The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewIsrael Shamir Archive
The Bloody Passovers of Dr Toaff
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Blood, betrayal, torture, and surrender are intervowen in the story of an Italian Jew, Dr Ariel Toaff, as if penned by his compatriot Umberto Eco. Dr Toaff stumbled onto a frightful discovery, was horrified but bravely went on, until he was subjected to the full pressure of his community; he repented, a broken man.

Dr Toaff is the son of the Rabbi of Rome and a professor in the Jewish University of Bar Ilan, not far from Tel Aviv. He made a name for himself by his deep study of medieval Jewry. His three-volumed Love, Work, and Death (subtitled Jewish Life in Medieval Umbria) is an encyclopaedia of this admittedly narrow area. While studying his subject he discovered that the medieval Ashkenazi Jewish communities of North Italy practiced a particularly horrible form of human sacrifice. Their wizards and adepts stole and crucified Christian babies, obtained their blood and used it for magical rituals evoking the Spirit of Vengeance against the hated Goyim.

In particular, he dwelt on the case of St Simon of Trent. This two-year old child from the Italian town of Trent was kidnapped by a few Ashkenazi Jews from his home on the eve of Passover 1475 AD. At night, the kidnappers murdered the child; drew his blood, pierced his flesh with needles, crucified him head down calling “So may all Christians by land and sea perish”, and thus they celebrated their Passover, an archaic ritual of outpouring blood and killed babies, in the most literal form, without usual metaphoric “blood-wine” shift.

The killers were apprehended, confessed and were found guilty by the Bishop of Trent. Immediately, the Jews took their protest to the Pope and he had sent the bishop of Ventimiglia to investigate. He allegedly accepted a hefty bribe from the Jews and concluded that the child was murdered by a Hamas mine in order to besmirch Israel, as there was no Tsahal ordnance found on the beach of Trent. “Simon had been killed by Christians with the intention of ruining the Jews”, said the pre-war Jewish Encyclopedia, in a clear case of premonition: the same argument was used by Jews in 2006 while explaining away the mass murder of children in Kafr Qana.

However, in 15th century the Jews were influential, yes, but all-powerful, no. They could not deal with the world like they did in 2002 after their massacre of Jenin by ordering everybody to buzz off. They had no American veto in the Security Council. They could not bomb Rome, and the word “antisemitism” was invented 400 years later. They were given a fair deal which is much worse than preferred treatment: Pope Sixtus IV assembled a commission of six cardinals chaired by the best legal mind of that time, for retrial; and this Supreme Court found the murderers guilty. See more for a Catholic version and a Jewish version of the events. The records of the trial have survived centuries and are still available in Vatican.

In 1965, the Roman Catholic Church entered a perestroika [i]. These were the halcyon days of the Vatican II when the modernizers uprooted the foundations of tradition hoping to update the faith and to fit it into the new Jewish-friendly narrative of modernity; in plain prose, the bishops wanted to be loved by the liberal press.

The ever-watchful Jews used the opportunity and pushed the bishops to decommission St Simon of Trent. They were happy to oblige: already in bizarre ritual, the Church leaders had found the Jews free from guilt for Crucifixion of Christ while admitting the Church’s guilt for persecution of Jews; the crucifixion of an Italian baby was a small matter compared with this reversal. In a hasty decision, the bishops ruled that the confessions of the killers were unacceptable because obtained under torture, and thus the accused were innocent, while the young martyr was anything but. His cult was discontinued and forbidden, and the remains of the martyred child were removed and dumped in a secret place to avoid resumption of pilgrimage.

And now we come back to Dr Ariel Toaff. While going through the papers of the trial, he made a staggering discovery: instead of being dictated by the zealous investigators under torture, the confessions of the killers contained material totally unknown to the Italian churchmen or police. The killers belonged to the small and withdrawn Ashkenazi community, they practiced their own rites, quite different from those used by the native Italian Jews; these rites were faithfully reproduced in their confessions, though they were not known to the Crime Squad of the day. “These liturgical formulas in Hebrew with a strong anti-Christian tone cannot be projections of the judges who could not know these prayers, which didn’t even belong to Italian rites but to the Ashkenazi tradition,” Toaff wrote. A confession is of value only if it contains some true and verifiable details of the crime the police did not know of. This iron rule of criminal investigation was observed in Trent trials.


