Hitler AntiRacist parody, brilliant and bang on the money.
By Way of Deception describes the shocking scope and depth of the Mossad’s influence, disclosing how Jewish communities in the U.S., Europe, and South America are armed and trained by the organization in secret self-defense units, and how Mossad agents facilitate the drug trade in order to pay the enormous costs of its far-flung, clandestine operation. And it portrays a network that has grown …
This is part 1 of 2 of The Holocaust: Shifting the Blame by Jews for Hitler. “ShiftingtheBlame” examines the Holocaustby looking at key events in history that took place before the apparent Jewish genocide. By examining historical facts we begin to see a pattern of concealment and propaganda as we explore the Jewish role in the Russian …
The Zionist Terror Network
Background and Operation of the Jewish Defense League and other Criminal Zionist Groups
This booklet documents the background and criminal activities of Jewish Zionist terrorist groups, and especially the Jewish Defense League. Particular emphasis is given here to terror — including murder — against “thought criminals” who question the Holocaust story that six million Jews were systematically killed during the Second World War.
|Thomas Marcellus, Director of the Institute for Historical Review, sorts damaged files from the wreckage of the devastating arson attack on July 4, 1984, against the southern California research and publication center.|
Zionist terrorists openly proclaim an arrogant Jewish-supremacist ideology and acknowledge their readiness to use violence against those who disagree with them. With a well-documented record of bigotry and crime, they pose a serious danger to our society, and to men and women everywhere who treasure freedom.
The most zealous non-governmental Zionist terrorist organization has been the Jewish Defense League. Its activists have been involved in a wide range of crimes, and the US Federal Bureau of Investigation has repeatedly cited it as a criminal terrorist group.
The Jewish Defense League was founded in 1968 by Rabbi Meir Kahane. Born Martin David Kahane in 1932 in Brooklyn, New York, he was the first-born son of an orthodox rabbi who was active in the “revisionist” movement of Zionist hard-liner Ze’ev Jabotinsky. Jabotinsky and other leaders of his movement were guests at the Kahane household while Martin (Meir) was a boy. As a youth, Kahane became an active member of the Jewish-supremacist Betar movement, which Jabotinsky had founded in 1925. Kahane’s first arrest came in 1947, when he was 15, for leading a group of Betar youth in an attack against visiting British foreign minister Ernest Bevin. (note 1)
Two of Jabotinsky’s most fervent followers went on to gain notoriety as leaders of Zionist terror groups, and, later, as prime ministers of Israel: Menachem Begin, who once headed the Irgun group, and Yitzhak Shamir, who headed the Lehi group (Stern gang). Shamir, for example, played a crucial role in the Lehi murder in November 1944 of British Middle East envoy Lord Moyne, and in the September 1948 assassination of Swedish United Nations peace mediator Count Folke-Bernadotte. (note 2)
For a time in the 1960s, Kahane led a double life. He lived and worked under the name of Michael King, keeping this identity secret even from his wife. During this period, he later related, he worked for the Central Intelligence Agency and for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. For the FBI he spied on the right-wing John Birch Society as well as on various left-wing student groups. (note 3)
Posing as the non-Jewish Michael King, he had affairs with a number of young women he picked up in New York bars. One of them was Gloria Jean D’Argenio, a (non-Jewish) 22-year-old model who worked under the name of Estelle Evans. After their meeting in 1966, they promptly began an affair. Never revealing his true identity, he even proposed marriage. After Kahane/King broke off the relationship a few weeks later, she attempted suicide by hurling herself into the East River, dying two days later (on Kahane’s 34th birthday). (note 4)
Kahane’s life changed dramatically in 1968, when he and several colleagues founded the Jewish Defense League. Brandishing guns and provocative slogans (“Every Jew a .22,” “Never Again”), Kahane’s JDL quickly attracted considerable media attention. Kahane pointedly exploited rising anti-black sentiment among Jews in the New York area. (note 5)
Kahane and his new organization received important and probably crucial support from two powerful allies: Israel’s right-wing Herut political party and the New York Mafia.
Between December 1969 and August 1972, Kahane’s JDL — with important support and guidance from Menachem Begin’s Herut party in Israel, top officers of Israel’s Mossad secret service, and several wealthy American Jewish businessmen — carried out a campaign of criminal attacks against Soviet Russian diplomats and other Soviet targets in the USA. The goal was to focus attention on and generate sympathy for Soviet Jewry, and to damage relations between the United States and Soviet Russia. (note 6)
On May 12, 1971, Kahane and a dozen other JDL members were arrested by federal agents for conspiracy to manufacture explosives. One day later, Kahane announced an alliance with a group founded by Mafia boss Joseph Colombo, Jr., a one-time killer who had risen to head the Colombo crime syndicate. “Kahane received substantial aid from the New York Mafia,” writes Israeli journalist Yair Kotler in his biography of the JDL founder. Until Colombo’s murder in 1971, relations between Kahane and the New York City mob boss were very close, and the two criminal chiefs worked closely together. (note 7)
Kahane claimed to have spent a total of three years in American prisons as a result of his militant activities. (note 8) During the early 1970s, Kahane abandoned the JDL and moved to Israel — returning on occasional visits to raise money. Building on the international notoriety he had gained as JDL leader, in 1976 he launched his radical Kach party. In 1984 he was elected to the Israeli Knesset (parliament) as his party’s only deputy. Meanwhile, the JDL’s New York chapter collapsed, and splinter groups emerged with names such as the “Jewish Direct Action,” the “United Jewish Underground,” “Save Our Israel Land,” and the “Jewish Defenders.” (note 9)
Kahane was assassinated on November 5, 1990, while addressing a meeting of supporters at a hotel in midtown Manhattan, New York City. (note 10)
In numerous speeches and essays, and in several books, Meir Kahane preached an arrogant and even genocidal message of Jewish supremacy and ruthless Zionism. For the JDL leader and his many fervent followers, any and all measures to further Jewish survival and welfare — including terror, dispossession and murder — are entirely justified. (note 11)
Typical of his passionate and outspoken prose style is a representative essay by Kahane that appeared in 1980 in a leading Jewish community paper. He wrote: (note 12)
“…Vengeance is a fundamental Jewish concept that is a precept, injunction, commandment for the Jew…Vengeance becomes, thanks to the gentilized and perplexed era in which we live, a maligned thing…Let the government of Israel, which is responsible for the lives of its citizens, make the streets, buses, shops and homes of the Ishmaelites [Palestinians] perpetual places of terror and stark insecurity…Wipe away the bitter degradation of God’s name that is symbolized by Arab refusal to bow to Jewish sovereignty. A truly Jewish government is one that understands the need to…burn out the desecration by removing, burning out, the evil that is the Arab nation in our midst.”
In another essay, this one published in 1973, Kahane emphasized Jewish invincibility. The day will come, he promised, when all non-Jews would acknowledge the superiority of the Chosen people: (note 13)
“The Jewish people cannot ever be destroyed, but rather they and their G-d of History will emerge in days to come triumphant over the evils and foolishness of all other nations. Zion will and must emerge as the mount to which all peoples will turn and the Jewish L-rd will be the One before Whom all knees bend…”
In an essay published in 1982, Kahane stressed the pitiless, either-or, us-or-them, nature of the struggle between Jews and their “enemies”: (note 14)
“Let us look at events through Jewish eyes…Lebanon:…A war was begun [by Israel] against a “Palestinian” enemy — an entire people — which seeks to wipe out the Jewish state and the vast majority of its Jews. It was…a war unto the death, the utter destruction of the enemy, the instilling of total fear, terror, until he capitulates and acknowledges the L-rd.”
Jewish and liberal democratic values are incompatible, Kahane often insisted: “I have said it a million times. Western democracy as we know it is incompatible with Zionism…The idea of a democratic Jewish state is nonsense.” (note 15) On another occasion he stated: “Democracy is for people who don’t have the truth. No earthly, temporal government has any relevance to the actions of the Jew when its orders and regulations are contrary to [Jewish] Torah law…Judaism has never been a democratic form of society.” (note 16)
A virtual obsession for Kahane was the brutal wartime treatment of Europe’s Jews. “Never Again,” the JDL slogan, pointedly referred to the Holocaust experience. In Kahane’s view, every non-Jew is a potential Nazi murderer. “As long as one gentile lives opposite one Jew, the possibility of a Holocaust remains,” he wrote. (note 17) The moral measure of every action, Kahane stressed, must be “is it good for the Jews?” Failure to act in accordance with this principle, he emphasized, will lead to “a new Auschwitz.” (note 18)
|Meir Kahane in 1979 at his headquarters in Jerusalem, the “Musuem of the Potential Holocaust.” (Photo from The False Prophet by Robert Friedman)|
In his biography of Kahane, author Robert Friedman relates some of the quirkiness of the militant rabbi’s personality. Recalling his first meeting with him at his “Museum of the Potential Holocaust” in Jerusalem, Friedman wrote: “It struck me on that first encounter that Kahane was a man obsessed with sex and violence. He chattered incessantly about Arab men sleeping with Jewish women.” (note 19)
Kahane publicly called Arabs “dogs,” (note 20) and on at least one occasion promised to eliminate Arabs from Israel “like bug spray on these cockroaches.” (note 21) In numerous speeches, and in a 1980 book entitled They Must Go, Kahane outlined his plan for the forcible mass expulsion (or “transfer”) of Palestinian Arabs from the “Land of Israel” — that is, “greater Israel” (including the West Bank territory seized by Israel in 1967).
Kahane’s worldview was summed up in the “statement of principles” of the Kach movement, which he founded and headed. It begins with an arrogant description of “the Jewish People” as “special, chosen, holy and supreme.” (note 22) A primary Kach goal is
the transfer of the Arabs from all parts of Eretz Israel [the enlarged “Land of Israel”]. The Arabs’ presence in Israel ensures hatred, disturbances, and bloodshed. It is a time bomb, threatening the existence of the Zionist enterprise. The Arabs living in Eretz Israel must therefore be transferred to the Arab countries.
Kahane and his supporters agitated for an Israeli law that would criminalize sexual relations between Jews and non-Jews. (At it is, Jews were already forbidden from marrying non-Jews in Israel.) The proposed law would also outlaw a broad range of social contacts between Jews and non-Jews, including mixed schools, community centers, beaches, and even neighborhoods. (note 23)
Kahane and his sympathizers have never been particularly bothered by the parallels between his proposed law and Hitler’s “Nuremberg Laws” of 1935, which similarly banned sexual relations between Jews and non-Jews. (note 24)
As Kahane and other hardline Zionists have persistently pointed out, Jewish religious law clearly forbids Jews to marry non-Jews. (note 25) Similarly, Kahane never tired of citing Jewish religious scripture in support of his ruthless, uncompromising message. As American Jewish author Lenni Brenner has acknowledged, Kahane and his supporters are (note 26) “absolutely correct in insisting that Judaism was a tribal religion, replete with hereditary priests performing animal sacrifices. It was genocidal to the Amalekites, and tried to do so toward the Canaanites. There was much else that was fanatic and racist.”
