Let the Romans Rule Palestine/Israel Again

Pontius Pilate - noble Roman Governor of Palestine - stuck trying to keep Roman civilization to Jews

Here’s my favorite scene from one of my favorite historical movies:

Monty Python “The Life of Brian – What Have the Romans Ever Done for US?”


This is a very funny movie scene – it’s also IMO 100% true. The only people that ever successfully ruled this God(s) forsaken, J plagued place were our White European kinsmen – the Romans. As in all Roman conquests, the Romans let the conquered people keep their God(s) and customs as long as it didn’t interfere, threaten Roman rule – the “Pax Romana”. This Roman Peace included the huge, HUGE benefits of Roman Civilization. The New Testament Christian Bible tells the story of Jesus Christ the Jewish Christian messiah (adopted by the Muslims as the second to the last Islamic prophet). During the time of Jesus Christ, with Palestine then under Roman rule, there were rumors spreading everywhere about a Jewish rebellion against Roman rule, which would come in the most bloody way soon after Jesus Christ’s death.

The Romans listened to the various Jewish leaders about the rumors of a Jewish rebellion – a rebellion led by the long foretold Jewish Messiah. The Pharisees told the Romans “this Jesus Christ, this false Jewish King, this false Jewish messiah was leading the rebellion against Rome. While they were loyal Roman subjects and had no king but Caesar.

The Roman governor Pontus Pilate interviewed Jesus Christ and found him innocent – practically the first honest Jewish person he had met since he took that backwater assignment.

But the Pharisees insisted the Romans execute Jesus Christ to keep the Pax Romana in Palestine – and that they did.

One of the not so secrets (for those who would look) of history is that the Talmudic Jewish religion calls for an ethnic Jewish Messiah King, not a universalist Messiah of Peace to all the world as St. Paul presented in the new religion Judeo Christianity . St. Paul/Pharissee Saul of Tarsus preached to the White Greek/Roman and Jewish populations in Roman Syria that a new age of universal peace and equality was at hand a new age where there would be no differences between “Greeks (Romans) and Jews, free and slave, men and women” NT Galatians 3:28

“The Jews looked for a special savior, a messiah, who was to redeem mankind by the agreeable process of restoring the fabulous glories of David and Solomon, and bringing the whole world at last under the firm but benevolent Jewish heel. (British author HG Wells “The Outline of History” author of “The War of the Worlds”, “The Time Machine”)

“Zionism is an expression of Jewish refusal to assimilate. If the Jews have suffered, it is because they have regarded themselves as a chosen people. ” (British author HG Wells “The Anatomy of Frustration”)

So what do we remaining White Anglos in North America do about the carnage in Gaza and Islamists in Turkey, Yemen and elsewhere promising World War III to stop, avenge the Israeli slaughter of Arab Palestinians walled off in Gaza? There’s not much we can do, except advocate for American neutrality, pray for peace (not many Christians left to hear our prayers in the Holy Land) and maybe….

Call for the Romans to come back and rule this place, nobody else especially the Js can do it.

Here’s hoping for a second Pax Romana


    • True, but they always called themselves Romans. Even the final emperors were called Basileos Romanoi (King of the Romans). Maybe the best Romans of all to rule over Bibi and his homies would be Corn Pop and his crew.

  1. Jaye, Great post overall but Judeo-Christianity is a nonsense term which makes as much sense as Christian-Zionism. It’s a term the Christian-Zionist Hagee and other apostate morons like to employ, along with Talmudics like Ben Shapiro. Modern Judaism (Talmudism) post-dates Christianity by 500 years, though it is a direct descendent of the Pharisees who (as noted) framed Christ as a rebel to be executed. As usual they had someone else do their dirty work – even though they considered his crime under the Hebrew law (Torah) to be acting as a false prophet – which required stoning to death.

    Pilate gave them a choice of who to free and the Pharisee mob chose to free the criminal Barrabas (surpirse). Christ was then executed by crucifixion on the Sabbath day, all contrary to the old Hebrew law. Judaism and Christianity have no more in common than darkness and light do. The Hebrew religion is traditionally regarded in Christianity as the pre-incarnation Church. That’s why the Talmudics rail on about “replacement theology”. There is even a scriptural passage mentioning the resurrection of many early faithful in the moments after Christ’s sacrifice was accomplished.

  2. I understand your thesis, Jack: that the ancient Roman Empire was able to suppress the Jews, and if it ruled the area now, the Jews would not be running amok. But the Roman Empire never cared about common people, except to use them, and let Jesus slip through the cracks of its system of “justice,” and crucified Him. Palestine, and the world, need a completely different system than imperialism. Rome which began as a small, tribal city-state, deteriorated into a class-structured, very militant “republic for the few” that conquered the other Italian tribes and the Etruscans, and kept on expanding by constant war to become the greatest (and arguably most evil) imperial, hegemonic power of the ancient world. The Gauls, Britons, Germans, Greeks, Egyptians, Phoenicians, Syrians, Dacians, and other peoples that the Hegemon (Rome) conquered didn’t call being conquered “Pax” (peace). Most of the German tribes kept resisting and were never conquered. Obviously I am not a fan of “Rome” in the form of the ancient empire, or in the form of the Byzantine Roman empire, or in the form of Roman Catholicism. The Roman imperial conquest of what is now called Palestine, in 63 B.C., was not beneficial to the conquered people, who resisted and revolted against it. Later, Byzantine Roman imperial colonialism was so harmful that many people welcomed the Arab Muslims who defeated and expelled the Romans from Jerusalem in A,D. 638. Finally, it was Roman Catholicism that sent waves of “Christian” Crusaders to Palestine, who committed many massacres (even of Christians), and made Saracens appear gentle and humane by comparison. Palestine was at its closest to peace and independence when it was under the protection of the Turks.