This discovery has the potential to shake, shock and reshape the Church. The noble learned rabbi Dr Toaff brought back St Simon, the double victim of 15th century vengeance and of 20th century perestroika. This called for repentance of the Vatican doctors who forgot the murdered child while looking for friendship with important American Jews, but they still do not admit their grave error. Monsignor Iginio Rogger, a church historian who in the 1960s [mis]led the investigation into St Simon’s case, said that the confessions were completely unreliable for “the judges used horrible tortures”. This was an antizionist and hence antisemitic remark, for rejection of confessions obtained under torture would let all the Palestinian prisoners out of Jewish jails; this was an anti-American remark, for the US recognizes the value of torture and practices it in Guantanamo and elsewhere. This was a holocaust-denier remark for thus they invalidate the Nürnberg trials. The renown Jewish American lawyer and adept of torture Alan Dershowitz could have argued against Rogger; but somehow he did not.

“I wouldn’t want to be in Toaff’s shoes, answering for this to historians who have seriously documented this case,” said Rogger to USA Today. Toaff’s shoes are vastly preferable to those of Rogger who will have to answer for slighting the saint in Heaven.

Moreover, this Trento crime was not an exception: Toaff discovered many cases of such bloody sacrifices connected with the mutilation of children, outpouring of blood and its baking in Matzo(unleavened bread) spanning five hundred years of European history. Blood, this magic drink, was a popular medicine of the time, and of any time: Herod tried to keep young bathing in blood of babies, alchemists used blood to turn lead into gold. Jewish wizards meddled in magic and used it as much as anybody. There was a thriving market in such delicacies as blood, powder made of blood and bloody matzo. Jewish vendors sold it accompanied with rabbinic letters of authorization; the highest value was blood of a goy katan, a gentile child, much more usual was blood of circumcision. Such blood sacrifices were “instinctive, visceral, virulent actions and reactions, in which innocent and unknowing children became victims of the love of God and of vengeance,” Toaff wrote in the book’s preface. “Their blood bathed the altars of a God who, it was believed, needed to be guided, sometimes impatiently pushed to protect and to punish.”

This somewhat cryptic remark can be understood by reading Israeli professor Israel Yuval’s book Two Nations in Thy Womb. Yuval explained that blood libations were necessary (in the eyes of Jewish magicians) to bring forth Divine Vengeance upon the Goyim. He also quotes an irrefutable (i.e. not denied by Jews) instance of blood sacrifice by a Jew. ( Read about it in my article Bloodcurdling Libel.) Toaff improved upon Yuval by stressing the ordinary magic use of blood by Jews in the Middle Ages, and by allowing for the anti-Christian element: crucifixion of victims and the cursing of Christ and Virgin. Here his book is supported by (admittedly, more timid) Reckless Rites: Purim and the Legacy of Jewish Violence by Elliott Horowitz. Horowitz tells his reader of strange rituals: flagellation of the Virgin, destruction of crucifixes and the beating up and killing Christians.

Now it is behind us. We can look at the past and say: yes, some Jewish wizards and mystics practiced human sacrifices. They murdered children, mutilated their bodies and used their blood in order to outpour Divine Wrath on their non-Jewish neighbours. They mocked Christian rites by using Christian blood instead of blood of Christ. The Church and the people all over Europe were right. The Europeans (and the Arabs, and the Russians) weren’t crazy bigots, they understood what they saw. They punished the culprits but they left the innocent in peace. We, humans, can look at this dreadful page of history with pride, and shed a tear or two for the poor children destroyed by these wrath-seeking monsters. Jews may be more modest and cease carrying their historical wounds on the sleeve: their forefathers thrived despite these terrible doings by some of their coreligionists, while in the Jewish state, sins of some Palestinians are visited upon all of them. We can also dismiss with shudder the whining of Israel’s friends when they want us not to see the Jenin Massacre or Qana Massacre for – yes, exactly, this is like the “blood libel”, i.e. not a libel at all.

