„The Jews have always been with Jehovah, and all that Jehovah has belongs to the Jews.“ (A Program for the Jews and Humanity, Harry Waton, p. 177)
„Only Judaism is a historic and moral religion: all other religions are neither historic nor moral.“ (A Program for the Jews and Humanity, Harry Waton, p. 131).
„There never was a time when any Jew believed that Jehovah spoke to Moses or to the Prophets in any other sense than we believe today that God – that is, existence – reveals himself through the minds of a Spinoza, a Hegel, a Marx, an Einstein and the like.“ (A Program for the Jews and Humanity, Harry Waton, p. 217)
„We belong to the One mastering God: you belong to the republic of playful gods.“ (Maurice Samuel, You Gentiles, p. 36).
„A Jew, by the fact that he belongs to the chosen people and is circumcised, possesses so great a dignity that no one, not even an angel, can share equality with him. In fact, he is considered almost the equal of God.“ (Pranaitis, I.B., The Talmud Unmasked, Imperial Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russia, 1892, p. 60).
„Our Jewishness is not a creed, it is ourself, our totality. Indeed, it may be fairly said that the surest evidence of your lack of seriousness in religion is the fact that your religions are not national, that you are not compromised and dedicated, en masse, to the faith.“ (Maurice Samuel, You Gentiles, p. 73).
„In the heart of any pious Jew, God is a Jew. Is your God an Englishman or an American?“ (Maurice Samuel, You Gentiles, p. 75).
„Professor Albert Einstein, German-Jewish refugee and Jewry’s greatest living idol, according to an Associated Press Dispatch of September 11, 1940, in an address at the Conference of Science, Philosophy and Religion at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, urged religious teachers to ‘give up the doctrine of a personal God, that is, give that source of fear and hope which in the past placed such vast power in the hands of priests.’ Professor Einstein obviously intended the word ‘priests’ to include ministers and preachers as well as priests. This is another way of advocating the false doctrine of Marx (Mordecai), Lenin, and Trotsky (Bronstein) that religion is the opium of the people.“ (War! War! War!, Cincinnatus, p. 143).
„Take the curious placing of the thumb to thumb and forefinger to forefinger by the High Priest when he lifted his hands, palms outward, to bless the multitude…Much of the drama’s text was from the Old Testament and Orthodox Ritual of Judaism.“ (The Romance of a People).
„As I looked upon that spectacle, as I saw the flags of the nations carried to their places before the reproduction of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, and as I saw the six-pointed star, the illuminated interlaced triangles, shining above all the flags of all the peoples of all the world, my mind turned back to what Judge Harry M. Fisher, Chairman of the Jewish Day Committee, said in advance as to the whole idea of this pageant: ‘The idea summarized by the prophet Isaiah – ‘At the end of days all peoples shall be coming to the mountain of the Lord’ – will be portrayed.’” (The Visionary on the Mountain Top).
„The Jews are not a part of a vast Whole which they re-integrate in dying, but they are a Whole in themselves, defying space, time, life, and death. Can God be outside the Whole? If he exists, necessarily he confounds himself with this Whole…Thus Divinity in Judaism is contained in the exaltation of the entity represented by the Race – passionnel entity, eternal flame, it is the Divine essence. It must be preserved and perpetuated, therefore the idea of pure and impure was created.“ (Nomades, Kadmi Cohen, (1929)).
„‘I am that I am,’ said the Eternal. The Eternal – it is the race. One in substance – undifferentiated. One in time – stable and eternal.“ (Nomades, Kadmi Cohen, (1929)).
„A Mantra is composed of certain letters arranged in definite sequence of sounds, of which the letters are the representative signs. To produce the designed effect, Mantra must be intoned in the proper way, according to rhythm and sound…a Mantra is a potent compelling force, a word of power.“ (Arthur Avalon, Tantra of the Great Liberation, in a partial explanation of the Jewish Cabala or Kabbalah; Light-Bearers of Darkness, Inquire Within, p. 73)
„The purpose, the manner of attaining this happiness, of gaining this Liberation, is in your own hand. It does not lie in the hand of some unknown god, or in temples or in churches, but in your own self. For temples, churches, and religions bind, and you must be belong all dreams of God in order to attain this Liberation. There is no external God as such who urges us to live nobly, or to live basely; there is but the voice of our own intuition…When that voice is sufficiently strong, when that voice – the result of accumulated experience, is obeyed, and you yourself become that voice, then you are god…So the most important thing is to uncover this god within each one of you. That is the purpose of life; to awaken the dormant god (the unused sex-force, the Kundalini within you) to give life to the spark which exists in each one of us, so that we become a flame (illuminised), and join the eternal flame of the world (the universal life-force or ether, as above so below, of Hermes)…In the permanent is established, is seen, the only god in the world – yourself that has been purified.“ (The Creed of the Cabalistic Jews – the Deified Man – the origin of Humanism; Star Review Magazine, Paris September 27, 1927: Teachings given at Ommen, August 1927).