Few prominent Israeli or American Jewish community leaders were ever willing publicly to support Kahane, and major American Jewish organizations — such as the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, and the American Jewish Congress — took care to disavow Kahane and the JDL. At the same time, though — and in spite of his well-documented criminal record and his message of undisguised bigotry and arrogance — Kahane and the JDL enjoyed sympathy and considerable support from a surprisingly broad cross-section of American Jewry. Over the years, American Jewish businessmen gave millions of dollars to Kahane. (note 27)
|Zionist terrorism is the subject of a front-cover feature article in the New York weekly Village Voice, November 12, 1985.
At the conclusion of an address given in 1971 at a prosperous synagogue in Potomac, Maryland, during which the JDL leader praised the fire-bombing of a car, the well-to-do congregation gave Kahane a standing ovation. (note 28) Jackie Mason, a prominent American comedian, publicly supported Kahane and performed at a fund-raising benefit for the JDL in early 1972. “Democratic principles shouldn’t apply to Israel like they do to America,” explained Mason (like Kahane, an ordained Rabbi). (note 29) At a single fundraiser dinner in Boston in 1986, more than $20,000 was reportedly collected for Kahane. (note 30)
An indication of Kahane’s acceptance by even major American political figures came in 1972, when the JDL leader was invited by US Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson to stand together with him on a New York City stage. This was during the powerful politician’s campaign for the Democratic party’s presidential nomination. (note 31) Another prominent JDL supporter was US Congressman Mario Biaggi, who represented the Bronx in Washington. (note 32)
A leading Jewish community paper, the sensational Brooklyn-based weekly Jewish Press (with a circulation of 130,000 to 160,000), took on Kahane as an editor and columnist, giving him an influential forum for his strident and often deliberately mendacious writing. (note 33)
America’s most influential daily paper, the (Jewish-owned) New York Times, gave Kahane a measure of respectability and legitimacy by publishing essays by him on its widely read “op ed” opinion page. (note 34) Kahane’s book, They Must Go, which calls for the genocidal mass expulsion of Palestinian Arabs from their ancient homeland, was published in 1980 by the “mainstream” New York publishing firm of Grosset & Dunlap.
American television, newspapers and magazines never subjected Kahane to even a fraction of the criticism and contempt they so readily directed against non-Jewish militants in groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, the “Aryan Nations” or “The Order,” which preached comparable messages and goals.
In Israel, Kahane won support and even a measure of fanatical devotion from many “ordinary” Jews, particularly “Sephardic” Jews from the Arab world (who now make up a majority of Israel’s Jewish population). Describing a visit by Kahane to the Israeli city of Afula in July 1985, during a period of Jewish-Arab tension there, journalist Yair Kotler wrote: (note 35)
His appearance was enough to heat up the atmosphere and incite the curly-haired young people on the street corners, who see each Arab as a potential threat to their social standing.
Those on the street corners shouted “Kahane the savior!”‘ They attacked Arabs, both from within Israel [proper] and the [occupied] territories who came to Afula to work. They threw stones at Arab cars …
They looted shops. The mob continued to shout “Kahane, Kahane! Death to the Arabs,” sweeping before it everyone it encountered …
His [Kahane’s] distorted face was seen by millions of viewers in Israel and throughout the world as he shouted, “The only answer is to throw the Arabs out. I want the Arabs out, out, out!”
The city was a volcano. Kahane had set the tone from afar, and fear and hatred were rampant. Passions ran high. The Arab was the enemy…Meir Kahane, the racist who had come to Israel from the United States, had lit a fire.
Kahane is dead, but the flames of bigotry and fanaticism he worked so hard to fan still burn. Indeed, recent surveys show that ever more Israeli Jews support, or are at least willing to seriously consider, the most brutal measures against the Arabs living under their control, including genocidal forced mass expulsion from the land of “greater Israel.”
Over the years, Zionist militants have carried out hundreds of illegal actions against real or imagined “enemies,” including many acts of vandalism and harassment, and countless threatening phone calls. What follows here, though, are details about some particularly spectacular criminal operations. While JDL responsibility for many of them has been conclusively established, in some cases precise responsibility could not be established.
|Jewish Defense League responsibility for a terrorist firebombing attack against an alleged “Nazi war criminal” is reported here in the New York Post, September 7, 1985.|
Perhaps the most widely-publicized crime in which the JDL has been implicated is the murder on October 11, 1985, of Alex Odeh, West Coast regional director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. Odeh was killed in a bomb blast when he entered his group’s office in Santa Ana, southern California. (note 46)
An FBI official announced in 1985 that the Jewish Defense League was believed responsible for the murder of Odeh and at least two other terrorist incidents on the East Coast. “We are attributing the three bombings to the JDL,” said FBI official Lane Bonner. (note 47) Similarly, an FBI report released in July 1986 cited “elements” of the Jewish Defense League as responsible for the murder of Odeh. (note 48)
Three JDL members were identified by US federal investigators in 1988 as the perpetrators of the bombing that took Odeh’s life. The accused assassins, who were born in the USA but fled to Israel to avoid punishment, are Keith Fuchs, Andy Green and Robert Manning. (note 49) Law enforcement officials in Los Angeles and New York have named Robert Manning — an important Jewish Defense League activist — as a suspect in at least four political bombings in 1985, including the one that killed Odeh. Manning, authorities said, had a two-decade history of violent activities that also included threats against producers of a television show. (note 50)
After joining the southern California chapter of the Jewish Defense League as a charter member in 1971, Manning quickly earned a reputation as a particularly tough street fighter. JDL chief Irv Rubin praised him as a “pretty strong boy. I’ve seen him fight. We tangled with Nazis in the streets, Arabs in the streets. He was a real active guy.” (note 51) In a 1988 court document, a federal prosecutor wrote: “It became known that [Manning], while purporting to act on behalf of the Jewish cause, on several occasions placed or threw explosive devices at locations of Arab antagonists.” (note 52)
The Israeli government sought to obstruct the FBI’s investigation of the Odeh slaying, the federal agency charged in November 1987. (note 53) Manning himself tried to evade extradition by claiming heart trouble, by taking 20 sleeping pills, and by charging that he was being wrongfully persecuted simply because he is a pious, orthodox Jew. In spite of all this, Manning was finally extradited to the United States in July 1993. (note 54)
The US Justice Department’s Federal Bureau of Investigation has repeatedly characterized the JDL as a terrorist and criminal organization. A report issued in 1985 by the FBI’s Terrorist Research and Analytical Center confirmed: (note 55)
In FBI terrorism analyses published since 1981, responsibility for 18 terrorist incidents has been attributed to groups seeking to publicize past and present injustices suffered by the Jewish people. While claims for some of these acts have been made in the names of the “Jewish Defenders,’ “United Jewish Underground,” and “Jewish Direct Action,” 15 of the incidents were attributed to the Jewish Defense League (JDL), by far the most well known of these groups.
Also in 1985, the FBI named the Jewish Defense League as the second most active terrorist group in the United States. (Only Puerto Rican terrorists were more active during this period.) The FBI linked the JDL to 37 terrorist attacks carried out from 1977 to 1984. (note 56) Two years later, the FBI announced that Jewish extremist groups had carried out 24 terrorist acts from 1981 through 1986, 17 of which were the work of the Jewish Defense League. (note 57)
|The Jewish Defense League was named in 1985 as a major terrorist group by the US Federal Bureau of Investigation, as a major California newspaper reports here.
Another US federal government agency, the Department of Energy, similarly characterized the JDL in a report issued in 1986: (note 58)
For more than a decade, the Jewish Defense League (JDL) has been one of the most active terrorist groups in the United States. Although the JDL maintains that it is a political action group concerned with dramatizing the plight of Soviet Jewry and, in more general terms, protecting Jews and Jewish interests worldwide, the FBI has long classified it as a terrorist organization.
…The underlying purpose of the JDL is to reverse the mythical image of the Jews as victims. This militancy also fuels the anti-Soviet campaign designed to create and foment new sources of tension in Soviet-American relations …
The JDL, however, has also attacked Arab, Iranian, Iraqi, Egyptian, Palestinian, Lebanese, French, and German targets in the United States … In 1978 [for example], Egyptian diplomats were targeted…Attacks have also been staged by League chapters in France, Britain, Italy and Israel.
|David Willcox (left) at a demonstration in Washington, DC, April 22, 1993, to protest the new US Holocaust Memorial Museum. A short time after this picture was taken, Zionist hoodlums attacked and seriously injured him.
Photo by Fred Burkhart)
In more recent years, the official report went on,
The JDL has pursued a dual-track strategy of acts of civil disobedience and generally peaceful protest, along with acts of outright terrorism…Bombing is the JDL’s favorite tactic, accounting for 78 percent of all JDL incidents. Shootings are next, accounting for 16 percent, followed by arson, vandalism, and kidnaping, accounting for one percent each …
Since 1968, JDL operations have killed seven persons and wounded at least 22…Sixty-two percent of all JDL attacks are directed against property; 30 percent against businesses; four percent against academics and academic institutions; and two percent against religious targets.
Typically, an anonymous caller will claim responsibility for a specific terrorist act for either the JDL or one of its alleged subgroups, only to have an official spokesman for the JDL deny the group’s involvement the following day.
In the past, although the JDL was among the most active terrorist organizations in the United States, the threat it posed appeared to be primarily symbolic…Recent events, however, suggest that this view requires revision. The increase of militant Jewish terrorism represents not only an escalation of violence, but a significant change in targeting patterns, as well as a dramatic shift in tactics.
…The group appears to be concentrating its efforts on persons and institutions it considers to be enemies of Judaism and Israel. The targets now  include alleged former Nazis and war criminals; Palestinian and Arab individuals and institutions; and persons and so-called research centers promoting views about the Holocaust that minimize the dimensions of Jewish suffering.
Perhaps the most far-reaching change, however, is the increasing use of assassination, both to draw attention to the terrorists’ causes and to eliminate perceived enemies of the Jewish people and Israel.
Besides Kahane, two of the most prominent JDL activists have been Irv Rubin and Mordechai Levy. Each has been repeatedly arrested for criminal activities.
Until 1982 or 1983, Mordechai (Mark) Levy was one of the most active of Jewish Defense League activists. (note 59) Among his numerous arrests was one in 1981 as a suspect in a car bombing. (note 60) On one occasion he dressed up in a full regalia Nazi uniform to apply for a parade permit to march at Independence Hall in Philadelphia, apparently in an effort to alert the local Jewish community to the “dangers of neo-Nazism.” (note 61)
|Irv Rubin with JDL followers at a 1981 gathering. Holding a baseball bat is Mordechai Levy. Rubin and Levy later became deadly rivals.|
After leaving the JDL (supposedly because it was not “militant enough”) he founded the Jewish Defense Organization. He claimed that his group, based in New York City, had more than 3,000 members. (The real figure was probably no more than a few dozen.) In the years that followed, Levy and rival Zionist militant Irv Rubin engaged in increasingly bitter feuding.
