by Dr. William Pierce
What’s said to be the most expensive motion picture ever made was released a few weeks ago and has been earning record money at the box office. The film, of course, is Titanic, and it’s about the sinking of the ocean liner S.S. Titanic on April 15, 1912, with the loss of 1,513 lives, after the ship struck an iceberg in the North Atlantic.
There are many superlatives in the film. The Titanic was the largest ship ever built at the time. It also was the most luxurious ship, intended to provide high-speed trans-Atlantic transportation in comfort for the rich and pampered. The implication of the film is that the sinking of the Titanic is the greatest maritime disaster of all time. I’m sure that the great majority of the American public believes that to be the case, but it isn’t. Everyone has heard about the sinking of the Titanic, and very few have heard about the sinking of the S.S. Wilhelm Gustloff, which was the greatest maritime disaster.
It is easy to understand why everyone has heard about the Titanic: it was a very big, very expensive ship, claimed to be virtually „unsinkable,“ which went down on its maiden voyage with a record number of celebrities and tycoons aboard. The irony of the sinking helped generate public interest and an enormous media coverage. When the Wilhelm Gustloff went down, on the other hand, with the loss of more than 7 000 lives, the controlled media adopted the deliberate policy that it was a non-event, not to be commented on or even reported. The Wilhelm Gustloff, like the Titanic, was a big passenger liner and was reasonably new and luxurious. But it was a German passenger liner. It was sunk in the Baltic Sea on the night of January 30, 1945, by a Soviet submarine. It was packed with nearly 8 000 Germans, most of them women and children escaping from the advancing Soviet Army.
Many of these German refugees lived in East Prussia, a part of Germany that the Communist and democratic Allies had agreed would be taken from Germany and given to the Soviet Union at the end of the Second World War. Others lived in Danzig and the surrounding area, which the democrats and Communists had decided would be taken from Germany and given to Poland. All of these refugees were fleeing in terror from the Reds, who already had demonstrated in East Prussia what was in store for any German unfortunate enough to fall into their hands.
As Soviet military units overtook columns of German civilian refugees fleeing to the west, they behaved in a way which has not been seen in Europe since the Mongol invasions of the Middle Ages. Often the men, most of them farmers or Germans who had been engaged in other essential occupations and thus exempted from military service, were simply murdered on the spot. The women were, almost without exception, gang-raped. This was the fate of girls as young as eight years old and old women in their eighties, as well as women in the advanced stages of pregnancy. Women who resisted rape had their throats cut or were shot. Very often women were murdered after being gang-raped. Many women and girls were raped so often and so brutally that they died from this abuse alone.
Sometimes Soviet tank columns simply rolled right over the fleeing refugees, grinding them into the mud with their tank treads. When Soviet Army units occupied East Prussian villages, they engaged in orgies of torture, rape, and murder so bestial that they cannot be described fully on this program. Sometimes they castrated the men and boys before killing them. Sometimes they gouged their eyes out. Sometimes they burned them alive. Some women after being gang-raped were crucified by being nailed to barn doors while still alive and then used for target practice.
This atrocious behavior on the part of the Communist troops was due in part to the nature of the Communist system, which had succeeded in overthrowing Russian society and the Russian government in the first place by organizing the scum of Russian society – the losers and ne’erdo- wells, the criminals, the resentful and the envious – under the Jews and setting them against the successful, the accomplished, the refined, and the prosperous, promising the rabble that if they pulled down their betters then they could take the place of the latter: the first shall be last, and the last shall be first.
It was the members of this rabble, this scum of Russian society, who became the bosses of local soviets and collectives and workers’ councils – when the positions had not already been taken by Jews. The Soviet soldiers of 1945 had grown up under this system of rule by the worst; for 25 years they had lived under commissars chosen from the dregs of Russian society. Any tendency toward nobility or gentility had been weeded out ruthlessly. Stalin had ordered the butchering of 35 000 Red Army officers, half of the old Russian officers’ corps, in 1937, just two years before the war, because he did not trust gentlemen. The officers who replaced those shot in the 1937 purge were not much more civilized in their behavior than the commissars.
An even more specific and immediate cause of the atrocities committed against the German population of East Prussia was the Soviet hate propaganda which deliberately incited the Soviet troops to rape and murder – even to murder German infants. The chief of the Soviet propaganda commissars was a hate-filled Jew named Ilya Ehrenburg. One of his directives to the Soviet troops read:
„Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the fascist beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of these German women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! As you storm onward, kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army.“
Not every Russian soldier was a butcher or a rapist, of course: just most of them. A few of them still had a sense of morality and decency which even Jewish Communism had not destroyed. Alexander Solzhenitsyn was one of these. He was a young captain in the Red Army when it entered East Prussia in January 1945. He wrote later in his Gulag Archipelago:
All of us knew very well that if the girls were German they could be raped and then shot. This was almost a combat distinction.
In one of his poems, „Prussian Nights,“ he describes a scene he witnessed in a house in the East Prussian town of Neidenburg:
Twenty-two Hoeringstrasse. It’s not been burned, just looted, rifled. A moaning by the walls, half muffled: the mother’s wounded, half alive. The little daughter’s on the mattress, dead. How many have been on it? A platoon, a company perhaps? A girl’s been turned into a woman, a woman turned into a corpse. . . . The mother begs, „Soldier, kill me!“
For his failure to take Comrade Ehrenburg’s directive to heart, Solzhenitsyn was reported by the political commissar in his unit as not being Politically Correct and was packed off to the gulag: that is, to a Soviet concentration camp.
And so, German civilians were fleeing in terror from East Prussia, and for many of them the only route of escape was across the icy Baltic Sea. They packed the port of Gotenhafen, near Danzig, hoping to find passage to the west. Hitler ordered all available civilian ships into the rescue effort. The Wilhelm Gustloff was one of these. A 25,000-ton passenger liner, it had been used before the war by the „Strength through Joy“ organization to take German workers on low-cost vacation excursions. On January 30, 1945, when it steamed out of Gotenhafen it carried a crew of just under 1 100 officers and men, 73 critically wounded soldiers, 373 young women of the Women’s Naval Auxiliary, equivalent to our WAVES, and more than 6 000 desperate refugees, most of them women and children.
Soviet submarines and aircraft were a constant menace to this rescue effort. They regarded the refugee ships in the light of Ehrenburg’s genocidal propaganda: the more Germans they could kill the better, and it didn’t make any difference to them whether their victims were soldiers or women and children. At just after 9:00 PM, when the Wilhelm Gustloff was 13 miles off the coast of Pomerania, three torpedoes from the Soviet submarine S-13, under the command of Captain A.I. Marinesko, struck the ship. Ninety minutes later it sank beneath the icy waves of the Baltic. Although a heroic effort to pick up survivors was made by other German ships, barely 1 100 were saved. The rest, more than 7 000 Germans, died in the frigid water that night.
A few days later, on February 10, 1945, the same Soviet submarine sank the German hospital ship, the General von Steuben, and 3 500 wounded soldiers aboard the ship, who were being evacuated from East Prussia, drowned. To the Soviets, inflamed by Jewish hate propaganda, the sign of the Red Cross meant nothing. On May 6, 1945, the German freighter Goya, also part of the rescue fleet, was torpedoed by another Soviet submarine, and more than 6 000 refugees fleeing from East Prussia died.
The lack of knowledge in the United States about any of these terrible maritime disasters of 1945 is profound, even among people who consider themselves knowledgeable on naval matters. And this ignorance stems from the deliberate policy of the controlled media, a policy which has relegated these disasters to the category of non-events. The reason for this media policy originally was the same reason which led the Jewish media bosses to blame the slaughter of 15 000 Polish officers and intellectuals in the Katyn woods in 1940 on the Germans. They knew that the Soviets had done it, as part of their effort to „proletarianize“ Poland and make the Poles more amenable to Communist rule, but they didn’t want to tarnish the image of our „gallant Soviet ally,“ as the Reds were called by the controlled U.S. media during the war. They wanted Americans to think that the Germans were the bad guys and the Soviets were the good guys, so they simply lied about the Katyn massacre.
Likewise, even in the last months of the war, they didn’t want Americans alerted to the fact that our „gallant Soviet ally“ was butchering and raping the civilian population of East Prussia and deliberately sinking the civilian refugee ships which were helping the East Prussians escape across the Baltic Sea. That might damage America’s enthusiasm for continuing the destruction of Germany with the help of our „gallant Soviet ally.“ So the controlled media simply didn’t report these things.