„(The Wandering Jew says) Aye, let the Nazarene (True Israelites) dogs lift their hands and eyes in ignorant wonder; the great Goldsmid was my very and mere instrument: I raised him because I deemed him worthy; I found him incompetent to the vast and sacred duty I designed him for, and I dashed him down even as we cast aside the gourd when we no longer require a drinking-cup. Who among the elder frequenters of the great Temple of Mammon, which is called the Exchange, does not remember the golden box with which the hand of Goldsmid was perpetually occupied in his busiest and most important moments! It was his talisman. The words of power had been pronounced above it; with it he could encounter a world and be triumphant…I had warned him again and again; I had menaced, I had entreated, but in vain; I found him incurable in his neglect of the cause of our people and our god; and even while he was wassailing at his luxurious villa in the neighborhood of Morden, the words of power went forth from my lips, and his talisman had departed from him for ever…He appeared upon the Exchange without his palladium; bargained, lost, and saw absolute ruin looking at him with steadfast and unpitying eyes. Two days he bore this, and then he blew his brains out! None can be false to our cause and prosper.“ (Nesta Webster, Secret Societies and Subversive Movements)
„There is no people in history so narrowly and so ferociously conservative and traditionalist as the People of Israel, and its national traditions are all religious; we find ourselves in the presence of this unique, strange, and bizarre composition – a people religion and a religion-people, the two ideas are inseparable.“ (Le Problème Juif,“ 1921, Georges Batault)
„Humanity changes, empires arise and fall, ideals spring up, become resplendent, and are extinguished, the Jew remains, Judaism remains clothed in its fierce exclusivism, hoping all from the future, indefatigable, superhuman, inhuman…A people without land, wandering nation, dispersed race, they preserve a country, their religion…ever pursuing the mirage of a golden age, a new era, a messianic time when the world would live in joy and peace, subject to Yahweh, serving his Law under the rule of the sacerdotal people, who had been prepared by trials for the attainment of this hour…[This] the most conservative among peoples is justly reputed as being possessed by a spirit of inextinguishable revolt…they are eternally unadaptable, and can only hope for subversion…“ (Le Problème Juif, 1921, Georges Batault)
By Dr. William L. Pierce (1999)
St, Martin’s Press has just published a fascinating new book. It’s by journalist Gordon Thomas and is titled Gideon’s Spies: the Secret History of the Mossad. Mossad is the name of Israel’s official espionage and assassination agency. The history of the Mossad is an interesting enough subject in itself: all of the gory details about how our gallant, little, democratic ally in the Middle East carries out state-sponsored assassinations, terrorist bombings, and other hanky-panky, with nary a word of protest from that great enemy of terrorism we have in the White House. Bill Clinton likes to wax indignant about the terrorism of Osama bin Laden and Colombian rebels and Hutus in Uganda and others – that is, about the terrorism of everyone except our gallant, little, democratic ally in the Middle East.
What makes Thomas’s book especially interesting and relevant at the moment, however, is that he details some Mossad espionage inside the Clinton White House. Specifically, he reveals that Clinton knew that his steamy telephone-sex sessions with his Jewish bimbo/intern Monica Lewinsky were being tapped by the Mossad. We know that Clinton knew, because he told Monica about it after an oral-sex session in the Oval Office, and she told Special Prosecutor Ken Starr, in sworn testimony, what Clinton had told her. Clinton knew, because the FBI’s counter-espionage people knew and had warned him.
Now, this is not really new, because it was in the published Starr report. The Congress knew all about it during the impeachment process and the Senate trial. What is new is that it’s finally beginning to get a little press coverage, the result of the publication of Thomas’s book. It was all over the front page of the New York Post ten days ago. Why didn’t it get a lot of press coverage earlier? Well, the obvious answer is because the telephone tapping was being done by our gallant, little, democratic ally in the Middle East, and neither the media people nor the politicians in the Congress want to say anything bad about Israel; it’s not good for one’s career.
Why is it important? Well, just think what it tells us about Mr. Clinton’s character. He knew that his telephone-sex sessions with Monica were being recorded by the Israelis, because the FBI told him, but he didn’t care. And he also didn’t care that the FBI was tapping Monica’s telephone too. He warned Monica about it so that they could prepare a cover story in case the press learned about it, but he kept right on having telephone-sex with Monica. Such irresponsibility is hard to fathom. To Clinton, being President is a game. The idea of the game is to have as much fun as possible while pretending to be a serious world leader. If you’re a skillful enough liar and a good enough actor you can get away with it, especially if your friends in the media cover for you – and if the people who like you because you feel their pain keep giving you a “thumbs up” on the popularity polls. Well, as I told you a long time ago, Clinton is a constitutional psychopath, and this is just one more indication of that fact.
More important than what this telephone-tapping tells us about Clinton’s character and attitude is what it tells us about our relationship with our gallant, little, democratic ally in the Middle East. The Israelis, of course, always have waged an espionage war against America. Every time they get caught – as, for example, in the Jonathan Pollard case – they promise they will never do it again, and their apologists in the media and in the Congress explain that they really shouldn’t be blamed, because they’re only spying on us so that Israel will be secure. They’re surrounded by enemies in the Middle East, and they need every bit of national security information they can get. They can’t trust anyone but themselves with their security, because during the “Holocaust” everyone else let them down, we’re told.
Well, actually, we know from past experience that the Israelis not only steal our secrets, they sell these secrets to our enemies. Selling U.S. military and diplomatic secrets to the Soviet Union back during the Cold War was standard operating procedure for the Israelis. These days they have a willing buyer for stolen secrets in the form of China. Beyond selling secrets, Israeli spying has a much more sinister purpose, as former Central Intelligence Agency Director William Casey indicated to Thomas in an interview. Most countries spy for security purposes. Israel spies in order to control the country on which she is spying, primarily through the blackmail of politicians. In the case of the Lewinsky telephone taps there are strong indications that the Israelis used the information they collected to blackmail Clinton. They wanted him to halt an FBI search for an Israeli agent on the White House staff, otherwise they would leak their recordings of his telephone-sex with Monica to the press.