In August 1989, Levy was arrested following a dramatic night-time confrontation with Rubin and other JDL members. Fearing that Rubin was trying to kill him, Levy went to the roof of the building where he lived and began spraying the lower Manhattan street with semiautomatic rifle fire, wounding an air-conditioning repairman as he sat in his parked van. (note 62) Levy was later sentenced to four and a half years imprisonment for injuring the 69-year-old repairman. (note 63)
On April 22, 1993, Jewish Defense Organization members attacked demonstrators who had gathered in Washington, DC, to protest the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. At least one person was seriously injured. A JDO spokesman told reporters that several members of his group had attacked and beat “four or five” of the 150 or so persons who had rallied to express their opposition to the Museum. (note 64)
One of the victims was David Willcox, a 52-year-old employee of the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. He was standing on a street corner when three men wearing black “paramilitary” uniforms and skull caps with the Star of David attacked, beating him on the head and legs with metal pipes. Willcox required hospitalization and 12 stitches in his head.
Two JDO members later confirmed the attack against Willcox. JDO spokesman Michael Schneider told a reporter that his group would continue to do “whatever is necessary ” to “defend” Jews, including attacking “enemies” in the street. The FBI said that it is investigating the attack against Willcox as a possible act of “domestic terrorism,” while city police announced that they were looking into the incident as a possible “hate crime.” (As we go to press, though, no arrests have been made.)
Since the early 1970s, Irv Rubin has been perhaps the most prominent Jewish Defense League activist and spokesman. After a time as leader of the group’s JDL’s West coast operations, he emerged as “national chairman” of the post-Kahane JDL. By 1979, Rubin had managed to get arrested 39 times in connection with JDL activities. (note 65)
In March 1992, Irv Rubin was arrested on suspicion of conspiring to commit murder. He was released a few days later after the Los Angeles district attorney’s office determined that police lacked sufficient evidence to hold him. (note 66)
In August 1992, Rubin’s JDL succeeded in forcing a Los Angeles restaurant and nightclub, the Largo, to cancel a concert on behalf of the Palestine Aid Society, to raise money for humanitarian assistance. Rubin warned Largo proprietor Mark Flanagan that he could “expect trouble” and an “angry protest” unless he cancelled the event. Soon after, Flanagan discovered that his business’ door locks had been destroyed by still-dripping fast-acting molecular glue. Then, just hours before the event was to begin, Flanagan canceled the concert out of fear that patrons might be victims of a possible JDL attack. (note 67)
Among the most persistent targets of Jewish terrorists in recent years have been those who reject the generally accepted Holocaust story that six million Jews were systematically murdered in Europe during the Second World War.
In recent decades, a growing number of scholars have been citing an impressive body of evidence that raises serious doubts about many supposedly well-documented aspects of the Holocaust story. These “Holocaust revisionists” include acclaimed best-selling British historian David Irving, French professor Dr. Robert Faurisson and Dr. Arthur Butz of Northwestern University. (For more about Holocaust revisionism and the arguments of revisionist historians, write for a catalog of books, tapes and other material from the Institute for Historical Review.)
Incidents of violence against revisionist “thought criminals” have included:
|Mordechai Levy, leader of the militant Jewish Defense Organization, is taken into custody by police following an August 1989 shooting incident in which he wounded a bystander.|
Since its founding in 1978, the Institute for Historical Review has been the leading American publisher of books and other materials questioning the Holocaust extermination story. For this reason, its office in southern California, as well as individual IHR employees, soon became targets of a systematic campaign that included a drive-by shooting, three firebombings, vandalization of IHR employee-owned automobiles, slashings of 22 tires of employee automobiles, JDL-organized demonstrations outside the IHR office, and numerous telephone threats during office hours and at night to IHR employees at home. So intense did the harassment become that the family of one IHR employee was forced to move. (note 77)
|Jewish Defense League activists, one carrying an Israeli flag, shout slogans while marching outside the office of the Institute for Historical Review in Torrance, California, April 5, 1981.|
During the course of a JDL demonstration in front of the IHR office on March 19, 1981, Mordechai Levy and other JDL protesters attacked the car of the landlord’s agent, who had arrived to ensure security. While shouting threats, Levy smashed the right front passenger window of the man’s car as he drove off. (note 78)
A few weeks later, on April 5, 1981, JDL hoodlums staged another violent demonstration outside the IHR office, during which an IHR employee was thrown to the ground and beaten.
In the early morning hours of June 25, 1981, came the first firebombing attack against the IHR office. Fortunately, the arson device — similar to a “Molotov cocktail” — caused only minor damage. A man claiming to represent the “Jewish Defenders” announced responsibility for the attack in phone calls to news agencies. (note 79)
The second arson attack against the IHR office came on April 25, 1982, in which a copy machine, a few pieces of furniture and some records were damaged. In a telephone message to a local news agency, a group calling itself “the Jewish Defenders” claimed responsibility. (note 80)
In an attack on September 5, 1982, the IHR office was riddled with gunfire, demolishing two windows and damaging the front door. Additionally, a small arson device caused some slight damage to the front of the office. Later that day, as throughout the week, came a barrage of murder-threatening telephone calls. Although the caller’s voice was identified as that of Mordechai Levy, typically, no one was arrested in the case. (note 81)
This terror campaign culminated in a devastating arson attack on the Institute’s offices and warehouse in Torrance on July 4, 1984 — the 209th anniversary of American independence. Damage in the attack, carried out in the early morning hours of the 4th, was estimated at $400,000. (note 82)
In a special edition of the IHR Newsletter (August 1984), IHR Director J. Marcellus summed up:
As a physical entity, the Institute for Historical Review has virtually ceased to exist. Ninety percent of our book and tape inventory — the largest collection of revisionist historical literature to be found anywhere — has been wiped out. Every last piece of office equipment and machinery — including desks, chairs, files and shelves — lay in charred heaps of useless, twisted scrap. Manuscripts, documents, artwork, galleys and film negatives — products of more than six long years of a tough, dedicated effort to bring suppressed historical data to people the world over — no longer exist. Tens of thousands of books…estimated at over $300,000 in value, are gone…More than 2,500 square feet of space that was once the world’s most controversial publisher lies blackened in chaos and total ruin.
Two days later, JDL leader Irv Rubin showed up at the site of the gutted IHR offices to publicly praise the arson attack. The JDL, he declared, “wholeheartedly applauds the recent devastation of the offices of the Institute for Historical Review.” Denying any personal responsibility himself, Rubin said that the criminal attack had been carried out by a former JDL activist named Larry Winston (Joel Cohen). “I believe, with all my heart, that he [Winston/Cohen] had something to do with this” arson, Rubin declared. (note 83)
|Some attendees of the 1989 IHR Conference demonstrate outside the Red Lion Inn Costa Mesa, California, to protest the hotel’s capitulation to threat and intimidation by the Jewish Defense League.|
Although no one was ever arrested in connection with the 1984 firebombing, the sophisticated nature of the attack suggests that it could have been the work of trained operatives of a foreign governmental agency.
Apart from local news coverage, American newspapers and television reported almost nothing about this act of criminal “book burning.” This skewed media treatment moved noted journalist Alexander Cockburn to observe (in the pages of the liberal weekly The Nation): (note 84)
The outfit in the United States that does publish material belittling generally accepted accounts of the Nazi extermination of the Jews is called the Institute for Historical Review. I don’t recall much fuss when its offices in Torrance, California, were firebombed in July 1984. Perhaps this is what Mailer meant by “sophistication” in handling such heterodox opinion.
At the same time, though, a few prominent voices courageously spoke out against the attack. American historian John Toland — who received the Pulitzer prize for general non-fiction in 1971 for his book The Rising Sun — wrote to the IHR: (note 85)
When I learned of the torching of the office-warehouse of the Institute for Historical Review, I was shocked. And when I heard no condemnation of this act of terrorism on television and read no protests in the editorial pages of our leading newspapers or from the halls of Academe, I was dismayed and incensed…I call on all true believers in democracy to join me in public denunciation of the recent burning of books in Torrance, California.
British historian David Irving, author of numerous acclaimed, best-selling works of history, declared: “I was deeply shocked to hear of the fire-bomb attack on your premises.”
In mid-February 1989, Jewish Defense League intimidation brought on the cancellation of a three-day Institute for Historical Review conference at two hotel sites in southern California.
Arrangements had been made months in advance to hold the Ninth IHR Conference at the Red Lion Inn hotel in Costa Mesa. Several days before it was to begin, the hotel received the first of a barrage of telephone threats warning that if it permitted the IHR gathering to take place as scheduled, there would be large, disruptive demonstrations in front of the hotel. It didn’t take many such threats to persuade general manager Russell Cox to cave in to the Zionist group, and to cancel the hotel’s contract with the IHR. Cox then added insult to injury by permitting JDL chief Rubin to hold a “news conference” in the hotel lobby.
Arrangements were then hastily made to relocate the IHR gathering to a nearby Holiday Inn hotel. However, just hours before it was to commence — and as attendees were arriving — the Holiday Inn likewise cancelled out, bowing to JDL threats similar to those made against the Red Lion Inn.
At this point, and with help from former US Congressman John Schmitz, IHR Director J. Marcellus made emergency arrangements with Joe Bischof, proprietor of the “Old World Village” shopping center in Huntington Beach, to hold the IHR Conference there. Bischof refused to bow to JDL intimidation, including a demonstration at the site by a handful of sorry-looking placard-waving JDLers led by Rubin, who shouted insults at passersby. In spite of the disruption, and some inconvenience for attendees, the Ninth IHR Conference proved one of the most successful and high-spirited ever. (note 86)
On January 22, 1992, revisionist activist David Cole was attacked by JDL thugs at a meeting held at the University of California at Los Angeles. Before the meeting began, JDL leader Rubin first tried to push the youthful Cole down a flight of stairs. JDL hoodlums also harassed and pushed around meeting organizer Robert Morrissey. After the meeting commenced, JDL punks tried to shout down the speakers, and then threw food at Cole. Finally, a JDL thug assaulted Cole — who is Jewish — hitting him in the face and bloodying his nose. (note 87)
|David Cole at the 1992 IHR Conference. He was attacked by JDL thugs at a meeting in January 1992 at the University of California at Los Angeles.|
The tumult was recorded on videotape by a camera crew of the CBS television news program “48 Hours,” as well as by news crews of two local Los Angeles television stations. Neither of the two local stations mentioned a word of the incident in their nightly news broadcasts. Similarly, CBS officials decided not to air even a second of this outburst, not even in a segment about Holocaust revisionism that was part of the CBS television network’s hour-long magazine-format program “48 Hours” broadcast of February 26, 1992. Network officials apparently decided that scenes of Zionist hoodlums beating a young Jewish revisionist would not “fit” with the image of revisionism that CBS wanted to project to its many viewers. (note 88)
Violence in Europe
In France, François Duprat — a gifted young historian, educator, and prolific writer — was murdered in 1978, thereby becoming the first person to be killed because of his support for Holocaust revisionism. Duprat had publicized the writings of former concentration camp inmate Paul Rassinier, distributed a booklet, Did Six Million Really Die?, and had published a revisionist article of his own, “The Mystery of the Gas Chambers.” (note 89)
|Francois Duprat. Because of his skeptical view of the Holocaust extermination story, this gifted French educator was murdered in a 1978 bomb blast.|
As a result of such activism, the 38-year-old teacher was assassinated on March 18, 1978, when the car he was driving was blown up in a bomb blast. His wife, who was with him, lost the use of her legs in the attack. A Jewish “Remembrance Commando” and a “Jewish Revolutionary Group” promptly claimed responsibility for the murder. (note 90) So sophisticated was the attack that it is difficult to believe that no government agency was involved.