Let us hope that the great daring act of Professor Toaff will become a turning point in the life of the Church. The swing caused by perestroika of Vatican II went too far. Remember that the Russian perestroika ended with the collapse of the whole structure. While anti-papists feared an anti-Christ on the See of St Peter, there is the real danger of a Gorbachev.

In an Italian town of Orvieto on the Adriatic shore, the Jews demanded the removal of an exhibition of great artistic value and the cessation of the procession commemorating the miracle of Trani. There, a millennium ago, a consecrated host was stolen from the church by a Jewess, the thief decided to fry the body of Christ in oil, but miraculously the host turned into flesh and started bleeding profusely so that the holy blood poured all over the house. Indeed such cases of host desecration are well attended all over Europe; they were well described by Yuval, Horowitz and Toaff; they indeed occurred, and only infamous Jewish chutzpah pushed The Roman Association of Friends of Israel into writing a letter to the Pope demanding an end to a one-thousand-year-old observance. And they got it. The Church bent over, the panels were dismantled, the procession cancelled and profound apologies to Jews were issued, to the vast satisfaction of Israeli ambassadors Gideon Meir (to Rome) and Oded Ben Hur (to the Vatican) who dictated the capitulation.

“Strange world indeed ours. – wrote Domenico Savino in the excellent web-magazine Effedieffe. – The offense is brought to the Christian Faith and forgiveness is asked of those who had perpetrated it.” Savino muses whether it was impossible just to politely ignore the demand of Friends of Israel, and he quotes at length the words of Cardinal Walter Kasper, the Vatican representative at this capitulation. Kasper is doing full Monty: he denies that the Church is the True and Only Chosen Israel, asserts the equal position of the Jews as “elder brothers”, denies the necessity of Christ, asks forgiveness of the Jews while promising “a new spring for the Church and the world”.

“Spring for the Church?! – exclaims Savino. – Ah, but we have heard it already! The Pope said after Vatican II “We waited for the spring and the storm has come ». That spring has been enough for us and after this reconciliation in Orvieto I do not want more to hear the word ‘spring’ and see the wide smirk of satisfaction of “elder brothers” Gideon Meir and Oded Ben Hur!”


The perestroika came not only in Italy, and not only within the Catholic Church. In Germany a new sacrilege is being prepared: a “politically correct Bible” with the story of Passion being changed so as not to cause discomfort to Jews. The title is misleading: they may not call their bastard product “new German translation of the Bible free of gender bias and anti-Semitism”, like one can’t call one’s waste water, “wine free of intoxicants”. Changing one letter in the Bible is equivalent to ruining the world, says the Talmud, and adduces an example of a Torah scroll where one word is changed, from “meod” (very) to “mavet” (death). Such a death-celebrating Torah would surely cause our world to perish. “Antisemitism-free” scripture probably will center on Jewish suffering while the Church will play the role of the villain of the piece. It will extol Judas and reject Christ. Likewise, removing “gender bias” will also remove the Annunciation, this great divide between sterile monocausality of the Jews and the Christian meeting of Heaven and Earth. Indeed the Christian model was so much more successful that even Jews adopted it in their Cabbala, and apparently decided to dump the redundant old monocausality to the Germans.

In England, an old liberal weekly, the Observer, changed its feathers and became the neocon nest supporting the war and Bush-Blair alliance. In perfect logical sequitur the paper also renounced Christ and preferred Jews, as in this review of a new English book. Adam Mars-Jones prefers Oscar Schindler to General Adam von Trott who was executed for his part in Generals’ Plot in 1944: “That’s what made Schindler’s List such a startling film: it followed Jewish ethics by showing the hero’s outer journey, for once, rather than an inner one. The guy was tainted – so what? That’s his business, as long as he saved Jews. His mitzvahs earned him his place among the Righteous Gentiles, and in the absence of an afterlife (not really a feature of Jewish belief) that’s all that can be said. Let’s have more of that tone, and less of a cult of martyrdom. Veneration for sacrifice, for purely symbolic victory, can distort the most well-meaning enterprise, and risks insulting the dead, who had no options.”