The White House denies there was any blackmail, and of course the Israelis deny it. Gordon Thomas says that he has no evidence of direct Israeli blackmail and suggests that it probably was more subtle and indirect than that. All he can be sure of is that the Mossad was recording Bill and Monica’s telephone-sex sessions, and that the FBI was looking for an Israeli spy in the White House. Beyond that it’s just speculation. But the search for the Israeli spy in the White House was halted, and then Mr. Clinton went right on having telephone-sex with Monica, knowing that it was being recorded and in addition suspecting that some Jew on his staff was working secretly for the Mossad – but he didn’t care. Can you imagine how frustrating that sort of thing must be for the FBI and other counter-espionage agencies?
Well, that’s life in the Clinton era. And of course, when the Senate voted on Clinton’s articles of impeachment last month, every Jew in the Senate, Republican as well as Democrat, voted for acquittal. There are 11 Jews in the U.S. Senate – which, incidentally, is more than four times their quota of the U.S. population. During the impeachment hearings and the trial some of these Jews said they were for Clinton, and some said they were against him. New York’s Jewish Democrat Senator Charles Schumer loudly supported Clinton throughout the process. Connecticut’s Jewish Democrat Senator Joseph Lieberman and Pennsylvania’s Jewish Republican Senator Arlen Specter publicly denounced Clinton. But when the final showdown came all 11 Jews quietly voted to keep Clinton in office. It makes one wonder about the genuineness of their denunciations of Clinton during the trial. What counted in the end was that Bill Clinton cannot say “no” to Israel, and he has appointed more Jews to his administration than any three other Presidents, and all the Jews in the Senate and in the media appreciate that. That is what counts with them.
The FBI is not the only American law-enforcement agency which is frustrated by the unwillingness of Bill Clinton to say “no” to the Israelis. Israel continues to be the hideout of choice for Jewish criminals of all sorts fleeing from justice. A Jew commits a murder or a rape or some other serious crime in the United States, and if he’s worried about being caught and punished he simply catches the next flight to Israel. That country has a custom of refusing to extradite any Jewish criminal wanted for an offense against non-Jews in another country. Once a Jewish criminal reaches Israel, he is safe from prosecution and can thumb his nose at the world, no matter how heinous his crime.
A recent example of this is the case of Maryland Jew Samuel Sheinbein. In September 1997 Sheinbein and another Jew, Aaron Needle, killed a non-Jewish teenaged neighbor, Alfredo Tello, in an argument over drugs. After the two Jews had bludgeoned, stabbed, and strangled Tello, they slashed his throat. Then they cut Tello’s body up with a power saw, and burned some of the parts. When the Maryland police came looking for him, Sheinbein got some money from his wealthy parents and hopped the next flight to Israel. He’s been there ever since. The Israelis consider it immoral to turn a Jew over to Gentiles to be punished, and they have refused all requests by Maryland authorities for his extradition. Just over two weeks ago, on February 25, the Supreme Court of Israel handed down a final ruling against efforts to extradite Sheinbein. The Israelis say they will put Sheinbein on trial in Israel for the murder of Alfredo Tello. So far they haven’t gotten around to it. And if they ever do, don’t bet on a conviction.
Another recent case of this sort of thing is that of Dror Goldberg, a Jew who committed an especially vicious murder in Houston, Texas. On November 27 of last year the 20-year-old Goldberg walked into a wig shop near his Houston apartment, pulled out a knife, and began stabbing and slashing the two owners and a clerk. The owners survived the attack, but the 54-year-old clerk died of her wounds. Police familiar with Goldberg’s past activities suspect that it was a thrill killing: he simply wanted to kill someone with a knife to see what it felt like. Goldberg was arrested, but, like Sheinbein, he has wealthy parents. His parents put up bail to get him out of jail, and now Houston police say they have reason to believe that Goldberg has fled to Israel to escape prosecution.
Now, let me tell you, if it were any country but Israel the U.S. government wouldn’t tolerate this sheltering of criminals who have murdered U.S. citizens. At the very least diplomatic relations would be cut off and economic sanctions would be imposed. But of course, Israel gets special treatment. Israel can do no wrong, not only in the eyes of the Clinton government, but in the eyes of virtually every government the United States has had in the last 50 years. When Jews in the United States collaborated in the theft of nuclear materials from a U.S. nuclear fuel processing plant and the smuggling of the material to Israel in 1962, President John Kennedy and the media here were interested only in covering it up, not in holding Israel and its collaborators to account.
When the Israelis deliberately attacked and tried to sink a U.S. Navy vessel, the U.S.S. Liberty, in the Mediterranean in 1967, killing 35 U.S. citizens in the process, President Lyndon Johnson and the controlled news media in the United States didn’t give a thought to punishing or even criticizing Israel for the murderous attack. Their entire concern was to keep the affair covered up, to keep the American public in the dark about it, and to protect Israel from any blame. The Liberty sent out an emergency call for assistance while it was under attack by the Israelis, and the U.S. Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean sent jet aircraft speeding to the rescue. As soon as Lyndon Johnson learned that it was the Israelis who were trying to sink the Liberty, however, he ordered the U.S. jets recalled and left the Liberty on its own. He was terrified of the potential political reprisals against him if Israelis were killed by U.S. jets. Better to let the Israelis sink the Liberty and kill her entire crew. Even today the government’s official story is that the attack on the Liberty was a “mistake,” and beyond that, “no comment.”
And as it was with Lyndon Johnson in 1967 and with other U.S. Presidents both before and since then, so it is with Bill Clinton today. U.S. government policy is that Jews can do no wrong; Israel can do no wrong. This policy is excused on the basis that Israel is our gallant, little, democratic ally in the Middle East, and that’s why we give her special consideration in all things. But really, that’s no excuse. Israel is no ally; Israel is and always has been nothing but an enormous liability for America.