It is no secret that Israel provides training and weapons for local “Jewish defense groups” in the United States and many other countries. Victor Ostrovsky, a former intelligence case officer of the Mossad, Israel’s spy and secret service agency, confirms this connection in his much-discussed book, By Way of Deception. (note 91) One department of the Mossad, writes Ostrovsky, is the Tsafririm, which is
responsible for setting up Jewish defense groups, called “frames,” or misgerot, all over the world, now including some parts of the United States, where anti-Semitism is regarded as a threat … The main job is to help the leaders of Jewish communities outside Israel plan for their own security. Part of this is done through the hets va-keshet, or “bow and arrow,” Israel’s paramilitary youth brigades.
… Often youths from other countries are brought over [to Israel] to spend the summer learning about security, picking up such skills as completing obstacle courses, pitching tents, and learning how to use a sniper rifle and Uzi assault rifle. Still others learn upgraded security skills, such as how to build a slick, for hiding weapons or documents, when and how to do security checks, as well as fundamentals of investigation and intelligence gathering.
Israel provides weapons for the many “Jewish defense groups,” confirms Ostrovsky, indirectly through known arms dealers.
In Europe the most important Zionist terrorist group is Tagar, the youth (or “student”) branch of the radical Zionist movement Betar. The Tagar/Betar group has carried out numerous criminal attacks against “enemies,” including Holocaust revisionists. Headquartered in Paris, Tagar/Betar has close ties with the Israeli government, and particularly with the political party of Begin and Shamir. Tagar is reportedly controlled by Israel’s covert operations agency, the Mossad. (note 92)
Tagar activists have often boasted of their determination to “strike” against anyone who “denies the Holocaust.” Tagar admitted responsibility for a physical assault against French revisionist historian Olivier Mathieu during a television interview in February 1990. Three months later, Tagar thugs sacked the “Ogmios” bookstore in Paris (which carried revisionist titles).
Tagar/Betar activists receive combat training along military lines from Israeli army officers. Tagar members wear paramilitary blue uniforms with white ties (the Zionist colors). Tagar/Betar has operated in Europe with the knowledge and approval of high French officials such as Prime Minister Laurent Fabius (who is Jewish). In more than one Tagar/Betar attack against opponents, French police have passively stood by. (note 93)
Tagar activists have operated in France under other names, including “Jewish Defense Organization” and “Jewish Combat Organization.” Private para-military groups are strictly forbidden in France, except Jewish ones. Between June 1976 and April 1991, such Jewish “militias” have carried out 50 attacks. In effect, Jewish terrorists in Europe can attack their “enemies” with impunity. (note 94)
Tagar has also been active in the United States. In February 1992, the “Tagar Student Zionist Organization at the Ohio State University” in Columbus organized a protest meeting against Holocaust revisionism. The group distributed a leaflet — which, typically, contained factual falsehoods — specifically attacking revisionist activist Bradley Smith. (note 95)
Dr. Robert Faurisson — Europe’s most prominent Holocaust revisionist (and a member of the Editorial Advisory Committee of the IHR’s Journal of Historical Review) — was severely injured in a nearly fatal attack on September 16, 1989. (note 96)
|Robert Faurisson in a hospital bed following a nearly fatal attack by Zionist thugs on September 16, 1989.|
After spraying a stinging gas into his face, temporarily blinding him, three assailants punched him to the ground and then repeatedly kicked him in the face and chest. The 60-year-old scholar, who had been out walking his poodle in a park in his home town of Vichy, suffered a broken jaw and severe head injuries. Physicians operated for four and a half hours to repair his jaw and treat a broken rib and badly swollen face.
A group calling itself “The Sons of the Memory of the Jews” claimed responsibility for the savage attack. In a statement, the group threatened: “Professor Faurisson is the first, but will not be the last. Let those who deny the Shoah [Holocaust] beware.” (note 97) While French police officially would acknowledge only that “three young Jewish activists from Paris” had carried out the assault, the attackers are strongly suspected to have been with the Tagar/Betar organization. (note 98)
Prominent individuals and organizations in France, along with the country’s most influential daily newspaper, Le Monde, condemned the attack. However, French-Jewish “Nazi hunter” Serge Klarsfeld sought to excuse or justify the crime. “Someone who has provoked the Jewish community for years should expect this sort of thing,” he said. “One cannot insult the memory of the victims without inviting the consequences.” (note 99)
While the September 1989 attack against Faurisson was the most vicious, it was neither the first nor the last. Between November 1978 and May 1993, he was attacked on ten separate occasions. (note 100)
|Dr. Faurisson speaking at the Tenth IHR Conference, October 1990.|
As this report shows, non-governmental Zionist terrorism has been a problem for more than twenty years. It remains a serious problem today.
Espousing Jewish supremacy, the Zionist terrornetwork operates internationally, linking Israel, Europe and the United States. In addition to the suffering and destruction resulting directly from its many crimes, the network’s campaign of bigotry fosters a dangerous climate of hate and intolerance. Through intimidation, threat and violence, Jewish-Zionist terrorists have succeeded in silencing numerous voices. Many others have never spoken up out of fear that they might likewise become victims.
Particularly alarming is the important support provided to these criminal groups by the government of Israel. This official collaboration poses a threat not only to the freedom and security of individuals in many countries, but to the very freedom and sovereignty of nations.
At the same time, though, the danger should not be exaggerated. Zionist power is formidable but not limitless. For one thing, Jewish militants are often so inept and mutually suspicious that they squander much of their energy on attacks against each other. (note 107)
Moreover, the number of individuals and organizations that Zionist militants perceive as “anti-Semitic enemies” has increased so dramatically in recent years that any one person or group is less likely to be singled out for attack. (Even the much-feared “anti-Semite” epithet has lost much of its impact. In 1991, an Israeli government cabinet minister denounced President George Bush as “anti-Semitic” because he wasn’t acting quickly enough in approving a $10 billion loan guarantee to Israel.)
The readiness of Zionist militants to use violence against those whose views they reject is an implicit admission of moral and intellectual weakness. By resorting to violence against Holocaust revisionists and others, Zionist fanatics inherently acknowledge their inability to discredit their adversaries’ arguments in free and open debate. Each new act of intimidation and violence only serves to further underscore this intellectual impotence.
THE ZIONIST TERROR NETWORK: Background and Operations of the Jewish Defense League and other Criminal Zionist Groups
Completely revised 1993 edition
Compiled and written by Mark Weber
Copyright (c) 1985, 1993 by the
Institute for Historical Review
P.O. Box 2739
Newport Beach, CA 92659
First of all, thank you very much, Greg, for the introduction. I’d like to thank also the IHR and Mark Weber particularly for inviting me here. I’m very happy to be here, to be part of this event. I like long-winded topics, at least topic titles, so I’ll read the topic which I have selected for today. It’s as follows: “Jewish Tactics as Exemplified in the Controversy Over Jewish Involvement in the Transatlantic Slave Trade.” So I won’t be speaking that much on the controversy itself. What I’m trying to do is to use my subjective experience, that is, the experience I’ve had, for close to a decade now, in dealing with this controversy.
And what I’m going to try to do now — to use my concrete, subjective experience on the firing line, so to speak. And I’m going to try to extract from my experience certain basic sort of tactics that I think the Jewish lobby has used over the years pertaining to my particular situation. But in trying to extract these tactics from my own situation, I suspect that I may very well resonate with the experience of some other people here, because my suspicion is that there tends to be a generalized practice which transcends your particular situation. So, even though in my case I was dealing with a specific situation — the transatlantic slave trade — my suspicion is that the kinds of tactics which were used against me may be not very dissimilar to those experienced by many other folks who have been involved in other kinds of disputes with this particular lobby.
The first thing I should do by way of introduction is just to basically summarize precisely what my controversy was. I know it’s familiar to many people here, but I’m sure not to everybody in this audience. As was mentioned a minute ago in the introduction, I teach at Wellesley College in Massachusetts. For many years I’ve taught a survey course in African-American history. This is a one semester course, that moves very rapidly over the whole gamut of African-American history. In 1993 I introduced to this course a book which is on sale here, a book which then was fairly new, a book which I myself had only just recently become introduced to. This book, which is published by the historical research department of the Nation of Islam, is entitled The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews. And what that book did, relying primarily on sources written by Jews, and Jewish sources of a variety of types, is to try to sort of synthesize the existing information on Jewish involvement in the slave trade, the bringing of Africans as slaves from Africa to the so-called new world. There wasn’t that much in the book that was new — all the information, practically, was secondary information, which had been already published, although hidden away to a large extent in very esoteric Jewish journals, which the average Jew, I discovered later, had no idea about.
Nevertheless, it wasn’t new information. It was new to many people, including myself, and I found it very interesting that even though I had taught African-American history for many years, I had been only dimly aware of the role of Jews in that slave trade. What I discovered was that the Jewish role in that slave trade had been very cleverly camouflaged for many, many years. Where Jews were involved, usually they tended not to be identified as Jews, whereas where Christians were involved, or where Muslims were involved. there was ready identification of such persons by their ethnicity, by their religious affiliation, and so on. In the case of Jews, they would be called other things — Portuguese, Spanish, Brazilian, whatever. But, you know, that crucial identification tended to be obscured. So, as a good professor – I think I’m a good professor. I’m always on the lookout for new information, to enrich my classes. So I was very fascinated by this new information, and decided to add a few readings from this book in my class. And that’s when, as the saying goes, all hell broke loose. [Laughter]
Apparently, I didn’t realize it, but I actually stumbled into a controversy which was already brewing because the book had apparently caused some consternation in Jewish circles. And it’s only afterwards, when I went back and did my research, that I discovered that one or two editorials had already appeared, by way of the Jewish power structure, in a sense warning people like myself to stay away from the book. There already apparently had been a full-page op ed piece in The New York Times, one that, I was told, was the largest, longest op ed that had ever been published in that paper. It was actually typeset in the form of a Star of David. It was written by someone called Henry Lewis Gates of Harvard University, one of the black spokesmen for the Jewish lobby. Even the paper from my basic home town, the Boston Globe, had carried an editorial, which I was unaware of at the time, not long before I began to use the book. And in a sense, the purpose of these editorials and op eds was to warn folks to stay away from that book, or else. But me, in my foolhardiness, ignored the warnings, being largely unaware of the warnings in the first place. And so I stumbled into this problem.
In fact Jews had been involved not only in the African slave trade, but also, and for a very long period of time, in a variety of other slave trades as well. Apparently, they had actually dominated slavery and the slave trade in medieval times. A couple of days ago, while on the plane on the way here, I was re-reading a Ph. D. dissertation from 1977 [“The Ebb and Flow of Conflict: A History of Black-Jewish Relations through 1900”] by a man called Harold D. Brackman, who is a functionary of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. In his dissertation, which details Black-Jewish relations from ancient times up to 1900, he actually acknowledges the fact that Jews were the principal slave traders in the world for several hundred years — although, and in typical fashion, he puts a very interesting spin on it. He acknowledges, as I guess he has to, that Jews were the major slave traders in the world, trading slaves everywhere from Russia to western Europe, to India, to China — but he says that they dominated the world trade only for a few hundred years — only. [laughter] He said that they were the main slave traders from the eighth century to the twelfth century — but that was no big thing. It was only a few hundred years.
