The Statue of Liberty, an Edomite Trojan Horse

“... Homer relates that Troy reached its greatest splendor in the reign of King Priam. Its destruction was caused by Paris, a son of Priam, who abducted Helen, the wife of Menelaus, King of Sparta, and carried her off to the Trojan capital. The Greeks spent 10 years in collecting an army to avenge this outrage, and, under the leadership of Agamemnon, who had 1,186 ships and 100,000 men drove the Trojans within the walls of Troy ... It is related that the Greeks were unable to capture the city by direct assault. Hence, they constructed a huge wooden horse, within which they concealed a band of the bravest Greek heroes ....” (World Scope Encyclopedia, vol. 10). To make a long story short, the Trojans lost the war to the Greeks. Like the “huge wooden horse” of the Greeks, the “Statue of Liberty” planted on Bedloe Island in New York Harbor is serving a similar purpose, and there are few who comprehend the significance!

To hit the road running, I will quote from Who’s Who in Jewish History, by Joan Comay, p. 128:

“LAZARUS, Emma 1849-1887. US poetess. Emma Lazarus is remembered principally as the author of the sonnet ‘The New Colossus’ which is engraved upon the Statue of Liberty in New York harbour. The poem expresses her vision of America as a sanctuary for the ‘huddled masses’ of Europe, victims of religious and economic persecution.

“The daughter of a New York Sephardi family, she began writing poems and novels in her teens. Ralph Waldo Emerson took an interest in her work, and she developed a correspondence with Henry Longfellow that was to continue over the years. The pogroms in Russia in 1881-1882 gave her a passionate interest in Jewish problems. She learned Hebrew and translated Judah halevi and other medieval Spanish-Jewish poets. Her volumes of poetry, such as Songs of a Semite (1882) and By the Waters of Babylon (1887), are filled with prophetic Zionist sentiment, and she urged her views in essays that appeared in contemporary American periodicals. It is ironical that at the request of her assimilated family, works with a Jewish content were omitted from a collected edition published two years after her death.”

To understand the lingo among the immigrant-jews during the late 1800’s, one must grasp that the Sephardim-jews were erroneously dubbed “German-jews” while the Ashkenazi-jews were erroneously dubbed “Russian-jews”. To show that the Statue of Liberty was basically bought and paid for with jewish lucre is evident in the book Our Crowd, pp. 127-128:

“In the gaslit New York of 1876, the hand torch of the Statue of Liberty, the gift from France, sprouted surrealistically from a street corner at Fifth Avenue and Twenty-sixth Street – part of a campaign to raise money to get the rest of the statue assembled on an island in the harbor, where it would welcome immigrants to the New World. (France had contributed $450,000 toward the erection of the statue, but expected the United States to contribute an additional $350,000 for the construction of a pedestal. For several years, while Americans bickered over who should pay this bill, the rest of Bertholdi’s 225-ton lady reposed in a warehouse.) Emma Lazarus had written her lines, ‘Give me your tired, your poor ...’ to be inscribed upon the base of the controversial gift. Miss Lazarus’ lines had a majestic ring. But – or so it seemed at the time – they also conveyed a somewhat condescending tone. Seligmans, Lehmans, and Goldmans may have arrived tired and poor, but did not enjoy being called ‘the wretched refuse’ of some teeming European shore. Many German Jews in the 1870’s, perhaps overquick to sense a slight where none was intended, interpreted Miss Lazarus’ words as a snide comment on their own humble immigrant beginnings. Subscribing funds for the statue’s erection on Bedloe’s Island became largely a Sephardic project, eschewed by Germans. Such forces served to draw the Germans even closer to one another, into their own ‘Hebrew Select,’ with their own exclusive standards.”

