|May 15th, 2008||#1|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Mount Zion - Jew York Shitty
Jews Despised by History's Best Men
The Jews are the only people in the world who have found hostility in every country in which they settled in any numbers. The big question is WHY?
Today it is taught in the schools that "Anti-Semitism" began in Germany in the 1930s after which they were deported. What is not studied is the fact that at one time or other the Jews have been expelled from every nation in Europe! When the Jews first began to immigrate to America the early colonialists in New York, Charleston and Savannah tried to ban their entry. Benjamin Franklin pleaded with the members of the Continental Congress to enter a specific ban against Jewish immigration into the U. S. Constitution to bar them for all time to come.
The Jews claim that they are "only" a religion. The truth is that the Jews are a RACE. Less than 30% are members of any Synagogue. Whether they are Orthodox religious, atheists, capitalists or communists they still claim to be Jews members of the Jewish race! Every race has inherited traits. In the case of the Jews they include trading, money-changing, usury, and a loathing for "productive labor" which is scorned as beneath the dignity of the Jews in their "bible" called "THE TALMUD."
The Jews have not changed since the days when Jesus Christ took up a whip and drove "the money changers out of the Temple." Jews have always united to form monopolies. Today they control all the department store chains and specialty shops along with the lucrative jewelry and animal fur trade. Jews dominate the fields of all precious metals such as gold, silver, platinum, tin, lead, etc. They will always ban together to drive Gentile competitors out of business.
Today America is being flooded with Jewish immigrants from Russia and even 20,000 per year leave Israel for the U. S. all with dollar signs in their eyes. Jews have used their vaunted money-power to seize control of the Democratic Party and constitute over 50% of all its financial contributions. Today they are buying up more and more major U. S. companies. While only 3% of the population, the Jews control over 25% of the nation's wealth and this percentage rises every year. They are the only racial group totally organized to work for political domination over America.
Opposition to the Jews did not begin in Germany but dates back before the birth of Christ over 2,000 years ago! Study the statements made by "The world's greatest men." They reveal why the "wandering Jews" have made enemies out of every host country that ever accepted them.
CICERO (Marcus Tullius Cicero). First century B.C. Roman statesman, writer.
"Softly! Softly! I want none but the judges to hear me. The Jews have already gotten me into a fine mess, as they have many other gentleman. I have no desire to furnish further grist for their mills." (Oration in Defense of Flaccus)
Cicero was serving as defense counsel at the trial of Flaccus, a Roman official who interfered with Jewish gold shipments to their international headquarters (then, as now) in Jerusalem. Cicero himself certainly was not a nobody, and for one of this stature to have to "speak softly" shows that he was in the presence of a dangerously powerful sphere of influence. and on another occasion Cicero wrote: "The Jews belong to a dark and repulsive force. One knows how numerous this clique is, how they stick together and what power they exercise through their unions. They are a nation of rascals and deceivers."
SENECA (Lucius Annaeus Seneca). First century Roman philosopher. "The customs of that most criminal nation have gained such strength that they have now been received in all lands. The conquered have given laws to the conquerors." (De Superstitione)
DIO CASSIUS. Second century Roman historian. Describing the savage Jewish uprising against the Roman empire that has been acknowledged as the turning point downward in the course of that great state-form: "The Jews were destroying both Greeks and Romans. They ate the flesh of their victims, made belts for themselves out of their entrails, and daubed themselves with their blood... In all, 220,000 men perished in Cyrene and 240,000 in Cyprus, and for this reason no Jew may set foot in Cyprus today." (Roman History)
DIODORUS SICULUS. First century Greek historian.Observed that Jews treated other people as enemies and inferiors. "Usury" is the practice of lending money at excessive interest rates. This has for centuries caused great misery and poverty for Gentiles. It has brought strong condemnation of the Jews!
BERNARDINO OF FELTRO. 15th century Italian priest. A mild man who extolled patience and charity in normal circumstances, he described himself as a "barking dog" when dealing with Jews: "Jewish usurers bleed the poor to death and grow fat on their substance, and I who live on alms, who feed on the bread of the poor, shall I then be mute before outraged charity? Dogs bark to protect those who feed them, and I, who am feed by the poor, shall I see them robbed of what belongs to them and keep silent?" (E. Flornoy, Le Bienbeureux Bernardin the Feltre)
AQUINAS, THOMAS, Saint. 13th century scholastic philosopher. In his "On the Governance of the Jews," he wrote: "The Jews should not be allowed to keep what they have obtained from others by usury; it were best that they were compelled to worked so that they could earn their living instead of doing nothing but becoming avaricious."
HILAIRE BELLOC, in the book THE JEWS, page 9 "There is already something like a Jewish monopoly in high finance . . . There is the same element of Jewish monopoly in the silver trade, and in the control of various other metals, notably lead, nickel, quicksilver. What is most disquieting of all, this tendency to monopoly is spreading like a disease."
H. H. BEAMISH, in New York Speech, October 30, 1937 "The Boer War occurred 37 years ago. Boer means farmer. Many criticized a great power like Britain for trying to wipe out the Boers. Upon making inquiry, I found all the gold and diamond mines of South Africa were owned by Jews; that Rothschild controlled gold; Samuels controlled silver, Baum controlled other mining, and Moses controlled base metals. Anything these people touch they inevitably pollute."
W. HUGHES, Premier of Australia, Saturday Evening Post, June 19, 1919 "The Montefiores have taken Australia for their own, and there is not a gold field or a sheep run from Tasmania to New South Wales that does not pay them a heavy tribute. They are the real owners of the antipodean continent. What is the good of our being a wealthy nation, if the wealth is all in the hands of German Jews?"
POPE CLEMENT VIII "All the world suffers from the usury of the Jews, their monopolies and deceit. They have brought many unfortunate people into a state of poverty, especially the farmers, working class people and the very poor. Then as now Jews have to be reminded intermittently anew that they were enjoying rights in any country since they left Palestine and the Arabian desert, and subsequently their ethical and moral doctrines as well as their deeds rightly deserve to be exposed to criticism in whatever country they happen to live."
NESTA WEBSTER, In World Revolution, The Plot against Civilization, page 163 "Since the earliest times it is as the exploiter that the Jew has been known amongst his fellow men of all races and creeds. Moreover, he has persistently shown himself ungrateful . . . The Jews have always formed a rebellious element in every state."
FRANZ LISZT, famed composer quoted in Col. E. N. Sanctuary's Are These Things So?, page 278 "The day will come when all nations amidst which the Jews are dwelling will have to raise the question of their wholesale expulsion, a question which will be one of life or death, good health or chronic disease, peaceful existence or perpetual social fever."
JESUS CHRIST, speaking to the Jews in the Gospel of St. John, 8:44 "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lust of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is not truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar and the father of it. - then answered the Jews " (which makes it clear that Christ was addressing the Jews.)
MARTIN LUTHER, Table Talk of Martin Luther, translated by William Hazlet, page 43 "But the Jews are so hardened that they listen to nothing; though overcome by testimonies they yield not an inch. It is a pernicious race, oppressing all men by their usury and rapine. If they give a prince or magistrate a thousand florins, they extort twenty thousand from the subjects in payment. We must ever keep on guard against them."
REV. GORDON WINROD, in his book The Keys to Christian Understanding, pages 114 - 115 "Judaism does not know Jesus Christ. Judaism hates Jesus Christ. When St. Paul was in Judaism, before he was converted to Christianity, he hated Jesus Christ and persecuted Christians and Christianity." Paul said: "You have heard of my earlier career in Judaism how furiously I persecuted the Church of God, and made havoc of it; and how in devotion to Judaism I out-stripped many men of may own age among my people, being far more zealous than they for the tradition of my forefathers." (Gal. 1:13, 14, Weymouth Translation).
While in Judaism, Paul persecuted Christians because of his intense hatred for Christians and because of his conformity to the tradition of the fathers. This shows that the tradition of teachings of Judaism are filled with hate for Christians. Few people know of this because they do not carefully read their Scriptures and because of the great pains which Jews have take to deceive the Christians. Care has been exerted by the Jews to hide their ECONOMIC-POLITICAL conspiracy for complete world domination UNDER high sounding words that have a "RELIGIOUS" ring in the ears of Christians. The Jews use such "religious" sounding words as "the Jewish faith," "the Jewish religion," "Jewish spiritual values," "Jewish religious doctrines," and like phrases which deceive and lead the unlearned into total equanimity. Behind this mask of religiosity stands a complete plan for world government, world power, world conquest, a Jewish kingdom of this world, and the destruction of Christianity.
REV. WILLIAM S. MITCHELL of Philadelphia, quoted in Count Cherep-Spiridovich's book The Secret World Government, page 194 "If there is an ingrate in history, it is the Jew. In this land which befriended him he as conspired, plotted, undermined, prostituted and corrupted and (hiding to this hour behind the braver screen of other folks), dares to contrive and scheme the death of every Christian principle which has protected him."
ST. JUSTIN, martyr stated in 116 A. D. "The Jews were behind all the persecutions of the Christians. They wandered through the country everywhere hating and undermining the Christian faith."
ST. JOHN, Gospel of St. John 7:1 "After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry because the Jews sought to kill him."
M. H. DE HEEKELINGEN, in Israel: Son Passe, Son Avenir "The former Rabbi Drach, converted to Catholicism, says that the Talmud contains "a large number of musing, utterly ridiculous extravagancies, most revolting indecencies, and, above all, the most horrible blasphemies against everything which the Christian religion holds most sacred and most dear." "In the matter of the translation of the Talmud by non-Jews, we have always preferred that of Luzsensky, whose accuracy has been established by the Courts. In 1923, the Public Prosecutor of Hungary caused his Hungarian Talmud to be seized on account of "attack on public morals" and "pornography." In delivering its verdict, the Court declared 'INTER ALIA:' "The horrors contained in the translation of Alfred Luzsensky are to be found, without exception, in the Talmud. His translation is correct, in that it renders these passages, which are actually to be found in the original text of the Talmud, after their true meaning." QUINTAS SPETIMUS FLORENS TERTULLIAN (160 - 230 A. D.) Latin Church Father "The Jews formed the breeding ground of all anti-Christian actions."
REV. MARTIN LUTHER, sermon at Eisleben, a few days before his death, February, 1546 "Besides, you also have many Jews living in the country, who do much harm . . . You should know the Jews blaspheme and violate the name of our Savior day for day... for that reason you, Milords and men of authority, should not tolerate but expel them. They are our public enemies and incessantly blaspheme our Lord Jesus Christ, they call our Blessed Virgin Mary a harlot and her Holy Son a bastard and to us they give the epithet of changelings and abortions. Therefore deal with them harshly as they do nothing but excruciatingly blaspheme our Lord Jesus Christ, trying to rob us of our lives, our health, our honor and belongings."
MARIA THERESA, Queen of Hungary and Bohemia (1771 - 1789) "Henceforth no Jew, no matter under what name, will be allowed to remain here without my written permission. I know of no other troublesome pest within the state than this race, which impoverished the people by their fraud, usury and money-lending and commits all deeds which an honorable man despises. Subsequently they have to be removed and excluded from here as much as possible."
(The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia states that "The Talmud is the real "bible" of the Jews and that it supersedes the Old Testament. This volume has been condemned down through the ages for preaching hatred for Christ and all Christians. Read "THE TALMUD UNMASKED" for the full shocking details.)
DIDEROT, DENIS. 18th century French scholar. His famous ENCYCLOPEDIE, the bible of the pre-revolutionary French "enlightenment," has often been complained of by Jewish writers as 'anti-Semitic.' Some of Diderot's other writings are likewise unfriendly: "And you, angry and brutish people, vile and vulgar men, slaves worthy of the yoke Talmudism which you bear ... Go, take back your books and remove yourselves from me. (LA MOISADE) The Talmud taught the Jews to steal the goods of Christians, to regard them as savage beasts, to push them over the precipice . . . to kill them with impunity and to utter every morning the most horrible imprecations against them. (JUIFS)
NESTA WEBSTER, in Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, page 370 "The Jewish conception of the Jews as the Chosen People who must eventually rule the world forms indeed the basis of Rabbinical Judaism . . .The Jewish religion now takes its stand on the Talmud rather than on the Bible."
F. TROCASE, in Jewish Austria "No obstacle discourages them; they persevere throughout the world, throughout the centuries, the unity of their race. The Talmud has given them a powerful organization which modern progress has been unable to change. Deep, ineradicable hatred of everything that is not Jewish stimulates them in war which they wage against Christian Society, which is too divided to be able to fight with the necessary energy."
COUNT HELMUTH VON MOLTKE, Prussian general "The Jews form a state, and, obeying their own laws, they evade those of their host country. The Jews always consider an oath regarding a Christian not binding. During the Campaign of 1812 the Jews were spies, they were paid by both sides, they betrayed both sides."
MOHAMMED, in the Koran "Whoever is a friend of a Jew, belong to them, becomes one of them, God cannot tolerate this mean people. The Jews have wandered from divine religion. You must not relent in your work which must show up Jewish deceit."
BACON, FRANCIS. 16th century British writer, politician. In his The New Atlantis, he remarked that Jews "hate the name of Christ and have a secret and innate rancor against the people among whom they live." He also disapproved of non-Jewish usurers as "Judaizers" who would wear "tawny bonnets" like Jews.
