Subject: Paul Fromm's "Letter to Editor" in the Quesnel Cariboo Observer, Jan. 16, 2008
From: "The Radical Press" <radical@radicalpress.com>
Date: Fri, January 18, 2008
To: "RADICAL PRESS" <radical@radicalpress.com>
Dear Radical Reader,
Here is what is likely to be the first of many supportive letters now
appearing in the Quesnel Cariboo Observer regarding the B'nai Brith attack
upon myself, my webite, and by default, the Canadian internet itself. Please
pass it along and if you should feel moved to write a letter too the address
is: Editor Quesnel Cariboo Observer <newsroom@quesnelobserver.com> . I am
aware of a number of submissions that have yet to appear but as I said
before the window is open and now is the time to express one¹s opinion on
this important matter. Additional letters that get published will be sent to
this list.
Thank you.
For freedom of speech and thought everywhere,
Arthur Topham
Pub/Ed
The Radical Press
Canada¹s Radical News Network
radical@radicalpress.com
http://www.radicalpress.com
³Digging to the root of the issues since 1998²
------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Topham¹s views under attack: B'nai Brith claims anti-Jewish writings,
the Observer, Jan. 13.
Congratulations on the excellent article on Arthur Topham.
There is a wholesale attack on free speech on the Internet under way in
Canada under Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.
Under this obscure but totalitarian provision, truth is no defence, intent
is no defence. All that is necessary for a conviction and finding of
discrimination is that the writer make comments "likely to expose" a
privileged ethnic, religious or sexual minority to " ³hatred or contempt."
I've represented as a legal agent a number of the victims of this censorship
law young people usually too poor to afford the $20,000 or more legal fees
they need for such a hearing.
Rulings show that "contempt" is any criticism of these privileged groups.
In the 29 years this law has been in force first, aimed at political
messages on telephone answering machines, and more recently postings on the
Internet no victim has ever been acquitted. That¹s right: a 100 per cent
conviction rate against freedom of speech.
There¹s a good reason for this. Unlike a real court, the "member" or person
sitting in judgement is specially chosen for his/her bias for the
prosecution.
Tribunal members are to have "special knowledge or and sensitivity" to human
rights. That may sound benign. However, it means a special bias to group
rights, as opposed to the accused¹s individual right to freedom of speech,
freedom of belief and freedom of the press.
In Arthur Topham¹s case, it is outrageous he should be up on a complaint for
criticizing the policies of a foreign state, Israel. The Zionists who took
over the land of others, the Palestinians, both Christian and Muslim, have
much to answer for and should not be immune to criticism.
His tormentor, the League for Human Rights of B¹nai Brith, sadly has, for
the past few years, tried to make criticism of Israel a criminal offence.
Arthur Topham deserves our support in the costly battle ahead.
Paul Fromm, director
Canadian Association for Free Expression
--------------------
I would also like to add a plug here with respect to my financial situation.
I'm still unable to work steady due to the amount of time and energy
required to deal with this matter. Donations have been coming to me and I'm
feeling rather awed and humbled by people's generosity. Unfortunately I'm
still very much under the gun in this respect so if it is possibly please
send either a M.O. or a Cheque or Cash to:
The Radical Press
4633 Barkerville Hwy
Quesnel, B.C. V2J 6T8
If you include your email address I will contact you to let you know I
received your mail and also be able to thank you personally.
Sincerely,
Arthur Topham
Radical Press
The B'nai Brith and the Origins of their Anti-Defamation League (ADL)
Dear Radical Reader,
The following chapter is taken from Douglas Reed¹s classic The Controversy
of Zion located online at
With the renewed interest in the Zionist-run B¹nai Brith¹s current attack
upon Canada¹s internet and their efforts to stifle our freedom of speech I
felt it was appropriate to send this interesting assessment of the
Anti-Defamation League (ADL) to list members. I will assume that those
interested will be willing to spend more than two minutes reading. The
information that Reed passes along is invaluable to a realistic
understanding of what is and has been coming down the track for a very long
time. Please pass this along to your own associates. We only have so much
time to alert other Canadians to the danger that these alien forces pose to
our democratic system.
As an added note: I just received word that Israel Shamir's website has been
attacked and is down. Shades of things to come?
While military invasions and counter-invasions multiplied during the six
years of the Second War, absorbing all thought and energy of the masses
locked in combat, a silent invasion went on which produced more momentous
effects than the armed ones. This was the political invasion of the American
Republic and its success was shown by the shape of American state policy at
the war's end, which was so directed as to ensure that the only military
invasions that yielded enduring "territorial gains" were those of the
revolution into Europe and of the Zionists into Arabia. Historically
surveyed, Mr. Roosevelt's achievement may now be seen to have been threefold
and in each respect perilous to his country's future: he helped to arm
Zionism, he armed the revolution in its Moscow citadel, and he opened the
doors of his American citadel to its agents.