The Observer reviewer made clear his choice for Judas or Caiaphas (“though tainted, he wanted to save Jews”) and against Jesus Christ who was the Sacrifice. His call for “less of a cult of martyrdom, less veneration for sacrifice, for purely symbolic victory” would make Golgotha the final last word, with no Resurrection in sight. Who needs Christian virtues? Man’s faults and vices are “his business, as long as he saved Jews”, and the best a goy may hope for is a “place among the Righteous Gentiles”. From this point of view, St Simon and other children did not die in vain; they helped the Jews call for God’s Vengeance, and that is the best they could possibly wish. Likewise, British soldiers could not hope for a better fate than to die for Israel on the streets of Basra, or Teheran, or elsewhere.

Thus, in Rome, Berlin or London, the Jews won a round or two in their competition with the Church. By stubbornly hanging on and never regretting, never apologizing, always working against Christianity, they succeeded in replacing in many simple minds the image of the Via Dolorosa, Golgotha and the Resurrection with their gross misrepresentation of human history as of a long line of innocent Jewish suffering, blood libels, holocausts and the Zionist redemption in the Holy Land. Though people reasonably rejected the idea of Jewish guilt in death of Christ, they installed instead an even more absurd idea of Church’s guilt in death of Jews.

The consequences are not purely theological. Britain, Italy and Germany acquiesce in Jewish strangulation of Christian Palestine, in the blockade of Gaza, in the robbery of Church lands in Bethlehem and Jerusalem. They support American Drang Nach Osten. Worse: they lose their connection to God, their empathy to fellow human beings dries up, as if the blind spirit of vengeance conjured up by innocent blood caught up with them.

The publication of Dr Toaff’s book could become a not-a-minute-too-early turning point in the Western history, from apology of Judas to adoration of Christ. Yes, his narrative of murdered children makes just a small crack in the huge edifice of Jewish exceptionalism built in Europeans’ mind. But great edifices can fall in a moment, as we learned on 9/11.

Apparently, the Jews felt it and they attacked Toaff like maddened swarm. A renown Jewish historian, rabbi and a son of a rabbi, wrote about 500-year old events – why should they bestir themselves? In the Middle ages, use of blood, necromancy, black magic were not an exclusively Jewish realm. Witches and wizards of gentile background did it too. So just join the human race, warts and all! But this is too demeaning to the arrogant Chosenites.

“It is incredible that anyone, much less an Israeli historian, would give legitimacy to the baseless blood libel accusation that has been the source of much suffering and attacks against Jews historically,” said ADL National Director Abe Foxman. The Anti-Defamation League called the book “baseless and playing into the hands of anti-Semites everywhere.”
Not much of an historian, not much of a rabbi, Foxman has a priori knowledge, based on faith and conviction, that it is “baseless”. But then, he said the same about the Jenin Massacre.

In a press release, Bar-Ilan University “is expressing great anger and extreme displeasure at Toaff, for his lack of sensitivity in publishing his book about blood libels in Italy. His choice of a private publishing firm in Italy, the book’s provocative title and the interpretations given by the media to its contents have offended the sensitivities of Jews around the world and harmed the delicate fabric of relations between Jews and Christians. Bar-Ilan University strongly condemns and repudiates what is seemingly implied by Toaff’s book and by reports in the media concerning its contents, as if there is a basis for the blood libels that led to the murder of millions of innocent Jews.”

These are firing words. Toaff came under strong community pressure: he was about to find himself at 65, on the street, probably without pension, without old friends and students, ostracized and excommunicated. Probably his life was threatened as well: Jews employ professional secret killers to deal with such nuisances. In the old days, they were called rodef, now they are called kidon, still as efficient as of old, and they were intercepted less often than bloodthirsty maniacs. His reputation would be annihilated: a Sue Blackwell would “consult her Jewish friends” and call him a Nazi, an ADL-sponsored Searchlight would discover, invade or invent his private life, many small Jews in the Web would denigrate him in their blogs and in their flagship, the Wikipedia. Who would befriend him? Probably not a single Jew, and not many Christians.


In the beginning of the attack, he tried to brave it: “I will not give up my devotion to the truth and academic freedom even if the world crucifies me.” Toaff told Haaretz earlier this week that he stood by the contention of his book, that there is a factual basis for some of the medieval blood accusations against the Jews.