LUTHER, MARTIN. 16th century German religious reformer. "They are the real liars and bloodhounds, who have not only perverted and falsified the entire Scriptures from beginning to end and without ceasing with their interpretations. And all of the anxious sighing, longing and hoping of their hearts is directed to the time when some day they would like to deal with us heathen as they dealt with the heathen in Persia at the time of Esther . . . On how they love the book of Esther, which so nicely agrees with their bloodthirsty, revengeful and murderous desire and hope.
1). The sun never did shine on a more bloodthirsty and revengeful people as they, who imagine to be the people of God, and who desire to and think they must murder and crush the heathen. And the foremost undertaking which they expect of their Messiah is that he should slay and murder the whole world with the sword. As they at first demonstrated against us Christians and would like to do now, if they only could; have also tried it often and have been repeatedly struck on their snouts . . . Their breath stinks for the gold and silver of the heathen; since no people under the sun always have been, still are, and always will remain more avaricious than they, as can be noticed in their cursed usury. They also find comfort with this: "When the Messiah comes, He shall take all the gold and silver in the world and distribute it among the Jews.
2). Thus, wherever they can direct Scripture to their insatiable avarice, they wickedly do so. Therefore know, my dear Christians, that next to the Devil, you have no more bitter, more poisonous, more vehement and enemy than a real Jew who earnestly desires to be a Jew. There may be some among them who believe what the cow or the goose believes. But all of them are surrounded with their blood and circumcision. In history, therefore, they are often accused of poisoning wells, stealing children and mutilating them; as in Trent, Weszensee and the like. Of course they deny this. Be it so or not, however, I know full well that the ready will is not lacking with them if they could only transform it into deeds, in secret or openly.
3). A person who does not know the Devil, might wonder why they are so at enmity with the Christians above all others; for which they have no reason, since we only do good to them. They live among us in our homes, under our protection, use land and highways, market and streets. Princes and government sit by, snore and have their maws open, let the Jews take from their purse and chest, steal and rob whatever they will. That is, they permit themselves and their subjects to be abused and sucked dry and reduced to beggars with their own money, through the usury of the Jews. For the Jews, as foreigners, certainly should have nothing from us; and what they have certainly must be ours. They do not work, do not earn anything from us, neither do we donate or give it to them. Yet they have our money and goods and are lords in our land where they are supposed to be in exile! If a thief steals ten gulden he must hang; if he robs people on the highway, his head is gone. But a Jew, when he steals ten tons of gold through his usury is dearer than God himself! Do not their TALMUD and rabbis write that it is no sin to kill if a Jew kills a heathen, but it is a sin if he kills a brother in Israel? It is no sin if he does not keep his oath to a heathen. Therefore, to steal and rob (as they do with their moneylending) from a heathen, is a divine service . . . And they are the masters of the world and we are their servants yea, their cattle! I maintain that in three fables of Aesop there is more wisdom to be found than in all the books of the Talmudists and rabbis and more than ever could come into the hearts of the Jews . . . Should someone think I am saying too much I am saying much too little! For I see in their writings how they curse us Goyim and wish as all evil in their schools and prayers. They rob us of our money through usury, and wherever they are able, they play us all manner of mean tricks . . . No heathen has done such things and none would to so except the Devil himself and those whom he possesses as he possesses the Jews. Burgensis, who was a very learned rabbi among them and by the grace of God became a Christian (which seldom occurs), is much moved that in their schools they so horribly curse us Christians (as Lyra also writes) and from that draws the conclusion that they must not be the people of God. Now behold what a nice, thick, fat lie it is when they complain about being captives among us! Jerusalem was destroyed more than 1,400 years ago during that time we Christians have been tortured and persecuted by the Jews in all the world. On top of that, we do not know to this day what Devil brought them into our country. We did not fetch them from Jerusalem! . . . Yes, we have and hold them captive, as I would like to keep my rheumatism, and all other diseases and misfortunes, who must wait as a poor servant, with money and property and everything I have! I wish they were in Jerusalem with the other Jews and whomsoever they would like to have with them.
Now what are we going to do with these rejected, condemned Jewish people? . . . Let us apply the ordinary wisdom of other nations like France, Spain, Bohemia, et al., who made them give an account of what they had stolen through usury, and divided it evenly; but expelled them from their country. For as heard before, God's wrath is so great over them that through soft mercy they only become more wicked, through hard treatment, however, only a little better. Therefore, away with them! How much more unbearable it is that we should permit the entire Christendom and all of us to be bought with our own money, be slandered and cursed by the Jews, who on top of all that be made rich and our lords, who laugh us to scorn and are tickled by their audacity! What a joyful affair that would be for the Devil and his angels, and cause them to laugh through their snouts like a sow grinning at her little pigs, but deserving real wrath before God. (From THE JEWS AND THEIR LIES) Maybe mild-hearted and gentle Christians will believe that I am too rigorous and drastic against the poor, afflicted Jews, believing that I ridicule them and treat them with much sarcasm. By my word, I am far too weak to be able to ridicule such a satanic brood. I would fain to do so, but they are far greater adepts at mockery than I and possess a god who is master in this art. It is the Evil One himself. Even with no further evidence than the Old Testament, I would maintain, and no person on earth could alter my opinion, that the Jews as they are today are veritably a mixture of all the depraved and malevolent knaves of the whole world over, who have then been dispersed in all countries, similarly to the Tartars, Gypsies and such folk."
WASHINGTON, GEORGE, in Maxims of George Washington by A. A. Appleton & Co. "They (the Jews) work more effectively against us, than the enemy's armies. They are a hundred times more dangerous to our liberties and the great cause we are engaged in... It is much to be lamented that each state, long ago, has not hunted them down as pest to society and the greatest enemies we have to the happiness of America."
This prophecy, by Benjamin Franklin, was made in a "CHIT CHAT AROUND THE TABLE DURING INTERMISSION," at the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention of 1787. This statement was recorded in the dairy of Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, a delegate from South Carolina. "I fully agree with General Washington, that we must protect this young nation from an insidious influence and impenetration. The menace, gentlemen, is the Jews. In whatever country Jews have settled in any great number, they have lowered its moral tone; depreciated its commercial integrity; have segregated themselves and have not been assimilated; have sneered at and tried to undermine the Christian religion upon which that nation is founded, by objecting to its restrictions; have built up a state within the state; and when opposed have tried to strangle that country to death financially, as in the case of Spain and Portugal. For over 1,700 years, the Jews have been bewailing their sad fate in that they have been exiled from their homeland, as they call Palestine. But gentlemen, did the world give it to them in fee simple, they would at once find some reason for not returning. Why? Because they are vampires, and vampires do not live on vampires. They cannot live only among themselves. They must subsist on Christians and other people not of their race. If you do not exclude them from these United States, in their Constitution, in less than 200 years they will have swarmed here in such great numbers that they will dominate and devour the land and change our form of government, for which we Americans have shed our blood, given our lives our substance and jeopardized our liberty. If you do not exclude them, in less than 200 years our descendants will be working in the fields to furnish them substance, while they will be in the counting houses rubbing their hands. I warn you, gentlemen, if you do not exclude Jews for all time, your children will curse you in your graves. Jews, gentlemen, are Asiatics, let them be born where they will nor how many generations they are away from Asia, they will never be otherwise. Their ideas do not conform to an American's, and will not even thou they live among us ten generations. A leopard cannot change its spots. Jews are Asiatics, are a menace to this country if permitted entrance, and should be excluded by this Constitutional Convention.
STYVESANT, PETER. 17th century Dutch governor in America. "The Jews who have arrived would nearly all like to remain here, but learning that they (with their customary usury and deceitful trading with the Christians) were very repugnant to the inferior magistrates, as also to the people having the most affection for you; the Deaconry also fearing that owing to their present indigence they might become a charge in the coming winter, we have, for the benefit of this weak newly developing place and land in general, deemed it useful to require them in a friendly way to depart; praying also most seriously in this connection, for ourselves also for the general community of your worships, that the deceitful race such hateful enemies and blasphemers of the name of Christ not be allowed further to infect and trouble this new colony. (Letter to the Amsterdam Chamber of the Dutch West India Company, from New Amsterdam, September 22, 1654.) The Jews whom he attempted to oust merely applied to their fellow Jews in Holland, and the order came back from the Company countermanding the expulsion. (For a similar situation during the Civil War, see ULYSSES GRANT). Among the reasons given by "their worships" for over-ruling their governor, one stands out rather glaringly, in view of the usual Jewish contention that their people were 'poor and persecuted:' " . . . and also because of the large amount of capital which they have invested in shares of this Company." (Harry Golden and Martin Rywell, THE JEWS IN AMERICAN HISTORY) THE GEORGIA COLONY IN AMERICA. On January 5, 1734, the trustees ordered that three Jews who had been sending coreligionists into the colony without authorization "use their endeavors that the said Jews may be removed from the Colony of Georgia, as the best and only satisfaction that they can give to the Trustees for such an indignity offered to Gentlemen acting under His Majesty's Charter." (C. Jones, HISTORY OF SAVANNAH)
JEFFERSON, THOMAS. 18th century American statesman. "Dispersed as the Jews are, they still form one nation, foreign to the land they live in." (D. Boorstin, THE AMERICANS) "Those who labor in the earth are the Chosen People of God, if ever he had a chosen people." (NOTES ON VIRGINIA)
BEAMISH, HENRY H. 20th century British publisher. "There is no need to be delicate on this Jewish question. You must face them in this country. The Jew should be satisfied here. I was here forty-seven years ago; your doors were thrown open and you were then free. Now he has got you absolutely by the throat that is their reward." (New York speech, October 30, 1937)
HARRINGTON, LORD. 19th century British statesman. Opposed admission of Jewish immigrants to England because: "They are the great moneylenders and loan contractors of the world... The consequence is that the nations of the world are groaning under heavy systems of taxation and national debt. They have ever been the greatest enemies of freedom. (Speech in the House of Lords, July 12, 1858)
WALTER CRICK, British Manufacturer, in the NORTHAMPTON DAILY ECHO, March 19. 1925) "Jews can destroy by means of finance. Jews are International. Control of credits in this country is not in the hands of the English, but of Jews. It has become the biggest danger the British Empire ever had to face."
WORLD FAMOUS MEN of the past accused the Jews of founding Communism. This charge is well founded. The Communist philosophy was drawn up by Karl Marx who descended from a long line of Rabbis. His ideology of anti-Christian and Socialist thought is outlined in the Jewish "TALMUD" which is the "bible" of the Jews. Of the four political groups which overthrew the Christian Czar of Russia two were 100% Jewish. They were the Mensheviks and The Jewish Bund. The other two were the Socialist Revolutionary Party and the Bolsheviks. Both were headed by Jews but had some Gentile members. Today we now know that Lenin was Jewish and all of the leaders of his first government were Jews. They were Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev and Sverdlow. The wealthiest Jewish banker in the world at that time, Jacob Schiff of Kuhn, Loeb investment bank of New York City, gave Trotsky and Lenin $20 million to overthrow the Czar and establish the Soviet tyranny (according to the "NEW YORK JOURNAL-AMERICAN" of February 3, 1949.)
CHURCHILL, WINSTON. 20th century British politician. In 1920, he wrote a long newspaper article of the recent Bolshevik seizure of Russia. After praising what he called the "national Jews" of Russia, he said: "In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish efforts rise the schemes of the International Jews. The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxemburg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide revolutionary conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster has ably shown, a definite recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworlds of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of the enormous empire. There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creating of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistic Jews. It is certainly the very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders . . . In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astounding. And the prominent if not the principal part in the system of terrorism applied by the extraordinary Commissions for combating Counter Revolution has been take by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses. The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every bit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing. ("Zionism versus Bolshevism: A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People." ILLUSTRATED SUNDAY HERALD, London, February 8, 1920.)
BAKUNYIN, MIKHYL. 19th century Russian revolutionary. "Marx is a Jew and is surrounded by a crowd of little, more or less intelligent, scheming, agile, speculating Jews, just as Jews are everywhere, commercial and banking agents, writers, politicians, correspondents for newspapers of all shades; in short, literary brokers, just as they are financial brokers, with one foot in the bank and the other in the socialist movement, and their arses sitting upon the German press. They have grabbed hold of all newspapers, and you can imagine what a nauseating literature is the outcome of it. Now this entire Jewish world, which constitutes an exploiting sect, a people of leeches, a voracious parasite, Marx feels an instinctive inclination and a great respect for the Rothschild's. This may seem strange. What could there be in common between communism and high finance? Ho ho! The communism of Marx seeks a strong state centralization, and where this exists there must inevitably exist a state central bank, and where this exists, there the parasitic Jewish nation, which speculates upon the labor of the people, will always find the means for its existence . . . In reality, this would be for the proletariat a barrack regime, under which the workingmen and the working closely and intimately connected with one another, regardless not only of frontiers but of political differences as well this Jewish world is today largely at the disposal of Marx or Rothschild. I am sure that, on the one hand, the Rothschild's appreciate the merits of Marx, and that on the other hand, women, converted into a uniform mass, would rise, fall asleep, work and live at the beat of the drum; the privilege of ruling would be in the hands of the skilled and the learned, with a wide scope left for profitable crooked deals carried on by the Jews, who would be attracted by the enormous extension of the international speculations of the national banks . . . (Pol Emique contres les Juifs) This startling piece of prediction is particularly impressive to those who have observed the Soviet scene and notice its strange relationship with capitalist financiers overwhelmingly Jewish - since the revolution. The line runs from Olof Aschberg, self-described "Bolshevik banker" who ferried to Trotsky the huge sums raised for the revolution by financiers in Europe and America, to Armand Hammer in the 1970s, who has specialized in multimillion-dollar trade concessions with the now supposedly 'anti-Semitic' commissars.