He began the process at the start of his presidency by his recognition of
the Soviet, when the ambassador of the revolution, Maxim Litvinoff,
undertook that the revolutionary state would keep its nose out of American
domestic affairs; Mr. Roosevelt's mentors were not the men to remind him
that when once the fox gets in his nose he'll soon find ways to make his
body follow. The story of his support of the revolutionary state by money and arms belongs to a later chapter; this one aims to tell the tale of its
penetration of the American Republic on its own soil during his long
presidency.
Mr. Roosevelt began by breaking down the barriers against uncontrolled
immigration which the Congresses immediately before him strove to set up,
because they saw in it the danger of the capture of the American
administration by "a foreign group". Under various of his edicts the
supervision of immigration was greatly weakened. Immigration officials were
forbidden to put questions about Communist associations, and the separate
classification of Jewish immigrants was discontinued. This was supported by
a continuous press campaign against all demands for enquiry into loyalty or
political record as "discrimination against the foreign-born".
None can say how many people entered the United States during that period. By 1952 Senator Pat McCarran, chairman of the United States Senate Judiciary
Committee, estimated that, apart from legal immigration, five million aliens
had illegally entered the country, including large numbers of "militant
Communists, Sicilian bandits and other criminals". The chief investigating
officer of the Immigration Service declined even to estimate the number of
illegal entrants but said that at that time (when some measure of control
had been re-established) "over half a million a year" were being intercepted
and sent back at the Mexican border alone. The Social Security authorities,
who supplied the cards necessary to obtain employment, were forbidden to
give any information about applicants to the immigration or police
authorities.
This mass of immigrants went to swell the size of the "fluctuating vote" on
Page 340
which Mr. Roosevelt's party (still following Mr. House's strategy)
concentrated its electoral effort and its cry of "no discrimination". Under
the president's restrictions on loyalty-interrogations the way into the
civil service and armed forces was opened to American-born or
legally-domiciled alien Communists. The results to which this led were shown
in part by the many exposures of the post-war period, the literature of
which would fill an encyclopaedia of many volumes. The entire West was also
involved (as the Canadian, British and Australian exposures in time showed)
and the significant thing is that, with the Canadian exception, no
governmental investigation ever led to these partial revelations, which were
always the work of persistent private remonstrants; nor was genuine remedial
action ever taken, so that the state of affairs brought about during the
1930's and 1940's today continues not much changed, a source of grave
weakness to the West in any new war.
The renewal of large-scale immigration formed the background to the
political invasion of the Republic. This was a three-pronged movement which
aimed at the capture of the three vital points of a state's defences: state
policy at the top level, the civil services at the middle level and "public
opinion" or the mass-mind at the base. The way in which control over acts of
state policy was achieved (through the "adviserships" which became part of
American political life after 1913) has already been shown, this part of the
process having preceded the others. The methods used to attempt the capture
of government services will be discussed later in this chapter. In what
immediately follows the capture of the mass-mind in America, through control
of published information, will be described; it was indispensable to the
other two thrusts.
This form of political invasion is called by Dr. Weizmann, who exhaustively
studied it in his youth, when he was preparing in Russia for his life's work
in the west, "the technique of propaganda and the approach to the masses".
The operation so described may now be studied in actual operation:
Far back in this book the reader was invited to note that "B'nai B'rith" put
out a shoot. B'nai B'rith, until then, might be compared with such groups of
other religious affiliation as the Young Men's Christian Association or the
Knights of Columbus; its declared objects were the help of the poor, sick
and fatherless and good works in general. The little offshoot of 1913, the"Anti-Defamation League", had by 1947 become a secret police of formidable
power in America.*
In Doublespeak "anti-defamation" means "defamation" and this body lived by
calumny, using such terms as anti-semite, fascist, rabble-rouser,
Jew-baiter, Red-baiter, paranoiac, lunatic, madman, reactionary, diehard,
bigot and more
* In fact though not in form. The secret police in countries where the
institution is native (Hitler's Gestapo was copied from the Asiatic model,
which had a century-old tradition in Russia and Turkey) have the entire
power and resources of the state behind them; indeed, they are the state. In
America Zionism built the nucleus of a secret police nearly as effective in
many ways as those prototypes. It could only become equally effective if it
gained full control of the state's resources, including the power of arrest
and imprisonment, and in my judgment that was the ultimate goal.
Page 341
of the like. The vocabulary is fixed and may be traced back to the attacks
on Barruel, Robison and Morse after the French revolution; the true nature
of any writer's or newspaper's allegiance may be detected by keeping count
of the number of times these trade-mark words are used. The achievement of this organization (usually known as the AD.L.) has been by iteration to make
fetishes of them, so that party politicians hasten to deny that they are any
of these things. Under this regime reasoned debate became outlawed; there is
something of sorcery in this subjugation of two generations of Western men
to the mumbo-jumbo of Asiatic conspirators.