After the triumph of the democratic and Communist Allies and the unconditional surrender of Germany this reason no longer was valid, of course. But by then another motive had taken its place. The Jews were beginning to build their „Holocaust“ story and were demanding sympathy from the world – and reparations money from anyone they could get it from. As they began wailing about the supposed extermination of six million of their kinsmen in „gas ovens“ by the wicked Germans and portraying themselves as the innocent and inoffensive victims of the greatest crime in history, they didn’t want any facts getting in the way – and they certainly didn’t want Americans to see both sides of the conflict; they didn’t want the Germans seen as victims too. All Germans were evil, just like Comrade Ehrenburg had said; all Jews were good; and that was it. The Jews suffered, and the Germans didn’t, and so now the world owed the Jews a living for not stopping the „Holocaust.“
It really wouldn’t help their „Holocaust“ propaganda at all to have the American public learn about what had happened in East Prussia or in the Baltic Sea – or to learn that our „gallant Soviet ally“ had deliberately murdered the leadership stratum of the Polish nation in the Katyn woods, and that some of the murderers involved in that horrendous act were Jews. And so there has been a conspiracy of silence in America on the part of the Jewish media bosses. That’s why Hollywood was willing to spend $200 million producing the film Titanic but would never consider any film dealing with the sinking of the Wilhelm Gustloff. It’s not that such a film couldn’t make money – I think that a film about East Prussia and the Wilhelm Gustloff could be a real blockbuster – it’s that there must be no sympathy for the Germans. There must be no rethinking of America’s reasons for waging war against Germany, no questioning of whether or not we did the right thing in allying ourselves with Communism on behalf of the Jews. And beside these considerations, the truth simply doesn’t count – at least, not to the Jews who control our mass media.
This bit of history – America’s motivations for engaging in the war in Europe, which really was something altogether separate from the war in the Pacific, despite the alliance between Germany and Japan – this bit of history always has fascinated me. And one of the interesting aspects about it is the unwillingness of so many Americans to examine it. I understand the sentiments of the Clintonista elements. To the kind of people who voted for Clinton, the Soviets were the good guys and the Germans were the bad guys on ideological grounds. Gang-rape, mass murder, and the sinking of refugee ships are not really crimes in the eyes of the Bill-and-Hillary types when they’re done by Communists against „Nazis.“
But there also were a lot of decent Americans who fought in the war in Europe, anti-Communist Americans, and many of them don’t want to think about the fact that they fought on the wrong side. These American Legion and VFW types don’t want to hear about who really killed all of those Polish intellectuals and leaders in the Katyn woods. They don’t want to know what happened in East Prussia in 1945. They hate it when I ask them, why did we fight Germany in the name of freedom and then turn half of Europe over to Communist slavery at the end of the war? They become angry when I suggest that perhaps Franklin Roosevelt was the same sort of lying, Jew-collaborating traitor that Bill Clinton is, and that in return for media support he lied us into the war on behalf of the Jews, just the way Clinton is lying us into a war in the Middle East on behalf of the Jews.
I was far too young for military service in the Second World War, but I am sure that if I had fought in that war, I’d be even more interested in understanding what was behind it. I believe that knowing the truth about these things is far more important than protecting our carefully nurtured belief that we were on the side of righteousness. I believe that understanding how we were deceived in the past is necessary, if we are to avoid being deceived in the future.
By James Ennes
James M. Ennes was serving as a US Navy lieutenant on board the USS Liberty when it was attacked by Israeli forces on June 8, 1967. He is the author of Assault on the Liberty, a detailed account of the attack published in 1980 by Random House. Born in 1933 and now retired, he served with the US Navy during most of his adult life.
This interview, published in the Iranian newspaper Jam-e-Jam, July 27, 2002, was conducted by Ali Jafar. The text is posted on-line at:
Question: When did you join the USS Liberty and what position did you serve on June 8, 1967?
Answer: I joined the ship in April 1967. I was a lieutenant and was assigned to be the ship’s Electronic Materiel Officer, responsible for the maintenance and repair of all of the ship’s electronic equipment. I also stood watches on the bridge as Officer of the Deck.
Q: There have been many cases of “friendly fire” and misidentification in wartime. Unlike other cases, the attack on the USS Liberty has lingered for 35 years and still remains unresolved. Israelis claim that the attack on the Liberty was also a case of mistaken identity, and that they misidentified the Liberty for an Egyptian horse carrier, El Quseir. One of the reasons that they present for their argument is that the attacking jets circled the ship three times looking for a flag, but no flag was flown. Do you agree with that statement?
A: “Friendly fire” is a brief, accidental attack. This was a prolonged, carefully coordinated attack. It has been called the most carefully planned “accident” in the history of warfare. The Israeli account of the attack is untrue. We flew a flag at all times, and it stood out clearly displayed in a good breeze. Israeli jets circled us 13 times during the several hours before the attack, and during that period we heard their pilots informing their headquarters by radio that we were American. When the attack started, the attacking jets passed high overhead once, then turned 180 degrees and came down the centerline firing without any attempt to identify us. Long after the attack I was contacted by an Israeli pilot who told me that on his first flight over the ship he saw our American flag and informed his headquarters that we were American, but was told to ignore the flag and attack anyway. He refused to do so and returned to base where he was arrested. I was told by an Israeli in the war room that they knew we were American. I have been told by several American intelligence analysts who read, or in some cases heard, the messages between the pilots and their headquarters that these messages make it very clear that the pilots and their headquarters knew we were American.
Q: You have written a book titled Assault on the Liberty. What are some of the most convincing reasons or evidences you presented in that book to prove that the Israelis knowingly attacked the Liberty?
A: Among other things, the extensive reconnaissance, the fact that the attack continued for 75 minutes, and the fact that they compiled a totally false account of what happened. After the torpedo explosion the torpedo boats examined our name in English on the stern and our American flag on the mast from less than 50 feet away, and continued to fire from close range for another 40 minutes. As US Secretary of State Dean Rusk said later, an accident may occur for a few minutes, but there is no way our very distinctive-looking ship could have been fired upon for 75 minutes from close range without it being recognized as American.
In the hours after the attack a “consensus report” was written reflecting the view of all American intelligence agencies that the attack was deliberate. This report was circulated, but was withdrawn and cancelled and all copies destroyed because it was too embarrassing politically to be allowed to stand.
Q: Being small in size and population, Israelis have always relied on spying to get intelligence information. They have spied on many Arab and non-Arab countries including the US. In October 1954 quite a few of the Israeli spies were arrested and two of them were executed in Egypt. Elias Cohen was the Israeli spy who was caught in 1965, and later executed in Syria, and I am sure you know about Jonathan Pollard, the Israeli spy whose spying activities cost the lives of America’s most loyal and best agents in the Communist world. Generally speaking, how could the Israelis not have known that El Quesir was not even there?
A: They could not have made such a mistake. Israeli naval officers have told me they are embarrassed by the claim that they could been so incompetent as to make such a mistake.
Q: It has been reported that after the Liberty radioed for help, two aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean responded by launching fighter aircraft, but they were recalled before reaching their destination to help the Liberty. Can you tell us who gave the orders, and why they were recalled?
A: Secretary Robert McNamara ordered the recall of rescue aircraft. He has refused to discuss the matter. The recall order was confirmed by President Lyndon Johnson. President Johnson later said that he would not risk shooting down Israeli aircraft, even if Americans died as a result.
Q: Quite often the American government is referred to as a “government of the people, for the people, by the people.” In 1967 your responsible officials, by recalling the launched aircraft, left you practically unprotected, and since then, your government not only blocked every effort to launch an investigation, but in fact did everything it could, to cover it up for 35 years. Is there any doubt in your mind that the very government, that you put your life on the line to protect, betrayed you and your shipmates?
A: Someone in our government certainly failed to protect us after promising that we would be protected.
Q: There are certain motives behind any crime that is committed. If indeed, as you believe, the Israeli attack on the Liberty was premeditated, what was their motive for attacking the Liberty?
A: The USS Liberty was an intelligence ship. Clearly someone in Israel feared that we would learn something that Israel did not want the US to know. Some American intelligence experts have said that they believe this was the pending invasion of Syria to capture the Golan Heights.
Q: In recent years an impressive number of American officials, including Admiral Thomas Moorer, who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) at the time of the Liberty incident, have gone on record insisting that the Israeli action was, in fact, deliberate. Are you optimistic that after 35 years of cover up, the truth may finally come out?
A: No. I fear that Israel has so many friends in the Congress and the White House that no effective investigation is ever likely to be conducted. But we can continue to report the facts so that the world may learn the truth. In 1956 President Eisenhower forced the Israelis to cease their advance toward Suez. This was still a bitter memory in Israel in 1967. The Israelis did not want to risk having to withdraw from the Golan Heights as they had from Suez, so they disabled the USS Liberty in the hope that the US could be kept in the dark until the Heights were in Israeli hands.
This week a Navy Times survey of its readers showed that about 90 percent support a call for a new investigation of the attack. Yet few members of Congress are likely to support an inquiry, as it would certainly prove embarrassing to Israel.