WILHELM II. German Kaiser. "A Jew cannot be a true patriot. He is something different, like a bad insect. He must be kept apart, out of a place where he can do mischief - even by pogroms, if necessary. The Jews are responsible for Bolshevism in Russia, and Germany too. I was far too indulgent with them during my reign, and I bitterly regret the favors I showed the prominent Jewish bankers." (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, July 2, 1922)
CARDINAL MINDSZENTY, of Hungary quoted in B'nai B'rith Messenger, January 28, 1949 "The troublemakers in Hungary are the Jews... they demoralize our country and they are the leaders of the revolutionary gang that is torturing Hungary."
ADRIEN ARCAND, New York speech, October 30, 1937 "When it came to Mexico, the promoters of Communism were the Jews Calles, Hubermann and Aaron Saenz; in Spain we saw Azaa and Rosenberg; in Hungary we saw Bela Kun, Szamuelly, Agoston and dozen other Jews; in Bavaria, we saw Kurt Eisner and a host of other Jews; in Belgium Marxian Socialism brought to power Vadervelde alias Epstein, and Paul Hymans, two Jews; in France, Marxian Socialism brought forth the Jews Leon Blum (who showed so well his Jewish instincts in his filthy book Du Mariarge), Mandel, Zyromsky, Danain and a whole tribe of them; in Italy we had seen the Jews Nathan and Claudio Treves. Everywhere, Marxism brings Jews on the top And this is no hazard."
HILAIRE BELLOC, renown historian in G. K.'s WEEKLY, February 4, 1937 "The propaganda of Communism throughout the world, in organization and direction is in the hands of Jewish agents. As for anyone who does not know that the Bolshevist movement in Russia is Jewish, I can only say that he must be a man who is taken in by the suppression of our deplorable press."
A. HOMER, writes in Judaism and Bolshevism, page 7 "History shows that the Jew has always been, by nature, a revolutionary and that, since the dispersion of his race in the second century, he has either initiated or assisted revolutionary movements in religion, politics and finance, which weakened the power of the States wherein he dwelt. On the other hand, a few far-seeing members of that race have always been at hand to reap financial and political advantage coincident with such upheavals."
CAPTAIN MONTGOMERY SCHYLER, American Expeditionary Forces, Siberia, in a military intelligence report dated March 1, 1919, to Lt. Col. Barrows in Vladivostok "It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the United States but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since its beginning guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest type, who have been in the United States and there absorbed every one of the worst phases of our civilization without having the least understanding of what we really mean by liberty."
MRS. CLARE SHERIDAN, Traveler, Lecturer in NEW YORK WORLD, December 15, 1923 "The Communists are Jews, and Russia is being entirely administered by them. They are in every government office, bureau and newspaper. They are driving out the Russians and are responsible for the anti-Semitic feeling which is increasing."
MAJOR ROBERT H. WILLIAMS, in Fecp and the Minority Machine, page 10 "B'nai B'rith, the secret Jewish fraternity, was organized in 1843, awakening world Jewish aspirations, or Zionism, and its name, meaning "Sons of the Covenant," suggests that the 12 men who organized the fraternity aimed at bringing about the fulfillment of "the Covenant," or the supposed Messianic promise of rulership over all peoples. To rule all peoples, it is first necessary to bring them together in a world federation or world government which is the avowed aim of both Communists and Zionists."
VLADIMIR, LENIN, Founder of Bolshevik Communist (From an article in Northern Pravda, October-December 1913, quoted in Lenin on the Jewish Question, page 10) "There the great universally progressive features of Jewish culture have made themselves clearly felt: its internationalism, its responsiveness of the advanced movements of our times (the percentage of Jews in democratic and proletarian movements is everywhere higher than the percentage of Jews in the general population.) . . . Those Jewish Marxists who join up in the international Marxist organizations with the Russian, Lithuanian, Ukrainian and other workers, adding their might (both in Russian and in Jewish) to the creation of an international culture of the working class movement, are continuing the best traditions of Jewry."
JOSEPH STALIN in a reply given on January 12, 1931 to an enquiry made by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency of America (Stars and Sand, page 316) "Anti-Semitism is dangerous for the toilers, for it is a false track which diverts them from the proper road and leads them into the jungle. Hence, Communists, as consistent internationalists, cannot but be irreconcilable and bitter enemies of anti-Semitism. In the U.S.S.R., anti-Semitism is strictly prosecuted as a phenomenon hostile to the Soviet system. According to the laws of the U.S.S.R. active anti-Semites are punished with death."
HENRY FORD in (The Dearborn Independent, 12-19 February 1921 "Jews have always controlled the business . . . The motion picture influence of the United States and Canada . . . is exclusively under the control, moral and financial, of the Jewish manipulators of the public mind."
M. OUDENDYK, the Netherlands' Minister to Petrograd on September 6, 1918, to the British Government, published in the unexpurgated edition of A Collection of Reports on Bolshevism in Russia, April, 1919 ". . . I consider that the immediate suppression of Bolshevism is the greatest issue before the World, not even excluding the war which is till raging, and unless, as above stated, Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole World, as it is organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things."
A. N. FIELD, in Today's Greatest Problem "Once the Jewishness of Bolshevism is understood, its otherwise puzzling features become understandable. Hatred of Christianity, for instance, is not a Russian characteristic; it is a Jewish one."
FATHER DENIS FAHEY; in his book The Rulers of Russia, page 25 "The real forces behind Bolshevism is Russia are Jewish forces, and Bolshevism is really an instrument in the hands of the Jews for the establishment of their future Messianic kingdom."
A. N. FIELD, The Truth About the Slump, page 208 "The World today, however provides a spectacle of a great concentration of Jewish power. In New York there is a concentration of Jewish financial power dominating the entire world in its material affairs, and side by side with it is the greatest physical concentration of the Jews ever recorded. On the other side of the globe, there has taken place in Russia the greatest concentration of the Jewish revolutionary activity in all history . . . The enormously significant thing in the world today is that both this power of the purse (Theodor Herzl's "terrible (Jewish) power of the purse") and revolutionary activity are working in the direction of destroying the entire existing order of things, and not only are they working in a common direction, but there is a mass of evidence that they are working in unison."
H. H. BEAMISH, N.Y. speech, 1937 "Communism is Judaism. The Jewish Revolution in Russia was in 1918."
HILARY COTTER, author of Cardinal Minszenty, The Truth About His Real "Crime," page 6 "Communism and Judaism are one and the same."
ADRIEN ARCAND, Canadian political leader in New York Speech, October 30, 1937 "There is nothing else in Communism a Jewish conspiracy to grab the whole world in their clutches; and no intelligent man in the world can find anything else, except the Jews, who rightly call it for themselves a "paradise on earth."
Jews are eager to bring Communism, because they know what it is and what it means. It is because Communism has not been fought for what it really is a Jewish scheme invented by Jews that it has progressed against all opposition to it. We have fought the smoke-screen presented by Jewish dialecticians and publicists, refusing to fight the inventor, profiteer and string-puller. Because Christians and Gentiles have come to fear the Jews, fear the truth, and they are paralyzed by the paradoxical slogans shouted by the Jews."
REV. KENNETH GOFF, in STILL 'TIS OUR ANCIENT FOE, page 99 "The Frankenstein of Communism is the product of the Jewish mind, and was turned loose upon the world by the son of a Rabbi, Karl Marx, in the hopes of destroying Christian civilization as well as others. The testimony given before the Senate of the United States which is take from the many pages of the Overman Report, reveals beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jewish bankers financed the Russian Revolution."
POPES, ROMAN CATHOLIC.
SYLVESTER I. Condemned Jewish anti-Christian activity.
GREGORY I ('The Great'). Protested wholesale circumcision of Christian slaves by Jewish traders, who monopolized the slave trade in Europe and the Middle East and were widely suspected of supplying white girls to Oriental and African buyers.
GREGORY VIII. Forbade Jews to have power over Christians, in a letter to Alfonso VI of Castile.
GREGORY IX. Condemned the TALMUD as containing "every kind of vileness and blasphemy against Christian doctrine."
BENEDICT XIII. His Bull on the Jewish issue (1450) declared:
"The heresies, vanities and errors of the TALMUD prevent their knowing the truth."
JULIUS III. Contra Hebreos retinentes libros (1554) ordered the TALMUD burned "everywhere" and established a strict censorship over Jewish genocidal writings an order that has never been rescinded and which presumably is still binding upon Catholics.
PAUL IV. Cum nimis absurdim (1555) promulgated immediately after his coronation, was a powerful condemnation of Jewish usury. It embodies a model legal code to curb Jewish power that was recommended to all communities.
PIUS IV. Condemned Jewish genocidal writings.
PIUS V. Hebraeorum gens (1569) expelled all Jews from the Papal States.
GREGORY XIII. Declared that Jews "continue to plot horrible crimes" against Christians "with daily increasing audacity."
CLEMENT VIII. Condemned Jewish genocidal writings.
ALEXANDER VIII. Condemned Jewish genocidal writings.
BENEDICT XIV. Quo Primum 1751) denounced Jewish control of commerce and "systematical despoliation" of the Christian through usury.
PIUS VII. Known generally as an 'anti-Semite' by Jewish writers.
BENEDICT XV. Warned, in 1920, against "the advent of a Universal Republic which is longed for by all the worst elements of disorder." This is resented by some Jews because of their active sponsorship and direction of such projects as the League of Nations and United Nations. And in effect, all Popes who have issued editions of the Index Expurgatorius, in which Jewish genocidal and anti-Christian writings are condemned, according to the instructions of the Council of Trent.
GRANT, USYSSES S. 19th century American general, politician. While in command of the 13th Army Corps, headquartered at Oxford, Mississippi, he became so infuriated at Jewish camp-followers attempting to penetrate the conquered territory that he finally attempted to expel the Jews: "I have long since believed that in spite of all the vigilance that can be infused into post commanders, the special regulations of the Treasury Department have been violated, and that mostly by Jews and other unprincipled traders. So well satisfied have I been of this that I instructed the commanding officers at Columbus to refuse all permits to Jews to come South, and I have frequently had them expelled from the department, but they come in with their carpet-sacks in spite of all that can be done to prevent it. The Jews seem to be a privileged class that can travel anywhere. They will land at any woodyard on the river and make their way through the country. If not permitted to buy cotton themselves, they will act as agents for someone else, who will be at military post with a Treasury permit to receive cotton and pay for it in Treasury notes which the Jew will buy up at an agreed rate, paying gold. (Letters to C. P. Wolcott, assistant secretary of war, Washington, December 17, 1862)
1). The Jews, as a class, violating every regulation of trade established by the Treasury Department, and also Department orders, are hereby expelled from the Department.
2). Within twenty-four hours from the receipt of this order by Post Commanders, they will see that all of this class of people are furnished with passes and required to leave, and anyone returning after such notification, will be arrested and held in confinement until an opportunity occurs of sending them out as prisoners, unless furnished with permits from these headquarters.
3). No permits will be given these people to visit headquarters for the purpose of making personal application for trade permits. By order of Major Gen. Grant Jno. A. Rawlings, Assistant Adjutant General (General Order Number 11, December 17, 1862)
The expulsion order was immediately countermanded by the general-in-chief, H. W. Halleck, in Washington. Apparently the expelled Jews had immediately contacted their kinsmen there and had pressure brought to bear.
SHERMAN, WILLIAM T. 19th century American soldier. In a letter from Union-occupied Memphis, July 30, 1862, he wrote: "I found so many Jews and speculators here trading in cotton, and secessionists had become so open in refusing anything but gold, that I have felt myself bound to stop it. The gold can have but one use the purchase of arms and ammunition . . . Of course, I have respected all permits by yourself or the Secretary of the Treasury, but in these new cases (swarms of Jews), I have stopped it." (The Sherman Letters)
ROSS, L. F. 19th century American military man. As did Generals ULYSSES S. GRANT and WILLIAM T. SHERMAN, Ross confronted Jewish 'carpetbagging' cotton traders preying upon captured Confederate areas during the Civil War. In a letter to General John A. McClernand, he wrote: "The cotton speculators are quite clamorous for aid in the getting their cotton away from Middleburg, Hickory Valley, etc., and offer to pay liberally for the service. I think I can bring it away with safety, and make it pay to the Government. As some of the Jew owners have as good as stolen the cotton from the planters, I have no conscientious scruples in making them pay liberally to take it away."
OLMSTED, GREDERICK LAW. 19th century American architect, historian. "A swarm of Jews has, within the last ten years, settled in every Southern town, many of them men of no character, opening cheap clothing and trinket shops, ruining or driving out of business many of the old retailers, and engaging in an unlawful trade with the simple Negroes, which is found very profitable. (The Cotton Kingdom. For other views on Jewish involvement in exploiting the South, see ULYSSES S. GRANT and MARK TWAIN.)
TWAIN, MARK (S. L. Clemens). 19th century American writer. "In the U.S. cotton states, after the war . . . the Jew came down in force, set up shop on the plantation, supplied all the Negroes' wants on credit, and at the end of the season was the proprietor of the Negro's share of the present crop and part of the next one. Before long, the whites detested the Jew.
1). The Jew is being legislated out of Russia. The reason is not concealed. The movement was instituted because the Christian peasant stood no chance against his commercial abilities. The Jew was always ready to lend on a crop. When settlement day came, he owned the crop; the next year he owned the farm like Joseph.