When the A.D.L. was born in 1913 it had merely desk-room in the parent B'nai
B'rith office and a tiny budget. In 1933 Mr. Bernard J. Brown wrote,"Through the intervention of the A.D.L. we have succeeded in muzzling the
non-Jewish press to the extent that newspapers in America abstain from
pointing out that any person unfavourably referred to is a Jew". In 1948 the
Jewish Menorah Journal of New York wrote, "Should but one phrase in a
reprinted literary classic reflect unjustly upon Jews, the A.D.L. will
promptly belabour the innocent publisher until he bowdlerizes the offending
passage. Let one innocent movie-producer incorporate a Jewish prototype,
however inoffensive, in his picture and the hue and cry raised by the A.D.L.
will make him wish he's never heard of Jews. But when Jews are subtly
propagandized into accepting Communist doctrine . . . the A.D.L. remains
silent. No word, no warning, no hint of caution, much less exposure and
condemnation: although there are men high in the councils of the
organization who should know by their own experience how the Communists
'infiltrate'." (The Menorah Journal spoke for the many Jews who were alarmed
because the A.D.L. was attacking anti-Communism as anti-semitism).
These quotations show the growth of the A.D.L.'s power in thirty-five years.
It has imposed the law of heresy on the public debate in America. No
criticism of Zionism or the world-government plan is allowed to pass without
virulent attack; criticism of Communism is only tolerated in the tacit
understanding that any war with Communism would lead to the communized
world-state; and as to that, "Jerusalem is the capital of the world no less
than the capital of Israel" (the Zionist mayor of Jerusalem, 1952).
America has today a few surviving writers who fight on for independent
debate and comment. They will discuss any public matter, in the light of
traditional American policy and interest, save Zionism, which hardly any of
them will touch. I have discussed this with four of the leading ones, who
all gave the same answer: it could not be done. The employed ones would lose
their posts, if they made the attempt. The independent ones would find no
publisher for their books because no reviewer would mention these, save with
the epithets enumerated above.
The AD.L., of such small beginnings in 1913, in 1948 had a budget of three
million dollars (it is only one of several Jewish organizations pursuing
Zionist aims in America at a similar rate of expenditure). The Menorah
Journal,
Page 342
discussing "Anti-Defamation Hysteria", said, "Fighting anti-semitism has
been built up into a big business, with annual budgets running into millions
of dollars". It said the object was "to continue beating the anti-semitic
drum" and "to scare the pants off prospective contributors" in order to
raise funds. It mentioned some of the methods used ("outright business
blackmail; if you can't afford to give $10,000 to this cause, you can take
your business elsewhere"), and said American Jews were being "stampeded into
a state of mass-hysteria by their self-styled defenders". *
The Menorah Journal also drew attention to the falsification of news by
Jewish news agencies subsidized by the big organizations. It showed that
some minor brawl among juveniles in Manhattan had been depicted in"front-page scare headlines which would have led a stranger to believe that
a Czarist pogrom was going on" (by these same means the "Czarist pogroms"
earlier, and Rabbi Stephen Wise's "reported pogrom in Berlin" in 1933
reached the world). Out of this particular "scare headline" grew a
mass-meeting in Madison Garden, where another politician aspiring to
presidential office (a Mr. Wendell Willkie at that moment) declared, "The
mounting wave of anti-semitism at home shocks me. . . etc., etc."
"Mass-hysteria" is not only produced among Jews and band-wagon politicians
by this method; it produces another kind of mass-hysteria among earnest but
uninformed people of the "Liberal" kind: the mass-hysteria of
self-righteousness, which is a tempting form of self-indulgence. The late
Mr. George Orwell was of those who helped spread "mass-hysteria" in this
way. He was a good man, because he did not merely incite others to succour
the weak and avenge injustice, but went himself to fight when the Civil War
broke out in Spain, then discovering that Communism, when he saw it, was
worse than the thing which (as he thought) he set out to destroy. He died
before he could go to Palestine and experience any similar enlightenment, so
that what he wrote about "anti-semitism" was but the echo of"anti-defamationist hysteria". It is so good an example of this that I quote
it; here a man of goodwill offered, as his own wisdom, phrases which others
poured into his ear.
He explored "anti-semitism in Britain" (1945) and found " a perceptibly
anti-semitic strain in Chaucer". Mr. Hilaire Belloc and Mr. G.K.Chesterton
were "literary Jew-baiters". He found passages in Shakespeare, Smollett,
Thackeray, Shaw, T.S. Eliot, Aldous Huxley and others "which if written now
would be stigmatized as anti-semitism" (he was right without knowing it; if
written now they would have been stigmatized). Then he suffered what
Americans call a pratfall. He said that "offhand, the only English writers I
can think of who,
* The reader need not find any contradiction between this quotation and my
statement in the preceding paragraph. Debate and comment are largely free in
the Jewish press, which is intended chiefly for perusal "among ourselves",
and the newspaper-reader, anywhere in the world, who takes the pains
regularly to obtain Jewish newspapers of all opinions will find himself much
better informed about what goes on in the world. The black-out is in the
non-Jewish press.
