-Caveat Lector-
----------
>From: Ric Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [CTRL] The Protocols
>Date: Fri, Aug 13, 1999, 7:01 PM
>
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Howard R. Davis III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> My understanding is that the "Protocols" were based upon a book by a
>> frenchman named Joley called "Dialogues in Hell between Monteqestue
>> and Michaelvelli. I remember that it was published in Belgium around
>> 1870s(?) and was an attack against then current French government. He
>> was later supposedly kidnapped back to France and spent some time in
>> jail. Maybe dying there. (The Russian secret police forged the later
>> "Protocals" in an effort to boost one of their own). I think I read
>> this in the "Spear of Destiny" by Ravencroft.
>
> It all boils down to: Which conspiracy would one rather attribute the
> Protocols to? Is there a vast Judaic plot that's accurately reflected
> by the Protocols? Or is the more prosaic Imperial Russian Secret Police
> responsible? Is the existence of the French/Belgian document sufficient
> evidence to destroy the Jewish-plot theory, or was it planted by the
> Illuminati to distract truth-seekers? Is ANY evidence of alleged
> plotters credible, or could it ALL be manufactured? Is 'evidence'
> relevant, or will one believe whatever the hell one desires?
>
Simply randomly choosing to believe one thing over another and to think that
this is a rational way of choosing one's beliefs is not the manner I
personally wish to operate. I prefer to weigh the evidence as best I can and
deduce some reasonable model of reality in which I operate. Of course, I
realize that I have made in the past inaccurate choices and do not have a
fully accurate model of reality. However, I believe that my present model is
more accurate than my past models and hope to continue to improve in just
the same way as humanity in general has made some improvements. We no longer
believe, for example, that the earth is flat.
As for the "Protocols" specifically. My info on the origin, as stated above,
is not certain by any means. I haven't held the supposed original book in my
hands and even if I had, it wouldn't have done me much good since I don't
read French. However, Ravenscroft seemed to be fairly believable and his
story made sense. If it were true, then it would indicate a creation earlier
than the Jewish conference which was held in the 1890s. That would tend to
indicate that its creation was independent of any Jewish involvement.
Howard Davis
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
