"The Protocols are not a forgery == 
 In this study of the Protocols of Zion, I present the strongest counter-arguments of my ablest opponents (Israel Zangwill, Herman Bernstein, Norman Cohn), that it's a forgery, in their own words. I do so because, unless I can refute their strongest points, my case is not made. 

 This, I believe, is my strength: that I am able to do so. I have yet to see any of my opponents, e.g. Jared Israel, place a link to this page on any of their websites, although I link to Jared Israel. Reader, if you know of such a link, please inform me: mailto:myers at cyberone.com.au. 

 Whilst I believe the Protocols of Zion authentic, my view is probabilistic. Philosophically, I emphasise uncertainty - the limits of human knowledge; that we only know partial truths - whereas dogmatists want to replace one system of certainty (e.g. Christian dogma) with another (e.g. Atheistic or New Age): perspectivism.html. 

 In keeping with this philosophy, I have no problem with my opponents' views being publicly available, and facilitate this by quoting them or linking to them; they, however, seem not to reciprocate. 

 The fact that I believe the Protocols authentic does not mean that I think it 100% ""correct"". For example, I disapprove of its endorsement of aristocracy; I interpret this as meaning that aristocratic control (feudalism) stood in the way of the revolutionary changes exemplified by the French and Russian Revolutions.  

 To the extent that the Protocols seems to have correctly predicted the trend of events, this implies some constancy of intent. Even if so, things have not always gone to plan; there are other forces at play. History books may be 99% accurate, but the 1% they omit makes all the difference. When ""writing in"" that 1%, one might give the impression that the other 99% does not count; but, of course, one is merely correcting what has been omitted or distorted.  

 This is Part 1 of the Toolkit. It deals with the arguments at the top level, and links to resources putting the case that the Protocols of Zion is a forgery, in particular a plagiarism of Dialogues in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu, by Maurice Joly, published in 1864. These arguments are critically examined.  

 Part 2 of the Protocols of Zion Toolkit deals with the Revolutionary background to Emperor Napoleon III of France, against whom Joly's Dialogues is pitched. The French Revolution, the Communist Revolutions of 1830, 1848 and 1871, and the Bolshevik Revolution are covered here.  

 Continued: 
 http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/toolkit.html 

 == "