Page 343
before the days of Hitler, made a definite effort to stick up for Jews are
Dickens and Charles Reade". Thus he extolled one of the A.D.L.'s"Jew-baiters" as a champion of Jews; in America the film of Oliver Twist was
banned because of Fagin! This was the work of the A.D.L.; its
representative, a Mr. Arnold Forster, announced:
"American movie-distributors refused to become involved in the distribution
and exhibition of the motion picture after the A.D.L. and others expressed
the fear that the film was harmful; the Rank Organization withdrew the
picture in the United States". Later the picture was released after
censorship by the A.D.L.; "seventy two eliminations" were made at its
command and a prologue was added assuring beholders that they might accept
it as "a filmization of Dickens without anti-semitic intentions". (In
occupied Berlin the A.D.L. ban was final; the British authorities ordered
Dickens withdrawn from German eyes).
I was in America at this time and thus saw the fulfilment of a prediction
made in a book of 1943, when I wrote that, as the secret censorship was
going, Chaucer, Shakespeare and Dickens would one day be defamed as"anti-semites". I thought to strain probability, to make a point, but it
happened in all three cases: a Shakespearean actor-manager visiting New York
was ordered not to play The Merchant of Venice, Dickens was banned, and the
defamationists put Chaucer on their black-list.
A private organization which can produce such results is obviously powerful;
there is nothing comparable in the world. Mr. Vincent Sheehan wrote in 1949,"There is scarcely a voice in the United States that dares raise itself for
the rights, any rights, of the Arabs; any slight criticism of the Zionist
high command is immediately labelled as anti-semitic". Miss Dorothy
Thompson, whose picture and articles at that time were published everyday in
hundreds of newspapers, similarly protested. Mr. Sheehan's popularity with
book-reviewers immediately slumped; Miss Thompson's portrait and writings
are seldom seen in the American press today.
How is the oracle worked? By what means has America (and the entire West)
been brought to the state that no public man aspires to office, or editor
feels secure at his desk, until he has brought out his prayer-mat and
prostrated himself to Zion? How have presidents and prime ministers been led
to compete for the approval of this faction like bridesmaids for the bride's
bouquet? Why do leading men suffer themselves to be paraded at
hundred-dollar-a-plate banquets for Zion, or to be herded on to Zionist
platforms to receive "plaques" for services rendered?
The power of money and the prospect of votes have demonstrably been potent
lures, but in my judgment by far the strongest weapon is this power to
control published information; to lay stress on what a faction wants and to
exclude from it all that the faction dislikes, and so to be able to give any
selected person a "good" or a "bad" press. This is in fact control of "the
mob". In today's
Page 344
language it is "the technique of propaganda and the approach to the masses",
as Dr. Weizmann said, but it is an ancient, Asiatic art and was described,
on a famous occasion, by Saint Matthew and Saint Mark: "The chief priests
and elders persuaded the multitude . . . The chief priests moved the people
. . ."
In forty years the A.D.L. perfected a machine for persuading the multitude.
It is a method of thought-control of which the subject-mass is unconscious
and its ability to destroy any who cry out is great. One of the first to be
politically destroyed was the head of the Congressional Committee charged to
watch over sedition (the Un-American Activities Committee). The Protocols of
1905 foretold that the nation-states would not be allowed to "contend with
sedition" by treating it as crime and this "forecast" also was fulfilled.
Mr. Martin Dies relates that he was required by the secret inquisition to
restrict the definition of "subversion" to "fascism", and to equate"fascism" with "anti-semitism". "Subversion", had these importuners had
their way with him, would have been any kind of resistance to "the
destructive principle", not the subverting of the nation-state. He would not
yield, but was driven out of political life by defamation.
The A.D.L. (and the American Jewish Committee) "set out to make the American
people aware of anti-semitism". It informed Jews that "25 out of every 100
Americans are infected with anti-semitism", and that another 50 might
develop the disease. By 1945 it was carrying out "a high-powered educational
program, geared to reach every man, woman and child" in America through the
press, radio, advertising, children's comic books and school books,
lectures, films, "churches" and trade unions. This programme included "219
broadcasts a day", full-page advertisements in 397 newspapers, poster
advertizing in 130 cities, and "persuasions" subtly incorporated in the
printed matter on blotters, matchbox covers, and envelopes. The entire
national press ("1900 dailies with a 43,000,000 circulation") and the
provincial, Negro, foreign-language and labour newspapers were kept supplied
with, "and used", its material in the form of "news, background material,
cartoons and comic strips". In addition, the A.D.L. in 1945 distributed"more than 330,000 copies of important books carrying our message to
libraries and other institutions", furnished authors with "material and
complete ideas", and circulated nine million pamphlets "all tailored to fit
the audiences to which they are directed". It found "comic books" to be a
particularly effective way of reaching the minds of young people, soldiers,
sailors and airmen, and circulated "millions of copies" of propaganda in
this form. Its organization consisted of the national headquarters, public
relations committees in 150 cities, eleven regional offices, and "2,000 key
men in 1,000 cities".