2). In the England of John's time everybody got into debt to the Jew. He gathered all lucrative enterprises into his hands. He was the King of Commerce. He had to be banished from the realm. For like reasons, Spain had to banish him 400 years ago, and Austria a couple of centuries later. In all ages Christian Europe has been obliged to curtail his activities. If he entered upon a trade, the Christian had to retire from it. If he set up as a doctor, he took the business. If he exploited agriculture, the other farmers had to get at something else. The law had to step in to save the Christian from the poor-house. Still, almost bereft of employments, he found ways to make money. Even to get rich. This history has a most sordid and practical commercial look. Religious prejudices may account for one part of it, bit not for the other nine. Protestants have persecuted Catholics but they did not take their livelihoods away from them. Catholics have persecuted Protestants but they never closed agriculture and the handicrafts against them. I feel convinced that the Crucifixion has not much to do with the world's attitude toward the Jew; that the reasons for it are much older than that event . . . I am convinced that the persecution of the Jew is not in any large degree due to religious prejudice. No, the Jew is a money-getter. He made it the end and aim of his life. He was at it in Rome. He has been at it ever since. His success has made the whole human race his enemy. You will say that the Jew is everywhere numerically feeble. When I read in the Cyclopedia Britannica that the Jewish population in the United States was 250,000 I wrote the editor and explained to him that I was personally acquainted with more Jews than that, and that his figures were without doubt a misprint for 25,000,000. People told me that they had reasons to suspect that for business reasons, many Jews did not report themselves as Jews. It looks plausible. I am strongly of the opinion that we have an immense Jewish population in America. I am assured by men competent to speak that the Jews are exceedingly active in politics. ("Concerning the Jews," Harper's Monthly Magazine, September 1899)
Twain's opinion on the Jews is probably the best-kept secret in American literary history. Immediately after his death, his eccentric daughter Clara married or was married by the Jewish piano player, Ossip Galbrilowitsch. Twain's publishers were given speedy instructions to delete "Concerning the Jews" from the collected works, where it had appeared in the book The Man that Corrupted Hadleybury & Other Stories.
1). Since Jews provided most of the agitators and orators who pushed forward the Abolition campaign that culminated in the Civil War (which Jewish bankers largely financed, on both sides), it seems a legitimate question whether there was any preplanning for the wholesale and retail economic looting done by mainly Jewish carpetbaggers after the war.
2). We have cited a host of other writers on the terrible economic depredation that Jewry visited on the people of Tzarist Russia.
ERNEST RENAN, French historian "The Jews are not merely a different religious community, but and this is the most important factor ethnically an altogether different race. The European felt instinctively that the Jew is a stranger, who immigrated from Asia. The so-called prejudice is natural sentiment. Civilization will overcome antipathy against the Israelite who merely professes another religion, but never against the racially different Jew . . . In Eastern Europe the Jew is the cancer slowly eating into the flesh of other nations. Exploitation of the people is his only aim. Selfishness and a lack of personal courage are his chief characteristics; self-sacrifice and patriotism are altogether foreign to him."
GOLDWIN SMITH, Professor of Modern History at Oxford, wrote in Nineteenth Century, October 1881 "The Jew alone regard his race as superior to humanity, and looks forward not to its ultimate union with other races, but to its triumph over them all and to its final ascendancy under the leadership of a tribal Messiah."
MENCKEN, H. L. 20th century American writer. "The Jews could be put down very plausibly as the most unpleasant race ever heard of. As commonly encountered they lack any of the qualities that mark the civilized man: courage, dignity, incorruptibility, ease, confidence. They have vanity without pride, voluptuousness without taste, and learning without wisdom. Their fortitude, such as it is, is wasted upon puerile objects, and their charity is mainly a form of display." (Treatise on the Gods) The fact that what are commonly spoken of as rights are often really privileges is demonstrated in the case of the Jews. They resent bitterly their exclusion from certain hotels, resorts and other places of gathering, and make determined efforts to horn in. But the moment any considerable number of them horns in, the attractions of the place diminish, and the more pushful Jews turn to one where they are still nicht gewuenscht . . . ("not wanted.") "I am one of the few Goyim who have ever actually tackled the TALMUD. I suppose you now expect me to add that it is a profound and noble work, worthy of hard study by all other GOYIM. Unhappily, my report must differ from this expectation. It seems to me, save for a few bright spots, to be quite indistinguishable from rubbish . . ."
"The Jewish theory that the GOYIM envy the superior ability of the Jews is not borne out by the facts. Most GOYIM, in fact, deny that the Jew is superior, and point in evidence to his failure to take the first prizes: he has to be content with the seconds. No Jewish composer has ever come within miles of Bach, Beethoven and Brahms; no Jew has ever challenged the top-flight painters of the world, and no Jewish scientist has equaled Newton, Darwin, Pasteur or Mendel. In the latter bracket such apparent exception as Ehrlich, Freud and Einstein are only apparent. Ehrlich, in fact, contributed less to biochemical fact than to biochemical theory, and most of his theory was dubious. Freud was nine-tenths quack, and there is sound reason for believing that even Einstein will not hold up: in the long run his curved space may be classed with the psychosomatic bumps of Gall and Spurzheim. But whether this inferiority of the Jew is real or only a delusion, it must be manifest that it is generally accepted. The GOY does not, in fact, believe that the Jew is better than the non-Jew; the most he will admit is that the Jew is smarter at achieving worldly success. But this he ascribes to sharp practices, not to superior ability." (Minority Report: H. L. Mencken's Notebooks)
SHAW, GEORGE BERNARD. 20th century British dramatist. "This is the real enemy, the invader from the East, the Druze, the ruffian, the oriental parasite; in a word: the Jew. (London Morning Post, December 3, 1925) This craving for bouquets by Jews is a symptom of racial degeneration. The Jews are worse than my own people. Those Jews who still want to be the chosen race (chosen by the late Lord Balfour) can go to Palestine and stew in their own juice. The rest had better stop being Jews and start being human beings. (Literary Digest, October 12, 1932)
WAGNER, RICHARD. 19th century German composer. "The Jew has never had an art of his own, hence never a live of art-enabling import . . . "So long as the separate art of music had a real organic life-need in it, down to the epochs of Mozart and Beethoven, there was nowhere to be found a Jew composer: it was utterly impossible for an element quiet foreign to that living organism to take a part in the formative stages of that life. Only when a body's inner death is manifest, do outside elements win the power of judgment in it yet merely to destroy it. On one thing am I clear: that is the influence which the Jews have gained upon our mental life, as displayed in the deflection and falsification of our highest culture-tendencies. Whether the downfall of our culture can be arrested by a violent rejection of the destructive alien element, I an unable to decide, since that would require forces with whose existence I am unacquainted. (Judaism in Music)
SOMBART, WERNER. 20th century German economist. "Capitalism was born from the money loan. Money lending contains the root idea of capitalism. Turn to the pages of the TALMUD and you will find that the Jews made an art of lending money. They were taught early to look for their chief happiness in the possession of money. They fathomed all the secrets that lay hid in money. They became Lords of Money and Lords of the World . . . "
FITZGERALD, F. SCOTT. 20th century American novelist. "Down a tall busy street he read a dozen Jewish names on a line of stores; in the door of each stood a dark little man watching the passers from intent eyes eyes gleaming with suspicion, with pride, with clarity, with cupidity, with comprehension. New York he could not dissociate it from the slow, upward creep of this people the little stores, growing, expanding, consolidating, moving, watched over with hawks' eyes and a bee's attention to detail - they were Jews.
EMERSON, RALPH WALDO. 19th century American philosopher, poet. "The sufferance which is the badge of the Jew has made him, in these days, the ruler of the rulers of the earth. (Fate an essay)
BURTON, SIR RICHARD FRANCIS. 19th century British diplomat, writer. After a sting as consul at Damascus, Syria, where some years before, a Catholic priest was allegedly murdered in a blood ritual by Jews, Burton took an interest in the matter. His investigations satisfied him that such killings actually were performed by certain sects of Jews. "The Jew's hand was ever, like Ishmael's, against every man but those belonging to the Synagogue. His fierce passions and fiendish cunning, combined with abnormal powers of intellect, with intense vitality, and with a persistency of purpose which the world has rarely seen, and whetted moreover by a keen thirst for blood engendered by defeat and subjection, combined to make him the deadly enemy of all mankind, whilst his unsocial and iniquitous Oral Law contributed to inflame his wild lust of pelf, and to justify the crimes suggested by spite and superstition."
DREISER, THEODORE. 20th century American writer. "New York to me is a scream a Kyke's dream of a ghetto. The Lost Tribe has taken the island. (Letter to H. L. Mencken, November 5, 1922) " "Liberalism, in the case of the Jew, means internationalism. If you listen to Jews discuss Jews, you will find they are money-minded, very sharp in practice. The Jews lack the fine integrity which at last is endorsed, and to a certain degree followed, by lawyers of other nationalities. The Jew has been in Germany for a thousand years, and he is still a Jew. He has been in America for all of 200 years, and he has not faded into a pure American by any means and he will not. (Letter to Hutchins Hapgood, The Nation magazine, April 17, 1935)"
WELLS, H. G. 20th century British writer. "The Jews looked for a special savior, a messiah, who was to redeem mankind by the agreeable process of restoring the fabulous glories of David and Solomon, and bringing the whole world at last under the firm but benevolent Jewish heel." (The Outline of History)
"Zionism is an expression of Jewish refusal to assimilate. If the Jews have suffered, it is because they have regarded themselves as a chosen people." (The Anatomy of Frustration)
"A careful study of anti-Semitism prejudice and accusations might be of great value to many Jews, who do not adequately realize the irritations they inflict." (Letter of November 11, 1933)
Wells was in the habit of referring to KARL MARX as "a shallow third-rate Jew," and "a lousy Jew" in private correspondence. (Norman MacKenzie, H. G. Wells)
LINDBERGH, CHARLES. 20th century American aviator, writer. Wednesday, August 23, 1939 "We are disturbed about the effect of the Jewish influence in our press, radio and motion pictures. It may become very serious. Fulton Lewis told us of one instance where the Jewish advertising firms threatened to remove all their advertising from the Mutual system if a certain feature were permitted to go on the air. The threat was powerful enough to have the feature removed."
Thursday, May 1, 1941 "The pressure for war is high and mounting. The people are opposed to it, but the Administration seems to have 'the bit in its teeth' and is hell-bent on its way to war. Most of the Jewish interests in the country are behind war, and they control a huge part of our press and radio and most of our motion pictures. There are the 'intellectuals' and the 'Anglophiles,' and the British agents who are allowed free rein, the international financial interests, and many others." (The Wartime Journals)
GENERAL GEORGE VAN HORN MOSELY, in the New York Tribune, March 29, 1939 "The war now proposed is for the purpose of establishing Jewish influence throughout the world."
HERDER, JOHANN GOTTFRIED. 18th century German philosopher. "The Jewish people is and remains in Europe an Asiatic people alien to our part of the world, bound to that old law which it received in a distant climate, and which, according to its confession, it cannot do away with . . . How many of this alien people can be tolerated without injury to the true citizen? A ministry in which a Jew is supreme, a household in which a Jew has the key of the wardrobe and the management of the finances, a department or commissariat in which Jews do the principal business, are Pontine marshes which cannot be drained. (Bekehrung der Juden) For thousands of years, since their emergence on the stage of history, the Jews were a parasitic growth on the stem of other nations, a race of cunning brokers all over the earth. They have cause great evil to many ill-organized states, by retarding the free and natural economic development of their indigenous population. ("Hebraer," in Ideen)
BONAPARTE, NAPOLEON. French statesman, general. "The Jews provided troops for my campaign in Poland, but they ought to reimburse me: I soon found that they are no good for anything but selling old clothes . . ." "Legislating must be put in effect everywhere that the general well-being is in danger. The government cannot look with indifference on the way a despicable nation takes possession of all the provinces of France. The Jews are the master robbers of the modern age; they are the carrion birds of humanity . . . "They must be treated with political justice, not with civil justice. They are surely not real citizens."
"The Jews have practiced usury since the time of Moses, and oppressed the other peoples. Meanwhile, the Christians were only rarely usurers, falling into disgrace when they did so. We ought to ban the Jews from commerce because they abuse it . . . The evils of the Jews do not stem from individuals but from the fundamental nature of this people." (From Napoleon's Reflections, and from speeches before the Council of State on April 30 and May 7, 1806.)
"Nothing more contemptible could be done than the reception of the Jews by you. I decided to improve the Jews. But I do not want more of them in my kingdom. Indeed, I have done all to prove my scorn of the most vile nation in the world." (Letter to his brother Jerome, King of Westphalia, March 6, 1808)
1). Every big and small Jew in the peddling trade must renew his license every year.
2). Checks and other obligations are only redeemable if the Jew can prove that he has obtained the money without cheating. (Ordinance of March 17, 1808. Napoleonic Code.)
DE GAULLE, CHARLES. 20th century French politician. Addressing the Zionist imbroglio in the Mideast in a news conference of November 27, 1967, he observed: "The Jews remain what they have been at all times: an elite people, self-confident and domineering."