Q: Generally speaking, in an incident like the Liberty attack, one would feel that the most valuable, viable and valid sources of information would be people such as yourself, who were present on the battlefield on June 8, 1967. A. Jay Cristol, a pro-Israeli federal judge and one of the most outspoken critics of the Liberty story, is the author of a book titled The Liberty Incident. He supposedly has done extensive research, and has interviewed many of the survivors. It has been reported that you refused to cooperate with him. Was there any particular reason that caused you not to cooperate?
A: After a brief telephone conversation, I did not trust him to treat the subject fairly or objectively. His dissertation and his later book proved that judgment to be valid, in that he has distorted many of the facts.
For instance, his book makes much of what he claims is the visual acuity of fighter pilots, yet experienced pilots tell me that pilots can see much more than Cristol claims, and could easily have seen our flag. Cristol discounts as untrue the unanimous eyewitness reports of American survivors, but accepts as true virtually every false claim by the Israelis. He relies upon the Court of Inquiry, which is itself false and has been discredited by its own legal counsel. He claims Liberty’s radio intercept range was only 25 miles, which is dead wrong. He claims the Liberty had no radio telephone contact with Washington, which is untrue. He claims only a few survivors regard the attack as deliberate, yet the truth is that survivors are unanimous in calling the attack deliberate. He claims our radios were not jammed, when even the corrupt Court of Inquiry says they were. He claims he came to Seattle to interview me, and that I broke a promise to see him, which is untrue. In fact, he had asked only to talk to me by telephone during a layover in Seattle, and I chose not to take the call because I realized that his intent was to try to discredit us, not to report our story objectively.
In fact, Cristol claims to have made numerous trips to Israel and to have interviewed over 200 people for his book, but his research is very unbalanced, drawing primarily from Israeli sources while ignoring or discounting most eyewitness reports. He has interviewed few survivors, and those only very briefly. He brands Liberty’s senior intercept officer a liar, yet made no attempt to interview him. His research appears to be aimed entirely at attempting to discredit survivors, not to investigate the attack objectively. He claims to be the world’s foremost expert on the attack, but I have never heard from a survivor who believes he can be taken seriously.
Q: Upon returning to the US, the Liberty crew members were ordered and in fact threatened to be silent. Who gave the order and why?
A: Survivors were visited in hospitals all over the US by many different officers and warned to be quiet. Aboard the ship, Admiral Kidd called men together in groups and warned them never to talk about the attack with anyone, not even their wives and mothers, or risk being sent to prison.
Q: In November of 1979 the Iranian students in protest to the US government policy of letting the former Shah of Iran in the US for medical treatment, stormed the US embassy in Tehran and held 52 American hostage for 444 days. ABC news almost immediately launched a new [television] program by the name of “Nightline,” with correspondent Ted Koppel reporting on the condition of the hostages as well as the developments of the story itself, night by night. The title of the nightly report was: “The Iran Crisis: America Held Hostage.” As I am sure you know, the hostages finally came home safe and sound, and were given a hero’s welcome, and “Nightline” has continued its special reports on important events, including many interviews with former hostages. By comparison, the brutal and tragic Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, in which 34 innocent young Americans were killed and 171 others were badly wounded, is something that most Americans, who are well-informed about President Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky, may not even be aware that it ever took place. You know, Mr. Ennes, one wonders why there wasn’t a similar program like “Nightline” launched for the Liberty and her survivors? What would have been wrong if ABC news had a nightly report with a title such as “The Middle East Crisis: Israeli Attack on the USS Liberty”? It seems as if the mainstream mass media had a tacit agreement with the US government to keep the public in the dark about the Liberty and the plight of its survivors. Don’t you feel that they have acted very selectively, and in fact unfairly, in regards to the Liberty incident?
A: There is much opposition in this country to this story being told. Ted Koppel is an interesting case. In 1982 Ted Koppel invited several survivors to his studios in Washington, DC, where we filmed a full report on the attack. It was edited and scheduled for broadcast, and then on the very day it was to be broadcast Israel invaded Lebanon, and that bigger story replaced the Liberty story. Later, when broadcasters planned to present the Liberty show, the films had mysteriously vanished from the file room, never to be found.
Q: Jean-Paul Sartre, the famous French philosopher, has said, and I quote, “Man is a product of time and place.” By reading chapter six of your book, one can see that on June 8, 1967, you experienced perhaps the worst day of your life. The political officials who were supposed to help you, betrayed you. The president and military officials who were supposed to rescue you and your shipmates, recalled the aircraft and left you unprotected against the attacking Israeli jets. The mass media, which was supposed to give extensive coverage to the Liberty and the plight of its survivors, has acted with deafening silence, and finally, taking your experience with A. Jay Cristol into consideration, one could say that the pen that should have elicited the facts and told the truth, has distorted it. Can you please tell us how the Liberty incident has affected your life?
A: I published the first edition of this book in 1980, expecting to go on to other things. To my surprise, the story lives on. Twenty-two years later I continue to get daily mail and phone calls. I have created the web site at http://www.ussliberty.org to help answer the many questions that still arise.
Q: Is there anything else that you would like to say regarding the Liberty or in general.
A: My shipmates and I have tried for 35 years to tell the truth about the attack to the American public and to the world. We appreciate the opportunity you have given us to tell the story to the Iranian people. We wish you peace.
Candor About War Against Iraq
“Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.”
-General Wesley Clark, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander. Interview in The Guardian (Britain), August 20, 2002.
War: Enemy of Freedom
“Of all the enemies to liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The Constitution expressly and exclusively vests in the Legislature the power of declaring a state of war [and] the power of raising armies… A delegation of such powers [to the president] would have struck, not only at the fabric of our Constitution, but at the foundation of all well organized and well checked governments. The separation of the power of declaring war from that of conducting it, is wisely contrived to exclude the danger of its being declared for the sake of its being conducted.”
-James Madison, Political Observations, 1795
On America’s Foreign Policy
“Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her [Americas] heart, her benedictions, and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. But she is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banner of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom.”
-John Quincy Adams, 1821
Lincoln On the President’s Power to Make War
“Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose, and you allow him to make war at his pleasure.
“… Study to see if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect… If, today, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, ‘I see no probability of the British invading us,’ but he will say to you, ‘Be silent; I see it, if you don’t?'”
-Abraham Lincoln, The Writings of Abraham Lincoln (ed., A. Lapsley), vol. 2, pp. 51-52.
“For those who have Awareness,
a hint is quite enough.
For the multitudes of heedless,
mere knowledge is useless.”
– Haji Bekdash, circa 1200 AD
“You can muffle the drum, and you can loosen the strings of the lyre, but who shall command the skylark not to sing?”
– Khalil Gibran
Denial. BBC Films. 109 minutes.
By Michael Hoffman
This reviewer was expecting that it would be a tedious ordeal to sit through Denial, Hollywood’s attempted canonization of the obnoxious thought cop Deborah Lipstadt, which was supposed to also serve as the final confirmation of the libel trial in London in 2000 that saw historian David Irving’s reputation supposedly shredded (cf. Revisionist History no. 86).
Actually, the imps of contrariness have seen to it that Denial rehabilitates Irving. While the film’s production values are high and the cast is A-list, the director, Mick Jackson, is no Steven Spielberg and his movie backfires. Denial gives new impetus to World War II revisionism, which heretofore was assumed by many to consist of a coterie of drooling crackpots. Even in a movie that detests Irving, he nonetheless comes off as a formidable advocate.
There are two challenging questions for any Hollywood director seeking to lens Prof. Lipstadt’s courtroom battle and maintain minimal credibility at the same time: why she never took the stand, and why no “Holocaust survivor” was brought to testify by her defense team. According to Denial, Lipstadt (played by Rachel Weisz), was forbidden to testify by her lawyers, who wanted to keep the focus on putting Irving (Timothy Spall) on the defensive, and not her. It makes sense, but whether it is true or not we can’t determine. After all, Lipstadt refused to speak to the news media during the long trial (a fact the movie omits). The latter refusal would seem to indicate a fear of exposure of her ignorance of World War II history. Meanwhile, Mr. Irving was extensively cross-examined in court and spoke volubly to the press on nearly every occasion.
The second daunting question turns on an even more-perilous and potentially highly damaging issue: why were there no “Holocaust survivors” on the witness stand? Here David Hare, the film’s scriptwriter, really goofs and apparently no one on the production team caught his blunder, though many in the audience will spot it. In the movie, Lipstadt is outraged that her lawyers will not call on “survivors” to testify. The head of her defense team, Anthony Julius, has a response. (Julius is rendered as an expressionless, one-dimensional, and in many respects unsympathetic character, played deadpan by actor Andrew Scott, known for roles as the villainous Moriarity in the BBC Sherlock TV series, and the traitorous head of the British Secret Service in the 007 film, Spectre). We first meet Julius while he is holding a copy of the book he authored which, we see from the cover, traduces the reputation of the esteemed Christian poet T.S. Eliot. Julius informs Prof. Lipstadt that he will not call the “survivors” because he wants to spare them the disrespect which Irving (who acted as his own attorney), would demonstrate toward them in cross-examination.