But Toaff was not made of stern stuff. Like Winston Smith, the main character of Orwell’s 1984, he broke down in a mental cellar of Jewish inquisition. He published a full apology, stopped distribution of his book, promised to submit it to Jewish censorship, and “also promised to donate all the funds forthcoming from the sale of his book to the Anti-Defamation League” of good Abe Foxman.

His last words were as touching as those of Galileo recanting his heresy: “I will never allow any Jew-hater to use me or my research as an instrument for fanning the flames, once again, of the hatred that led to the murder of millions of Jews. I extend my sincerest apologies to all those who were offended by the articles and twisted facts that were attributed to me and to my book.”

Thus Ariel Toaff surrendered to the community pressure. Not that it matters what he says now. We do not know what mental tortures were prepared for him in the Jewish Gestapo of ADL, how he was forced to recant. What he gave us is enough. But what has he given us? In a way, his contribution is similar to that of Benny Morris and other Israeli New Historians: they repeated the data we knew from Palestinian sources, from Abu Lughud and Edward Said. But Palestinian sources were not trusted – only Jewish sources are considered trustworthy in our Jewish-centered universe. Thus Morris et al helped millions to free themselves from the enforced Zionist narrative. This would not be necessary if we were able to believe a goy vs. Jew: an Arab about the Expulsion of 1948, an Italian about St Simon, maybe even a German about war deportations. Now Ariel Toaff has freed many captive minds by repeating what we knew from a variety of Italian, English, German, Russian sources. If “blood libel” turned out to be not a libel but a regular criminal case, maybe other Jewish claims will go down, too? Maybe the Russians were not guilty of pogroms? Maybe Ahmadinejad is not a new Hitler bent on destruction? Maybe Muslims are not evil Jew-haters?

Ariel Toaff gave us also a window to view processes inside Jewry, in order to learn how this incredible discipline of Swarm is maintained, how dissidents are punished, how uniformity of mind is achieved. Jewry is indeed exceptional from this point of view: a Christian (or Muslim) scientist who would find a blemish in the long history of the Church will not hide it, he is not likely to be terrorized into obedience; he will not be ostracized if he embraces the most vile view; even if excommunicated, the scientist or the writer will find enough support, as Salman Rushdee, Voltaire and Tolstoy discovered. Nor Church neither Ummah command this sort of blind discipline, and nor Pope neither Imam wields the power of Mr Abe Foxman over his coreligionists. And Foxman does not care for truth, but goes for what is (in his view) good for the Jews. No amount of witnesses, not even a live broadcast of Jewish blood sacrifice would force him to accept unpleasant truth: he will find a reason why. We saw it in the case of Qana bombardment, when Israeli planes destroyed a building and killed some fifty children, surely more than the wizards of Umbria did. Thus do not expect Toaff’s book will convince Jews – nothing can.

Do not envy this unity of Jewish hearts and minds; this unity’s obverse side is that No Jew Is Free. A man is forced to become a Jew by his parents; he has no freedom of mind on any stage; he has to follow the orders. My Jewish reader, if you’ll understand that you are a slave, not in vain you’ve read that far. Until you are able to answer the rhetoric question “Aren’t you a Jew?” with simple “No”, you’ll remain a prisoner on parole, a captive on the string. Sooner or later they will pull the string. Sooner or later you’ll have to lie, to search for weasel words, to deny what you know is right and true. Freedom is at your gate; stretch your arm and take it. Like the Kingdom of Heaven, freedom is yours for asking. Freedom is Christ, for a man chooses Christ with his heart, not with his foreskin. You are free when you accept Christ and are able to reply as the Gospel says (Matth 5:37) “Let your ‘Yes’ mean ‘Yes, I am a Christian’ and your ‘No’ mean ‘No, I am not a Jew.’ Luckily, it is possible. Toaff could have had it; what a pity his courage failed him!