SAND, GEORGE (Amantine Dupin Dudevant). 19th century French novelist. "I saw in 'the wandering Jew' the personification of the Jewish people, exiled in the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, they are once again extremely rich, owing to their unfailing rude greediness and their indefatigable activity. With their hard-heartedness that they extend toward people of other faiths and races they are at the point of making themselves kings of the world. This people can thank its obstinacy that France will be Judized within fifty years. Already some wise Jews prophesy this frankly." (Letter to Victor Lorie, 1857)
COMMUNITY OF STRASBOURG, FRANCE. In an address to the ASSEMBLEE in 1790, the city's revolutionary leaders opposed citizenship for Jews, because: "Everyone knew the inherent bad character of the Jews and no one doubted they were foreigners . . . Let the 'enlighteners' stop defaming the Gentiles by blaming them for what is wrong with the Jews. Their conduct is their own fault. Perhaps the Jews might eventually give up every aspect of their separation and all the characteristics of their nature. Let us sit and wait until that happens; we might them judge them to be worthy of equality. (Tres Humble Adresse qui Presente la Commune de la Ville Strasbourg)
ROBERTS, STEPHEN H. 20th century Australian historian. Though hostile on almost every point to National Socialism, his The House that Hitler Built does admit that Jews were a menace in Germany: "It is useless to deny that grave Jewish problems existed in Germany. The nation was in the unfortunate geographical position of being the first stage in the perennial push westward of the Polish Jews. Unless forced on, they tended to stop in Berlin and Hamburg, where they obtained an unduly share of good professional positions. In Berlin, for example, when the Nazi came to power, 50.2 percent of the lawyers were Jews. In medicine, 48 per cent of the doctors were Jews, and it was said that they systematically seized the principal hospital posts. The Jews owned the largest and most important Berlin newspapers, and they had made great inroads on the educational system."
FRANCO, FRANCISCO. 20th century Spanish statesman. In his victory speech in Madrid, on May 19, 1939, he declared: "Let us be under no illusion. The Jewish spirit, which was responsible for the alliance of large-scale capital with Marxism and was the driving force behind so many anti-Spanish revolutionary agreements, will not be got rid of in a day."
PRIMO DE RIVERA, JOSE. 20th century Spanish political reformer (assassinated by the Communists). He stressed that the instruments of Jewish domination in the modern world are money and the press, and that communism is an instrument of international Jewish capitalism used to smash and afterwards rule the nations. (El Estado Nacional)
H. H. BEAMISH, in a New York address, October 30 - November 1, 1937 "In 1848 the word "anti-Semitic" was invented by the Jews to prevent the use of the word "Jew." The right word for them is "Jew" . . . "I implore all of you to be accurate call them Jews. There is no need to be delicate on this Jewish question. You must face them in this country. The Jew should be satisfied here. I was here forty-seven years ago; your doors were thrown open to the Jews and they were free. No he has got you absolutely by the throat that is your reward."
CHRISTEA, PATRIARCH. 20th century Romanian prelate. "The Jews have caused an epidemic of corruption and social unrest. They monopolize the press, which, with foreign help, flays all the spiritual treasures of the Romanians. To defend ourselves is a national and patriotic duty not anti-Semitism. Lack of measures to get rid of the plague would indicate that we are lazy cowards who let ourselves be carried alive to our graves. Why should we not get rid of these parasites who suck Romanian and Christian blood? It is logical and holy to react against them." (New York Herald Tribune, August 17, 1937)
HOUSTON STEWART CHAMBERLAIN, world famed author of Foundations of the Nineteenth Century, Vol. I, page 337 "The revelation of Christ has no significance for the Jew! . . . I have searched through a whole library of Jewish books in the expectation of finding naturally not belief in the Divinity of Christ, nor the idea of redemption, but the purely human feeling for the greatness of the suffering Savior but in vain. A Jew who feels that, is, in fact, no longer a Jew, but a denier of Judaism. And while we find, even in Mohammed's Koran, at least a vague conception of the importance of Christ and profound reverence for His personality, a cultured leading Jew of the nineteenth century (Graetz) calls Christ "the new birth with the death mask," which inflicted new and painful wounds upon the Jewish people; he cannot see anything else in Him. In view of the Cross he assures us that "the Jews do not require this convulsive emotion for their spiritual improvement," and adds, "particularly not among the middle classes of inhabitants of the cities." His comprehension goes further. In a book, republished in 1880, by a Spanish Jew (Mose de Leon) Jesus Christ is called a "dead dog" that lies "buried in a dunghill." Besides, the Jews have taken care to issue in the latter part of the nineteenth century several editions (naturally in Hebrew) of the so-called "censured passages" from the Talmud, those passages usually omitted in which Christ is exposed to our scorn and hatred as a "fool," "sorcerer," "profane person," "idolater," "dog," "bastard," "child of lust," etc.: so, too, His sublime Mother."
ADRIEN ARCAND, Canadian political leader of the 1930s "Through their (Jew's) international news agencies, they mold your minds and have you see the world not as it is, but as they want you to see it. Through their cinema, they are the educators of our youth and with just one film in two hours, can wipe out of a child's brain what he has learned in six months in the home, the church or the school."
NESTA WEBSTER, in her book Germany and England "England is no longer controlled by Britons. We are under the invisible Jewish dictatorship a dictatorship that can be felt in every sphere of life."
HENRY WALLACE, Secretary of Commerce, under President Harry Truman, wrote in his dairy that in 1946 "Truman was "exasperated" over Jewish pressure that he support Zionist rule over Palestine. Wallace added "Pres. Truman expressed himself as being very much 'put out' with the Jews. He said that 'Jesus Christ couldn't please them when he was here on Earth, so how could anyone expect that I would have any luck?' Pres. Truman said he had no use for them and didn't care what happened to them."
WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYANT, three times the Democratic Party candidate for President said: "New York is the city of privilege. Here is the seat of the Invisible Power represented by the allied forces of finance and industry. This Invisible Government is reactionary, sinister, unscrupulous, mercenary, and sordid. It is wanting in national ideals and devoid of conscience . . . This kind of government must be scourged and destroyed."
HENRY ADAMS (Descendant of President John Adams), in a letter to John Hay, October 1895 "The Jewish question is really the most serious of our problems."
SPRING-RICE, SIR CECIL. 20th century British politician. "One by one, the Jews are capturing the principal newspapers of America. (Letter of November 1914, to Sir Edward Grey, foreign secretary. Letters and Friendships)
CAPOTE, TRUMAN. 20th century American writer. In an interview, he assailed "the Zionist mafia" monopolizing publishing today, and protested a tendency to suppress things that do not meet with Jewish approval. (Playboy magazine, March 1968)
VOLTAIRE (Francois Marie Arouet) 18th century French philosopher, writer. "Why are the Jews hated? It is the inevitable result of their laws; they either have to conquer everybody or be hated by the whole human race . . ." "The Jewish nation dares to display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations, and revolts against all masters; always superstitious, always greedy for the well-being enjoyed by others, always barbarous cringing in misfortune and insolent in prosperity." (Essai sur le Moeurs)
"You seem to me to be the maddest of the lot. The Kaffirs, the Hottentots, and the Negroes of Guinea are much more reasonable and more honest people than your ancestors, the Jews. You have surpassed all nations in impertinent fables in bad conduct and in barbarism. You deserve to be punished, for this is your destiny." (From a letter to a Jew who had written to him, complaining of his 'anti-Semitism.' Examen des Quelques Objections . . . dans L'Essai sur le Moeurs.)
"You will only find in the Jews an ignorant and barbarous people, who for a long time have joined the most sordid avarice to the most detestable superstition and to the most invincible hatred of all peoples which tolerate and enrich them." ("Juif," Dictionnaire Philosophique)
"I know that there are some Jews in the English colonies. These marranos go wherever there is money to be made . . . But whether these circumcised who sell old clothes claim that they are of the tribe of Naphtali or Issachar is not of the slightest importance. They are, simply, the biggest scoundrels who have ever dirtied the face of the earth." (Letter to Jean-Baptiste Nicolas de Lisle de Sales, December 15, 1773. Correspondence. 86:166)
"They are, all of them, born with raging fanaticism in their hearts, just as the Bretons and the Germans are born with blond hair. I would not be in the least bit surprised if these people would not some day become deadly to the human race." (Lettres de Memmius a Ciceron, 1771)
CANNOT, E. 19th century French reformer. In La Renovation, journal of the socialist school of CHARLES FOURIER. "Jews! To the heights of your Sinai . . . I humbly lift myself. I stand erect and cry out to you, in behalf of all my humble equals, of all those whom your spoliation has brought to grief, who died in misery through you and whose trembling shades accuse you: Jews! for Cain and Iscariot, leave us, leave us! Ah, cross the Red Sea again, and go down there to the desert, to the promised land which is waiting for you, the only country fit for you; o you wicked, rude and dishonest people, go there!!!" repute.htm
The Western democracy of today is the forerunner of Marxism which without it would not be thinkable. It provides this world plague with the culture in which its germs can spread.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
|May 16th, 2008||#5|
Waiting for the 4th Reich
Join Date: Jan 2006
He argues that their synagogues and schools be set on fire, their prayer books destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, homes razed, and property and money confiscated. They should be shown no mercy or kindness.
these "poisonous envenomed worms" should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time. He also seems to advocate their murder, writing "we are at fault in not slaying them."
-Martian Luther on the jews.
The truth spoken by a hero 500 years ago!
The desire to remain racially pure is a proof of the vitality and good health of a race. -Adolf Hitler
|May 16th, 2008||#7|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Niggerville, Oakland, California
...if everyone knew this!!!!
EDIT: Can anyone direct me to WN literature about Churchill and Stalin. I am very confused by these two. I have been under the impression that these two were joo sympathizers, and, at the same time, killers.
Last edited by Where to begin.; May 16th, 2008 at 05:56 PM.
|August 24th, 2009||#9|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The wild frontier
Famous men on Jews
What Famous Men Have To Say About Jews 1-3
What Famous Men Have To Say About Jews 2-3
What Famous Men Have To Say About Jews 3-3
Benjamin H. Freedman - A Jewish Defector Warns America (1 of 9)
Secede. Control taxbases/municipalities. Use boycotts, divestment, sanctions, strikes.
|February 23rd, 2010||#10|
Join Date: Aug 2009
American Capitalism is a Jewish scheme to funnel all the wealth to them. A draining mechanism. Has the Characteristic Jewish Pyramid infrastructure with the Jews sitting on top rolling in money. With State protection every aspect of society has been taken over by a handful of corporations almost all of them with Jewish heads. And all controlled by the the Evil Jewish Federal "Express" Reserve. The system we are living under is garbage. The people that work the hardest get paid the least. The people the do the least work get paid the most. minimum wage laws keep us from being able to rally for higher pay and pay ceilings further restrict what we can save. This is also coupled with the massive influx of immigrants all happy to make 7 dollars an hour dealing with controlling bosses who demand the impossible and put everyone under a great deal of stress flipping a burger 40 hours a week. In order to earn more you have to get promoted but when this happens you are moved up to a level far smaller than the one you came from with only a handful of people or just yourself. Moving you closer to the Jews. But no one can ever come close to the Jews wealth because of income tax laws. If you make too much the Government takes just enough away to keep you from being super super rich. (like the Jews) Once "Capitalism" has run it's course here and the economy crashes they will move elsewhere onto the next parasite ever increasing their wealth and power.
Fractional Reserve Banks are also a Jewish invention. A bank is supposed to be a representation of a country's wealth not a debt dispenser/wealth usurper.
"Had I foreseen these results of subjugation, I would have preferred to die at Appomattox with my brave men, my sword in my right hand." - Robert E Lee
|May 22nd, 2011||#11|
Bread and Circuses
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Jewed Faggot States of ApemuriKa
Blog Entries: 1
|October 27th, 2011||#12|
Bread and Circuses
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Jewed Faggot States of ApemuriKa
Blog Entries: 1
President Harry S.Truman
"The Jews I find are very, very selfish. They care not how many Estonians, Latvians, Finns, Poles, Yugoslavs or Greeks get murdered or mistreated as Displaced Persons as long as the Jews get special treatment. Yet when they have power, physical, financial or political neither Hitler or Stalin has anything on them for cruelty or mistreatment to the under dog".
Diary of US President Harry S.Truman - entry for July 21, 1947.
|April 1st, 2012||#13|
Join Date: Jul 2011
It would take an astonishingly focused effort to eliminate the Jews. Maybe a secret organization developing technologies to lower their birthrates to where they die out.
Charlie didn't get much USO. He was dug in too deep, or movin' too fast. His idea of a great R&R was cold rice and a little rat meat. He had only two ways home: death or victory.
|May 2nd, 2012||#14|
Join Date: Mar 2012
First I want to inform you that every video on this post has been taken down by the jews. I hope they can be replaced.
If there would be only one post in this forum that is required reading this would be it. This should be required reading in every school in the counry.
Also lets not leave out General George S. Patton
Got this from Alex Linder
Why The Zionists Killed General George S. Patton
Why The Zionists (Including Henry Morganthau) Controlling The Allies Killed General George S. Patton
At the end of World War II, one of America's top military leaders accurately assessed the shift in the balance of world power which that war had produced and foresaw the enormous danger of communist aggression against the West. Alone among U.S. leaders he warned that America should act immediately, while her supremacy was unchallengeable, to end that danger. Unfortunately, his warning went unheeded, and he was quickly silenced by a convenient "accident" which took his life.
Thirty-two years ago, in the terrible summer of 1945, the U.S. Army had just completed the destruction of Europe and had set up a government of military occupation amid the ruins to rule the starving Germans and deal out victors' justice to the vanquished. General George S. Patton, commander of the U.S. Third Army, became military governor of the greater portion of the American occupation zone of Germany.