The name of the body which supplied this mass of suggestive material never
reached the public. During the 1940's the system of "syndicated writers" in
New York or Washington enveloped the entire American press. One such
writer's
Page 345
column may appear in a thousand newspapers each day; editors like this
system, which saves them the cost of employing their own writers, for its
cheapness. Through a few dozen such writers the entire stream of information
can be tinctured at its source (the method foretold in the Protocols). By
all these means a generation has been reared in America (and this applies
equally to England) which has been deprived of authentic information about,
and independent comment on, the nature of Zionism, its original connection
with Communism, the infestation of administrations and capture of"administrators", and the relationship of all this to the ultimate
world-government project.
The opposition to this creeping control was strong at first and was
gradually crushed during two decades (I have given examples in England) by
various methods, including the purchase of newspapers, but chiefly by
unremitting and organized pressure, persuasive or menacing. In America a
newspaper which prints reports or comment unacceptable to the A.D.L. may
expect to receive a visit from its representatives. Threats to withdraw
advertizing are frequently made. The corps of "syndicated" writers joins in
the attack on any individual writer or broadcaster who becomes troublesome;
many American commentators have been driven from the publishers' lists or"off the air" in this way. An illustrative example:
The Chicago Tribune in 1950 reported the view of a senior official of the
State Department that the United States was ruled by "a secret government"
consisting of three members of the deceased Mr. Roosevelt's circle: Mr.
Henry Morgenthau junior, Justice Felix Frankfurter and Senator Herbert
Lehman. The word "Jew" was not used; the article expressed the opinion of a
high public servant on a matter held by him to be of great national
importance. This article raised much commotion in the Zionist and Jewish
press throughout the world (few non-Jewish newspapers paid attention to it,
for the obvious reason). I was in South Africa but guessed what would follow
and when I next went to America learned that I was right; the Tribune Tower
in Chicago was besieged by the A.D.L. with peremptory demands for an
apology. On this particular occasion none was made; the newspaper was at
that time a lonely survivor from the days of independent reporting and
comment. (A piquant detail; the writer of this "anti-semitic" report had
interested himself, not long before, in efforts to obtain the release on
parole of a Jew serving a life-term for murder, on the ground that expiation
might reasonably be held to have been made).
Even the figures for expenditure, staff and activities, above given, convey
no true idea of the power and omnipresence of the A.D.L. I myself would not
have believed, until I saw it, that a body of such might could almost
invisibly operate in a state still nominally governed by president and
Congress. Its numerous offices and sub-offices are clearly only the centres
of a great network of agents and sub-agents, for its eye is as all-seeing as
that of the N.V.D. in captive Russia or of the Gestapo once in Germany, as I
found through personal experience.
Page 346
I am a fairly obscure person and when I went to America in 1949 was almost
unknown to the public there, the publication of most of my books having been
prevented by the methods above described. I found that the A.D.L. watched me
like a hawk from my arrival and from this first realized its immense spread
and vigilance; I had not suspected that it scrutinized every roof for every
sparrow. An American acquaintance who had read some of my books introduced
me to a colleague who expressed pleasure at meeting their author. This man
asked me to dine with him and a friend, whom he presented as "my cousin".
The cousin was an entertaining fellow; I learned a year later that he was
head of the A.D.L.'s New York office and the true organizer of the little
dinner-party.* This happened a few days after I landed and thereafter the
A.D.L. knew my every movement. They knew about the book I was writing and
when it was ready for publication the "cousin" approached the American
publisher of an earlier book of mine with a pointed request to know if he
contemplated issuing this one; a man of discretion, he answered No.
Three years later, in 1952, when this book had appeared in England, the
American Legion's magazine at Hollywood published some five hundred words
from it. The A.D.L. at once demanded a retraction from the Hollywood
commander of the Legion, who referred to the magazine's editor. No
inaccuracy was alleged; the deputation just called the book "anti-semitic".
The editor refused to retract unless false statement or other valid reason
were proved, and resigned when the commander, ignoring him, published the
familiar "apology" in face of threats that "all Jews" would boycott the
Hollywood Stadium, which was operated by the Legion. The editor, departing,
said this proved the truth of what was stated in the book. The apology
availed the commander nothing for the nationwide American Broadcasting
Company, which had been televising the Legion's events at the Stadium, at
once announced that it would terminate its contract with the Legion and
televise rival events; the commander ruefully said that this "comes as a
complete shock to me".