The fact that the Russian-jews became offended at Emma Lazarus’ lines, “Give me your tired, your poor etc. ...” is prima facie evidence that the whole project of the Statue of Liberty was a jewish contrivance from its beginning! It is obvious that it was nothing more than a jewish sleight-of-hand trick to get the White American’s minds off the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution, where it expressly states, “to us and our posterity”, and substitute “your tired”, “your poor”, “your huddled masses”, “the wretched refuse”, “homeless, tempest-tost” in its place. Then to connect these spurious terms to the U.S. Constitution, the statue’s right arm holds a great torch raised high in the air, while the left arm grasps a tablet bearing the date of the Declaration of Independence. What an outrage of blasphemy! This was nothing more than an attempt by the cursed descendants of Cain to rewrite the intent of U.S. Constitution. If this isn’t enough of an insult, the original name of the Statue of Liberty was Liberty Enlightening the World, or as Scripture proclaims, 2 Cor. 11:14: “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.” It’s tantamount to saying, “up with Satan, and down with your Christian forefathers’ form of government!” What is even more provoking is the fact that the right arm is the strong arm, but the Statue of Liberty places the Declaration of Independence in the weak left arm! Only traitors would do such a damnable thing. In effect, it places the Declaration of Independence subsidiary to Satan’s false light!

However, this is not the end of the story concerning Emma Lazarus and her infamous activities. I will now quote from A Century of Jewish Life, by Ismar Elbogen, pp. 332-333 in part:

“... Schiff’s interest in Jewish matters began early, and he was always distinguished by the reverential regard he showed to Jewish scholarship and Jewish scholars. During the forty years of his active career there was scarcely a worthy Jewish movement in the United States in which he was not to be found at the forefront. He was a recognized leader of American Jewry during the critical period in which that Jewry attained world importance.

“When the overwhelming stream of immigrants made necessary the erection of temporary barracks to shelter them, it was Jacob Schiff who financed the undertaking. The plight of her fellow Jews turned the gifted poetess, Emma Lazarus (1849-1887), into an enthusiastic Jewess who recalled the Jews to a realization of their own dignity and worth. It was on her numerous visits to the barracks which Schiff had built that she realized the need of giving their inmates work in order to guard them from the crippling consequences of idleness. In the columns of the American Hebrew, which quickly grew to be an outstanding Jewish periodical, she kindled the ardor of the larger community for the task of training the refugees, and more especially their children, in the technical arts and in trades. Due to her efforts the Hebrew Technical Institute was established in New York and similar schools were set up in Boston, Philadelphia and Chicago ...

“It was no light task to make such great masses employable. But the situation was much more favorable than in England, for America was hungry for workers. The first newcomers were far from accumulating riches, but they did find a livelihood. None of them became a public charge. Those who were needy were helped by the United Hebrew Charities, which came into being after the dissolution of the Emigrants Societies. The newcomers lived in overcrowded and unhealthy dwellings in the most wretched fashion; whenever they could do so they would actually deny themselves food in order to be able to bring their relatives from abroad. Nevertheless, as was shown by an inquiry, the state of their health was not bad; their children flourished and developed properly ....”

To validate this account even further, I will quote from the book The Story of the Jew, by Rabbi Lee J. Levinger and his wife Ema Ehrlich Levinger in 1928, and later edited by Green, Bial, & Long, pp. 161-162:

“The First Jews in America

“In the first century after the discovery, hundreds of Jews and Marranos came to the New World. Some came seeking the gold of El Dorado; most came seeking freedom. But they did not find it immediately. The ships that planted the Spanish flag from Florida to Peru also carried the cross of the Inquisition. Thirty-six years after the first European stepped foot in the New World, a Jew was burned at the stake in Mexico. The persecutions reached their peak in 1639 when sixty-three Marranos were condemned in Peru in one mass trial.

“When the Dutch took Brazil, Jews built substantial colonies at Recife and Surinam. But the respite was short. The Portuguese took back Brazil in 1654 and the Jews scattered northward through the West Indies. The history of the Jews of the United States begins with that scattering. Twenty-four refugees from the Portuguese Inquisition limped into the harbor of New Amsterdam aboard the tiny brig St. Charles.

“Peter Stuyvesant, Governor of New Amsterdam, was not pleased to see the Jews, some of whom were penniless. He tried to bar them, but the colony belonged to the Dutch West India Company, whose Jewish stockholders made him accept the Jews. The refugees were admitted with one restriction, ‘providing that they shall not become a charge upon the community.’ The Jews gladly accepted this condition. It was to have a profound effect upon the development of the American Jewish community.

“The Jewish colony in North America grew slowly, mostly from Sephardic Jews who came by way of England. By the time of the Revolution they numbered about twenty-five hundred traders, merchants, and shipowners. They were scattered up and down the coast, centering on five congregations, Newport, New York, Philadelphia, Charleston, and Savannah. They lived in peace and security with their neighbors, but they did not have full civil rights. Yet, even as second-class citizens, the Jews of America truly lived in a golden land.”