I discovered also that the Jews were very instrumental in the ideological underpinning for the African slave trade — the notorious Hamitic myth — which more than anything else has provided a sort of ideological underpinning or rationale for the slave trade. This comes out of the Talmud. In fact, Harold Brackman himself acknowledges that this was the first explication of the story in the Biblical book of Genesis about Ham, the so-called progenitor of the African race, having been cursed by Noah, and so on. But apparently, according to Brackman, the Talmud was the first place that put a racist spin on this story. The Biblical story was racially neutral, but the Talmud apparently put a very awful racist spin on this story, which later on became the basis, the ideological underpinning, for the African slave trade. So all of this I was to discover as I became embroiled in the controversy.
One of the things that interested me, too, was that the Jewish element was apparently also a major element in what came to be known in the 19 th century as the white slave trade. The white slave trade was a major multinational, international trading in women for immoral sexual purposes, as prostitutes, and so on. And I found, too, that Jewish entrepreneurs in Europe apparently were also major figures in that so-called slave trade.
So I became aware of all of this. Just to summarize briefly what I discovered in the book, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, and in the subsequent readings, with regard to the African slave trade, is that once it got going in the 15th century, the Jews again were a very important part of it. The book was not suggesting, just I have never suggested, that the Jews were the only people involved, or even the major people involved. My basic point has always been that whereas everybody else that I’m aware of who was a part of the slave trade has acknowledged being part of it. In fact, many of the people who were a part of the genesis of the slave trade later also became part of the abolitionist movement to end the trade. But as far as I know, the Jewish element is the only one that has resisted acknowledging its participation in this trade. In fact, it has gone beyond merely resisting knowledge of this information coming out. It has become very upset when this information has come to the fore.
And that has been my basic problem. Why? What’s so special about this group that places itself beyond the pale, so to speak — no pun intended — beyond the pale of criticism. And whereas any other group can be criticized, this group — it seems to me — is beyond criticism. Especially for me as a black person, I become very upset if someone tries to walk into my classroom to tell me that I, as a black person teaching black history, have to sort of regard their involvement in my history as somehow out of bounds.
So, after becoming involved in this history, via the Hamitic myth, Jews were some of the important financiers of this slave trade in the very early periods. One of the major multi-national corporations that financed the Atlantic slave trade very early on was the Dutch West India Company. As we know, the Jews had been chased out of Spain, and chased out of Portugal. The Netherlands was the one area which welcomed them to some degree. And this was right around the same time, the 15th century, that the slave trade was gearing up — so they were positioned, geographically and in other ways, to become an important element in the financing of the Dutch West India Company, a major multinational corporation that was involved in the slave trade.
In the early 17th century Jews were, in fact, a major element in the slave trade in places like Brazil and Surinam in South America, in places like Curacao in the West Indies, and in Jamaica, Barbados and other places. I discovered that they were also very well positioned in this country — that many of the traders in colonial times who brought slaves across the Atlantic to this country were in fact Jewish ship-owners and slave traders. Some of the best known names in colonial North America who were involved in that traffic were people like Aaron Lopez of Newport, Rhode Island, who was one of the best-known names of all.
I discovered that Jews owned many of the ancillary corporations that sort of fed into the slave trade. For example, rum distilling was a major business that was ancillary to the slave trade because rum was used as an item of trade, to exchange for slaves in West Africa. And most of the rum distilleries in places like Boston and elsewhere in New England were, I believe, owned by Jews, and so on.
I discovered that according to the 1830 census, even though Jews were a small proportion of the population in North America, nevertheless they were inordinately represented among the slave owners. Yes, they were a small portion of the population overall, but on a percentage basis that were significant. Jewish historians who have analyzed the 1830 census have discovered that whereas something like 30-odd percent of the white population may have owned one or more slaves in the South, for Jewish households it was over 70 percent. So according to an analysis of the 1830 census by Jewish historians, Jews were more than twice as likely, on a percentage basis, to own slaves.
I also discovered that Jews, despite their involvement in the slave trade, were very few and far between in the abolitionist movement. They were much, much less likely than other groups to be involved in this movement. So that in a nutshell, then, is the set of facts that caused me to become involved in this interesting controversy. And what I want to do, then, is to dwell not on the facts themselves, but on what I perceive to be the main tactics that were used, because I found myself, like I said, on the front line of this situation, and I became very fascinated, looking at their tactics. And the more I began to read around this question, the more I saw patterns emerging.
The first and major tactic that I discovered in their attack on me was their reliance on lies — just straight-up lies. There’s no other way to describe it, just telling lies. Many of the categories that I will enumerate overlap, and many of them could also come under this general rubric of telling lies. But I think that if one had to isolate a single tactic, it was a tactic of telling lies. I think they’ve elevated telling lies to a very high artistic form. [Laughter]. For example, very early in my controversy, the major Jewish organizations became involved. And this is very fascinating. Here am I, a professor in a very small college, teaching a class of maybe 30 students, but they attached such great importance to this, that within a very short space of time the major Jewish organizations became involved, and it became a national event. For example, one Sunday morning on the ABC network television program “This Week With David Brinkley,” there was a whole segment dealing with this question — about my telling my students that Jews were involved in the slave trade.
Up to that point I was still a little astounded, considering the prominence given to what, to me, was a totally inconsequential thing. Shortly after all of this started, four of the major Jewish organizations issued a joint press release attacking me: the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, the American Jewish Congress, and the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston. Afterwards they said that this was somewhat unprecedented for these major Jewish organizations to combine their efforts to attack one little obscure professor at a small school. They also admitted that it was unusual to issue this press release in the middle of one of their high holy days — of which there are quite a few, I understand — to sort of disturb the sanctity of this high holiday by issuing something along these lines.
Now, I actually saw one of the original press releases, which I have likened to a medieval scroll. It reminded me of a movie I saw as a boy, with Robin Hood, in which the Sheriff of Nottingham went into Sherwood Forest [laughter], and he would unroll a long proclamation and tack it on a tree, saying “Robin Hood, beware. We’re looking for you.” That kind of a thing. [laughter]. This was literally a scroll. You couldn’t read it without having to unroll it. I’ve never seen anything like it. It had the logos of these four organizations. And this opened my eyes to the proclivity of these folks to tell lies.
This proclamation told the world that I was refusing to let my students discuss this information. First of all, it presented me as providing wrong information — blatantly false information, as another Jewish person described it to my classroom. And it said that in the classroom I was apparently ramming this stuff down my students’ throats, and forbidding any discussion — a claim that was absolutely, hideously untrue. It said that I had a history of all kinds of problems with my school, and that my colleagues had been complaining about me for many years. Up to now I have had no inkling of what these complaints could possibly be. I know of no such incidents, certainly not before this time.
I was able to take this press release and read it out to my class. It was a very good learning experience for the students, because here were the students who I was accused of misleading and whatnot, and I was able to show them the kind of information that gets into the major media. One of the interesting lies that came out around this time was by the campus rabbi. She came into my office — yes this was a “she,” actually — complaining about my teaching this information. So I told her: Well look, if you think this information is false, why don’t you come to my class? I will invite you to my classroom. I will allow you to stand up in front of my class and explain what’s wrong with this information, and then we can have a debate in front of the class. And she agreed. But of course she quickly changed her mind. And not only did she change her mind, but then she put it out that I had refused to discuss the material with her. [laughter].
So point number one is the proclivity to tell lies. Point number two was a very interesting proclivity towards attempting to damage one’s professional credibility. There was a tendency to libel and slander whoever they were upset with. In this case it was me. There was one Jewish gentleman, about 50 years old, who began making anonymous calls, random calls, to the campus. He would call the dorms, he would call people’s offices, just randomly. And he would tell them he was a Jewish student at Harvard University. He would tell them that he had discovered that I did not really have a PhD, and that I was not qualified to be teaching at Wellesley College. This was one of the more bizarre examples of the attempt to discredit me professionally.
There was a gentleman who I subsequently brought a libel case against, and lost. I brought three cases, but lost them all. This gentleman suggested that I was an affirmative action PhD, and that the only reason I got a PhD was because of affirmative action. He said the only reason I got tenure at Wellesley College — I was one of the youngest professors ever tenured there — was because they were afraid of me. I was portrayed as this great, black, loudmouthed person, so just to keep me quiet they decided to give me tenure. [laughter].
One of the most interesting of these efforts to discredit me was by a gentleman called Leon Wieseltier, who describes himself as a literary editor of the New Republic magazine. Now in 1994, I think it was, at the height of all this hysteria, The Washington Post Book World invited me to review four new books for an issue, which I did. They gave my review a lot of space. It was the longest book review in that issue.
And in the very next week’s issue, there were, predictably, two or three outraged letters from Jewish individuals asking The Washington Post Book World if had been aware of who this person was — the great anti-Semite Tony Martin. Don’t you know who this is? [laughter] How can you let him write in this prestigious periodical? And this guy Wieseltier went a step further. The title of my book is The Jewish Onslaught, and the subtitle is “Despatches from the Wellesley Battlefront.” Now, I spell despatches “d-e-s.” Most Americans spell it “d-i-s.” I grew up in a British tradition, in a British colony, and to this day I spell honor “h-o-n-o-u-r.” Most of you do not. The “e” in “despatches” is a British spelling. And this idiot [laughter] obviously didn’t realize that there are alternative spellings of the word. Again, so anxious to try to discredit someone they disagree with, this guy actually told The Washington Post Book World in his letter that I was so ignorant and stupid that I couldn’t even spell the word “despatches.” [laughter]. Look at how stupid I was, who had been allowed to publish in their journal. Luckily for me, the editor of The Washington Post Book World was one of those rare persons who was apparently not too cowed by the Jewish onslaught. And she wrote a very nice rejoinder telling Wieseltier that she had checked two dictionaries, and in both of them she saw “despatches” — spelled with an “e” — as one of the optional spellings of the word. [Applause]
Then there was Mary Lefkowitz, one of my colleagues at Wellesley College. In a little literary magazine I’d never seen before. she actually alleged that I had pushed, had physically assaulted, a white student. Now, I teach at a women’s college. So, here she is playing into, I guess, all these perceptions of a big, black rapist or whatever. But she actually alleged that I physically pushed down a white student. This would be a white woman, and the woman fell down. Then, she said, I bent over her and raged. That was the word she used: I bent over her and raged. One had a vision of a raging animal. [laughter]. So of course I brought a libel suit against her.
And one of the things I discovered was that these folks are very, very well positioned in the court system. In fact, after having lost, well, I guess, two libel suits, I was beginning to think they must have had something to do with fashioning the libel laws in this country. [laughter]. Because in this case, you know, Lefkowitz actually acknowledged that what she said was wrong, and she acknowledged that she had not taken due care in ascertaining the facts. But even those acknowledgements were not enough for me to win the case. I had to prove that she had acted with reckless abandon, and all kinds of things. But it was a very interesting learning experience for me. The way libel laws work in this country, once they identify you as a “public person,” anyone basically has carte blanche. A person can say anything he wants. It can be true. It can be false. He doesn’t have to do research. He can say anything he wants. It’s almost literally that bad.