His fate reminds me that of Uriel (almost the same name!) Acosta. A noble forerunner of Spinoza, Acosta (born c. 1585, Oporto, Portugal – died April 1640, Amsterdam) attacked Rabbinic Judaism and was excommunicated. “A sensitive soul, Acosta found it impossible to bear the isolation of excommunication, and he recanted, writes Encyclopedia Britannica. Excommunicated again after he was accused of dissuading Christians from converting to Judaism, he made a public recantation after enduring years of ostracism. This humiliation shattered his self-esteem, and he shot himself.” Acosta’s error was that he went far, but not far enough.

[i] Uncannily, this church process practically coincided with the first Perestroika (Debunking of Stalin) initiated by Khrushchev on the XXII Party Congress in 1961, when the Communist Party repented sins and crimes of its great old leaders. One generation, thirty years later the Party collapsed, its membership was decimated by the second Perestroika. Penitence is good for soul, but then, soul is immortal.

(Republished from by permission of author or representative)
• Category: History • Tags: Classic, Jews 
Hide 19 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Art says:

    Do not envy this unity of Jewish hearts and minds; this unity’s obverse side is that No Jew Is Free. A man is forced to become a Jew by his parents; he has no freedom of mind on any stage; he has to follow the orders. My Jewish reader, if you’ll understand that you are a slave, not in vain you’ve read that far. Until you are able to answer the rhetoric question “Aren’t you a Jew?” with simple “No”, you’ll remain a prisoner on parole, a captive on the string.


  2. Anon[436] • Disclaimer says:

    Kruschev’s beginning of perestroika by denouncing Stalin was in 1956, not 1961, if I remember correctly.

  3. Yes, Art, I think that sums it up rather well and to my understanding that was the point of Marx’s book “The Jewish Question”. He criticized the Jewish demands for “emancipation”, their demand to be given the same rights as some other group or some compensatory rights, but Marx argued against that and I believe his point was that a single group cannot really possess any rights if they are not possessed by all. Therefore the proper goal is the emancipation of humanity, not simply one single group (from whence emanates our cooptation by identity politics – which is nothing more than the tried and true policy of “divide and conquer”).
    Rosa Luxemburg expressed the same view in her prioritizing the Socialist movement as a whole over Clara Zetkin’s more feminist orientation. And I think the same recognition is accorded by a part of the feminist movement today that they will not be satisfied with mere “equality” with men, for what will that gain them when men also now suffer unemployment, low wages, part-time, precarious work, increasing housing, fuel, healthcare, education, and food costs. No, they demand a changed system for all.

    • Replies: @Johan
  4. The Member of german resistance Adam von Trott zu Solz was not a General, he was a Diplomat.

  5. Dear Mister Shamir,

    Thank you very much. Another excellent article by you,and, as you know by now you’re quoted in the book by Attorney-At-Law Jeff Gates,”Guilt By Association : How Deception And Self Deceit Took America To War.”

    When I lived in Rome the head rabbi at the time was Elio Toaff the father of Ariel. There seems to be one error in a paragraph as if you, Mister Shamir,confusedly constructed the sentence out of proper historical context. Herein you write a Hamas mine which I can’t seem to make sense of not even figuratively ; if its supposed to be an historical analogy it isn’t very well put :

    “The killers were apprehended, confessed and were found guilty by the Bishop of Trent. Immediately, the Jews took their protest to the Pope and he had sent the bishop of Ventimiglia to investigate. He allegedly accepted a hefty bribe from the Jews and concluded that the child was murdered by a Hamas mine in order to besmirch Israel, as there was no Tsahal ordinance found on the beach of Trent.”

    A REPLY from a friend who forwarded to me your article : Dear Vortex: I was mystified by that paragraph too. Anastasia

    Does anyone have a clue to what is meant by Hamas mine ; as you can see my friend,Anastasia doesn’t.

    The book by Mister Ariel Toaff is still available in Italian yet since the end of 2011 it is almost impossible to buy books from Europe because there’s no more surface mail and more often than not the postage is more than the book,almost double the cost. The original title is : “Pasque Di Sangue. Ebrei D’Europa E Omicidi Rituali”/”Passovers of Blood : The Hebrews of Europe And Ritual Homicides”.