And it’s not just Israel which gets special treatment. It’s Jews generally, whether they run to Israel for protection or not. I’ll give you an example of the special treatment reserved for Jews which has gotten a very slight coverage in the news recently, and has been noticed by those of us who notice such things: that’s the case of Ira Einhorn. Einhorn was a Philadelphia-area leader of the so-called “counter-culture revolution” of the 1960s and 1970s, a revolution which Jews like to brag turned America upside down and changed young people’s values. Bill Clinton was part of that revolution as a cheerleader for the Viet Cong and Ho Chi Minh and as an enthusiastic user of illegal drugs.
Ira Einhorn was a smart, fast-talking Jewish con man, who moved in the same circles as other Jews of his ilk in that era: Jerry Rubin, Abbie Hoffman, Allen Ginsberg. Einhorn was much more than just a cheerleader for the Viet Cong. He was a full-fledged New Age guru. He managed to promote himself successfully as a spokesman for everything that was trendy: the marvelous effects of LSD and other psychedelic drugs, pyramid power, various oriental religious cults, transcendental meditation, UFOs and extraterrestrials, CIA conspiracies: you name it; Einhorn was able to pass himself off as an authority on it. He also was a drug dealer.
But mostly he was a very wordy and very self-confident Jew-boy, who was able to mesmerize Gentiles young and old and bring them under his sway – especially Gentile women. He managed to convince them that whatever nonsense he spewed on any subject was profound wisdom. This was the case despite the fact that he was fat, hairy, greasy looking, and otherwise singularly unattractive: almost a stereotype of the Jew for whom the name “kike” was coined. Of course, the Jewish media and Jews in the Philadelphia establishment helped Einhorn maintain his “guru” image by taking him seriously and giving him good press.
One of the young Gentile women Einhorn mesmerized was a beautiful, blonde girl from the little East Texas town of Tyler, Holly Maddux. Holly was not only beautiful, she was very bright and personable. She was a cheerleader in her high school and graduated as salutatorian. Then in 1965 she went off to Bryn Mawr University in Philadelphia. Bryn Mawr had been founded by Quakers, and in the 1960s it was a hotbed of everything liberal, trendy, and destructive of the old-fashioned values Holly had learned in Texas. Holly began sleeping with Jews while she was at Bryn Mawr. She was fascinated by their wordiness and their self-assurance, which she mistook for genuine intellectual qualities, as many another naive Gentile girl has done.
Eventually she met Ira Einhorn, who had risen to become the head Jewish hippie of Philadelphia, and she fell under his spell. Einhorn persuaded Holly to move into his apartment, and she lived with him for five years, cooking and cleaning for him and sexually “servicing” him and letting herself be humiliated as he showed off his blonde shiksa slave to his Jewish friends. Then Einhorn murdered Holly and stuffed her corpse into a trunk on an enclosed back porch attached to his apartment. The odor finally attracted the police, who obtained a search warrant and discovered the girl’s decomposing body. Einhorn was arrested and charged with Holly’s murder in March 1979. Einhorn hired Philadelphia Jewish lawyer Arlen Specter, now a Republican U.S. senator, to get his bail reduced from $500,000 to $40,000. Einhorn put up the required $4000 cash and split. He went to Canada and then to Europe in order to avoid prosecution for the murder of Holly Maddux. In Europe he continued his role of New Age guru, and he continued attracting and using Gentile women. Well . . . Jewish women too: his biggest financial supporter has been Barbara Bronfman, of the infamous Bronfman liquor-merchant and media family, which has been much in the news recently with demands for billions of dollars in reparations from the rest of the world because we haven’t been treating Jews right. And for 20 years, this Jewish hippie guru has been living high in Europe, being supported by various women, and no one seems willing to hold him accountable for the murder of Holly Maddux. The French government finally decided a few weeks ago that he should be deported, but they have given him two years to appeal their decision. I have a suspicion that two years from now Ira Einhorn will be in Israel.
Well, these are just a few miscellaneous examples of the sort of special treatment Jews routinely get. Part of the reason they get it is the consequence of Jewish media control, which leads politicians and bureaucrats to handle Jewish criminals with kid gloves, lest anyone think they are being “anti-Semitic.” Part of it undoubtedly is the consequence of Israeli espionage and blackmail of the sort we have seen in the Clinton administration. But part of it also is that too many ordinary Americans let themselves be buffaloed by Jews. We let ourselves be flummoxed by the Jews’ fast talk and air of self-confidence. When an Aryan meets a Jew it is like a slow-talking country bumpkin meeting a slick, fast-talking carnival huckster.
Our ancestors evolved in forest and field and on farms, fighting and working; their ancestors have spent the past 10,000 years in the market-places and bazaars of the Middle East, buying and selling, wheeling and dealing, haggling and swindling. To us words are for communication, for exchanging information; to the Jews words are to disarm, to hypnotize, to mislead, to deceive.
Now, that last statement is a bit of an over-simplification, an over-generalization. But it is nevertheless substantially true. Despite all of the individual exceptions each of us can think of, despite all of the individual Jews we have met who are not especially tricky and all of the Gentiles we have met who are, the general truth remains that as a race we have let ourselves be taken advantage of by a tribe of very tricky con men. We are letting the Jews as a whole do to us, to our society, and to our civilization what Holly Maddux let Ira Einhorn do to her. And we must put an end to this situation very soon. We must put an end to the special treatment we have been giving Jews, or we certainly will end up the way Holly Maddux did.