So, those are some of the efforts that were made to discredit me. Of course, I don’t think they succeeded. But again, this was a very persistent effort to sort of tarnish my image. And very much aligned with this, of course, was the generalized question of character assassination. This was part of that effort to damage one’s credibility.
There was also the tactic of what I describe as dirty tricks. Of course, this too is a subset within the general rubric of lies, I suppose. At Wellesley College there is a Hillel group. Hillel is the Jewish student organization that exists on campuses around the country. I remember reading in Paul Findley’s book, They Dare To Speak Out, that the Hillel people are formally trained, apparently by the ADL and other organizations, in tactics: how to disrupt meetings, how to push false propaganda on campuses, and so on. And even though I don’t know it for a fact, certainly those Hillel students who were part of the campaign did appear to be professionally trained.
In fact, the whole campaign against me was initiated by students from the Hillel group. They sat in on my class on the first day of the semester, just for one day. And somehow from that one day’s class they somehow figured out that I was teaching this book as fact. Apparently they figured that if I was teaching the book as “hate literature,” quote unquote, that would be okay. But the fact that I was teaching the book just as any other book, as one having some basic academic credibility — they considered that, of course, to be a grossly anti-Semitic thing. And they were the ones who raised the hue and cry.
There’s a group on campus called “The Friends of Wellesley Hillel.” This is a group of faculty and alumni who work very closely with the Hillel students. In the midst of this campaign they actually put together a packet of mostly libelous information, and mailed it to the mother of one of the students who was very, very vocal on my behalf. The students rallied around me. It’s quite incredible the extent to which these folks would operate. This is a group of grown people, such as deans of the college, professors, who take the time to sit on committees to put together a packet of basically lies and misinformation, and send it out. They actually targeted this one student because she was a leader of the students who were supporting me, and they sent this information to her mother.
Somebody came and tacked up a flyer around my office one day — I wasn’t in the office at the time – alleging sexual misconduct between myself and this same student who was vocal on my behalf. Fortunately for me, it didn’t work. And at one point they started a rumor that if I wrote recommendations for those students, they would not get jobs and would not get entry into graduate school, or anything. These are some of what I call dirty tricks.
There was also the tactic of what I call “going for the economic jugular” — to remove my ability to survive economically. An example of that was a joint press release that called for my expulsion from the college. It called for my tenure to be revoked. So again, that’s one of the hallmarks of their tactics, it seems to me. And I am sure that this is of wider application than in just my own case.
There was also the tactic of what I call Great Presumptuousness. I heard somebody last night mention the word “chutzpah.” I call it presumptuousness — the idea that a rabbi, a student chaplain, could come into my office to demand an explanation for why am I teaching this information. That to me is sheer presumptuousness. Even though I was polite, the essence of my response was, basically, “Who the hell are you to come here to tell me what I must teach [laughter] in a black studies class. I’m an expert on black studies. Who the hell are you?” I didn’t say it in those terms, but that was the import [applause] of what I was saying.
Before this Jewish onslaught began with me, just by sheer coincidence a few months earlier, I had been doing some research in a Jewish archive in New York City, and at that time a case similar to mine had just erupted concerning Professor Leonard Jeffries at City College in New York City. He had made a speech in Albany in which he had pointed out that Jews had a very large hand in fashioning Hollywood. In fact, there’s a book by a Jewish author, Neil Gabler, called An Empire of Their Own. And the subtitle, interestingly enough, is “How the Jews Invented Hollywood.” [Laughter]. What could be more explicit than that? The author is boasting about the way Jews basically shaped American popular culture.
So Len Jeffries, in his speech in Albany, had said Well, okay, so you all [Jews] invented American popular culture. You therefore have to take a large portion of the blame for the negative stereotypes concerning black folk that have been nurtured by Hollywood over the years. But of course they want to have their cake and eat it, too. They want to invent Hollywood, but they don’t want to take responsibility for the negative elements coming out of Hollywood. So Jeffries was branded as anti-Semitic, as usual, for having said that. So at that time, when I was visiting the Jewish archive, my own case had not yet emerged. But they tried to put me through this litmus test. It was almost as though they would not let me use the archives unless I disavowed any kind of association with Jeffries. The woman in charge asked me: “Do you know Len Jeffries?” I said Yes, I know him. He’s a good friend of mine, a colleague of mine. And she was very upset.
Again there’s this presumptuousness, this feeling that they have a right to put you through all these litmus tests — a right to demand of you why you are doing something that, to anybody else, is totally correct, and totally inoffensive.
Another tactic which I think I can distill out of my experience is a tendency to sidestep the real issues. I discovered that throughout this whole period of almost ten years now, they would almost never engage me on the facts of the matter. They would say: Okay, you say that Jews were involved in the slave trade. You’re a big anti-Semite. So I’ll say: Okay, let’s discuss it. Were Jews indeed half of the slave owners in Brazil in the 17th century? I’ll say, look at your own Encyclopaedia Judaica. It says that Jews were half the slave owners in Brazil. But they would never engage in that kind of factual debate. Never. They would always go off on a tangent, trying to besmirch your character, trying to take away your economic wherewithal, and so on. But they studiously avoid ever engaging in a discussion of the actual facts of the matter.
I had a graphic illustration of this just a few weeks ago when this question flared again, very briefly, on my campus. Somebody mentioned that ten years ago I had taught these [allegedly] blatant falsehoods, and whatnot. So I responded in the newspaper. And a couple of Jewish students wrote back, responding to me. And again, although I laid out several examples of Jewish historians acknowledging the Jewish involvement in the slave trade, there was no reference to this at all by the Jewish students. Instead, they began talking about stories from Europe in the Middle Ages, or some other era, about Jews killing white kids to take their blood and put it in matzos, and stories of their Jewish holocaust. In short, all kinds of stuff that had nothing to do with anything. In fact, I responded asking them what any of this has to do with the point that I was making. They did not read my article. They did not acknowledge the evidence I had given concerning Jewish involvement in the slave trade. What do stories of Jews killing somebody for their blood to put in matzos have to do the slave trade? But this was always their tendency. They would studiously avoid the facts and avoid the issue at hand, but instead bring in what we call Red Herrings — off the wall stuff. And this was a very persistent tactic, which I’ve been able to discern.
Another tactic — which may be just saying the same thing in a different way — is the tendency to introduce “straw men.” For example, I’m discussing Jewish involvement in the slave trade, but somebody responds by writing an article saying that I alleged – which is not true – that Jews were genetically predisposed towards enslaving others. This has nothing to do with anything that I was talking about. But again, they would totally disregard the facts of the case and introduce something totally different. They would introduce a “straw man,” get it on the record, and then they would attack the “straw man” they’ve created. And because they have such great influence in the media, this “straw man,” this false information, all of a sudden becomes part of the record. Even in court they’ll reference the same lies that they put in the newspaper, as though this is some disinterested source, some third party. And then this brings me to my next point — their ability to plant misinformation in the record, and then use that misinformation as though it’s some kind of well-documented, primary source.
Point number ten. This is what I call the use of quislings or surrogates, or what we in the black community call Uncle Toms. They have developed this art to a very high level — at least in my case, or in the black community. I’ve mentioned Henry Louis “Skip” Gates. There are many other notorious figures like that in the black community, who are all too willing to do their bidding. I must say that these folks are very, very well recompensed. These folks have been given incredible prominence. They go around the world speaking, sometimes for fifteen thousand dollars at a time. Those are the kind of honorariums these folks get. They’ve been given endowed chairs in their universities. Many of them can hardly put two sentences together. But because they’ve been willing to play this game, they’ve been elevated to prominence. When you pick up The New York Times, you’ll see them on the cover of the Sunday magazine section with regard to issues that pertain to black folk. And it doesn’t matter what it is specifically. It can be the history of Africa. It can be contemporary politics in the Caribbean. It doesn’t matter. They are quoted as the authorities, and so on. You’ll also see them on PBS television, on multi-million dollar programs and documentaries, and so on. And this has been a very effective tactic on their part; to pick out people from within, in this case, my own group — that is, people who are willing to, in a sense, sell themselves for the admittedly very ample rewards they’re given as a result.
Another tactic is their ability to leverage off of the influence which they undoubtedly have in high places. At Wellesley College, for example, a new president was coming on just as my case was moving to its climax, so to speak. And this new college president came in not knowing anything about what had been happening. And somehow these folks got her to write a letter, which I suspect they must have drafted themselves because she had no real knowledge of the background of what was happening. This was a letter condemning me for teaching that Jews were involved in the slave trade. This letter, according to newspaper reports, was sent out to maybe 40 to 60 thousand people. So you had the incoming president of Wellesley College sending out 40 to 60 thousand letters. This must be unprecedented in the annals of American higher education, I think. This is something for the Guinness Book of World Records [Laughter]. A university president sending out as many as 60, that’s six-zero, thousand letters, condemning one of her own professors for teaching something that is historically true. I’ve never, ever heard of such a case. Maybe I should indeed write to the Guinness Book of World Records and see if they can immortalize me by mentioning this.
Then there was the American Historical Association. Three Jewish historians actually went to the American Historical Association and got it to decree – that’s the only term I can use – to decree, by executive fiat, that the Jews were not involved in the slave trade. [Laughter] I’ve never ever heard of any such thing. This is totally antithetical to the way that academia operates. Who’s ever heard of such a thing: historical fact being determined by presidential decree from the American Historical Association. “We decree…” [mocking]. It’s like a Papal Bull in the Middle Ages… “We decree: The Jews were not involved in the slave trade.” [Laughter] It is absolutely amazing, but they actually succeeded in having this done.
Then there’s one of the most amazing cases of all. I was invited to speak in the city of Worcester, Massachusetts, by Worcester State College, round about 1994 or 95. And the Jewish groups were actually able to get the mayor of Worcester – one of the largest cities in the state – to call together a special press conference, in which he had leaders of all the major religions. He had a Roman Catholic head. He had a Baptist head — heads of various Protestant denominations — and rabbis, ADL types, and so on. The mayor assembled an entire coalition of religious and apparently civil rights organizations. For what? To denounce me prior to my appearance at Worcester State College. They had already tried to put pressure on the college, and on the people who’d invited me. To their great credit, those people stayed strong. They refused to bow, and I spoke. You would think that the mayor had more important things to do. [Laughter]. But here these groups were powerful enough to get the mayor of a major city to pull together a special conclave on a Jewish press release to denounce me.
Of course, the result was that my speech, when indeed it did take place, drew the largest audience in the history of the school. [Laughter and applause] Actually, I didn’t originally include this in my talk, but I really should mention their tendency on occasion to shoot themselves in the foot. [laughter] If they had left me alone, I think the only people who would have known of the Jewish involvement in the slave trade would have been my 30 students and myself. [Laughter, applause]. But now, of course, the whole world knows about it. And, as a result, the question of African slavery will never ever again be raised without the question of the Jewish role being part of the discussion. It’s now in the forefront of people’s consciousness. And that’s due to them. I mean, I never could have promoted this idea the way that they did. [Laughter].