Patton was regarded as the "fightingest" general in all the Allied forces. He was considerably more audacious and aggressive than most commanders, and his martial ferocity may very well have been the deciding factor which led to the Allied victory. He personally commanded his forces in many of the toughest and most decisive battles of the war: in Tunisia, in Sicily, in the cracking of the Siegfried Line, in holding back the German advance during the Battle of the Bulge, in the exceptionally bloody fighting around Bastogne in December 1944 and January 1945.
During the war Patton had respected the courage and the fighting qualities of the Germans -- especially when he compared them with those of some of America's allies -- but he had also swallowed whole the hate-inspired wartime propaganda generated by America's alien media masters.
He believed Germany was a menace to America's freedom and that Germany's National Socialist government was an especially evil institution. Acting on these beliefs he talked incessantly of his desire to kill as many Germans as possible, and he exhorted his troops to have the same goal. These bloodthirsty exhortations led to the nickname "Blood and Guts" Patton.
It was only in the final days of the war and during his tenure as military governor of Germany -- after he had gotten to know both the Germans and America's "gallant Soviet allies" -- that Patton's understanding of the true situation grew and his opinions changed. In his diary and in many letters to his family, friends, various military colleagues, and government officials, he expressed his new understanding and his apprehensions for the future. His diary and his letters were published in 1974 by the Houghton Mifflin Company under the title The Patton Papers.
Several months before the end of the war, General Patton had recognized the fearful danger to the West posed by the Soviet Union, and he had disagreed bitterly with the orders which he had been given to hold back his army and wait for the Red Army to occupy vast stretches of German, Czech, Rumanian, Hungarian, and Yugoslav territory, which the Americans could have easily taken instead.
On May 7, 1945, just before the German capitulation, Patton had a conference in Austria with U.S. Secretary of War Robert Patterson. Patton was gravely concerned over the Soviet failure to respect the demarcation lines separating the Soviet and American occupation zones. He was also alarmed by plans in Washington for the immediate partial demobilization of the U.S. Army.
Patton said to Patterson: "Let's keep our boots polished, bayonets sharpened, and present a picture of force and strength to the Red Army. This is the only language they understand and respect."
Patterson replied, "Oh, George, you have been so close to this thing so long, you have lost sight of the big picture."
Patton rejoined: "I understand the situation. Their (the Soviet) supply system is inadequate to maintain them in a serious action such as I could put to them. They have chickens in the coop and cattle on the hoof -- that's their supply system. They could probably maintain themselves in the type of fighting I could give them for five days. After that it would make no difference how many million men they have, and if you wanted Moscow I could give it to you. They lived on the land coming down. There is insufficient left for them to maintain themselves going back. Let's not give them time to build up their supplies. If we do, then . . . we have had a victory over the Germans and disarmed them, but we have failed in the liberation of Europe. We have lost the war!"
Patton's urgent and prophetic advice went unheeded by Patterson and the other politicians and only served to give warning about Patton's feelings to the alien conspirators behind the scenes in New York, Washington, and Moscow.
The more he saw of the Soviets, the stronger Patton's conviction grew that the proper course of action would be to stifle Communism then and there, while the chance existed.
Later in May 1945, he attended several meetings and social affairs
with top Red Army officers, and he evaluated them carefully. He noted in his diary on May 14: "I have never seen in any army at any time, including the German Imperial Army of 1912, as severe discipline as exists in the Russian army. The officers, with few exceptions, give the appearance of recently civilized Mongolian bandits."
And Patton's aide, General Hobart Gay, noted in his own journal for May 14: "Everything they (the Russians) did impressed one with the idea of virility and cruelty."
Nevertheless, Patton knew that the Americans could whip the Reds then -- but perhaps not later. On May 18 he noted in his diary: "In my opinion, the American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest of ease, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these. If it should be necessary to right the Russians, the sooner we do it the better."
Two days later he repeated his concern when he wrote his wife: "If we have to fight them, now is the time. From now on we will get weaker and they stronger."
Having immediately recognized the Soviet danger and urged a course of action which would have freed all of eastern Europe from the communist yoke with the expenditure of far less American blood than was spilled in Korea and Vietnam and would have obviated both those later wars not to mention World War III -- Patton next came to appreciate the true nature of the people for whom World War II was fought: the Jews.
Most of the Jews swarming over Germany immediately after the war came from Poland and Russia, and Patton found their personal habits shockingly uncivilized.
He was disgusted by their behavior in the camps for Displaced Persons (DP's) which the Americans built for them and even more disgusted by the way they behaved when they were housed in German hospitals and private homes. He observed with horror that "these people do not understand toilets and refuse to use them except as repositories for tin cans, garbage, and refuse . . . They decline, where practicable, to use latrines, preferring to relieve themselves on the floor."
He described in his diary one DP camp, "where, although room existed, the Jews were crowded together to an appalling extent, and in practically every room there was a pile of garbage in one corner which was also used as a latrine. The Jews were only forced to desist from their nastiness and clean up the mess by the threat of the butt ends of rifles. Of course, I know the expression 'lost tribes of Israel' applied to the tribes which disappeared -- not to the tribe of Judah from which the current sons of bitches are descended. However, it is my personal opinion that this too is a lost tribe -- lost to all decency."
Patton's initial impressions of the Jews were not improved when he attended a Jewish religious service at Eisenhower's insistence. His diary entry for September 17, 1945, reads in part: "This happened to be the feast of Yom Kippur, so they were all collected in a large, wooden building, which they called a synagogue. It behooved General Eisenhower to make a speech to them. We entered the synagogue, which was packed with the greatest stinking bunch of humanity I have ever seen. When we got about halfway up, the head rabbi, who was dressed in a fur hat similar to that worn by Henry VIII of England and in a surplice heavily embroidered and very filthy, came down and met the General . . . The smell was so terrible that I almost fainted and actually about three hours later lost my lunch as the result of remembering it."
These experiences and a great many others firmly convinced Patton that the Jews were an especially unsavory variety of creature and hardly deserving of all the official concern the American government was bestowing on them.
Another September diary entry, following a demand from Washington that more German housing be turned over to Jews, summed up his feelings: "Evidently the virus started by Morgenthau and Baruch of a Semitic revenge against all Germans is still working. Harrison (a U.S. State Department official) and his associates indicate that they feel German civilians should be removed from houses for the purpose of housing Displaced Persons. There are two errors in this assumption. First, when we remove an individual German we punish an individual German, while the punishment is -- not intended for the individual but for the race, Furthermore, it is against my Anglo-Saxon conscience to remove a person from a house, which is a punishment, without due process of law. In the second place, Harrison and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to the Jews, who are lower than animals."
One of the strongest factors in straightening out General Patton's thinking on the conquered Germans was the behavior of America's controlled news media toward them. At a press conference in Regensburg, Germany, on May 8, 1945, immediately after Germany's surrender, Patton was asked whether he planned to treat captured SS troops differently from other German POW's. His answer was: "No. SS means no more in Germany than being a Democrat in America -- that is not to be quoted. I mean by that that initially the SS people were special sons of bitches, but as the war progressed they ran out of sons of bitches and then they put anybody in there. Some of the top SS men will be treated as criminals, but there is no reason for trying someone who was drafted into this outfit . . ."
Despite Patton's request that his remark not be quoted, the press eagerly seized on it, and Jews and their front men in America screamed in outrage over Patton's comparison of the SS and the Democratic Party as well as over his announced intention of treating most SS prisoners humanely.
Patton refused to take hints from the press, however, and his disagreement with the American occupation policy formulated in Washington grew. Later in May he said to his brother-in-law: "I think that this non-fraternization is very stupid. If we are going to keep American soldiers in a country, they have to have some civilians to talk to. Furthermore, I think we could do a lot for the German civilians by letting our soldiers talk to their young people."
Various of Patton's colleagues tried to make it perfectly clear what was expected of him. One politically ambitious officer, Brig. Gen. Philip S. Gage, anxious to please the powers that be, wrote to Patton: "Of course, I know that even your extensive powers are limited, but I do hope that wherever and whenever you can you will do what you can to make the German populace suffer. For God's sake, please don't ever go soft in regard to them. Nothing could ever be too bad for them."
But Patton continued to do what he thought was right, whenever he could. With great reluctance, and only after repeated promptings from Eisenhower, he had thrown German families out of their homes to make room for more than a million Jewish DP's -- part of the famous "six million" who had supposedly been gassed -- but he balked when ordered to begin blowing up German factories, in accord with the infamous Morgenthau Plan to destroy Germany's economic basis forever. In his diary he wrote: "I doubted the expediency of blowing up factories, because the ends for which the factories are being blown up -- that is, preventing Germany from preparing for war -- can be equally well attained through the destruction of their machinery, while the buildings can be used to house thousands of homeless persons."
Similarly, he expressed his doubts to his military colleagues about the overwhelming emphasis being placed on the persecution of every German who had formerly been a member of the National Socialist party. In a letter to his wife of September 14, 1945, he said: "I am frankly opposed to this war criminal stuff . It is not cricket and is Semitic. I am also opposed to sending POW's to work as slaves in foreign lands, where many will be starved to death."
Despite his disagreement with official policy, Patton followed the rules laid down by Morgenthau and others back in Washington as closely as his conscience would allow, but he tried to moderate the effect, and this brought him into increasing conflict with Eisenhower and the other politically ambitious generals. In another letter to his wife he commented: "I have been at Frankfurt for a civil government conference. If what we are doing (to the Germans) is 'Liberty, then give me death.' I can't see how Americans can sink so low. It is Semitic, and I am sure of it."
And in his diary he noted:, "Today we received orders . . . in which we were told to give the Jews special accommodations. If for Jews, why not Catholics, Mormons, etc? . . . We are also turning over to the French several hundred thousand prisoners of war to be used as slave labor in France. It is amusing to recall that we fought the Revolution in defense of the rights of man and the Civil War to abolish slavery and have now gone back on both principles."
His duties as military governor took Patton to all parts of Germany and intimately acquainted him with the German people and their condition. He could not help but compare them with the French, the Italians, the Belgians, and even the British. This comparison gradually forced him to the conclusion that World War II had been fought against the wrong people.
After a visit to ruined Berlin, he wrote his wife on July 21, 1945: "Berlin gave me the blues. We have destroyed what could have been a good race, and we are about to replace them with Mongolian savages. And all Europe will be communist. It's said that for the first week after they took it (Berlin), all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped. I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed."
This conviction, that the politicians had used him and the U.S. Army for a criminal purpose, grew in the following weeks. During a dinner with French General Alphonse Juin in August, Patton was surprised to find the Frenchman in agreement with him. His diary entry for August 18 quotes Gen. Juin: "It is indeed unfortunate, mon General, that the English and the Americans have destroyed in Europe the only sound country -- and I do not mean France. Therefore, the road is now open for the advent of Russian communism."
Later diary entries and letters to his wife reiterate this same conclusion. On August 31 he wrote: "Actually, the Germans are the only decent people left in Europe. it's a choice between them and the Russians. I prefer the Germans." And on September 2: "What we are doing is to destroy the only semi-modern state in Europe, so that Russia can swallow the whole."
By this time the Morgenthauists and media monopolists had decided that Patton was incorrigible and must be discredited. So they began a non-stop hounding of him in the press, a la Watergate, accusing him of being "soft on Nazis" and continually recalling an incident in which he had slapped a shirker two years previously, during the Sicily campaign. A New York newspaper printed the completely false claim that when Patton had slapped the soldier who was Jewish, he had called him a "yellow-bellied Jew."
Then, in a press conference on September 22, reporters hatched a scheme to needle Patton into losing his temper and making statements which could be used against him. The scheme worked. The press interpreted one of Patton's answers to their insistent questions as to why he was not pressing the Nazi-hunt hard enough as: "The Nazi thing is just like a Democrat-Republican fight." The New York Times headlined this quote, and other papers all across America picked it up.
The unmistakable hatred which had been directed at him during this press conference finally opened Patton's eyes fully as to what was afoot. In his diary that night lie wrote: "There is a very apparent Semitic influence in the press. They are trying to do two things: first, implement communism, and second, see that all businessmen of German ancestry and non-Jewish antecedents are thrown out of their jobs. They have utterly lost the Anglo-Saxon conception of justice and feel that a man can be kicked out because somebody else says he is a Nazi. They were evidently quite shocked when I told them I would kick nobody out without the successful proof of guilt before a court of law . . . Another point which the press harped on was the fact that we were doing too much for the Germans to the detriment of the DP's, most of whom are Jews. I could not give the answer to that one, because the answer is that, in my opinion and that of most nonpolitical officers, it is vitally necessary for us to build Germany up now as a buffer state against Russia. In fact, I am afraid we have waited too long."
And in a letter of the same date to his wife: "I will probably be in the headlines before you get this, as the press is trying to quote me as being more interested in restoring order in Germany than in catching Nazis. I can't tell them the truth that unless we restore Germany we will insure that communism takes America."
Eisenhower responded immediately to the press outcry against Patton and made the decision to relieve him of his duties as military governor and "kick him upstairs" as the commander of the Fifteenth Army. In a letter to his wife on September 29, Patton indicated that he was, in a way, not unhappy with his new assignment, because "I would like it much better than being a sort of executioner to the best race in Europe."
But even his change of duties did not shut Patton up. In his diary entry of October 1 we find the observation: "In thinking over the situation, I could not but be impressed with the belief that at the present moment the unblemished record of the American Army for non-political activities is about to be lost. Everyone seems to be more interested in the effects which his actions will have on his political future than in carrying out the motto of the United States Military Academy, 'Duty, Honor, Country.' I hope that after the current crop of political aspirants has been gathered our former tradition will be restored."