    I should like two make to points : I do not deny that what Mister Ariel Toaff has authored and I haven’t read his work. So I am just casting forward something,a supposition,given also my profound interest in Metaphysics : Does this necessarily apply to all Ashkenazi of the Jewish faith or could it not be that a large part of them at that time were infiltrated or converted to Satanism? Or if not an official ism because not all Satanists would take a life,yet they focused on Satan,some dark force overtook their existence? I think of by analogy the demonic possession in seventeenth century France of the Roman Apostolic Catholic priest Father Urbain Grandier and the entire convent of Ursuline nuns which case is known as “The Devils Of Loudun” by Mister Aldous Huxley.

    Also it is quite interesting that in Israel Mister Toaff’s book hasn’t caused anywhere near the polemic as in the United States. I have noticed that the American Jew is a story unto himself in certain respects. What offends the American Jew doesn’t necessarily,at least up until the nineteen nineties offend for example the British Jew. A case in point is the difference between Mister Stanley Kubrick and his co-screenplay writer for his film ,”Eyes Wide Shut”. The protagonist couple aren’t Jewish as in the novel by Mister Arthur Schnitzler,”Traumnovelle”/”Dream Story”. According to Mister Raphael’s memoir of the film,”In the case of Eyes Wide Shut, Frederic Raphael (who is also Jewish) wanted to keep the Jewish background of the protagonists, but Kubrick insisted that they should be “vanilla” Americans, without any details that would arouse any presumptions.” I my opinion there is something about the American character of a Jew in the United States that causes this never never explicate anything or write a negative truth about a Jew. Kubrick the american as opposed to Raphael the Britisher,being Jewish aside. We find this American-British antipodes about a Jew not be shown in bad light with the character of Emmanuel Goldstein having his name changed in the American film versions of the novel,”1984″ by Mister George Orwell : to Cassandra in the 1953 Paul Nikell and to Cellador in the 1956 by Mister John Cromwell. But in the British versions,1954 by Mister Rudolph Cartier,Austro-Hungarian born and Jewish, the 1965 version by Mister Christopher Morahan not Jewish,English,and no opposition in England from British Jews,and finally the 1984 version by Mister Michael Radford,Welsh Christian born in India,Austrian Jewish mother,no problem either. what I am pointing out is that the Americans censor the character who is Jewish by changing his name but not one of the three British productions has any problem nor two of the film directors who are Jewish nor Jews in Britain. There is something about the American character and one who is Jewish ; obviously not everyone but quite conspicuous and ever present even amongst non Jewish Americans who are very pro-Zionist.

    God Bless,
    The Vortex

    • Replies: @j2
    , @Israel Shamir
  6. j2 says:
    @The Vortex

    “So I am just casting forward something,a supposition,given also my profound interest in Metaphysics : Does this necessarily apply to all Ashkenazi of the Jewish faith or could it not be that a large part of them at that time were infiltrated or converted to Satanism? ”

    I have read the book and studied this topic to some degree. Toaff does not specify the group in question, he only says that they were Ashkenazi Jews to differentiate them from e.g. Italian Jews. I, however, would make an educated guess that it was a question of Chasidei Ashkenazi. This is because the rite was deeply connected with practical Kabbalism. As you may know, other Jews stayed rather far from Chasidei Ashkenazi. The sect was connected through the Kalonymos family to exilarch traditions of more messianic type and later families of this sect were prominent in Tzadikim Nistarim, the secret society of Ba’al Shems.

    I do not remember that the expression “Hamas mine” was used in the English translation of the book. I would imagine the meaning was to say a miner from a near-by village, possibly called Hama.

    • Replies: @The Vortex
  7. individual Jews still do these things from time to time, i.e. murder of goyim with a peculiarly ritualistic element…said murders quickly covered up by both (((MSM))) and (((legal system))). For example, in NYC during the later 1970’s – I cannot remember the precise date – a Jewish lad named Jules Plehvy abducted a White Christian girl, brought her to his apartment, then stripped and tied her naked, face-down, and spread-eagled on a bed. Plehvy raped and sodomized her for some time, and ended by slitting her throat and draining her blood into a large bowl. Finally he dismembered the girl’s body, put the parts in a plastic bag and dropped the bag into a dumpster. When caught and brought to trial, he pled insanity…and I don’t recall any outcome. The murder was a sensation in the NY papers, esp. the Daily News and Post, for a couple of days….and then coverage suddenly ceased like someone flipped a switch. Go ahead and search the net…I’ve found nothing, complete smother.