Another tactic, of course, is their use of the major media. They become very agitated when one speaks of their control of the media. That’s one of the worst anti-Semitic things it’s possible for anybody to say. And yet, as in the case of the Jewish involvement in Hollywood, they themselves boast about their prominence in the media. In fact, in my book, The Jewish Onslaught, I quote Charles Silberman, a Jewish author, who wrote a book in the 1980s called A Certain People. And in it he boasts that of the seven top editors of The New York Times, all seven were Jews. He wrote about the major TV networks, and although I forget the precise figure, he mentions that the majority of the senior television network producers were Jews, and that it’s these producers who really determine what gets on the news, what stays out, what spin is put on information, and so on. So the people who are crucial to spinning the news, he wrote, are primarily Jews. He named names. And I quoted him in my book. But I was anti-Semitic for quoting him [laughter], which was not unusual.
When that huge scroll, that press-release scroll, was issued by the four major Jewish organizations, the Boston Globe, the city’s leading newspaper, published four major articles, including editorials and op eds, within about six days, attacking me on that question. That included an op ed in the Sunday paper and a major editorial on the editorial page. Again, these were filled with lies and distortions. I responded with a letter, which they refused to publish. So they had four major items attacking me in less than a week, but they refused to publish my rejoinder. And so, because these folks have such a sway over the major media, it gives them a very great advantage.
I remember being interviewed for the Fox front page program. They interviewed me for over an hour, but I guess that my responses to their questions were so tight that they could not find any sound bite to extract to make me look bad. So they gave me a couple sound bites, maybe half a second each, but instead of letting me talk, they had a narrator of some kind who spent about five minutes telling folks what I had said, but not letting me say anything, practically. And that, too, is one of their tactics.
The use of organizations is another tactic. Of course, I don’t have to tell this audience about the Anti-Defamation League. I think I also have pride of place on the ADL website. Although I haven’t checked recently, for several years I had Honorable Mention every year in their listing of anti-Semitic occurrences, and so on. In their listing of anti-Semitic occurrences of the previous year, there would be an item like, “Tony Martin gave a lecture at XYZ college.” That would in itself be cited as an anti-Semitic event — the fact that I gave a lecture someplace. The ADL actually issued a book about me. And although I’ve had it for years, I haven’t got around to reading it. They took the title of my book and turned it around. This ADL report is titled Academic Bigotry: Professor Tony Martin’s Anti-Jewish Onslaught.
Another tactic is what I call their unseemly histrionics. When I spoke at Worcester State College, there was a Jewish lady (I think her name was Schneider) who was on the College’s board of trustees. Amidst great fanfare, she resigned from the board because of the school’s invitation to me. But that’s what I call nothing but stupid histrionics. It got a lot of press, of course. It created a lot of media interest. But again, this was a case of shooting herself in the foot. As I remember they had initially scheduled me to speak in an auditorium that held about a hundred people. But after all the hysteria, which they themselves had generated, they had to change the venue to the largest auditorium they had, which held about 300 people. And even that wasn’t big enough. So eventually, when I turned up on a cold, wintry morning in February, they had that 300-capacity auditorium totally full. Then they had to run closed-circuit televisions outside for another 300 people to hear what I had to say. And of course, my speech got to be front-page news the next morning in the Worcester Telegram & Gazette, and so on.
Another thing they try to do is to pin what I call a nickname on you. They try to find some little slip of the tongue, or some little thing they can take out of context. And if they find it, then every time your name is mentioned in the media, they stick that on you. For example, Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam once made a slip. He was talking about a fact, as I mentioned earlier, that 75 percent of Jewish households in 1830 owned slaves. But he kind of got it wrong, as one often does in the midst of a speech — a slip of the tongue. And it came out, when he said it, that Jews owned 75 percent of the slaves. It was obviously a slip of the tongue. But they mentioned it repeatedly ever since, often using that sound bite to make it look like he was a great distorter of the truth.
In my case, fortunately for me, the most they could pin on me was the term “controversial.” So every time they mention me, I get to be the “controversial” professor. [Laughter]. They’re also very good at the good cop/bad cop game. While someone is trying to destroy you on one side, someone will come on the other side, all smiley and whatnot. But beware of the good cop. Very often it’s better to deal with the bad cop because the good one will often get you in jail much more quickly and smoothly than the bad one.
And sometimes they try to play you for a fool. At the same time they’re trying to destroy you, they’re trying to give you advice. [laughter] Last year, for example, when I decided to accept David Irving’s invitation to speak in Cincinnati, there was guy whose name I don’t recall who sent me an e-mail telling me what a racist David Irving was. He sent me this copy of some poem that Irving had written, saying he didn’t want his daughter to marry a Rastafarian or something — which is neither here nor there as far as I’m concerned. If he wants he wants his daughter to marry a Rastafarian or anybody else, or not marry them, So what? That has nothing to do with anything as far as I’m concerned. But again, here are people who are trying to destroy me, people who have spent the last ten years trying to portray me as all kinds of things, trying to take my livelihood away. and these same people can have the chutzpah, I guess, to warn me against somebody else. The whole idea is just totally amazing to me. Of course, I didn’t pay any great attention to what these guys are trying to say.
Another one of their tactics is hate mail. Their propensity for hate mail, I discovered, is absolutely amazing. Up to now, I still get a lot of hate emails. And a few days ago I got a hate postcard. On the one hand they try to portray themselves in public as these great liberals and nice folks and whatnot, but at the very same time they’re getting out this other kind of stuff.
Which also reminds me of the tendency towards violence. There was one Jewish guy, he said he was a Russian Jew, called Alexander Nechaevsky, who actually came onto my campus saying that he had come to get me. Luckily I wasn’t there to be gotten that day. I was somewhere out of town. But he came to the office, saying he had come to get me, and whatnot. They had to call the campus police, and he was given an order — a trespass order, I think they called it — not to appear on the campus again.
So these, then, are some of the kinds of tactics that I’ve been able to distill from my interaction with these folks over the last nine or ten years. Again, I’ve been very fascinated by the fact that I’ve become more broadly aware of similar situations involving others so that, it seems to me, many of these tactics may be of much more generalized application.
I don’t necessarily know the best way to respond. But I can just maybe outline, very quickly, the ways that I have tried to respond. I have tried to respond, first of all, by trying to stand on principle. From the very beginning, as far as I’m concerned, I’m talking the truth. I’ve said that the Jews were indeed involved in the slave trade. And as long as I am convinced in my own mind that I’m talking the truth, then that’s it. I’ve tried to disregard all of the other foolishness, and I’ve tried to stand on the truth. I’ve been on TV many times, debating people from the American Jewish Committee, and so on. And again, in such face to face debate, all of these tactics come into play. They try to attack your credibility, your character. But what I’ve always tried to do in those exchanges is to ignore, as far as I can, all of the ad hominem attacks, and concentrate on the facts. So they’ll say “Tony Martin is an anti-Semite.” I’ll just ignore it. I’ll say, 75 percent of Jewish households owned slaves, according to the 1830 census. I’ll stick to the facts, and I’ll use those kinds of media appearances as an opportunity to inform whoever happens to be listening.
I’ve also tried , where I could, to myself leverage off of their media power. There have been times when they have unwittingly given me an opportunity to appear before the mass media, and I’ve used those opportunities to the hilt — again, to push facts. I know in advance that I have only 30 seconds, so I try to ram as many facts into those 30 seconds as I can, and just forget all the anti-Semitic stuff. I can deal with that later.
I’ve also tried to develop, to the best of my limited resources, some kind of independent response. I find that independence is a very, very great benefit. I started my own little publishing company. It’s a little company, but it was very, very effective. My book, The Jewish Onslaught got out and sold like hotcakes. It’s really made a difference, just to have some kind of an independent medium. It wasn’t a major corporation or anything, but it was independent. I controlled it, and I was able to fight back to some degree.
I also think it’s important to have some kind of a support structure. I was very fortunate. They attacked me at a time when I already had established a pretty good sort of a support structure in academia. I was relatively well known. It wasn’t as easy for them to destroy my credibility as it might have been for people who were perhaps less accomplished. But I found that having a support structure and being able to avail oneself of it was very important.
And finally, in my case I tried wherever possible to take the matter to them. I didn’t sit back and wait, once the battle was joined. I found it, in fact. In the early days especially I think that they weren’t used to having people fight back the way that I did. I think it sort of threw them off balance. They came at me with all their usual bag of tricks, expecting me to fold immediately. But I once I was able to fight back, and once it began to appear to them that they had a long protracted struggle on their hands, and not an easy victory, it took them a while to actually try to regroup and figure out what to do.
So, I just offer these as perhaps things for folks to think about in their response. Thank you very much.
This is an edited transcript of Prof. Martin’s address given in June 2002 in Irvine, California, at the 14th Conference of the Institute for Historical Review.
About the Author
Tony Martin, a historian, was best known as a specialist of African American history. For years he served as a professor of Africana Studies at Wellesley College (Massachusetts).
He was born in 1942 in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago. He earned a B.Sc. honors degree in economics at the University of Hull (England), and M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in history at Michigan State University. He authored, compiled or edited 14 books. He was perhaps best known for his work on the life and legacy of the Black Nationalist leader Marcus Garvey. Martin’s many articles and reviews appeared in a variety of academic journals and popular periodicals, as well as in reference works and anthologies. He was also a popular lecturer, and addressed general and scholarly audiences across the US, in Canada, and in other countries. Martin retired in June 2007 as professor emeritus after 34 years with Wellesley College’s Africana Studies Department. He died in January 2013 at the age of 70 in Trinidad.
This is the absolute truth from “white privilege”, it’s just so happens to be from the lovely, truthful, coloured lady in the video. She knows we(Black and White) are being pitted against one and other because out of chaos they can bring us the order(communism) – ordo ab chao – as the freemasons motto says. This beautiful coloured lady knows the truth and who is behind the lies, She named [[[ them ]]] and their creed and the crimes upon humanity they commit. Their motto at the mossad also tells us “by way of deception thou shall do war”. Who uses deception and lies? Oh, that’s right. the devil himself, it’s the default tool he uses on the masses.
Thanks for the truth beautiful lady who ever or where ever you are, long may you continue to wake the woke.
The Anatomy of a Great Deception takes one man on an epic quest to uncover truth behind the attacks which claimed the dearest to him. This journey soon created disharmony within his family and near financial ruin. Hooper’s feature-length documentary encapsulates his findings during this tumultuous period of discovery. Of course, Hooper was not alone in his perception of a conspiracy.
Jews around the world celebrated 1917 when the Bolsheviks (Communists), led by Lenin and Trotsky, seized power in Moscow. The first legislative act that passed by the new legislature was the “anti-semitism act.” This law, according the traditions of men, made it a criminal offense to defame Jews and Judaism. Even a joke about the Jews was classified as a hate crime punishable by ten years in prison. What a remarkable similar environment we see today in Western societies that are completely under Zionist Jewish control, where brave people like Alison Chabloz, Monika Schaefer or Hervé Ryssen have to face ritual Talmudic inquisitions, which are disguised as pseudo legal constructs that serve justice. We better be warned for what is coming; today we see parasites like French Prime minister Macron calling for stricter anti-semite laws almost on a daily basis. Same trend, the same tribe, same outcome if we don’t wake up.