It’s a weak alibi. The honchos of Holocaustianity are painfully aware that putative “homicidal Auschwitz gas-chamber eyewitnesses” were eviscerated under cross-examination by lawyer Doug Christie during the 1985 trial in Canada of Ernst Zündel, for spreading “false news.” This was the actual reason there was no appearance by them at Lipstadt’s trial. At this point in the film, as I sat in the theater I jotted in my review notes, “Movie omits to mention Zündel trial’s discrediting cross-examinations of Judaic witnesses.”
Later in the movie however, Lipstadt demands once again that “Holocaust survivors” testify, and this time a more-candid Julius, albeit in rapid-fire dialogue, tells her that he can’t call on them because, “The survivors were torn apart at the Zündel trial.”
Exactly correct! When so-called “eyewitness Holocaust survivors” were cross-examined in the Zündel case, as detailed in this writer’s The Great Holocaust Trial, not one departed the witness stand with his credibility intact—and it is Hollywood’s Denial movie that reminds the world of this shocking and embarrassing fact, which shatters the main pillar upon which Auschwitz execution-gas-chamber mythology depends: the “undeniable” testimony of “eyewitnesses.” (The statement about the Zündel trial is made in a stream of verbiage from the Anthony Julius character. It is not said slowly or with emphasis. One has to be alert to catch it in the film).
The movie is haunted by the specter of Zündel, whose two trials (1985 and 1988) are landmarks in revisionism. The film’s opening scene has Prof. Lipstadt in a classroom writing on a chalkboard the four main points of “Holocaust denial.” The last two are borrowed from Prof. Robert Faurisson, the Zündel defense team’s research head, as he stated them in an explosive essay in 1978 in France’s leading newspaper, Le Monde. Lipstadt’s point four is straight from Faurisson and rings true: The gas-chamber myth was concocted to “extort money from the Germans and gain sympathy for the state of Israel.” Bingo!
In another of Lipstadt’s classroom points she asserts that any allegation that Judaic casualty figures are exaggerated constitutes “denial.” But unknown to the movie audience, she is herself on record saying that the high casualty figure for German victims of the Allied firebombing of the city of Dresden is exaggerated. The Talmudic double standard makes it perfectly respectable for her to lay a charge of exaggeration against the history of the Dresden bombing. Ordinary mortals do so with regard to Auschwitz at the risk of forfeiting their employment and reputation.
Early in the movie the viewer is taken on an actual tour of Auschwitz-Birkenau in Poland, where Lipstadt and her defense team stumble around among the sacred relics. She admonishes her barrister Richard Rampton (Tom Wilkinson) over his insufficient awe and reverence (he makes tearful amends later). The familiar propaganda about the camp is retailed, until the movie gets to a nearly intact old building. Before entering, it is unambiguously stated that to defeat the deniers’ position on Auschwitz homicidal gassings, one must defeat the Leuchter Report. By now I was wondering if my hearing was faulty, so welcome was this acknowledgement of that momentous study, which is usually demonized by media hacks and academics as a worthless trifle.
The Leuchter Report was commissioned by Zündel in the course of his 1988 trial. It reported a forensic, chemical analysis of physical material taken from the walls of buildings in Auschwitz. Revised by former Max Planck Institute chemist and historian Germar Rudolf, the Leuchter Report remains one of the most-devastating exposes of the hoax ever published, and here in a Hollywood movie its formidable potency is acknowledged—and never satisfactorily refuted in the course of the film! Although he is not mentioned, when the movie arrives at the courtroom proceedings themselves, the first day concludes with Dr. Faurisson’s signature aphorism concerning, “No Holes—No Holocaust.”
On another day of the trial, Rampton holds aloft two different editions of Irving’s classic history, Hitler’s War, and points out that the 1977 first edition upholds the genocide of Judaics, while the reissued and revised 1991 edition does not. True, but the movie omits what made the difference. Between 1977 and 1991 the two Zündel trials took place with the demolition of “survivor” testimony in the first, and the Leuchter Report issued at the second, which impressed Irving so much that he revised his Hitler book to reflect the Leuchter revelations which Zündel had made possible.
On occasions after Irving has spoken in court, the camera turns to Lipstadt’s character, showing her in paroxysms of frustration and agony. Conversely, when her own lawyer scores a legal or historical point she casts a venomous glance at Irving, suffused with undisguised hatred. The filmmakers have done her image no favors with this less-than-noble—but quite possibly accurate—depiction of her person and reactions.
Another fatal error in the movie’s goal of vindicating Lipstadt is that it fails to dispel the David vs. Goliath impression of a stacked legal battle. Irving is shown as a lone warrior up against a legal team that fills a room with solicitors, researchers, historians, archivists and the barrister. The audience watching the mustering of this throng must feel that they’ve been cheated: after having it shoved down their throats for decades that doubting homicidal gas chambers is the easiest thing in the world to discredit, it takes a host of lawyers, clerks and historians years of research and more than a month in court to refute one Doubting Thomas?
The unintended consequences become more obvious near the end of the movie, when, in a news conference, Lipstadt makes an analogy between revisionist historians and those who doubt that Elvis Presley is dead. Among the theater audience with whom I saw the film, her parallel went nowhere. It is too palpably jejune to gain traction in the face of the battle the viewer has just observed her multi-million-dollar team having undertaken, with several close shaves for them in the courtroom, and the verdict far from a foregone conclusion.
Denial is pompously self-righteous and foolishly bereft of the tedium-relieving humorous moments which clever directors use to leaven even the most serious cinema. Lipstadt is at first presented melodramatically as Destiny’s Heroine of the Jewish People From The Beginning of Time. After that gas bag is floated, the movie attempts to deflate it slightly with a few attempts at levity, which are aimed at showing her to be a good sport in spite of her carved-in-marble stature; but these fail. She comes off not as one of the guys but as a yenta with a foul mouth: “What the f**k just happened?” she demands to know when the judge states that anti-Semitism can be an honest belief; not necessarily a result of a desire to deceive. Meanwhile, in devastating contrast, Irving is depicted as always in form as an English gentleman, even if at times sarcastic and wounding.
Vile execration of Irving is on ample display: “Irving’s words are like s**t on your shoes,” says Anthony Julius. In a meeting in her hotel room between Lipstadt and her barrister Rampton, it is made clear that Irving is to be hated, “Look the devil in the eye and tell him what you feel,” Rampton advises. God help anyone who would dare to advise us to look upon Deborah Lipstadt as a devil.
The foul-mouthed banter and palpable hate are supposed to, on one hand endear us to the humanity of Lipstadt and her team, and on the other, to make sure we get the message that a doubter like Irving is to be hated, given the sacred subject which he has dared to question. But Timothy Spall, who plays Irving, despite the phony Etonian accent he adopts and perpetually high-pitched, straining voice (which little resembles Irving in real life), comes across as somewhat sympathetic. After the verdict is read we see Irving gallantly approach the barrister Rampton, congratulating him and offering to shake hands. Irving is rebuffed. There is a fundamental decency that permeates his underdog status and it is part of his appeal in Denial.
Lipstadt thinks it’s outrageous that Irving believes there are actually two points of view on World War II history. There is only one point of view, she hectors. But don’t the best parents and teachers convey to their youthful charges the truism that there at least two sides to every issue? Yet in Lipstadt’s inquisitorial, claustrophobic “Holocaust” world, there can only be one.
Yet another unintentionally exculpatory factor for Mr. Irving is the realization that a regiment of Lipstadt’s researchers pored over every extant speech he ever gave, and the several million words he wrote, in search of an error (about dozen or so were found). If any one of us had every word we wrote or spoke through most of our lives examined, there would be plenty of grist for any detractor’s mill. Only two Irving errors are submitted: a questionable interpretation of a morgue at Auschwitz, and misattributed words in a note by Heinrich Himmler; these are not exactly earth-shaking derogations of his historiography.
Meanwhile, the original grounds for Irving’s libel suit against Lipstadt and her publisher, Penguin Books—that they lied about his having stolen from the Moscow archives in Russia, and by claiming that he was associated with Hamas and other Arab terror organizations—are indeed found to be lies, just as David said. He was indeed libeled by Penguin and Lipstadt. Few who watch Denial will know that fact, or know of the intimidation tactic aimed at presiding Justice Charles Gray (Alex Jennings), when the Israeli ambassador with a full retinue of gun-toting guards, seated himself prominently in the courtroom during the trial. The message conveyed could not have been lost on the judge, nor the audience: a sovereign state, armed to the teeth, had a vested interest in an outcome of the trial favorable to their heroine, Dvora. (Lipstadt refers to herself by that Hebrew variant of her name when recalling her mother’s prophecy about her).