The following is what I covered in my Watch man’s Teaching Letter #39:

This is not the only erroneous information Ted R. Weiland advances. Weiland has very little to say of the Sephardic Jews, and what he does say is mostly in error. In his book “God’s Covenant People, Yesterday, Today And Forever”, Weiland quotes (page 68) a Jewish source, James Gaffe, from his book The American Jews, which says this:

“... the early Sephardic settlers for example, left practically no descendants who are still Jewish ... they disappeared not because they intermarried but because they refused to intermarry – and so, without sufficient choice among their own, they remained unmarried and died out. ... choosing extinction rather than assimilation.”

Now, I will back up to a note by Weiland: “Note that he (Gaffe) considers the Sephardic Jew extinct.” At this point, one must understand Weiland’s motive for quoting this “Jew.” Weiland is attempting to prove that the “Jews” of today are only “Jews” by religion. By doing this, he tries to avoid any connection whatsoever with a genetic Satanic seedline. But, in so doing, he backs himself into a corner. Weiland also tries to trace the “Jews’” lineage back to Esau in order to discredit any idea that they are descendants of Cain. By Weiland’s endeavor to prove the Sephardic extinct, he is also implying the Esau-Edomite-Jews are extinct. If the Sephardic-Esau-Edomite-Jews are extinct, why does Ted R. Weiland even make an issue out of it? I will now present evidence that the Sephardic “Jews” still exist. The following is a review of what I have written before concerning this:

THE SEPHARDIM ARE STILL AROUND! In the book OUR CROWD, ‘The Great Jewish Families of New York’, pages 29-30, and I will have to paraphrase the story: Sometime in the 1650’s a ship (“bark”, 3 masted sailing ship, St. Charles) dubbed the “Jewish Mayflower” brought twenty-three Sephardic Jews (Rabbi Lee J. Levinger says twenty-four) from the culture of medieval Spain and some of the great Sephardic families of New York descended from the “St. Charles” arrivals which included the Hendrickses, Cardozos, Baruchs, Lazaruses, Nathans, Solises, Gomezes, Lopezes, Lindos, Lombrosos & Seixases. Check these names and you can know, without any reservations, the Sephardic “Jews” are still around. On page 31, it tells how the German-Sephardic and (Ashkenazi) Jews of New York began to “intermarry.” It was the Sephardic that were the old Canaanite-Jews that came from Palestine .... They had the blood of Cain, Esau and the race of Rephaim (fallen angels). If the Sephardic Jews are extinct, as Ted R. Weiland implies, there is no longer an Esau-Edom! Why, then, even make an issue of Esau-Edom if this is the case? This is just one example of the many spurious statements people such as Weiland, Jones, Bruggeman and Weisman make in their presentations to mislead and confuse the issues. (end of citation from WTL #39)

UNABLE TO OVERCOME THE CURSE OF CAIN

At Gen. 4:12, it is recorded: “When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength, a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.” Now returning to A Century of Jewish Life, by Ismar Elbogen, pp. 333-335

“Michael Heilprin was an enthusiastic partisan of the back-to-the-land movement and was happy to find that many immigrants expressed a strong desire to devote themselves to agricultural pursuits. He made it his business to raise funds for this purpose. Settlements were attempted in several states, but unfortunately all of them miscarried. One time it was the water that was at fault, another time it was a crop failure; once drought, again frost and hail spoiled flourishing crops that were almost ready to harvest. Always it was complete lack of experience and consequently ill-chosen ground which was to blame for the failure. The settlers worked with all their might and contented themselves with the barest minimum, but none of the settlements survived its difficulties longer than four years. Individual farmers could set their teeth and outface failure until their soil rendered a return, and indeed many did so. But for closed colonies the requisite experience and capital were never available. Most of the enthusiasts were forced to return to the city disillusioned. A few colonies in southern New Jersey, like Alliance, Carmel, Rosenhayn, maintained themselves because their proximity to large cities provided them a favorable market and because the Baron de Hirsch Fund stood behind them.