After the Jewish Bolsheviks took power in Russia, Jews from all over the world poured in to Russia because, once again, they had the erroneous and twisted messianic believe that their victory in Russia validated their holy law; the Talmud.
For proof that Communism was created by Jews and serves as just another mask for Talmudic Judaism we just have to look at some of the numerous quotes made by Jews themselves about the topic, as they always brag about their “constructive” contributions to humanity.
For example Rabbi Harry Waton writes in his book A program for the Jews and humanity:
“The Communist soul is the soul of Judaism. Hence it follows that in the Russian revolution, the triumph of Communism was the triumph of Judaism”
“The Bolshevist revolution in Russia was the work of Jewish brains, of Jewish dissatisfaction, of jewish planning, whose goal is to create a new order in the world. What was performed in such an excellent way in Russia, due to Jewish brains and Jewish dissatisfaction, and by Jewish planning, shall also through the same Jewish mental and physical forces, became a reality all over the world”
I rest my case. Let’s look at one of the most powerful and most applicable quotes of the last century made by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008), Nobel-Prize-winning novelist, historian and critic of Communist totalitarianism:
“You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. The October Revolution was not what you call in America the “Russian Revolution.” It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be understated. Bolshevism was the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the global media itself is in the hands of the perpetrators.”
Indeed, the worst genocide in history wasn’t the Holocaust … in fact, it was perpetrated by members of the very same group of people who claim they were the victims of one. And it took the lives of 66 million (Solzhenitsyn’s estimate of those who perished between 1918 and 1957), not 6 million
Next is an article from 2016 by Lord Dreadnought
U.S.A. and western journalists and historians are prohibited from writing about the Jewish origins of Mao Tse Tung’s Red Chinese revolution. In fact, Mao was schooled by Skull and Bonesmen and initiated into the internationalist Masonic Lodge by socialist Jews from the United States. This was done with the tacit permission of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, a 32nd degree Mason and, later, President Harry S. Truman a 33rd degree Mason. Mao all along has been a closely-controlled puppet of Jewish revolutionaries—men like Israel Epstein and Sidney Shapiro, who lived in China and had the reins of power over two key areas of Beijing’s Communist Government—the treasury (money) and the media (propaganda). Interestingly, Zionist Jews hold sway over these same two essential instruments of government today in the United States and most if not all other Western countries.
The covert Jewish control of Mao and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) explains why convicted Jewish spy Jonathan Pollard, found guilty of stealing thousands of classified documents from the Defense Department where he worked, gave these materials to his masters, the Israeli Mossad operating in the U.S.A. The Israelis, in turn, transferred these valuable military secrets straight to Red crypto Chinese dictators in Beijing.
October 1 1949, Mao Tse Tsung declared the founding of the People’s Republic of China in Tiananmen Square, Beijing. He was funded by Rothschild created Communism in Russia and also the following Rothschild agents: Solomon Adler, a former United States Treasury official who was a Soviet Spy; Israel Epstein, the son of a Jewish Bolshevik imprisoned by the Tsar in Russia for trying to ferment a revolution there; and Frank Coe, a leading official of the Rothschild owned IMF. Jews were behind the rise to power of Mao Tse Tung, the communist dictator of China, who tortured and murdered tens of millions of Chinese (mostly Christians) during his brutal reign. Sidney Shapiro, an American Jew, was in charge of China’s propaganda organ. Another Jew, Israel Epstein, was Mao’s Minister of Appropriations (Finance).
Mao would murder sixty million innocent Chinese people under his rule mainly to destroy traditional Chinese culture in order to gain total control. As with Christianity, any practitioners of spiritual systems were outlawed, killed, and thrown into gulags, to die a slow death through slave labor, starvation and torture. The Communistic systems became the new culture of control. With China under their flag, Tibet was next on the list as being the last bastion of spiritual and historical knowledge. All the Jewish systems seek to remove spiritual knowledge from Gentiles and keep it in the hands of the Jewish elite. This is a major part of their indoctrination program. There has been a major Jewish population in China for over a thousand years such as the Jews of Kaifeng.
China has been built up into the biggest global superpower by the Jewish financial elite and every valuable Western technology has been shipped there. This was identical to what the Jews did with their USSR, turning it into a massive super state of military superpower, to wage conquest upon the rest of the earth, which they did. The only reason they were halted was the second war monkey wrenched their plans globally and led to the stagnation and fall of the USSR. There are reports that the America tactical silos are contracted to Israeli firms for certain electronics’ functions, they also have their agents all over the Pentagon and other key Western military and government networks.
The covert Jewish control of Mao and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) explains why convicted Jewish spy Jonathan Pollard, found guilty of stealing thousands of classified documents from the Defense Department where he worked, gave these materials to his masters, the Israeli Mossad operating in the U.S.A. The Israelis, in turn, transferred these valuable military secrets straight to Red Chinese dictators in Beijing. Pollard, a Jew born in Galveston, Texas, sits in a federal prison today. Recently, when Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu came to America, he visited Pollard in prison and assured the despicable turncoat Israeli spy that the Israeli government was working behind-the-scenes with Obama’s White House to pardon the convicted spy. Meanwhile, Pollard is a national hero in Israel—honored for stealing America’s most precious military secrets which Israel gave to Communist China. [Ren Ed: Pollard was released by Obama]
Even now according to official statistics Communist China again carried out more executions than the rest of the world put together. Amnesty International believes thousands are executed and sentenced to death there every year, but with numbers kept a state secret the true figure is impossible to determine.
‘Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history’.– David Rockefeller.
The most under reported, however is the “Soft Power” tactic currently being implemented by the Peoples Republic of China in the United States.
It was America that showed the world how to mass produce everything from automobiles to televisions to airplanes. It was the great American manufacturing base that crushed Germany and Japan in World War II. But now we are witnessing the deindustrialization of America. Thanks to Jewish control over government, thousands of factories have left the United States and moved to China in the past decade alone. Millions upon millions of manufacturing jobs have been lost in the same time period. The United States has become a nation that consumes everything in sight and yet produces increasingly little.
The United States has become bloated and spoiled and our economy is now just a shadow of what it once was. Once upon a time America could literally outproduce the rest of the world combined. Today that is no longer true, but Americans sure do consume more than anyone else in the world.
The Economic Policy Institute in Washington, D.C., estimates that America lost 2.7 million jobs as a result of the U.S.-China trade deficit between 2001 and 2011, 2.1 million of them in manufacturing. Wages of American workers have also suffered due to the competition with cheap Chinese labor, EPI says. A typical two-earner household loses around $2,500 per year from this dynamic.
Manufacturing was the hardest-hit industry, with fabrication of high-tech goods like semiconductors and electronics suffering the most, accounting for more than half of the $217.5 billion increase in the trade deficit between 2001 and 2011.
Most of the jobs lost or displaced by trade with China between 2001 and 2011 were in manufacturing industries (more than 2.1 million jobs, or 76.9 percent). Within manufacturing, rapidly growing imports of computer and electronic products (including computers, parts, semiconductors, and audio-video equipment) accounted for 54.9 percent of the $217.5 billion increase in the U.S. trade deficit with China between 2001 and 2011. The growth of this deficit contributed to the elimination of 1,064,800 U.S. jobs in computer and electronic products in this period. Indeed, in 2011, the total U.S. trade deficit with China was $301.6 billion—$139.3 billion of which was in computer and electronic products.
Thanks to the suicidal manufacturing policy in US, China GDP has risen from $350 billion in 1990 to $20 trillion (PPP) and surpassed the US in terms of GDP based on purchasing power parity (PPP). United States of America was the largest but International Monetary Fund and World Bank rank China since as the world’s largest economy. The US has been the global economic leader since overtaking the UK in 1872. Most economists previously thought China would pull ahead in 2019.
So if the United States continues to allow its manufacturing base to erode at a staggering pace how in the world can the U.S. continue to consider itself to be a great nation? We have created the biggest debt bubble in the history of the world in an effort to maintain a very high standard of living, but the current state of affairs is not anywhere close to sustainable. As of June 30, 2012, China held a total of $3.24 trillion in foreign exchange reserves (Bloomberg News 2012), about 70 percent of which were held in U.S. dollars. Every single month America does into more debt to communist China and every single month America gets poorer.
The deindustrialization and debt of the United States should be a top concern for every man, woman and child in the country. It is not that hard to understand what happens when the debt bubble pops. But sadly, most Americans do not have any idea what is going on around them.
Because America’s debt is exploding to unmanageable proportions, the United States finds itself financially dependent on China as one of its main creditors. Americans owe The Peoples Republic well over a trillion dollars and are going further into debt, but the Communist ruling elite in Beijing are not satisfied with having the U.S. as a virtual debtor client state. China’s political elite are also using their financial power to manipulate how Americans think — or don’t think — about China. Along with computers, electronics, and house wares, a new kind of Political Correctness is also being manufactured in China.
The Communist elite which controls China wants Hollywood to portray the Peoples Republic in a favorable light to American audiences, while rewarding the hard Left U.S. film industry with hefty profits for their cooperation.
These are dangerous events which directly threaten the United States. The threats offered by an increasing powerful Communist China are already all but ignored by the zionist mass media in US, both on the Right as well as on the Left. Beijing’s elite, however, are taking no chances. Ignoring the China threat is not enough, the American people must be made to love the Peoples Republic and all its works.
From looking at things, the Syrian conflict could be a smaller warm up to a planned global conflict. Russia has already participated in 2013 in a mass joint war games exercise with China on Eastern European soil with thousands of Red Chinese troops. They where training specifically for war against Western forces, this was kept out of the mainstream of course. This is what America and Western Europe have been prepped for over the decades, and how they planned to take Germany down into Communism during the First war, which they manipulated into existence for the sole purpose of taking all of Europe down into Communism, and they nearly did. It is a repeating set of tactics they are using.
The West is past the demoralization point and has entered into the destabilization phase. The Protest Wall St was organized by Jewish agents of Rothschild to be the start of a Communist movement, which is part of the subversion of decades of indoctrination of students into Communist ideals. At this point, one way or another, Zionists are seeking to take the West down should they start a full out Communist revolution, civil war or open war. One way or another, it seems Red Chinese troops will be on Western Soil “Liberating” us from the Fascist oppressors. This is what the Jews did with the Red Army rolling over Europe and the East, enslaving the many for the Jews.
“Shifting the Blame” examines the Holocaust by looking at key events in history that took place before the apparent Jewish genocide. By examining historical facts we again begin to see a pattern of concealment and propaganda as we explore the Jewish role in the “Russian” Revolution and other important events throughout our history.
As to whether the film maker is who he says he is and whether his intentions are really good or not is not the question, it’s the veracity of the information that he/they supplied in the documentary that is in question. Once that has been ascertained by your good self then I’ll leave you alone with your own reasoning to come to your own conclusion(s).
The Truth Will Set You Free.
Peace out people.
Can’t get over this video of a girl singing in an empty cathedral pic.twitter.com/g5Nry1CB9M
— Mariam (@mariam9ahmed9) December 25, 2018