    • There were two major jewish rebellions against Rome. The most famous one (AD 70) was actually the smaller of the two. The Bar-Kochba revolt (ca. AD 130) was far more extensive. With that one, the legions slaughtered many and expelled the rest so they were scattered elsewhere in the empire. Very few jews were left in the area after that. All empires require force to subject conquered nations to their rule – the Turks were even more brutal than the Romans, which is why they were easy pickings for the British to gin up an uprising from the Arabs in the WW I era – leading to the final collapse of the Ottomans.

      Turks aren’t Arabs, nor Kurds, Armenians, Berbers, or Egyptians (Mizraim). All of them chafed under Ottoman rule – which was notoriously corrupt. Of all the empires which ruled over the place now occupied by Israel, the pre-Islam Romans were probably the best (we’re talking about a very low bar here). The simple fact is that most nations don’t want to be ruled over by others. That’s the great flaw and achilles heel of empire. Not even the Mongols, whose sheer brutality likely exceeded anyone’s, could ride that tiger for very long. All empires are essentially vast looting schemes. There are some regions like Afghanistan where the natives are so war-like that they are impossible to rule – hence the famous ‘Graveyard of Empires’. An ‘eternal reich’ is mirage – a Game of Thrones which ultimately ends in ruin. Sic transit gloria mundi

      • Re: “All empires are essentially vast looting schemes”: Exactly. I also say that every line of nobility (royalty, etc.) began as a very successful gang of thieves, and that most “old money” is old theft, laundered by a few generations.

        Re: “The simple fact is that most nations don’t want to be ruled over by others”: Yes, it’s just not natural. Here’s a video of the “distaste” it provokes (note that twentieth-century British soldiers, with their Christian influence, had scruples about shooting children, unlike Israelis who would likely shoot them all):

    • “But the Roman Empire … let Jesus slip through the cracks of its system of ‘justice,’ and crucified Him.”

      The members of his pack of agitators were lucky they didn’t get the same treatment.

      “At length, when he imagined that the apostolic wanderings, his own teachings and miracles during the last two years, had sufficiently prepared and inclined the people to accept him and retain him as their expected Messiah, he fixes upon the time of the Easter festival, because he well knew that all Judea would then be assembled at Jerusalem. He chooses an ass with a foal in order to ride in state into the city, and appear as though he were the king of whom it was written: ‘Behold thy king cometh to thee.’ The apostles now thought that the kingdom was really about to commence. They busy themselves, assisted by some of the people, in spreading clothes upon the road, in strewing palms, and in crying ‘Hosanna to the son of David,’ that is to say, ‘Hail to the king, the Messiah who shall sit upon the throne of David; blessed be he who comes in the name of the Lord.’ In this fashion he rides through the gates into the city of Jerusalem, upon which there ensues a crowd, an uproar, and the whole town is thrown into a state of excitement. This extraordinary public procession, which was not only tolerated by Jesus, but had been diligently encouraged by him, could not have been aimed at anything but a worldly kingdom. He wished that all the people of Israel who were there gathered together should unanimously proclaim him King.

      “It is possible that Jesus may not have felt quite comfortable as to the result of this undertaking, and that he may have previously told his disciples that he must be ready to suffer and to die. But these were elated with hope, they promised to support and not to forsake him, even should they die with him. So the attempt was ventured upon. Jesus takes his seat upon the ass, he allows royal honours to be done to him, he makes a public entry, and as this appears in some measure to succeed, he goes straight to the temple, where the High Court of Justice was wont to be held; he lays aside his gentleness, begins a disturbance, and commits acts of violence, like one who suddenly considers himself possessed of worldly power. He overturns the tables of the money-changers, takes a scourge and drives the buyers and sellers and dealers in doves into the outer court of the temple.”
      —Pages 21-23 at https://archive.org/details/fragmentsfromrei00reim/page/20/mode/2up?view=theater
      (Fragments from Reimarus, Consisting of Brief Critical Remarks on the Object of Jesus and His Disciples As Seen in the New Testament)

      The Manson Family avant la lettre.

      • Well, when the Zealots seized Jerusalem in 66AD the first people they killed was the gang that allegedly were the group responsible for conspiring to have Pilate kill Jesus. If they both have the same enemies it’s telling. The historical Jesus most likely was part of the Zealot movement and a rebel, the gospels were a whitewash of that little inconvenient truth after the fall of the temple in 70AD. No religion celebrating a rebel leader would be tolerated, in order to keep the cult going the founder needed to be rewritten as benign. Josephus makes no mention of any historical Jesus? Was he really so small scale? Were passages censored because they did not support the theological story? Was “Jesus” or Joshua as the name is properly translated, a title given? Other mentions of messiah wannabees all seem to want to mimic Joshua’s conquest. Josephus blames the whole war on the influence of Judas the Galillean who was active around 6 AD and whose memory was venerated for the rest of the century as the great founder of the Zealot movement sort of like a Mao or Lenin. He was not just a warrior but also a religious leader, was this the historical Jesus? Maybe, but it’s pretty clear the Gospel story is fictional, a Greek rewriting of another culture’s religion. Sort of like all the white liberals creating their own hippie version of so called “Eastern Spirituality” with all that new age crap where some So Cal white guy with a beard working in cinematography claims to be “Buddhist.” Yeah, sure.

  3. Fact: The Romans after entering the Jew’s Temple, claimed the Jews worshipped a jackass. So said the Roman historians and geographers.

Comments are closed.