When I next visited America, in 1951, another acquaintance, who thought my
books informative and wished me to write for American newspapers, refused to
credit what I told him. He said he was sure a certain publication would
welcome
* By this means material for dossiers and for "smearing" attacks is often
obtained. In 1956 the A.D.L. published such a "smear" volume called
Cross-Currents, described as "the book that tells how anti-semitism is used
today as a political weapon". It was filled with attacks on "anti-semites"
and contained numerous extracts from letters and conversations supposed to
have passed between the persons named. The reviewer of the book in the New
York Times, though sympathetic (writing for that journal he would not be
antagonistic) said "the authors do not let the reader in on the secret of
how they came into possession of these intriguing papers . . . this
reticence about sources is a major weakness and it is particularly serious
where statements are quoted from an oral interview". Who were these
interviewers, he asked, and how did they go about their assignment? I could
have told him, and the reader of this book has the answer. If my "oral
interview" with the "cousin", who purported to be a strong "anti-semite",
did not provide material for this volume, the reason is of interest. Late in
a convivial evening he asked me suddenly how strong I thought"anti-semitism" to be in the United States. Believing him to be what he
professed to be, I answered just as I would have answered, had I known his
identity. I said that I had travelled in more than thirty of the forty-eight
States and had never once heard the word "Jew" mentioned by any of the thousands of people I had met, which was the fact.
Page 347
an article from me on a subject then topical (not Zionism) and wrote to its
editor. He was told, to his astonishment, that the publication of anything
of mine, was "verboten", and when he suggested publication without my name
was informed that this would not avail: "there is probably a representative
of the A.D.L. on our payroll" (I have the letter).
Another acquaintance, head of a large bookselling concern, ordered his
office to obtain a book of mine from Canada and was told that the Toronto
wholesaler reported inability to supply. I made enquiry and learned that no
order had reached Toronto. My acquaintance then investigated and could not
find out who, in his own office, had intercepted the order, telling me he
now realized that my books were "on the index".
The reader need only multiply these few examples from the personal
experience of one man to see the effect on the total sum of information
supplied to the public masses. The peoples of the Western nation-states are
deprived of information in the matters most vitally affecting their present
and future, by a press which (they are constantly told) is "the freest in
the world".
Another method used by the A.D.L. to keep Jews in "mass hysteria" and
non-Jews in a state of delusion is that of the agent provocateur, the bogus"anti-semite" (the "cousin" above mentioned is an example). Part of this
method is the distribution of "documents" exposing "the whole world plot"
and usually attributed to some unverifiable gathering of rabbis. The serious
student of the real Talmudic enterprise, which can be documented from
authentic Talmudic sources, at once recognizes these fabrications. An"admirer" once sent me such a "document", found (he said) in a secret drawer
of an old family bureau which could not have been opened for a hundred
years. I had the paper examined and then asked my correspondent to tell me
how his long dead great grandfather had contrived to obtain paper
manufactured in the 1940's. The correspondence closed.
An example of the employment of the bogus "anti-semite" by the A.D.L. is on
record, authenticated by the organization itself. A prolific writer of books
attacking "anti-semitism" in America is a man of Armenian origins, one
Avedis Boghos Derounian, whose best known alias is John Roy Carlson. Several
libel actions were brought against one of his books published during the
Second War, in which he attacked over seven hundred persons, and one judge,
awarding damages, said "I think this book was written by a wholly
irresponsible person who was willing to say anything for money; I would not
believe him on oath, nor at any time hereafter; I think that book was
published by a publisher who was willing to publish anything for money". In
November 1952 a radio-interviewer confronted this man with a well-known
American foreign correspondent, Mr. Ray Brock, who taxed Carlson with having
formerly edited "a viciously antisemitic sheet called The Christian
Defender". This could not be denied, as the fact had become known, so
Carlson said he had done it "with the approval of the Anti-
Page 348
Defamation League". The host-interviewer then interrupted to say that the
A.D.L., on enquiry by him, confirmed this (the confirmation was unavoidable,
the A.D.L. having admitted to the Chicago Tribune in 1947 that it had
employed the man between 1939 and 1941 and "found his services
satisfactory").
The fact that this man then was able (1951) to publish another book
attacking "anti-semites" and to have it loudly praised in the leading New
York newspapers (in face of the judicial comment above quoted) is a sign of
the great change which this organization has brought about in American life
in the last twenty years. The web of which the A.D.L. formed the centre
stretched to other English-speaking countries, so that no independent writer
anywhere could escape it. I give instances from my own experiences in that
larger setting:
In March 1952 Truth (which was then unsubjugated), reported that the
Canadian Jewish Congress had requested a Canadian bookseller to remove from
his shelves a book of mine. When I visited Canada that year I made enquiry
and found that this pressure was general on Canadian booksellers, many of
whom had yielded to it. At that time also a Zionist journal in South Africa
stated, "Until such time as racial groups receive protection in law, no
bookshop is entitled to say that it will sell books . . . like some of
Reed's books"; I later spent some time in South Africa and found the
position there to be identical with the one in Canada. The "racial
protection" foretold in the above quotation is the Zionist-drafted "Genocide
Convention" of the United Nations, which contains a provision prescribing
legal penalties for anything said by some faction to cause "mental harm";
this provision, if enforced during another war, would make the A.D.L.
censorship permanent and worldwide. I never went to Australia but think I
would have found there the secret interference prevailing in the bookshops
of Canada and South Africa. However, about the same time an Australian
senator, unknown to me even by name, in attacking an "anti-semitic"
organization equally unheard of by me, said it was "in close touch" with me;
Australian newspapers published this defamationist message but refused to
print the factual correction. During these years I received many complaints
from readers that the chief librarian of a large Toronto library had pasted
on the flyleaves of books of mine a "warning" to readers about them;
protests had no effect.