Other revelations from the makers of this movie:
If you’re already a true believer, the film may further cement your belief, but for thinking individuals who are paying attention, Denial alerts curious minds to the existence of a substantial body of dissent, going so far as to feature Mr. Irving’s website on-camera, as well as the covers of his books. Viewers of the film who follow up with an Internet search for the Leuchter Report or the “Zündel trial” (few though these may be) are going to encounter a world of revisionist discovery and intellectual challenge.
As we often remind our readers, our enemies are not invincible, any more than they are infallible. Their victory is not inevitable. They make big mistakes and Denial is one of them: a 109-minute commercial of sorts for a valiant writer whose reputation is still very much intact.
We seldom have the occasion to write the following words, but it is delightful to do so now: Thank you, Hollywood!
This article originally appeared in Revisionist History No. 87, November 2016.
Copyright© 2016 Michael Hoffman
Joshua Hammerman, a rabbi writing for the Times of Israel suggests a Joscars category for film awards. “The criteria for a Jos-car nomination is simple: the Jewish aspect of a film can include Jewish subject matter, Jewish values, or Jewish participation.” Then he admits its not really necessary because “With these criteria, you can find something “Jewish” in almost every film.” So does this mean the Jews control Hollywood?
Every film? Jewish? This brings to mind the classic anti-Semitic claim that “the Jews own Hollywood.” Of course that is ridiculous, but not for the reason you might think. If the claim is that Jews are significantly represented at all levels in the production and dissemination of culture, which includes movies, books, music, drama, journalism, dance, the visual arts and the humanities, my response is “guilty as charged.”
He mocks those involved in less important roles in the film industry.
Incidentally, have you noticed just how many gaffers, grips and best boys are Jewish? Neither have I.
The implication here is that “best boy” might as well be called “best goy”. We get the goy to do all the menial jobs, while we Jews do everything important, haha!
Those who subscribe to grand Jewish conspiracy theories are typically those who have the least familiarity with real live Jews. The ADL’s Global survey of 100 nations discovered that people living in countries with larger Jewish populations are less likely to hold anti-Semitic views than people living in countries with smaller Jewish populations. The same is true of places in America. It’s true with other groups too: familiarity reduces bigotry. In this case, absence makes the heart grow hateful.
Or to put it another way, people in countries without large Jewish populations are most likely to hold anti-Semitic views because Jews have not established a dominating influence in their culture, politics or media and used that influence to pump out philosemitic propaganda and marginalise anyone who challenges their agenda by pointing out the truth. They are able to accurately perceive the facts, free of Semitic filtering.
The rabbi then boasts of how Jewish domination of the instruments of cultural production prevents European patriots achieving their goal of preserving the existence of European peoples.
But I will say this — proudly. The influence of Jewish values, those principles Jews have long held sacred, has been most profound on the American cultural scene.
…These values, which are neither exclusively left nor right, but Jewish through and through, include humility, love and freedom and dignity. They clash markedly against the “values” of the “traditional” anti-Semite, who, as defined by the US Holocaust Memorial Museum, tends to be xenophobic, anti-intellectual, populist, racist, brutish and, if unchecked, ultimately genocidal.
And here’s the rub — the part that drives anti-Semites absolutely bananas. The influence of popular culture, in the US and throughout most of the world, continues to be far, far more pervasive than that of any government or branch of government. When Chief Justice Roberts (who is decidedly not an anti-Semite) wrote about the “undeniable appeal” of arguments of social fairness and equality in the 2015 same-sex marriage case, he was speaking of the undeniable influence of TV programs like “American Family” and current films like “Loving,” whose influence on the culture continue to be profound.
So when anti-Semites say “The Jews control Hollywood,” or “The Jews control the media,” they are really cursing the fact that their agenda can never achieve the ultimate triumph they seek until the instruments of culture are co-opted. And, yes, I can proudly say that Jews are continuing to hold up our end of the bargain, not by owning Hollywood, or by propagating any particular agenda, but by driving haters crazy.
Another story in the Times of Israel tells of how Jewish Hollywood mogul, Arnon Milchan (12 Years a Slave), has been involved in supplying Netanyahu with cigars and Israel with weapons. And some other Hollywood Jews have also apparently been involved in helping Israel over the years.
Peres, who was president at the time, said he recruited Milchan. “Arnon is a special man. It was I who recruited him … when I was at the Ministry of Defense. Arnon was involved in numerous defense-related procurement activities and intelligence operations,” said Peres.
Milchan also said he tried to get other Hollywood figures involved in his clandestine work, notably the late director Sydney Pollack. Pollack was allegedly involved in buying arms and military equipment for Israel during the 1970s and, according to Milchan, knew just what he was getting into. “Pollack knew, but I didn’t want to scare him because he’s American… He could have said ‘no,” Milchan said. “He said ‘no’ many times, but he also said ‘yes’ many times.”
He used Hollywood pull to lure a “US nuclear scientist” to a private meeting. What tribe was this scientist a member of? We can only speculate.
Milchan, who is part-owner of Israel’s Channel 10 television company, also admitted trying to use an unnamed big star to entice a US nuclear scientist to a private meeting in the actor’s house, although the interview didn’t clarify if the rendezvous ever took place. A number of actors feature in the Channel 2 documentary, including Russell Crowe, Ben Affleck and Robert De Niro, who is a personal friend of Milchan’s. De Niro told Dayan that he had heard things about Milchan; however nothing that was ever confirmed. “I wasn’t sure,” he said.
What was the purpose of this meeting with a scientist? No doubt obtaining classified information that would be of benefit to Israel.
Two years ago, authors Meir Doron and Joseph Gelman published a book titled “Confidential: The Life of Secret Agent Turned Hollywood Tycoon Arnon Milchan,” in which they asserted that Milchan was acting for Israel’s now defunct Bureau of Scientific Relations, known as Lekem. The clandestine bureau focused on obtaining information for secret defense programs that reputedly included Israel’s rumored nuclear weapons research and development program. The bureau was disbanded in 1987 after US Navy specialist Jonathan Pollard was caught spying for Israel.
So Milchan was involved with an Israeli agency that inveigled American Jews into committing treason against their “own country”. This is the same guy who produced 12 Years a Slave, a film that pushes the Blame Whitey slave narrative which stigmatizes Europeans and incites African-Americans to hate European-Americans.
By Mike Walsh
The holocaust mantra that falsely claims six million lives is drummed into our heads since early childhood. It then comes as a shock to learn that the fuhrer’s accusers between them take full responsibility for multiple acts of genocide that claimed no less than 164 million lives.
According to R. J. Rummel, Power Kills: Genocide and Mass Murder (Journal of Peace Research): Murder by government claimed the lives of 170 million people during the last 100 years.
If Hitler’s Germany is supposed to have accounted for six million of these unfortunate victims who takes responsibility for the 164 million victims whose plight is airbrushed off the West’s news pages and television screens? Eerily, we learn that the culprits responsible for 18 times the ‘Death by Government’ murders attributed to the Reich are Hitler’s accusers.
Name and shame; who was primarily responsible for the genocide of 164 million non-Jewish victims of genocide; racial and ethnic extermination? Why the endless clamour over six million alleged Jews but a deafening silence falls when one asks, ‘what about the other 164 million’?
Taking their places on the Dais of Death is the dwarfish ex-bank robber Bolshevik Russia’s Joe Stalin and America’s Franklin D. Roosevelt; beside them stands the toad-like half-American dilettante and notorious sexual deviant Winston Churchill. The fourth of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse riders is China’s Mao tse Tung.
Shockingly, MEGACAUST by Michael Walsh convincingly argues that most of the 164 million ‘death by government’ victims could have been prevented by a mainstream media that chose instead to collaborate with history’s greatest mass murderers.
The legendary Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse are Death, Famine, War and Conquest. If one wants to bring into stark relief the images of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse one needs look no further than Josef Stalin, Winston Churchill, Franklin D. Roosevelt and China’s Mao tse Tung).
In 1917 ~ before the Russian Tragedy, the population of Imperial Russia stood at 182 million. The 1990 census revealed that Russia’s population had dramatically decreased to 143 million over the 73 intervening years in which Bolshevism ravaged Imperial Russia. Over the same time period Britain’s population increased by 25 per cent despite suffering the haemorrhage of World War Two and unprecedented migration.
Had Russia’s population been allowed to keep pace by 1990 one would have expected Russia’s population to stand today at 230 million. In 1939 Germany’s population stood at 80 million but by 1950 was just 68 million. Interestingly, according to the Jewish World Almanac the only population that remained the same before and after World War Two and throughout the Russian Tragedy was the Jewish population of 13 million. How do we explain this?