And for those Americans who really want to get Israel off our backs and get Jewish influence out of our lives, we’re going to have to change our ways. We’re going to have to forget about the exceptions. We’re going to have to look at everything in black and white, with no shades of gray. Our situation is like that of Perseus in attempting to cut off the head of Medusa: one look for Perseus and the game would have been lost. If our people listen to the reasonable Jews, to the supposedly patriotic Jews, the honest Jews, we fall under their spell again. If we let them give us advice on how to deal with their tricky tribesmen, it’s like the country bumpkin meeting the carnival huckster all over again. So it’s going to be a rough and unpleasant future for us for a while yet.
After years of private research and study, Dr. Faurisson first made public his skeptical views about the Holocaust extermination story in two items published in December 1978 and January 1979 in the influential Paris daily Le Monde. This documentary is a recounting of events since that terrible and wonderful December 1978.
By Denis Wise
Inspired by Hitler’s success at restoring Germany’s pre-eminence and learning from Hitler’s success in burying the effects of the recession, America’s white community in the 1930s created over 100 pro-National Socialist organisations.
Ring-fenced by the First Amendment, they held public rallies, paraded in uniforms, carried the German Worker’s Party banners, and published anti-Bolshevik periodicals.
Organised crime in the United States was largely under Jewish control. Free from constitutional legalities, the mobsters confronted the workers who supported Hitler’s genuine non-Jewish socialism.
National Socialist Bund rallies in New York City created a dilemma for the city’s Jewish leaders. With 20,000 members, the Bund was the largest anti-Bolshevik group in the United States.
Jewish leaders wanted the rallies stopped, but could not do so legally. Nathan Perlman, a former Republican congressman, believed that the Jews should demonstrate more combativeness. In 1935, he furtively contacted Meyer Lansky, a leading organised crime figure, and asked him to help. Lansky related what followed.
The Jewish lawmaker assured Meyer Lansky that a blank cheque and legal assistance would be put at his disposal. Lansky, dubbed ‘the mob’s accountant’, was the most notorious of America’s mobsters; the gangster ran an international syndicate.
The mobster referred to Germany’s Communists as “my brothers”. Lansky refused the judge’s offer of money and assistance, but he did make one request. He asked Perlman to ensure that after he went into action he would not be criticised by the Jewish press. The judge promised to do what he could.
Lansky rounded up his mobsters who disrupted National Socialist meetings. Young Jews not connected to him or the rackets also volunteered to help. Meyer Lansky and others taught them how to use their fists and handle themselves in a fight. Lansky’s crews worked very professionally. The arms, legs and ribs of American workers were broken and heads cracked and the Jewish mobster earned quite a reputation for doing this work.
Lansky later described to an Israeli journalist one of the onslaughts in Yorkville, the German neighbourhood in northeast Manhattan:
“We got there in the evening and found several hundred people dressed in their brown shirts. The stage was decorated with a swastika and pictures of Hitler. The speaker started ranting. There were only 15 of us, but we went into action. We attacked them in the hall and threw some of them out the windows. There were fist fights all over the place.
Most of the Nazis panicked and ran out. We chased them and beat them up, and some of them were out of action for months. Yes it was violence. We wanted to teach them a lesson.”
Reflecting on his role in these episodes to me, Lansky fumed that he helped the Jewish community but was met with abuse. He believed the city’s Jewish leaders were pleased with his actions, but they failed to stop the Jewish press from condemning him. When the newspapers reported on the anti-Bund incidents, they referred to Lansky and his friends as ‘the Jewish gangsters’, which infuriated him.
Judd Teller, a reporter for a New York Jewish daily, relates how he met one day with several men who said they were from ‘Murder, Incorporated’. They wanted a list of ‘Nazi bastards who should be rubbed out.’
Afraid of the consequences of the casual murder of worker socialists the Jewish community was disinterested in the extreme violence proposed by their mercenary mobster.
Lansky replied, “Tell them to keep their shirts on. We won’t ice (murder) the bodies; only marinate them.” According to Teller the attacks by the Jewish mobsters was sufficient “marination” to drastically reduce attendance at Nazi Bund meetings, and discouraged Bundists “from appearing in uniform singly in the streets.”
After a series of attacks, the Bundists protested at having their meetings violently broken up and asked Mayor Fiorello La Guardia for protection from the Jewish mobsters.
La Guardia agreed under certain conditions. The Bundists could not wear their uniforms, sing their songs, display the swastika and workers flag, and could not march to beating drums. The Bundists agreed to his terms. La Guardia confined their parades to Yorkville and assigned Jewish and African-American policemen to patrol the route.
The Bund was also active across the river in Newark, New Jersey, which had a large German-American community. As a Jew, Abner Zwillman, who controlled the rackets in that city, was unwilling to allow the workers to operate with impunity in ‘his territory’. In 1934, he turned to Nat Arno, a Jewish ex-prize-fighter, and asked him to organise against the socialists.
The Jewish gang’s most infamous action occurred in Schwabbenhalle on Springfield Avenue bordering the German neighbourhood in Irvington. According to Hinkes:
“The Nazi scumbags were meeting one night on the second floor. Nat Arno and I went upstairs and threw stink bombs into the room where the creeps were. As they came out of the room, running from the horrible odour of the stink bombs and running down the steps to escape to go into the street to escape, our boys were waiting with bats and iron bars.
It was like running a gauntlet. Our boys were lined up on both sides and we started hitting, aiming for their heads or any other parts of their bodies with our bats and iron bars. The Nazis were screaming blue murder. It was one of the happiest moments of my life. It was too bad we didn’t kill them all. In other places we couldn’t get inside, so we smashed windows and destroyed their cars, which were parked outside. The Nazis begged for police help and protection, however, the police favoured us.”
Heshie Weiner, another participant in the fracas, remembers that one of the Nazis who came running down the stairs, had the indiscretion to shout “Heil” and was met by a chorus of iron pipes. Weiner claims that after this attack, “I never heard any more of Bund meetings by the Nazis in our area.”