“Heilprin’s influence in the creation of this Fund was considerable. In Constantinople Maurice de Hirsch was in contact with Oscar S. Straus (1840-1926), the United States ambassador to Turkey. Straus informed de Hirsch of the miserable condition of the immigrants in America. Prepared, as always, to give productive help, de Hirsch asked for a plan, and one was prepared by Michael Heilprin and met with de Hirsch’s approval. He made the income, and later the principal sum, of ten million francs ($2,400,000) available, and left the disposition of these moneys to the judgment of an American committee. Upon this committee sat men most experienced in such affairs, among others Schiff, Straus and Judge Mayer Sulzberger. In addition to temporary help immediately upon landing, such as providing shelter, distributing immigrants in the interior of the country and the purchase of tools for artisans, measures were taken for providing permanent help by making the immigrants self-sustaining. There was much difference of opinion in matters of detail, but eventually unity was achieved. In 1890 the Fund began to operate, and the American administration was given broad powers ....”

Here it must be asked, If Michael Heilprin, Maurice de Hirsch and Oscar S. Straus were able to conjure up ten million francs ($2,400,000) for the failed “back-to-the-land movement” of the Edomite-jews, how much might they have contributed to the fund for the Statue of Liberty, or as they called it at that time, Liberty Enlightening the World? And the jews tried the same so-called “back-to-the-land movement” in Canada, which also failed.

Ibid. p. 323: “Canada, too, had a considerable share of immigration. The proximity of the United States, the extent and fertility of the country, and the sparsity of its population were inducements to immigration but prevented a firm and independent development. The reception of the first refugees was very cordial. All charitable work was on a voluntary basis, and the personal interest and warmth with which they were met encouraged the immigrants and made it easy for them to settle down, so that they could soon help others to settle. When immigration became particularly heavy, in 1888, the Young Men’s Hebrew Benevolent Society of Montreal, which had always felt responsible for the immigrants, approached Baron de Hirsch and solicited the same interest on behalf of immigrants to Canada as he showed in those to the United States. The petition was promptly heeded; permanent assistance was promised and given. In 1891 the Baron de Hirsch Institute was opened. This provided shelter for newcomers and also secular education, with evening classes for adults. The Institute became more important as immigration grew after the turn of the century. Not content with this work, Baron de Hirsch and later the Jewish Colonization Association, which established a separate Canadian Committee, promoted the settlement of Jews as farmers. The government favored these efforts by putting land at their disposal gratis. As in almost all other countries these settlements began with a very difficult period of trial. Their success was retarded by unfavorable location and failure of crops. According to a census of 1920 there were 3,500 Jewish persons in Canada living by agriculture, and the annual value of their products was a million dollars.” That would be $285.71 per year per jewish farmer, hardly a living wage even back then! That would amount to about $23.80 per month to meet the needs of one jewish family!

Ibid. p. 324: “These figures signify little in view of the greatly increased immigration which took place, especially in the bad decade between the pogrom of Kishinev and the World War. Whereas there were only something more than 16,000 Jews in Canada in 1901, in 1911 the number was 50,000, or 1.03% of the total population, and in 1921 it had grown to 126,196, or 1.44%. This enormous absolute increase was received into the cities, of which some, like Winnipeg and Vancouver, were founded during this period and grew at an astounding rate. The Jews wandered from east to west along the railroad, and many settled at the stations fixed by the railroad. Their small stores became central points for the agricultural regions round about. There farmers not only found their necessities, but frequently an interpreter for the various languages spoken in the country, someone to read and write their letters, and sympathetic understanding for their human problems. At these railroad stops villages came into existence, and also Jewish congregations. They are to be found strewn over the whole broad dominion. But the main body of the Jews settled in a few large cities. Montreal_, Toronto, and Winnipeg contain about three-fourths of the total Jewish population. The character of the congregations was determined by the character of the immigrants, who brought a conservative attitude into an essentially conservative country. It is significant that, as late as 1921, 87% of the Jewish population recorded their mother tongue as Yiddish. Proximity to the United States determined the character of charitable institutions, hospitals, orphanages and the like; all such establishments followed the pattern set in the United States. The relief organizations for the victims of pogroms and for work in Palestine found ready support in Canada ....” Question: Who’s Statue of Liberty, or Who’s Trojan horse? An “Edomite-horse” of course!