And Patton continued to express these sentiments to his friends -- and those he thought were his friends. On October 22 he wrote a long letter to Maj. Gen. James G. Harbord, who was back in the States. In the letter Patton bitterly condemned the Morgenthau policy; Eisenhower's pusillanimous behavior in the face of Jewish demands; the strong pro-Soviet bias in the press; and the politicization, corruption, degradation, and demoralization of the U.S. Army which these things were causing.
He saw the demoralization of the Army as a deliberate goal of America's enemies: "I have been just as furious as you at the compilation of lies which the communist and Semitic elements of our government have leveled against me and practically every other commander. In my opinion it is a deliberate attempt to alienate the soldier vote from the commanders, because the communists know that soldiers are not communistic, and they fear what eleven million votes (of veterans) would do."
His denunciation of the politicization of the Army was scathing: "All the general officers in the higher brackets receive each morning from the War Department a set of American (newspaper) headlines, and, with the sole exception of myself, they guide themselves during the ensuing day by what they have read in the papers. . . ."
In his letter to Harbord, Patton also revealed his own plans to fight those who were destroying the morale and integrity of the Army and endangering America's future by not opposing the growing Soviet might: "It is my present thought . . . that when I finish this job, which will be around the first of the year, I shall resign, not retire, because if I retire I will still have a gag in my mouth . . . I should not start a limited counterattack, which would be contrary to my military theories, but should wait until I can start an all-out offensive . . . ."
Two months later, on December 23, 1945, General George S. Patton was silenced forever.
From Dick Eastman [email protected]
|July 3rd, 2012||#15|
Join Date: May 2009
Chaucer on Jews
Geoffrey Chaucer on Jews
Little is known about Chaucer personally; it is safe to say at any rate he was one of a number of 'court poets' c.1300-1400 in Western Europe. His grandfather and father were London wine merchants and a woman who is almost surely his granddaughter died a duchess. Much of Chaucer's work has been lost.
Excerpt from The Prioress's Tale from The Canterbury Tales:
In a great city in Asia there was,
among the Christian folk, a community of Jews,
maintained by the lord of that country
for purposes of foul usury and filthy lucre,
hateful to Christ and his followers;
and through their street peopl might ride or walk,
for it was free and open at either end.
As I have said, this little child, as he
went to and fro through the ghetto,
would sing most merrily, and cry
O Alma redemptoris constantly.
The sweetness of Christ's mother had so
pierced his heart that, in order to pray to her,
he could not stop singing on his way.
Our first foe, the serpent Satan,
who has his wasp's nest in the hearts of Jews,
swelled up, and said,' O Hebrew people, alas!
Is this a thing that is seemly to you,
That such a boy should walk as it pleases him
in contempt of you, and sing such a doctrine,
which is contrary to the reverence dur your laws?"
Thenceforth the Jews conspired
to hunt this innocent out of this world;
for this purpose they hired a murderer
who had a hiding place in an alley;
and when the child was passing by,
this cursed Jew seized him and held him fast,
and cut his throat, and cast him in a pit.
I tell you they threw him in a privy
where these Jews purge their entrails.
O folk of Herod cursed yet again,
what can your evil intent avail you?
The blood cries out on your cursed deed." ....
Last edited by littlefieldjohn; July 3rd, 2012 at 10:43 AM.
|December 18th, 2012||#16|
Join Date: Dec 2012
Time and Time again the jew has been expelled, but only a few times has their systematic destruction actually been implemented a few times, and not with a brutality that was needed.
|February 17th, 2013||#17|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Blog Entries: 34
Orwell's private writings reveal he detested jews, like all good men
As He Pleased
Plumbing the mystery of the first-person Orwell
We know from George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four that he thought of the diary as a potentially seditious form. Diaries are not illegal in the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four because nothing is—Airstrip One’s legal code has been abolished. But Orwell’s protagonist, Winston Smith, understands the consequences of committing his private thoughts and personal observations to the page well before he lifts his pen to print the words “DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER.” “If detected it was reasonably certain that it would be punished by death, or at least by twenty-five years in a forced-labor camp,” Orwell wrote. As Smith prepares to scribble his first passage, he asks himself why he’s keeping a diary, and surmises that it’s a letter to the future, to the unborn.
Diaries aren’t just generational time tunnels or rebellions against the state—they can also serve as self-dossiers, self-indictments, and confessions, as Smith also comes to learn. Orwell discovered the same during his adventures as a militiaman in the Spanish Civil War when police confiscated a wartime diary (or two) of his from his wife’s Barcelona hotel room in 1937 during a raid. According to Peter Davison, an Orwell scholar and the editor of this volume, the diary may have been forwarded to Moscow—which considered him a Socialist enemy of communism—and added to the archive of the Soviet secret police, the NKVD.
Another Orwell diary that appears to be MIA dates from the mid-1920s, when he was working in Burma as a colonial policeman. It has never surfaced and probably never will—though Orwell published a fictionalized account of his Burmese tour of duty in the 1934 novel Burmese Days. The surviving eleven diaries have been collected here under the sensible title Diaries and annotated expertly by Davison.
Fantasize all you want about Orwell’s lost volumes, but you’re probably wasting your time. Orwell produced six novels, most of them loosely autobiographical; three nonfiction books; and hundreds of reviews, editorials, and essays, as well as pamphlets, poems, radio broadcasts, and war dispatches. He was a literary fat-rendering plant when it came to reducing the raw material of his notes and diaries into something more distilled, as well-known works such as Down and Out in Paris and London, The Road to Wigan Pier, and Homage to Catalonia all attest. Had Orwell turned himself inside out and hauled himself up a flagpole we couldn’t have gotten a better look at him.
So the possibility that Diaries may reveal a new and improved Orwell—or a new and diminished one—can be easily dismissed. That’s the case whether you aligned yourself with Orwell’s celebrator and intellectual inheritor, Christopher Hitchens, who wrote the introduction for this edition, or that other recently departed leftist public intellectual, Alexander Cockburn, who likened Orwell to a “snitch” for informing on Communists (which he did).
Diaries combines both the lengthy, staccato logs and lists Orwell kept of his domestic life (number of eggs laid by his hens, the size of his garden harvest, the weather, the price of staples, the arrival of a milking goat, birds spotted on a walk) and his more considered entries, and for its publication we can all be grateful. But as your consumer adviser, I must add that this book isn’t “new.” It was published in the United Kingdom two years ago, and many of the best passages were previously published. Every time I underscored a memorable sentence in this American edition and plugged it into Google Books, I found it in an existing Orwell title.
For example: “I cannot get them to treat me precisely as an equal, however,” Orwell complains of the proletarians while collecting material in 1936 for what will become The Road to Wigan Pier. You can find that diary entry in The Collected Essays, Journalism, and Letters of George Orwell (1968) and The Complete Works of George Orwell (1998). “Our broadcasts are utterly useless because nobody listens to them,” he states on October 5, 1942, about his work for the BBC in India. Google Books locates that entry in multiple Orwell volumes. Likewise, “Evidently most English people have no idea that there are French books which are not pornographic,” which he wrote on August 27, 1931, is gettable in various Orwell books.
Or, if you don’t have time for a trip to the library or the money to buy these volumes, consult the Web. Great sections of the best of the Orwell diaries, including his hop-picking escapades, his Wigan Pier journey, and his war journals, have been posted with permission on the Orwell Prize website. These entries also include Davison’s notes and annotations.
Of course, some Orwell enthusiasts might seek Diaries in hopes that it maps the path he cut from first observations to finished works. These readers will come away brokenhearted. Orwell appears to have had two writing modes: publishable copy and domestic lists. According to Davison, Orwell would type up his diaries from his handwritten copy, making revisions on the fly or adding them after with a pen. (Sometimes wife Eileen O’Shaughnessy did the typing.) Diaries proves that the best writing happens in the brain—before a pen is picked up or a keyboard pounded—not through revisions.
Orwell semi-endorses this idea in a diary passage dated March 30, 1948, as he reflects on the difficulty of building a decent paragraph or even a working sentence while ill. He knew his way around being sick—disease was his lifelong companion. Cyril Connolly, a friend from childhood, recalled Orwell being a “chesty” and “bronchial” kid, which Orwell attributed to “defective bronchial tubes and a lesion in one lung.” Orwell encouraged advanced respiratory breakdown via his lifelong tobacco habit, acquired in his teens. In Burma, he came down with dengue fever and suffered chronic bronchitis. Biographer D. J. Taylor wrote that Orwell had “four bouts of pneumonia” by the time he turned thirty-four, a life-endangering malady back in the days before antibiotics. Later came Orwell’s influenza and the tuberculosis that would combine with his cigarette habit to ruin his lungs and finally kill him on January 21, 1950, at the age of forty-six.
Exiting sick bay in 1948, Orwell wrote:
When it is a case of a long illness, where you are weak & without appetite but not actually feverish or in pain, you have the impression that your brain is quite normal. Your thoughts are just as active as ever, you are interested in the same things, you seem to be able to talk normally, & you can read anything that you would read at any other time. It is only when you attempt to write, even to write the simplest & stupidest newspaper article, that you realise what a deterioration has happened inside your skull. At the start it is impossible to get anything on to paper at all. Your mind turns away to any conceivable subject rather than the one you are trying to deal with, & even the physical act of writing is unbearably irksome. . . . You have also no command of language, or rather you can think of nothing except flat, obvious expressions: a good, lively phrase never occurs to you. And even when you begin to re-acquire the habit of writing, you seem to be incapable of preserving continuity.
This self-diagnosis says more about the craft of writing than any dozen manuals on the subject for sale at bookshops.
Elsewhere in the collection, Orwell does produce the raw material of closely observed reportage with considerably less anguish. Take, for example, the extended description of descending into the double blackness of the mines with “coal-cutters”—the finished account of which ends up in Wigan Pier. Orwell’s chronicle of miners quarrying and transporting coal deposits to the surface echoes Herman Melville’s dissertation on whale disassembly in Moby-Dick, and his prose glows lovingly on the miners as they perform their labors. “Above ground, in their thick ill-fitting clothes, they are ordinary-looking men, usually small and not at all impressive,” Orwell wrote. “Below, when you see them stripped, all, old and young, have splendid bodies, with every muscle defined and wonderfully small waists. I saw some miners going into their baths. As I thought, they are quite black from head to foot. So the ordinary miner, who has not access to a bath, must be black from the waist down six days a week at least.”
The diaries, which span from 1931 to 1949, are not continuous: There are no entries between late 1931 and early 1936, none from 1937, and nothing between late 1942 and May 1946. The page count of his diary entries appears to spike when he’s working on one of his assigned books, like Wigan Pier, or a magazine piece, in the case of the hop-picking notes, which he promptly refashioned for a New Statesman essay, or when he’s preoccupied with one subject in particular and needs to clear his mind by formulating lists. Some of the lags can be attributed to hard work on other writerly fronts, such as his time during World War II as a BBC propagandist and a war correspondent for The Observer, which had him reporting from Paris after the liberation, as well as from Germany.
In his “domestic” diaries from Morocco (1938–39) and the island of Jura in Scotland (1946–47), Orwell gathers and stacks the mundane observations the way matchbook collectors fill cabinet drawers with their stashes. This love of lists surfaces frequently in his published work, most notably his 1946 essay “Confessions of a Book Reviewer,” in which he catalogues the detritus surrounding a lowly reviewer. Cigarette butts, cups of half-drunk tea, unanswered letters, and unpaid bills, as well as the stack of books awaiting review. Orwell is something of a naturalist in many of the domestic pages, spotting and naming birds and noting their mating calls, and dilating briefly on the hunting strategies of otters he’s watching.
I suspect I know what was going on here. In a February 3, 1936, passage, from his domestic diaries, Orwell the diarist slides a note through the time tunnel to Orwell the novelist, reminding him to someday use the “most melancholy noise” ever, which is broken ice rocking up and down. “Mem. to use in novel some time and to have an empty Craven A packet bobbing up and down among the ice,” he wrote. (Craven “A” was a brand of cigarettes.) I’ve searched Orwell’s work thoroughly to see if the message was acted on, but have failed to locate it. On the other hand, it doesn’t take much prospecting to find him transmuting observations about livestock into fiction.
In his introduction, Hitchens comments that you’d never deduce from reading the Morocco pages that Orwell was simultaneously conceiving and writing his novel Coming Up for Air, which is about England before the Great War. “I am as usual taking careful notes of everything I see, but am not certain what use I shall be able to make of them afterwards,” Orwell wrote in a September 29, 1938, letter. Evidently, the Moroccan climate was supposed to calm his lungs as his journals steadied his mind.
For someone so chronically ill, Orwell doesn’t devote many of his diary entries to the state of his health. Even when writing from a hospital bed, he avoids whinging. “Have not been well enough to enter up diary,” he wrote on December 19, 1948, more in apology than self-pity. Perhaps he wasn’t a stoic but had merely normalized his bloody coughing fits the way he normalized air-raid warnings in London during the Blitz, calling them “a great bore.” Or perhaps he was able to make peace with regular bouts of sickness because he equated illness with the creative act: “Writing a book is a horrible, exhausting struggle, like a long bout of some painful illness,” he famously observed in his 1946 essay “Why I Write.”