In Chicago, Herb Brin, who worked as a crime reporter for the City Press, joined the local Bund as a spy for the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of the B’nai B’rith. He told me, “I joined the Nazi party at the Hausfaterland on Western Avenue across from Riverview Park. It was a hotbed of Nazi activity,” he recalled. From 1938 through 1939, Brin kept the ADL informed about Nazi activities. What the ADL did not know was that he fed information about Nazi marches and rallies to Jewish gangsters. “I marched with the Nazis,” said Brin, “but I came back later with Jewish gangs and we beat them up good.”
By Theodore J. O’Keefe
World-class historian David Irving is no stranger to readers of the JHR. His address to the 1983 International Revisionist Conference, which appeared in the Winter 1984 Journal of Historical Review (“On Contemporary History and Historiography”), was something of a primer on Irving’s Revisionist historiographical method. It was spiced as well with tantalizing hints of new directions in Irving’s research and new book possibilities arising from them.
Not the least among Irving’s revelations were those that touched on Winston Churchill, descendant of one of England’s greatest families and leader of his nation and its empire (as he still thought it) at what many of his countrymen and many abroad still regard as Britain’s “finest hour.” Readers will recall that Irving exposed several instances of Churchill’s venality, cowardice, and hypocrisy, including Churchill’s poltroonish posturing at the time of the German air raid against Coventry and the facts of Churchill and his cronies’ secret subvention by the Czech government.
It will also be recalled that in his lecture Irving spoke of his projected book on Winston Churchill, which at the time was to be published in the U.S. by Doubleday and in Great Britain by MacMillan, two great firms entirely worthy of an author who has been churning out meticulously researched historical bestsellers for a quarter of a century. As has been pointed out in recent issues of the IHR Newsletter, Irving’s challenges to the reigning orthodoxy have become so unbearable to the Establishment that both the major houses refused to print the books as written. The task has now been undertaken by a Revisionist operation in Australia. Nearing completion, the new Irving book, Churchill’s War, is slated to be available from the IHR by the end of this year.
Last year David Irving made a world-wide speaking tour, visiting North America (the U.S. and Canada), Australia, South Africa, and Europe. He lectured on a wide range of topics pertaining to the troubled history of our century, with his customary flair for the pointed phrase and the telling anecdote. During one of his lectures, delivered at Vancouver, British Columbia on March 31, 1986, Irving offered a series of mordant new facts and insights on the life and career of Winston Churchill.
At the outset of his lecture, Irving remarked that the late Harold MacMillan (Lord Stockton), recently targeted by Nikolai Tolstoy (The Minister and the Massacres) for his role in the forcible deportation of tens of thousands of anti-Communist Cossacks, Byelorussians, Ukrainians, and others to the U.S.S.R. after World War II, had stated that Irving’s Churchill book would “not be published by his company, over his dead body.” Clearly Lord Stockton’s recent demise didn’t alter things at MacMillan, however.
Then Irving let out an electrifying piece of information:
The details which I will tell you today, you will not find published in the Churchill biography. For example, you won’t even find them published in Churchill’s own biography because there were powers above him who were so powerful that they were able to prevent him publishing details that even he wanted to publish that he found dirty and unscrupulous about the origins of the Second World War.
For example, when I was writing my Churchill biography, I came across a lot of private papers in the files of the Time/Life organization in New York. In Columbia University, there are all the private papers of the chief editor of Time/Life, a man called Daniel Longwell. And in there, in those papers we find all the papers relating to the original publication of the Churchill memoirs in 1947, 1949, the great six-volume set of Churchill memoirs of the Second World War. And I found there a letter from the pre-war German chancellor, the man who preceded Hitler, Dr. Heinrich Brüning, a letter he wrote to Churchill in August, 1937. The sequence of events was this: Dr. Brüning became the chancellor and then Hitler succeeded him after a small indistinguishable move by another man. In other words, Brüning was the man whom Hitler replaced. And Bruning had the opportunity to see who was backing Hitler. Very interesting, who was financing Hitler during all his years in the wilderness, and Brüning knew.
Brüning wrote a letter to Churchill after he had been forced to resign and go into exile in England in August 1937, setting out the names and identities of the people who backed Hitler. And after the war, Churchill requested Brüning for permission to publish this letter in his great world history, the six-volume world history. And Brüning said no. In his letter, Brüning wrote, “I didn’t, and do not even today for understandable reasons, wish to reveal from October, 1928, the two largest regular contributors to the Nazi Party were the general managers of two of the largest Berlin banks, both of Jewish faith and one of them the leader of Zionism in Germany.”
Now there is a letter from Dr. Heinrich Brüning to Churchill in 1949, explaining why he wouldn’t give permission to Churchill to publish the August, 1937 letter. It was an extraordinary story, out of Churchill’s memoirs, even Churchill wanted to reveal that fact, you begin to sense the difficulties that we have in printing the truth today.
Churchill, of course, knew all about lies. He was an expert in lying himself. He put a gloss on it. He would say to his friends, “The truth is such a fragile flower, the truth is so precious, it must be given a bodyguard of lies.” This is the way Churchill put it.
Irving went on to describe several sources of secret financial support enjoyed by Churchill. In addition to money supplied by the Czech government, Churchill was financed during the “wilderness years” between 1930 and 1939 by a slush fund emanating from a secret pressure group known as the Focus.