All is revealed by Michael Walsh in his just published MEGACAUST. Available only from Amazon and Kindle this game-changing exposé is likely to tear apart the arguments of those who claim that Hitler’s Germany was responsible for the deaths of six million Jews. MEGACAUST is the ultimate and final riposte to the myth of the six million.
By: Dr. Edward R. Fields
Jew Civil Rights Bill Author — Jacob Javits
Jews Behind Race-Mixing in America
The Answers Are Complex
Here Are the Facts
From Their Own Mouths — The Jews Reveal Their Plans
Jews Raise Money for Blacks
Lawyers for Militants Are Jews
Jews Urge White Christians to Marry Blacks but Urge Own Kind to Marry Jews Only
Different Story for Jews
Don’t Date Non-Jews
Why the Jews Seek the Mongrelization of the White Christian People
Self-Hate Instilled Within Whites
Charge Whites Guilty of Negroes’ Crimes
New Jersey’s Little Riot Commission
Communist Party Fought for Race Mixing
Millionaire Jews Back the Black Revolution
NAACP — A Jewish Organization
Jew Civil Rights Bill Author — Emanuel Celler
Sen. Jacob Javits (above) at a dinner given by the Joint Defense Appeal, a Jewish Fund raising organization, at the Hotel Plaza, in N.Y. on Oct. 24, 1957, called on President Eisenhower to name immediately the members of the CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION called for under the new Civil Rights Law.
At the time Javits was running for the U.S. Senate, there was much ado about his Red-front associations.
Cong. Emanuel Celler and Sen. Jacob Javits, both Zionists, were the authors of the infamous;
Civil Rights Bill.
JEWS BEHIND RACE-MIXING IN AMERICA
The purpose of this article is to prove, through documented evidence that Jews in America are the prime movers and guiding force behind the massive attempt to mongrelize the White Christian people with the Black Race.
Of course everyone realizes that there are many gullible and brainwashed Gentiles working toward this same end.
But the movement to mix the races in America is most definitely sparked and financed by organized Jewry in every city of any size in America containing a formal Jewish community.
The first question which arises is why are the Jews so fanatical in their zeal to integrate the races and why do they intensely resist mixing of their own blood with either us White Christians, or the Blacks?
In order to understand Jewish thinking on this matter, one must first recognize that the Jews are a very unique people.
The Jews are bound to one another by three different means— which no other people in the world have in common.
Race is defined as a group of people who have inbred with their own kind for centuries and exhibit like features and characteristics. Thus the Jews of today are a tight-knit race, and highly conscious of the great gulf which separates them from White Christians.
Gentiles do not have even the basic rudiments of unity existing in Jewry. We are of many different churches, different nationalities and from divided language groups of Europe. Feuds, wars, jealousy and hatreds have always divided our White Folk.
This division has made it easy, for a skillful and highly organized Jewish minority to dominate us.
If anyone is in doubt about Jewish control over our daily lives, let them check on who owns all the stores on Main Street. Find out who controls the three T. V. Networks. (Sarnoff heads NBC, Paley (Palensky) heads CBS and David Goldenson heads ABC.)
Check who controls Hollywood, or which racial group controls many of the giant combines buying controlling interest in thousands of formerly Christian owned companies in America!
Within each Jewish Community in every city of any size in America the Jews operate numerous organizations. They are designed to guide and control the lives of every Jew. They are also constructed to give the Jews a tremendously powerful single voice in American politics. Almost every Christian politician lives in dread of offending his local Jewish community. He knows that if he does not tread softly, listen to their every demand, endorse aid to Israel and sale of Israeli Bonds, support United Jewish Appeal—the Jews will vote for the man against him, spend a fortune to elect his next opponent, and direct the local daily press in a hate campaign against him.
All the small Jewish clubs and social groups are united under the American Jewish Committee. All Jew businessmen belong to a secret society called “B’nai B’rith” and they have their own secret spy agency called the “Anti-Defamation League.” These are the groups that harass Right-Wing Patriots and seek to control elected politicians and the daily press. But, their most important mission of all, is to integrate the White Christian people to produce an indolent, Mulatto race for the future.
The following are especially selected quotes from the most important Jewish leaders in America concerning the integration of the races.
Aaron Goldman addressing the National Council of Jewish Women said:
“We Jews have played a significant part in securing laws for Negroes that guarantee equality. We have raised the expectations of American Negroes and must not allow them to become frustrated, angry, and desperate if their dreams fail to materialize. The Negro must enter the mainstream of American life.”
Mrs. Joseph Willen, president of the National Council of Jewish Women reported on April 9, 1968 that:
“Jewish parents must intensify their fight in behalf of the American Negro’s struggle for racial justice and economic opportunity.
Our children ask us to look forward, not backward. We cannot bind our young people to us by reciting past persecutions.
We must set an example far Jewish youth by intensifying efforts in behalf of increased employment for Negroes and to aid anti-poverty programs. This is the best way to combat White backlash.”
Sen. Jacob Javits addressing the National Commission of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League in 1967 said:
“The Negroes’ struggle for equal rights is of vital importance to American Jews, and is the most important struggle in the United States.
Jewish support of the Negroes’ aspirations for equality should be regarded as a badge of honor.”
Sen. Javits called for massive aid to Negroes and asked for the taxpayers to provide $35 billion over the next 10 years to raise the Black man up to the level of Whites. He also called for the adoption of a guaranteed annual wage at double the amount called for by President Nixon.
Philip M. Klutznick, Vice-President of the Anti-Defamation League at the same convention said:
“Jewish communities have set the pattern in the area of ‘social action’ in America. The outpouring of Federal funds for poverty programs during the next 25 years will give the Jewish community an opportunity to redistribute their resources and redirect their energies in the most meaningful religious, cultural and special educational activities for Jews that history has ever known. Major Jewish organizations must unite to set up long range survey communities to establish the goals and priorities of American Jewish communities over the next three decades.”
(IMPORTANT NOTE: Readers should re-read this last paragraph. Jews run the poverty aid and urban renewal programs in many cities. It is not an admission that this tax money is being used by Jews to build political power for Jews).
Saul M. Linowitz, former ambassador to the Organization of American States, told the Zionist woman’s order, Hadassah at its 53rd meeting at Miami Beach:
“The bedrock for civil rights is nothing less than economic rights, school integration and the right to vote.”
Rabbi Arthur J. Lelyveld, addressing last year’s American Jewish Congress meeting in Miami Beach said:
“All of us must be prepared to make any sacrifice necessary to achieve an effective program aimed at achieving economic justice for the negro. We must make the economic sacrifice of paying higher taxes to win the more important war on poverty at home.”
Former Justice Abe Fortas, (removed from the Supreme Court for taking bribes from the corrupt Jew financier, Louis Wolfson) told a dinner of the American Jewish Committee in July of 1968 in New York City:
“The battles of the non-Whites for equality in America are essentially the same as those of the Jew, and the Jews must help in his struggle.”
Albert Vorspan, addressing the National Federation of Temple Sisterhoods in Miami Beach on Oct. 28, 1969, said:
“We Jews should know something about the outer limits of frustration and rage of the Black Communities. We who have suffered better understand the anguish of the Black man today.”
Theodore Bikel, Jewish folk singer and star in the play, “Fiddler On The Roof” in a speech of July, 1969, in a Jewish temple in Honolulu said:
“A strong commitment to civil rights is implicit in Judaism.
We must speak out against discrimination.”
Rabbi Maurice N. Eisendrath, president of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, on Oct. 26, speaking in Miami Beach called for a five year moratorium on the space program and an immediate ceasefire in Vietnam. The rabbi said this would free billions of tax dollars which could be immediately funneled into the Black ghetto:
“Call it reparations or simple justice, but some form of restitution is owed to the Negro.
America must rush massive aid to the Negro the way aid has been rushed to the Jews of Israel.”
Jewish publications are filled with countless articles about Jews raising money for militant negro causes. The Emma Lazarus Federation in New York City raised thousands of dollars for Martin Luther King’s now infamous Selma, Alabama march. Each year Mrs. Edward M. Warburg, wife of the multi-millionaire international Jewish banker, raises millions for the United Negro College Fund.
The most sensational and publicized fund raising dinner was held by wealthy Leonard Bernstein in his plush Park Avenue apartment for the 21 Black Panthers on trial for bombings in New York City. It was a sight to behold, in Bernstein’s elegant duplex apartment, the Jewesses in evening gowns, welcoming Black Panthers wearing wild beards, bushy Afro-hair styles and blue jeans.
The wife of the famous director of the New York Philharmonic, Mrs. Bernstein said later to the press:
“This was not a frivolous party, but a chance for all of us to hear what’s happening to them. They’ve really been treated very inhumanely. The trial of the 21 New York Black Panthers has had me very upset.”