    • Replies: @anon
  8. @The Vortex

    Thank you for asking about Hamas mine. I was too clever here, I am afraid. I intended to compare the case with the Jewish response to an event that took place when I wrote this essay. Then, Israelis murdered a few Gazan children by shelling them from the sea. There was a moderate outcry. The Jews said that the boys were killed by a Hamas mine, not by their shelling. I hope now it makes sense.

    • Replies: @The Vortex
  9. @j2

    Dear J2,

    Thank you for your COMMENT REPLY. I suppose by Italian Jews differentiated from Ashkenazi Jews Mister Ariel Toaff would consider,not wrongly,the Italian of the Jewish faith to be Sephardic. Your understanding of this subject is much appreciated.

    The author of this article,Mister Israel Shamir,five days after your response,gave me and all of us herein below, for it did cause confusion and discern for accurate and careful readers,an explanation of his reference to Hamas mine.

    God Bless,
    The Vortex

  10. @Israel Shamir

    Dear Mister Shamir,

    It most definitely makes sense now and was it ever necessary for not just me but others who were mystified by it. Thank you.

    God Bless,
    The Vortex

    • Replies: @Geowhizz
  11. moshe says:

    It’s true.

    I would like to add details.

    The blood of goyim or of renegade jews like shamir uplifts our souls. Especially at passover time.

    It’s also delicious and nutritious.

    I myself don’t go anywhere without a vial of blood from a newly slaughtered christian child.

    I wish our secret practices had remained under wraps but now that the story is out I may as well fess up and let “The Council” resolve this matter with the pontiff as they have done for millennia.

    Satan our god is stronger than your christ and will prevail in the end. Hail Satan!

    P.S. As a member of the third ring I’m not privy to the inner workings and decisions of The Council but I can say with A LOT of confidence that Ron Unz is running this site with their permission and almost certainly at their direction. My guess is that it serves as a lightening rod for the Open Eyed so that they can be assembles, counted, recorded and kept watch over.

    Man it’s good to be one of Satan-God’s Chosen Race!

  12. Tamar says:

    You are right – it was 1956, not 1961, but that period of Stalin’s denunciation by Kruschev is usually called ottepel ( оттепель ), not perestroika.

  13. Johan says:
    @Jerry Davidson

    Marx, Rosa Luxemburg, Clara Zetkin
    Westerners do not need the mentioned thinkers at all, their convoluted theories can only corrupt and cause division, and are designed as such, we have the enlightenment and our own philosophers.

  14. Jews are no longer the chosen people, Christians are.
    They chose Christ.

  15. anastasia says:

    This reminds me of a story some Catholic school children told me. They told me that a young girl, born of Hassidic Jewish parents, named Finkelstein, was in the play-yard with the Catholic girls. I do not recall how the conversation started, but the young girl stated to the Catholics at some point, “I am not Jewish.” The girls ridiculed her, and said, “how can you say that – your name is Finkelstein, of course you are Jewish.”

    The Catholic girls told me this story. I told them, “the young girl was correct, and you are wrong. If she says she is not Jewish, she is not. This young girl knew that blood did not bind her and that she was free. She knew that the teaching of Judaism that the blood of your mother determines what you are and what you believe is error. She knew it was a heresy – an error in thought. She knew at least that much, but the Christian girls who should know of the heresy of the Jews did not, but instead, subscribed to it.

    • Replies: @TomSal
  16. TomSal says:

    Yes, you determine your destiny yourself. You have the free will, and choose what you want to be in your life. There are always exceptions in all religions for good or bad. On other hand, the author here talks about the history, common teachings, beliefs, rituals of a specific religion (and its people in this case), not about some exceptions. I am sure there are Jews that deny or don’t want to be part of these evil doings. But the exceptions don’t eradicate the common majority, and shouldn’t let us ignore the common majority either.

  17. anon[617] • Disclaimer says: • Website
    @Haxo Angmark

    First hit was an article on the NYT. Claims he was her ex-boyfriend.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Israel Shamir Comments via RSS