Irving on the Focus:
The Focus was financed by a slush fund set up by some of London’s wealthiest businessmen. Principally, businessmen organized by the Board of Jewish Deputies in England, whose chairman was a man called Sir Bernard Waley Cohen. Sir Bernard Waley Cohen held a private dinner party at his apartment on July 29, 1936. This is in Waley Cohen’s memoirs… The 29th of July, 1936, Waley Cohen set up a slush fund of 50,000 pounds for The Focus, the Churchill pressure group. Now, 50,000 pounds in 1936, multiply that by ten, at least, to get today’s figures. By another three or four to multiply that into Canadian dollars. So, 40 times 50,000 pounds… about $2 million in Canadian terms was given by Bernard Waley Cohen to this secret pressure group of Churchill in July, 1936. The purpose was, the tune that Churchill had to play was, fight Germany. Start warning the world about Germany, about Nazi Germany. Churchill, of course, one of our most brilliant orators, a magnificent writer, did precisely that.
For two years, The Focus continued to militate, in fact, right through until 1939. And I managed to find the secret files of The Focus, I know the names of all the members. I know all their secrets. I know how much money they were getting, not just from The Focus, but from other governments. I use the word “other governments” advisedly because one of my sources of information for my Churchill biography is, in fact, the Chaim Weizmann Papers in the State of Israel. Israel has made available to me, all Churchill’s secret correspondence with Chaim Weizmann, all his secret conferences. It is an astonishing thing, but I, despite my reputation, in a kind of negative sense with these people, am given access to files like that, just the same as the Russian Government has, given me complete access to all of the Soviet records of Churchill s dealings with Ivan Maisky, Joseph Stalin, Molotov and the rest of them. I am the only historian who has been given access to these Russian records. It is a kind of horse trading method that I use when I want access to these files, because it is in these foreign archives we find the truth about Winston Churchill.
When you want the evidence about his tax dodging in 1949 and thereabouts, you are not going to look in his own tax files, you’re going to look in the files of those who employed him, like the Time/Life Corporation of America. That s where you look. And when you’re looking for evidence about who was putting money up for Churchill when he was in the wideness and who was funding this secret group of his, The Focus, you’re not going to look in his files, again you’re going to look in the secret files, for example, of the Czech government in Prague, because that is where much of the money was coming from.
Irving then revealed further details of Churchill’s financing by the Czechs, as well as the facts of Churchill’s financial rescuer by a wealthy banker of Austro-Jewish origins, Sir Henry Strakosch, who, in Irving’s words, emerged “out of the woodwork of the City of London, that great pure international financial institution.” When Churchill was bankrupted overnight in the American stock market crash of l938, it was Strakosch, who was instrumental in setting the central banks of South Africa and India, who bought up all
Churchill’s debts. When Strakosch died in 1943, the details of his will, published in the London Times included a bequest of £20,000 to the then Prime Minister, eliminating the entire debt.
Irving dealt with Churchill’s performance as a wartime leader, first as Britain’s First Lord of the Admiralty and then as Prime Minister. The British historian adverted to Churchill’s “great military defeat in Norway, which he himself engineered and pioneered,” and mentioned the suspicion of Captain Ralph Edwards, who was on Churchill’s staff at the time, that Churchill had deliberately caused the fiasco to bring down Neville Chamberlain and replace him as prime minister, which subsequently happened.
Irving spoke of Dunkirk:
In May, 1940, Dunkirk, the biggest Churchill defeat of the lot. It wasn’t a victory, it wasn’t a triumph, nothing for the British to be proud of. Dunkirk? If you look at the Dunkirk files in the British archives now, you will find, too, you’re given only photocopies of the premier files on Dunkirk with mysterious blank pages inserted.
And you think, at first, how nice of them to put these blank pages in to keep the documents apart. Not so. The blank pages are the ones that you really want to be seeing. In some cases, of course, the blank pages are genuinely censored with intelligence matters. But the other blank pages are letters between Churchill and the French Prime Minister, Paul Reynaud, which revealed the ugly truth that Churchill, himself, gave the secret order to Lord Gort, the British General in command of the British expeditionary force at Dunkirk, “Withdraw, fall back,” or as Churchill put it, “Advance to the coast.” That was Churchill’s wording. “And you are forbidden to tell any of your neighboring allies that you are pulling out.” The French and the Belgians were left in the dark that we were pulling out.
I think it’s the most despicable action that any British commander could have been ordered to carry out, to pull out and not tell either his allies on his left and right flanks that he was pulling out at Dunkirk. The reason I knew this is because, although the blanks are in the British files, I got permission from the French Prime Minister Paul Reynaud’s widow. His widow is still alive. A dear old lady about 95, living in Paris. And guiding her trembling hand, I managed to get her to sign a document releasing to me all the Prime Minister’s files in the French National Archives in Paris. And there are documents, the originals of the documents which we’re not allowed to see in London and there we know the ugly truth about that other great Churchill triumph, the retreat to Dunkirk. If peace had broken out in June of 1940, Churchill would have been finished. No brass statue in Parliament Square for Mr. Winston Churchill. He would have been consigned to the dustbin of oblivion, forgotten for all time and good riddance I say, because the British Empire would have been preserved. We would, by now, have been the most powerful race, can we dare use the word, the British race, the most powerful race on Earth.