Here we have the rich affluent left-wing, whose children all go to exclusive private schools, consorting with the Black militant radicals who are out to destroy this nation. Mr. and Mrs. Leonard Bernstein personally made out a check for $12,000 to help the Black Panthers at the dinner.
Two other fund raising parties have been held in New York by millionaire Jews to raise money for the murderous Black Panthers. John Simon, a Jew editor at T.V. panelist Bennet Cerf’s Random House Publishers, gave a similar party, as did Jew film director Sidney Lumet.
In almost every case of radical militants who are caught burning, killing and bombing, we find Jewish lawyers ready to defend them. Eldridge Cleaver, who fled the U. S. to escape prison was represented by the Jew Charles Garry.
The New York 21 are defended by the Jews Gerald B. Lefcourt and Sanford Katz. Of course everyone knows that the “Chicago Seven” (4 were Jews) revolutionaries were defended by the Jew legal team of Leonard Weinglass and William Kunstler.
Jew lawyers are also pushing for integration of White suburbs. A Harvard trained lawyer named Roger N. Beilenson heads “Westchester Residential Opportunities, Inc.”
They purchase homes in fine White neighborhoods for $16,000 up to $50,000 and then re-sell them to Blacks. Beilenson was a former housing director for the Urban League.
Both the Rockefeller Foundation and (Jew) Aaron Norman Foundation have given tax free grants to further his work.
“The New York Times” of Sept. 19, 1966, really let the cat out of the bag when it admitted:
“The Jewish community has long been the financial backbone of the civil rights movement. … No special commission on race is needed to arouse Jewish support for civil rights activity in the South. … Jewish support for civil rights is still high.”
And, of course, we all know that Jack Greenberg is the head of the NAACP Legal Fund and is responsible for filing all of the suits which have resulted in so much suffering by innocent White children forced into mixed schools by this Jewish conspiracy.
Rabbi Abraham Feinberg of Canada has won the nickname, “The Red Rabbi” for his visits to North Vietnam and efforts on behalf of communist causes. In the Maclean’s Review magazine of Sept. 5, 1967 he states:
“Until we learn to fight our ingrown fears of sexual relations between the races, the end of the race problem will not be in sight. Only when we no longer raise our eyebrows at the sight of a Negro holding hands with a White girl will the West have begun to tear the racial poison from its vitals.
Such a change will involve an inside-out remodelling of the White psyche, for our fear of mixed marriages is deeply rooted. But the change must begin sometime. Why not now!
If anything, the law should encourage, not forbid, the intermingling of ‘bloods’. Marches and civil-rights demonstrations can dramatize the immediate imperative of justice. Religious teaching can now enunciate the challenge of brotherhood.
Fair-employment laws and other civil rights legislation can protect minorities from overt discrimination.”
Plan for the Future
“The great ideal of Judaism. … is that the whole world shall be imbued with Jewish teachings, and that in a Universal Brotherhood of Nations—a greater Judaism, in fact—all the separate races and religions shall disappear.”
— from the Jewish World, 9th Feb. 1883
“ONE WORLD, ONE RACE … the deliberate encouragement of interracial marriages is the only way to hasten this process. And it may be that time is growing short. The dominance of our world has begun to shift, like cargo in a listing vessel, from the White races to the colored.”
Thus Rabbi Feinberg urges our White Christian people to surrender the blood of our forefathers and commit racial suicide by helping mongrelize the White race through interracial marriage!
Here we find the great contradiction in Jewish teachings.
While preaching the most extreme forms of race-mixing at inter-religious meetings and on college campuses in the press, on T.V. and Hollywood, the Jews tell their own youth a completely different story in the confines of the Synagogue.
Dr. Immanuel Jakobovits, Chief Rabbi of England, said in the “New York Times”:
“Intensive Jewish education must cover youths between 13 and 18”.
He said that unless they are warned of the dangers of inter-marriages:
“The whole fabric of the Jewish structure will suffer irreparable harm and damage.”
Rabbi Pesach Z. Levovitz, president of the Rabbinical Council of America said in the “New York Times,” Jewish;
“religious leaders must exercise all of their influence to stop mixed marriages between Jews and non-Jews. Those who marry out of the faith disappear within the preponderant Christian religions and cultural community.”
England’s Chief Rabbi, Immanuel Jakobovits recently made a visit to New York, and in point blank terms declared:
“Jewish teenagers shouldn’t date non-Jews. … Interfaith marriage is something we view with horror, almost as apostasy. For Jews the problem of intermarriage is the problem of sheer survival. Countless Jewish martyrs did not die for their faith so that we might fritter away our heritage.”
We would like to ask the rabbi; What about White Christians whose countless ancestors fought and died so that our race might be preserved? Is not the blood line of our people worth saving in the light of the importance the Jews place on this question? The Jews are not called “bigots” and “race prejudiced” when they fight against inter-marriage for their own kind. Yet, these same leftist Jews attack and vilify every White Christian who dares stand up for racial purity for our folk.
A FAMOUS JEW who came to America from Moscow in 1928 to write the first Civil Rights platform for the U. S. Communist Party.
The most cleverly contrived scheme in the history of race relations is now being employed by the Jews to break down the resistance of the White race. It is an elaborate plan to make White people ashamed of the color of our skin. It is deliberately designed to give us an inferiority complex whereby we will feel compelled to bring about our own racial destruction to rectify the superior position we naturally hold over the Black race.
It is even more clearly spelled out in a book written back in 1912 by a Communist theoretician named Israel Cohen of London, England. It is titled, “A Racial Program For The Twentieth Century” and has been published in the Congressional Record of June 7, 1957, and even entered as a paid ad some years ago in the Atlanta newspapers by Gov. Lester Maddox (then a prominent restaurant owner). Israel Cohen wrote:
“We must realize that our Party’s most powerful weapon is racial tension. By pounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by the Whites, we can mold them to the program of the Communist Party. The terms colonialism and imperialism must be featured in our propaganda.
In America, we will aim for a subtle victory. While inflaming the negro minority against the Whites, we will endeavor to instill in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negroes.
We will aid the negroes to rise to prominence in every walk of life, in the professions and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the negroes will be able to intermarry with the Whites and begin a process which will deliver America to our cause.”
This is the most diabolical plan ever conceived, to instill “self-hate” within White people so that we will embrace the Black race in order to “up-lift” them to our level (an impossibility). The plan goes much further and is a master hoax fostered by Jews upon our people.
In March of 1968 Lyndon Johnson’s “Commission on Civil Disorder” issued their report on the bloody and destructive negro riots which swept many of our major cities that previous summer. The full time staff director of the Commission was the Jew David Ginsburg. With a $1 million dollar budget, and 200 employees Ginsburg spent 7 months ‘investigating’ the riots. The final report, which he personally drafted found:
“Of the filth, crime and slums in which the Negro lives, White institutions created it, White institutions maintain it, and White society condones it — White racism is essentially responsible for the explosive mixture which has been accumulating in our cities since the end of World War II.”
The crux of the million dollar report was that — WE WHITE PEOPLE ARE TO BLAME FOR THE NEGRO RIOTS!
Many Americans openly expressed their outrage at Ginsburg’s findings. But most people missed the real point in question, that this was a brazen attempt to instill an inferiority complex in masses of White Christian Americans in one grand sweep.
We are supposed to feel guilty for the oppression Blacks have experienced in the past. Now we should want to throw ourselves at the feet of the negroes and beg for their forgiveness. The Jews would like for our vast masses to adopt the attitude of the young White girl from San Francisco, whose story was reported in The Thunderbolt. She said she was looking for a negro man to marry, so that in her own individual way she could try to make up some of the oppression Negroes had suffered.
Of course the truth of the story is that the American negro has a far higher standard of living than negroes have in ANY of their own countries in Africa. We do not owe the Black man anything. In fact the negro has shown us the height of ingratitude to the fact that we lifted them out of jungle savagery, gave them sanitary homes for the first time, jobs, welfare, free medical care, poverty aid and free food.
But, David Ginsburg says that we have not done enough.
His Riot Commission Report advocates raising the negro to a real life of luxury by the following methods:
This is Ginsburg’s plan to chain the White worker to a lifetime of tax slavery to make the negro an elite class of citizens to whom we third class Whites owe a free living.
Also in 1968, former New Jersey Gov. Richard J. Hughes appointed a “blue ribbon” committee to investigate the bloody Newark riots. Once again a Jew named Sanford Jaffe, wound up as executive director of this commission. You guessed it, he also found that White people were guilty of the crimes of the blacks! Sounds unbelievable, even insane, yet when you control the news media, you can make the right seem wrong and change lies into truth.
The Jaffe Commission found the following:
“Widespread violence in the nation’s urban slums would have happened sooner had not the Negro been patient and forbearing.”
The 1928 Civil Rights Program of the U. S. Communist Party was written by Joseph Pogany. This was the first [party] in America to adopt a civil rights program and the major parties copied them after World War Two.
