Jew for the privilege—privi = private law for the liege or king—of usury. So maybe they are hiding behind the Jewish Roth-schild as a victim shield, so that anger against their predatory usury can be deflected as anti-Semitism.

All three Presidential candidates are deferential to Israel but Trump is their golden child or Orange Moonchild as Isaac Middle says. He’s done an astrological chart showing Trump fulfills all the prophecies … a little too perfectly. Miles Mathis did his genealogical chart that indicates he’s Jewish … unless his background is entirely made up. Maybe an actor playing a part.

The value of religion for the globalists is that it doesn’t need to conquer to control. It can infiltrate, and strike from within. People of good heart and moral character, like Peter Breggin, can be its apologists. They can show it as a victim and get the tender-hearted to take it in.

Pasheen at Diva Drops wonders why Trump keep reciting The Snake Song at his rallies with the half-frozen snake whispering: “Take me in, tender woman, take me in for heaven’s sake.” And when it bites, sneering, “You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in.” Is this the tell they need to give for us to be a willing sacrifice? I read that the Khazarian method is to stand right in front of you and say, “I’m going to kill you … ok?” The warning indicates your consent.

The symbol of the Merovingian dynasty is the serpent or snake. What Peter says the globalists want to destroy is loyalty to nations so they can rule over all. Isn’t this what the scattered nation of Israel does—put loyalty to it above the nation that’s merely a tenderhearted host?

If we take back the local power to issue mortgages, and the credit to repay them, it defangs the snake. They stop owning our houses, our labor, and our lives for free. It doesn’t matter who’s behind the Rothschilds or who’s in front. It reclaims our power.

---

the semitism psychosis

The word Semite means Shemite, or descendant of Shem, the dynasty given the right to rule over his brothers. That ideology is sociopathic. No one has a divine right to rule over others who are cursed by God to be their slaves. Anti-Semitism is a rejection of rulers and slaves, which is a loving affirmation that people are equal. Semitism is a form of cold hatred in seeing superiority, domination and subjugation as God’s will.

I love the Breggins. My involvement in their lives through the curious incident of Malone doesn’t seem accidental. I think I was put in their path for a reason. They know with complete certainty that I don’t have hate in my heart for anyone, even the global predators. I suspect that childhood trauma is intentionally inflicted to keep them silent, loyal and obedient, and I don’t wish that on anyone.

Having someone trustworthy present information that conflicts with everything they’ve been taught is disturbing. No one can know that better than they do. What I say to them is what they’ve said for four years: don’t reject my conclusion, examine the facts for yourself. Apply your analytical skills to Hebrew scripture. Look at my logic and tell me where I’m wrong. Or agree that I’m right and Shemitism is neither safe nor effective.

Or do what I suspect many have done who know the Breggins. I think many have said, I just don’t have the energy to examine all the nuances of the science the way they do. But I know they’re good people who want the best for the world, and all of the people in it. I’m going to leave this part of the puzzle to them, knowing it’s in good hands. And I’m going to feel at peace because they’re taking on something I don’t have time for.

I am sad that my articles have caused the Breggins to be dismayed, but not that they felt disillusioned. Illusions aren’t serving any of us, no matter how comforting.

---

And now for something completely different, which I think I might need:

As world events spin out of control, I suggest we slow down. The faster we run, the further the goal moves away. I tell a story about nick-of-time miracles and permaculture spirituality. I look at empire vs. sovereignty and means vs. ends. I compare time to a hamster wheel. As things spin into control, I suggest we bide our time while spirit does the heavy lifting.

From A Course in Miracles, I look at what forgiveness is and what it is NOT. I trace my journey from the spiritual exercise of applying this to the face of evil himself, Hitler, and the revelations of my subsequent research into history. I then question the origins of fascism with Mussolini's surprising manifesto. And I answer a commenter who believes we're X missed meals away from murdering our neighbors and the most dangerous people are those who think people are inherently good.