In all these ways a curtain was lowered between the public masses and
factual information about their affairs. The capture of the mass-mind became
as complete as that of "the top-line politicians".
This left one position unconquered at the middle-layer between the captive
politicians and the persuaded-multitude. It was the class of which Dr.
Weizmann repeatedly complains: the permanent officials, the professionals
and experts. From the start the strongest opposition to Zionism's
encroachment came from this group (and from the "outside interference,
entirely from Jews" of which Dr. Weizmann also complained). The non-elected
official, the career civil servant, the professional soldier, the foreign
expert all are almost impossible to suborn. The
Page 349
permanent official does not depend on election and feels himself an integral
part of the nation. The professional soldier instinctively feels that the
nation and his duty are one, and recoils at the thought that military
operations are being perverted for some ulterior, political motive. The
expert cannot smother his knowledge at the bidding of party-men any more
than an expert craftsman can be tempted to make a watch that goes backward.
In fact, only the complete capture of a state, including the power of
dismissal, disqualification from employment and arrest can ever fully
overcome the resistance of public servants, professionals and experts to
something that clearly conflicts with their duty. The A.D.L., in my
judgment, showed that it looked forward to a day when it would overcome this
obstacle by an attempt that was made in 1943.
The high directing intelligence behind this body evidently knows that the
best moment to attain its aims is in the later stages and aftermath of a
great war. At the start the embroiled masses are still intent on the objects
professed and after the period of confusion which follows the war they
regain some clarity of vision and begin to ask questions about what has been
done under cover of the war; if the secret purpose has not then been
attained the opportunity has been lost. These secret purposes were advanced
between 1916 and 1922 (not between 1914 and 1918) in the First War, and
between 1942 and 1948 (not 1939-1945) in the Second War. If a third war were
to begin, say, in 1965 and continue until 1970, ostensibly for the purpose
of "destroying Communism", the secret effort to realize the full ambition of
Zionism and of the communized world-state would come during the period of
greatest confusion, say, from 1968 to 1974.
The bid to capture the civil service in America was made in 1943, the fourth
year of the Second War, and was partially exposed (by chance) in 1947, when
the fog was clearing. The aim was to interpose between the American people
and their public services a secret, defamationist black-list which would
prevent men of patriotic duty from entering them, and open them wide to
approved agents of the conspiracy. The lists then compiled were at one
period being so rapidly extended that they would soon have included every
person in the United States whose employment in public office was not
desired by the secret arbiters. The defamatory dossiers of the A.D.L. were
being incorporated in the official files of the American Civil Service. This
could have provided the basis for secret police action at a later stage
("political opponents" were rounded up on the strength of such lists by
Goering's new secret police on the night of the Reichstag fire). All unknown
to the American people, then and now, a coup of the first order was far
advanced in preparation.
Mr. Martin Dies once described the A.D.L., which supplied these lists, as "a
terrorist organization, using its resources, not to defend the good name of
Jews, but to force and compel compliance with the objectives of their
organization by
Page 350
terrorist methods; it is a league of defamation".* The description was borne
out by the disclosures of the Subcommittee to Investigate the Civil Service
Commission set up by the Committee on Expenditures of the American House of
Representatives, which met on October 3, 6 and 7, 1947 under the
chairmanship of Representative Clare E. Hoffman of Michigan.
This investigation also was brought about solely by the efforts of
individuals; the whole effort of government was bent on averting it. Some
loyal civil servant saw what was secretly being done and informed certain
Congressmen that black lists were being inserted in the Civil Service files.
Even that might not have led to any action, had not these Congressmen
learned that they themselves were among the blacklisted! Under the
restraints bequeathed by the long Roosevelt administration investigation,
even then, could only be set in motion on grounds that "funds voted by
Congress were being misused" (hence the intervention of the Committee on
Expenditures).
About a hundred American Senators and Congressmen then learned that they
(and some of their wives) were shown as "Nazis" on cards in the Civil
Service files. They succeeded in securing copies of these cards, which bore
a note saying that the defamationist information on them was "copied from
the subversive files" of a private firm of Zionist lawyers. These files, the
note continued, "were made up in co-operation with the American Jewish
Committee and the Anti-Defamation League; the sources of this information
must not be disclosed under any circumstances; however, further information
concerning above may be obtained . . ." (from the Zionist attorneys).