Pogany was a Jew, born in Moscow and sent to America in 1928 to help build the U. S. Communist Party. Using the alias Joseph Schwartz, he wrote the following program which the Reds adopted and distributed all over America.
OFFICIAL 1928 COMMUNIST PARTY PROGRAM
Every single one of the Jew Pogany’s original Platform points have today been adopted and put in force by both of the Jew influenced Democratic and Republican Parties.
Some people find it difficult to understand how a millionaire Jew can be a staunch supporter of the Black Militant Communist Revolution. It is because of their Jewish nature according to one of the richest Jews in America, Max Fisher of Detroit. Max Fisher owns the Marathon Oil Co. and the Fisher Theater chain. He sits on the board of directors of Michigan Consolidated Gas Co. and Michigan Bell Telephone Co., is chairman of Fruehauf Trucking Co., a director in Allen Industries and Safran Printing Co. and a partner in the huge $150 million Somerset Park apartment project in Troy, Michigan.
Being a militant revolutionary has not stopped him from declaring himself a Republican, and he is George Romney’s chief campaign fund raiser. He recently represented President Nixon at a meeting of Jewish leaders in New York City.
He told them Nixon had assured him Israel would receive all the aid she needs. On the negro question, no one can claim to be more radical than Max Fisher, who the “Detroit News” of Feb. 23, 1969 quotes:
“My fellow Jews must enter the great American Equal Rights Revolution. The growth of the Black Power concept is healthy because there was no leadership before. Militancy and turmoil are good, because it shows that the Negro is himself concerned and involved. We are in a revolution and the Negro has to be allowed to develop. I think that through my Jewishness I have a feeling of what the Negro wants. It comes from an empathy that springs from my Jewishness.”
Or take the Jew Saul Alinsky whose activities are financed by the Jew owned Midas Muffler Co. Alinsky heads a radical group called F.I.G.H.T. They led riotous picketings and demonstrations by Blacks demanding jobs at the Kodak Film Co. in Rochester, N. Y. They succeeded in blackjacking the company into giving them hundreds of jobs.
Alinsky now operates a school for Black revolutionaries— still financed by the Jewish owned Midas Muffler Corp. Recently he said:
“Just think of all the hell we kicked up in the past with only four or five organizers. Now we will be turning them out by the hundreds.”
Last but not least is the NAACP. The largest and best financed of all the groups fighting for the mongrelization of the White race. This organization has never had a negro as its head.
For the first 35 years of the NAACP’s formal existence it was run by two millionaire Jewish brothers. Joel Spingarn was president of the NAACP from 1920 until his death in 1939. Thereupon his brother Arthur Spingarn ran it until 1966. Due to old age, he turned the presidency over to Kivie Kaplan, a millionaire Jew shoe manufacturer from Boston, Mass. He heads it to this day. Roy Wilkins is merely his secretary and front dressing for the outer office.
The real mastermind behind the NAACP’s massive legal offensive which is almost solely responsible for the destruction of all the South’s laws and traditions keeping the races separate, including all the major school mixing decisions, were suits brought by Jack Greenberg, Jewish head of the NAACP Legal and Defense Fund.
The Jews visualize themselves in a never ending cold war with the White Christian people. They know that we are an independent and freedom loving people. The Jew knows that our individualism springs from the restless creative spirit of our race. They know that eventually our White race will revolt against Jewish economic, cultural and racial domination of our people.
They have but one hope, to put the White race to sleep through assimilation with the lazy, mindless, leaderless, shiftless and slave-like Negro race. As Mulattoes our future descendants would make obedient workers under Jewish masters.
The Jews are organized to prevent assimilation of their racial blood with either us White Christians or the Blacks.
They stand to be the only race in the future which will be mentally alert if mongrelization conquers our unborn descendants to come.
We are now, TODAY in a life and death STRUGGLE for racial survival. We are faced by a tight knit, political machine which is hell bent upon using its money power to destroy our White Folk. The time has come for every White man, woman and child in America to take his stand. The National States Rights Party provides our fellow White brothers with the best fighting attack program in existence to defeat this evil conspiracy.
Remember that your life upon this earth is but a very short one. We are placed here to create a decent and wholesome society in which our children can be raised and propagate. It is our duty to keep the race separate so as to provide for the everlasting continuation of future generations.
This is our God given mission upon this earth. Are you doing your part while there is yet still time to preserve the White race? It is a task more important than your personal life itself. Sacrifice and struggle lie ahead and we must be prepared to give our all for the SALVATION of God’s real ‘Chosen People’, —The White Race. Our White Race is responsible for the concepts of Liberty and Civilization which we have given to the entire world.
Always remember the following quotation from the late Sen. Theodore G. Bilbo who fought all his life to maintain the separation of the races:
“If our buildings, our highways, our railroads should be wrecked, we could rebuild them. If our cities should be destroyed, out of the very ruins we could erect newer and greater ones. Even if our armed might should be crushed, we could rear sons who would redeem our power.
But if the blood of our White race should become corrupted and mingled with the blood of Africa, then the present greatness of the United States of America would be destroyed and all hope for civilization would be as impossible for a negroid America as would be redemption and restoration of the White man’s blood which had been mixed with that of the negro.”
Congressman “Manny” Emanuel Celler (above), Zionist Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee is one of the boastful authors and defenders of the infamous Celler “CIVIL RIGHTS BILL,” which was prepared as part of the plan. to disorganize and condition the U.S. for the Communist take-over.
He gave a “BOYCOTT AMERICANS” speech in the House of Representatives on Aug. 28, 1957, which appears in the Congressional Record of Sept. 11, 1957, on page A-7475. It seems he is more concerned with the welfare of ISRAEL than that of the U.S.
“It is a favorite ruse of the Jews to represent the Christians as their only enemies; in reality the persecution of the Jews began long before the Christian era, nor has it since then been confined to countries where the Christian religion prevails. If Christendom is to be accused of ingratitude for the privilege of harboring numbers of Jews in her midst, the pagan world showed itself quite equally ungrateful. Egyptians, Persians, and Assyrians kept them in complete subjection; indeed, owing to their racial characteristics, it was found impossible even under the more liberal regime of Alexander the Great’s successors to receive them into the community of nations.” (World Revolution, Nesta Webster, p. 162).
REV. GORDON WINROD, in his book The Keys to Christian Understanding, pages 114 – 115: “Judaism does not know Jesus Christ. Judaism hates Jesus Christ. When St. Paul was in Judaism, before he was converted to Christianity, he hated Jesus Christ and persecuted Christians and Christianity.”
Paul said: “You have heard of my earlier career in Judaism – how furiously I persecuted the Church of God, and made havoc of it; and how in devotion to Judaism I out-stripped many men of may own age among my people, being far more zealous than they for the tradition of my forefathers.” (Gal. 1:13, 14, Weymouth Translation)
While in Judaism, Paul persecuted Christians because of his intense hatred for Christians and because of his conformity to the tradition of the fathers. This shows that the tradition of teachings of Judaism are filled with hate for Christians.
JUSTIN, martyr stated in 116 A. D.: “The Jews were behind all the persecutions of the Christians. They wandered through the country everywhere hating and undermining the Christian faith.”
JOHN, Gospel of St. John VII: “After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry because the Jews sought to kill him.”
QUINTAS SPETIMUS FLORENS TERTULLIAN (160 – 230 A. D.) Latin Church Father: “The Jews formed the breeding ground of all anti-Christian actions.”
A.N. FIELD, in Today’s Greatest Problem: “Once the Jewishness of Bolshevism is understood, its otherwise puzzling features become understandable. Hatred of Christianity, for instance, is not a Russian characteristic; it is a Jewish one.”
POPES, ROMAN CATHOLIC.
SYLVESTER I. Condemned Jewish anti-Christian activity.
GREGORY VIII. Forbade Jews to have power over Christians, in a letter to Alfonso VI of Castile.
PIUS IV. Condemned Jewish genocidal writings.
PIUS V. Hebraeorum gens (1569) expelled all Jews from the Papal States.
GREGORY XIII. Declared that Jews: “continue to plot horrible crimes” against Christians “with daily increasing audacity.”
CLEMENT VIII. Condemned Jewish genocidal writings.
ALEXANDER VIII. Condemned Jewish genocidal writings.
BENEDICT XIV. Quo Primum 1751) denounced Jewish control of commerce and “systematical despoliation” of the Christian through usury.
BENEDICT XV. Warned, in 1920, against “the advent of a Universal Republic which is longed for by all the worst elements of disorder.” This is resented by some Jews because of their active sponsorship and direction of such projects as the League of Nations and United Nations. – And in effect, all Popes who have issued editions of the Index Expurgatorius, in which Jewish genocidal and anti-Christian writings are condemned, according to the instructions of the Council of Trent.