Irving pointed out that Churchill rejected Hitler’s peace offers in 1939,1940, and 1941 (Irving supports the thesis that Rudolf Hess’s flight to Scotland was ordered by the Führer). Irving pinpointed one critical moment, and supplied the background:
The crucial moment when he managed to kill this peace offensive in England was July, 1940. If we look at the one date, July the 20th, this I think was something of a watershed between the old era of peace, the greatness of the British Empire and the new era, the new era of nuclear deterrent and the holocaust, the nuclear holocaust, July 20, 1940. Mr. Churchill is lying in bed that Sunday out in Checkers when he gets a strange message. It’s an intercept of a German ambassador’s telegram in Washington to Berlin. It’s only just been revealed, of course, that we were reading all of the German codes, not only the German Army, Air Force and Navy Codes, but also the German embassy codes. And if you’re silly enough to believe everything that’s written in the official history of British Intelligence, you will understand that the only reason that they released half of the stories is to prevent us from trying to find out the other half. And what matters is that we are reading the German diplomatic codes as well. On July 20th, the German ambassador in Washington sent an message to Berlin saying that the British ambassador in Washington had asked him very quietly, very confidentially, just what the German peace terms were. This, of course, was the one thing that Churchill could never allow to happen, that the British find out what Hitler’s peace terms are. He sends an immediate message to the foreign office, to Lord Halifax, saying, “Your ambassador in Washington is strictly forbidden to have any further contacts with the German ambassador, even indirectly. ” They were communicating through a Quaker intermediary.
Now, on the same day, Churchill sent a telegram to Washington ordering Lord Lothian, the British ambassador in Washington, to have nothing to do with the German ambassador. And the same day, he takes a third move to insure that the peace moves in Britain are finally strangled at birth. He orders Sir Charles Portal to visit him at Checkers, the country residence of British prime ministers. Sir Charles Portal was Commander in Chief of Bomber Command. Now what is the significance? Well, the significance is this. Up to July, 1940, not one single German bomb has fallen on British towns. Hitler had given orders that no British towns are to be bombed and, above all, the bombing of London is completely forbidden and embargoed. Churchill knows this, because he’s reading the German codes, he’s reading the German Air Force signals, which I can now read in the German files. Churchill is reading the signals and he knows that Hitler is not doing him the favor.
Hitler is still hoping that this madman in England will see reason or that he will be outvoted by his cabinet colleagues. So he’s not doing Churchill the favor of bombing any English towns. Churchill is frantic because he thinks he’s being outsmarted by Hitler. On July the 20th he sends for Sir Charles Portal, the Chief of Bomber Command, and he says to Sir Charles Portal, as we know from records from Command to the Air Ministry, “When is the earliest that you could launch a vicious air attack on Berlin?” Sir Charles Portal replies to
Winston, “I’m afraid we can’t do it now, not until September because the nights aren’t long enough to f1y from England to Berlin and back in the hours of darkness. September, perhaps, and in September we will have the first hundred of the new Sterling bombers…” But he also says, “I warn you, if you do that, the Germans will retaliate. At present they’re not bombing English targets, they’re not bombing civilian targets at all and you know why. And if you bomb Berlin, then Hitler will retaliate against English civilian targets.” And Churchill just twinkles when he gets this reply because he knows what he wants.
We know what he wants because he’s told Joe Kennedy, the American Ambassador, Joseph P. Kennedy, father of the late President, “I want the Germans to start bombing London as early as possible because this will bring the Americans into the war when they see the Nazis’ frightfulness and above all it will put an end to this awkward and inconvenient peace movement that’s afoot in my own Cabinet and among the British population.” I’ve opened Kennedy’s diary, I’ve also read Kennedy’s telegrams back to the State Department in Washington. They’re buried among the files. You can’t find them easily, but they are worth reading and you see in detail what Churchill was telling him. What cynicism. Churchill deliberately provoking the bombing of his own capital in order to kill the peace movement. He‘s been warned this would be the consequence, but he needs it. And still Hitler doesn’t do him the favor.
Irving then gave a detailed account of the cynical maneuvering of Churchill to escalate the aerial campaign against Germany’s civilian population to the point at which Hitler was driven to strike back against Britain’s cities, supplying the spurious justification for the R.A.F.’s (and later the U.S. Army Air Force’s) monstrous terror attacks against centuries-old citadels of culture and their helpless inhabitants.
The British historian further expanded on a theme he had touched on in his address to the IHR’s 1983 conference: Churchill the drunkard. Irving substantiated his accusation with numerous citations from diaries and journals, the originals of which often differ from heavily laundered published editions. He concluded his address with an anecdote of a ludicrous incident which found Churchill pleading with William Lyon Mackenzie King, wartime prime minister of Canada, to shift production in his countries’ distilleries from raw materials for the war effort to whiskey and gin, twenty-five thousand cases of it. According to Mackenzie King’s private diary, the Canadian prime minister tore up Churchill’s memorandum on the subject at precisely twenty-five minutes to eight on August 25, 1943, and Sir Winston had to soldier on through the war with liquid sustenance from other lands and climes. As Irving emphasized, Churchill’s drunken rantings, often during cabinet meetings, disgusted many of his generals, as when, at a meeting on July 6,1944, the prime minister told his commanders to prepare to drop two million lethal anthrax bombs on German cities. Of this meeting Britain’s First Sea Lord, Admiral Cummingham wrote, according to Irving: “There’s no doubt that P.M. is in no state to discuss anything, too tired, and too much alcohol.”
Irving’s demolition of the Churchill myth, based on a wealth of documentary evidence, most of which has been studiously avoided by the keepers of the Churchill flame, may constitute his most important service to Revisionism. The legendary V-for-victory-waggling, cigar-puffing “Winnie” is for many of a centrist or conservative bent the symbol and guarantee that Britain and America fought and “won” the Second World War for traditional Western values rather than to bleed Europe white and secure an enormous geopolitical base for Communism.
Irving’s Churchill biography promises to make trash of authorized studies as that of Martin Gilbert (which has already been described in private by one Establishment historian as “footnotes to Churchill’s war memoirs”). The publication of the first volume of Churchill’ s War later this year should be an historiographical event of the first importance.