The senior officer of that department of the United States Civil Service
Commission which was charged with investigating applicants for employment
appeared before the sub-committee on subpoena. As the official directly
responsible, he said the files were secret ones, the existence of which had
only just become known to him (presumably, when he received the subpoena).
The only files theretofore known to him were those normally kept by his
department; they recorded persons investigated who for various reasons were
to be rejected if they sought employment. He had ascertained that the secret
files contained "750,000 cards" and had been prepared in the Commission's
New York office (his own headquarters office was in Washington), and that
copies of the cards had been sent to and incorporated in the files of every
branch office of the Civil Service Commission throughout the United States.
He said he had no power to produce the secret files; power to do this lay
solely with the three Civil Service Commissioners (the very heads, under the
president, of the Civil Service).
These Commissioners (a Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Flemming and Miss Perkins), then
subpoenaed, refused to produce the files, stating that the president had
forbidden this (the secret files had been introduced under President
Roosevelt; this order
* In 1956 President Eisenhower sent the annual convention of the A.D.L. an
eulogistic message commending it for "reminding the nation that the ideals
of religion must apply in all areas of life".
Page 351
not to divulge came from President Truman). Thereon Mr. Hoffmann said, "This
is the first time I have ever heard the acknowledgement that we have in this
country a Gestapo".
The Commissioners made no protest. Mr. Hoffmann then asked if persons who
had no intention even of applying for a Civil Service post were
black-listed. The senior Commissioner, Mr. Mitchell, confirmed that this was
the case, thus explicitly admitting that the black list was of unlimited
range. Mr. Hoffmann said, "Then it has nothing to do with the immediate case
of a person applying for a job?", and Mr. Mitchell agreed. Mr. Hoffmann
continued, "You claim the right to list in your files the names of anyone
and everyone in this country? Is that not correct?" and the three
Commissioners silently assented.
The investigators discovered that in June and July of 1943 alone (that is,
in the confusion-period of a great war) 487,033 cards had been added to the
secret files, this work having occupied scores of clerks. A Congressman
reminded the Commissioners that in the very year (1943) when these secret
cards were incorporated the Civil Service Commission had specifically
forbidden its investigators even to ask questions about any applicant's
Communist associations (the policy generally introduced by President
Roosevelt). The Commissioners showed great anxiety to avoid discussing the
part played by the Anti-Defamation League in this affair and repeatedly
evaded questions on that point.
The official report, so astonishing by earlier standards, shows that the
A.D.L. was in a position secretly to introduce into official records
defamatory dossiers, quickly extensible into secret police files covering
the entire country. This was recognizably an attempt to gain control of the
American Civil Service and to make loyalty, by the earlier standards, a
disqualification. As no assurance of remedial action was obtained, the
result of this public investigation may be compared with a surgical
examination by doctors who, having opened the patient and found a malignant
growth near a vital organ, declare that they have order not to remove it and
sew up the incision. Thus the unhealthy condition remained.
The uses which could conceivably be made of such secret, nation wide
black-lists were illustrated by some strange episodes of 1951 and 1952, when
bodies of troops suddenly swooped on small towns in California, New York
State and Texas and "occupied" them in the name of "the United Nations" or
of "Military Government". City halls, police headquarters and telephone
exchanges were taken over; mayors, officials and private individuals were
arrested; bands of the "enemy" (garbed by some costumier in "Fascist"
uniforms) were paraded around; trials were held by military courts and
concentration camps were set up; proclamations were made threatening"resisters" and "conspirators" with dire penalties, and so on.
These proceedings look very much like a rehearsal of the kind of thing the
Page 352
world might well see, in the confusion-period of any third war, if "the
league to enforce peace" were making its third bid for world-authority. On
this occasion, too, indignant private investigators were quite unable to
discover what authority ordered these affairs. The official military
spokesman, a colonel at the Pentagon, when hard pressed by an inquirer, was
only allowed to say that the question was "one of local and political
significance, over which the military exercises no control"! That pointed to
the president, government and State Department, but all these authorities
remained as silent as the Civil Service Commissioners had been
uninformative.
By the end of the Second War this secret invasion, in all its forms, had
impaired the inner structure of the American Republic to such an extent that
some change in its outer form, as known to the world for 150 years, was
likely during the confusion-period of any third war. The instinctive
struggle of the original population to maintain itself and its traditions
against a usurpation, the nature of which it was not allowed to comprehend,
was failing. This resistance would gain strength, and mend some of the
breaches, as the Second War receded, but grave weaknesses remained which
were bound to show themselves under the strain of the new war, with the
thought of which the American mass-mind was daily made familiar by the
politicians and the controlled press.
From 1943 onward the weakness of the American Republic lay more in its own
impaired foundations than in any foreign air forces or fleets.
---------
All information posted on this web site is
the opinion of the author and is provided for educational purposes only.
It is not to be construed as medical advice. Only a licensed medical doctor
can legally offer medical advice in the United States. Consult the healer
of your choice for medical care and advice.