FOR ALL OF ORWELL’S unflinching encounters with casual brutality in the world at large, the diaries do illuminate one dark and private secret: the author’s own bigoted views of Jews. Orwell clearly maintained two sets of books, privately slagging Jews in his notebook while publicly condemning bigotry in his 1945 essay “Antisemitism in Britain,” in which he denounced anti-Semitism as “an irrational thing.” At one point in his travels around London during the Blitz, Orwell visited three subway stations that doubled as bomb shelters. There, he wrote, he found “a higher proportion of Jews than one would normally see in a crowd of this size. What is bad about Jews is that they are not only conspicuous, but go out of their way to make themselves so. A fearful Jewish woman, a regular comic-paper cartoon of a Jewess, fought her way off the train at Oxford Circus, landing blows on anyone who stood in her way.” Deeper in that entry, he wrote, “What I do feel is that any Jew, i.e. European Jews, would prefer Hitler’s kind of social system to ours, if it were not that he happens to persecute them.”
In his hop-picking diary, he teed off on a “little Liverpool Jew of eighteen, a thorough guttersnipe.” Orwell doesn’t even dignify the Liverpudlian with a name, calling him “the Jew” throughout.
I do not know when I have seen anyone who disgusted me so much as this boy. He was as greedy as a pig about food, perpetually scrounging round dustbins, and he had a face that recalled some low-down carrion-eating beast. His manner of talking about women, and the expression on his face when he did so, were so loathsomely obscene as to make me feel almost sick. We could never persuade him to wash more of himself than his nose and a small circle around it, and he mentioned quite casually that he had several different kinds of louse on him.
I don’t know what’s more remarkable here: Orwell’s self-confidence about his Jew-dar, his calculations of the proper percentage of Jews who should be escaping death by rushing to the stations, or his assessment of the filthy, greedy, pushy people he has identified as Jews.
Orwell’s novels mention Jews, but don’t excoriate them. On the basis of his published record, does Orwell thereby qualify for the same indulgence that some awarded to H. L. Mencken because his anti-Semitic comments were largely confined to his unpublished works? Do we reach for the other rationales that have been floated in defense of unconfessed anti-Semites in the literary world: that his offenses were committed in a less enlightened time, that England wasn’t a very friendly place for Jews in the first place, that his phobia of Jews appears to have been fragmentary, etc.?
In his introduction, Hitchens writes that he recoiled at the range of Orwell’s prejudice against Jews to be found in these diaries—but offers little in the way of judgment beyond his own visceral response as a reader.
One might have expected Hitchens—who has written eloquently on anti-Semitism and his own Jewish heritage—to address these issues in his introduction. All he allows is that Orwell expressed disgust and repulsion at all stupid and dirty people, directed his misanthropy and xenophobia at other groups, and that this was a “stage in Orwell’s own evolution” toward greater tolerance. (Davison takes a neutral, basically silent corner.) Hitchens mistakenly treats the issue as an embarrassing tic in a revered thinker and writer. That’s a shame: By issuing Orwell a get-out-of-jail-free card, he avoided deeper engagement with what it meant to be a public advocate of tolerance and a private bigot, a subject that was in his mιtier. The dateline on the Hitchens introduction is a little more than two months before his own premature death, so we can spot him a bundle of points. Still, by letting his hero off easy, Hitchens lets his readers down.
Davison informs us that Orwell invested little energy in preserving the manuscripts of his published work. The likely reason the Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four typescripts still exist, says Davison, is because Orwell didn’t “live long enough to destroy them.” But he valued these diaries, and made certain they survived, probably, like other literary diary keepers, in case his next novel called for the melancholy sounds of ice clanging, or he needed to wake memories of the Blitz, the souk, or the simple excitement of seeing the gold-crested wren for a new essay.
With the exception of Orwell’s disparagement of Jews, Diaries parallels what you already know about the author: Readers conditioned to the full-scale confessional mood of the modern memoir and diary have been warned. Orwell was at home in his diaries, writing most for himself, not for posterity. He trusted these pages, whose primary subject was the world, not George Orwell, and certainly not the inner George Orwell, a room that appears to have lacked a public entrance. Writing, for Orwell, was an illness you didn’t conquer in private any more than you did on the printed page. How many writers would assent to that view today?
Jack Shafer writes a column about the press and politics for Reuters.
October 18, 2012
In Down and Out in Paris and London, Orwell wrote about Jews from an almost Russian (not Nazi) antisemitic point of view.
He spoke of his desire to punch a "Jew pawnbroker) in the face.
Ironically he published that book in 1933 the year Hitler came to power and Russian Tsarist type antisemitic (the occasional Pogrom to intimidate Jews and keep them in their place) had become a thing of the past.
I was therefore not surprised that he indulged in private antisemitism in his diaries.
Unlike many people I don't believe that Orwell has much to teach us about today's political problems in the world.
Even in his life time there were better spokesman against fascism and Communism.
October 19, 2012
Many renown writers were antiSemiteT.S Eliot, Carl Max ,Hegal all were wrote very nasty language against Jews.Form beginning Christanity Christans whole heartedly hate Jews.There may economic reason behind that.Another cause is from childhood Christans . mothers teaching their child to hate Jews.May be Jews lived isolataed getto and did minge in with Chrisrtans that is also reason
October 19, 2012
A person in the past who didn't perfectly share the mores of contemporary people? Shocking. It's amazing, how people in the past did not exactly align themselves with our conceptions of proper etiqitte, correct thought, and allowable emotion. I never cease to be amazed.
October 19, 2012
Most Americans(and Europeans as well) seem to think the main evil of 'antisemitism' is the dislike, distrust, and/or hatred of Jews—or the hostility toward Jews. Therefore, the logical conclusion drawn by many people is that they must be nice to Jews at all times, try to love Jew as much as possible, blame themselves for harboring queasiness about certain aspects of Jewish culture and politics, and remind themselves constantly than any critical or hostile feelings regarding Jews must be evil and their own fault—and never that of Jews. This, of course, is crazy.
The true danger of Antisemitism was the scapegoating and dehumanization of Jews. Scapegoating is a dangerous form of blaming or accusation for it can falsely blame an innocent person or group for a crime committed by others OR disproportionately blame a single group for the problems of the world. Scapegoating can also be a form of projection, i.e. dumping one's transgressions, sins, and ill-feelings onto another person or group, thus absolving oneself of vices and negative characteristics by conveniently seeing them in the scapegoat.
So, the real lesson of Antisemitism is that we must be careful about being critical of a person or group, and we mustn't be too quick to leap to conclusions. It also means we must be honest with ourselves, face up to our own flaws, problems, and sins instead of projecting all our faults onto another people.
The lesson of Antisemitism is NOT that we should love Jews unconditionally, praise Jews(at all times), suppress all critical thoughts regarding Jews, and/or deny every hostile feeling we might feel toward Jews. Rather, we need to assess rationally and factually what it is about Jews and Jewish power that may do good or harm to us and why.
For if Antisemitism can be mindless, so can Semitism. We now live in the Semitist age in the West. The misguided lesson we took from Antisemitism is not the need to be careful in our criticism of Jews but that we shouldn't be critical at all. Ironically, Jews, the most secular and intellectual people on Earth(who take pride in their commitment to Reason), don't want us to think about them rationally, empirically, or critically. Even the most liberal Jewish publications will seethe and foam at the mouth if anyone talks about Jews in the 'wrong way'. There is no paucity of discussion of Jewish matters in the media and academia. If anything, the subject of Jewishness is even more disproportionately discussed than the subject of homosexuality. (Though gays are Jews' closest allies, Jews wanna be #1.) What is not permitted is any genuine critical view of Jews, Jewishness, and Jewish history. So, we can discuss Jewish history, Jewish achievements, Jewish influences(at least those deemed to have been positive), Jewish humor, Jewish suffering, Jewish brilliance(but not quite Jewish intelligence, with its connotations of genetic origins), and a host of other Jewish matters, BUT we cannot discuss Jewish POWER. Mark Sanchez found out the hard way. Schmcarthyism is many times more pervasive, destructive, and repressive than McCarthyism.
The main problem today isn't Antisemitism but Semitism. We are all blindly Semitist, and if you have any doubt, just consider the content of American conservatism. No people are as 'liberal' and anti-conservative(and anti-white-gentile and anti-Christians)as the Jews are. So, one would think the natural tendency of American conservatism would be a critical stance toward Jewish power. Of course, conservatives should be careful not to dehumanize Jews or blame Jews for everything, but Jewish power is a reality; it is immense, especially in finance, high-tech, law, academia, media, entertainment, government, and so on. If most of Jewish power regularly attacks and criticizes—and even scapegoats and dehumanizes the American right—, then it would only be natural for American conservatives to challenge and counter Jewish power.
But instead, American mainstream conservatism is even more slavish toward Jewish power than most liberals in the Democratic Party are. American conservatives will rail against liberals but never mention Jewish power, as if Turkish-Americans and American-Indians are as powerful within the Democratic Party and in the MSM. Throughout the 20th century, Jews didn't just criticize American conservatism in general. They called out the Wasps, and they continue to do so to this day. Jews know very well that not everyone in the GOP has equal amount of power. Jews have always characterized the GOP as the party of Wasp power or 'angry WHITE MALES', as if liberal Jews are without anger and always full of brotherly love. If Jews have fixated on Wasp power because Wasps were indeed more powerful than other groups in America(especially in the GOP), wouldn't it make sense for American conservatives to fixate on Jewish power since Jews have long dominated American liberalism? Yet, the iron law of Semitism says American conservatism should never speak truth to Jewish power, as if any discussion + Jews + Power = Antisemitism.
Being critical of power is necessary and being critical of absolute power is absolutely necessary. This isn't to say Jews have total and absolute power in America. They don't. But in one way, they do, and it is due to the wrong lesson we took from Antisemitism. After all, power isn't just a matter of money and influence but of taboos. Even if someone doesn't own all the wealth and influence in the world, he can possess power beyond his means if taboos forbid anyone from criticizing, challenging, or countering him. After all, why did God or gods grow so immensely powerful though they were but figments of man's imagination? Because taboos protected them from 'sacrilege' and 'blasphemy'. So, if a fantasy can amass that kind of power via the power of taboos, imagine the kind of power a people can have if they are protected from criticism by taboos.
This false lesson of Antisemitism—that we must never criticize Jews, we must love Jews at all times, and we must never confront Jewish power—has shielded Jews from any kind of criticism, no matter how necessary and justified. So, even though Jews don't have absolute power, we are absolutely powerless to criticize Jews, and that means Jews might as well be absolutely powerful. Anyone who dares to link 'Jewish' with 'Power' in a negative way is excommunicated from the institutional community. While individual Americans can still discuss Jewish power privately and on the internet, individual power is nothing compared to institutional power. At any given time, only those with the levers of power really make a difference, especially in our age of conglomeration where a few tycoons and oligarchs own and control vast networks of information, news, and entertainment(which may be as or even more effective as mind-control tools. After all, would so many foolish Americans have been weaned and leaned toward 'gay marriage' if it weren't for celebrity endorsement, TV talk shows and sitcoms, and etc.?) And in time, institutional power will control individual freedom, what with the likes of Elena Kagan and Elena Sotomayor itching to end the Constitutional guarantees of the First Amendment in the name of protecting minorities from 'hate speech', when the real reason for 'hate speech' laws is to protect powerful and privileged Jews from necessary criticism. Already in California, laws have been passed to condemn and ban speech critical of Zionism, its oppression of Palestinians, and its perversion of American foreign policy that have led to Wars of Israel where thousands of mostly white gentiles have been killed or crippled for life(and never mind the 100,000s of dead 'Muzzies').
The wrong lesson of Antisemitism has made us blind to the insane American foreign policy in the Muslim and Arab world. Again, the true lesson of Antisemitism shouldn't be Semitism—mindless worship of Jews and everything Jewish—but the danger of dehumanizing and scapegoating Jews OR ANY OTHER PEOPLE. If it was wrong to do it to Jews, then it is equally wrong to do it other peoples. Dehumanization is something other than being critical of a people. It is the denial of their humanity. But lack of criticism(and necessary condemnation at times) doesn't humanize a people either. It deifies them, and this is equally dangerous, for people, even ones as intelligent as Jews, are not gods and shouldn't be worshiped as such. Indeed, the deification of a people is related to the dehumanization of a people. It was because the Nazis deified the 'Aryans' as a sacred race that some non-'Aryan' races, such as Jews, had to be dehumanized. If the 'Aryans' are the perfect race—the fountain of everything beautiful, noble, creative, and brilliant—, then it follows that people presumed to the enemies of 'Aryans' must be the evil race.
Having deified Jews, we find it easy to dehumanize people whom Jews don't like and people perceived to the 'enemies' of Jews or Zionism. So, we turn a blind eye to the terrible suffering of Palestinians in Gaza and West Bank. Why should we acknowledge their humanity when they are less-than-human in contrast to the god-like Jews? And what did it matter that America's Zionist-driven policy starved 100,000s of women and children to death in Iraq in the 90s? And what does it matter that the Iraqi Christian community suffered greatly ever since the American invasion? They too are Arab, right? And since our main perception of Arabs is as 'enemies' of Jews and Zionism, what cares if they suffer as the result of America's Semitist foreign policy? Who cares if those Iraqis were Christian since, of course, we know all Arabs are subhuman 'Muzzies'. Besides, since Jews, by and large, are no great fans of Christianity, it might be 'antisemitic' for American Christians to be concerned about fellow Christians in other parts of the world. Since Jews are the deified race, the main purpose of American Christians is to serve Jews and worry about Jews, not about other Christians, especially if they are subhuman 'raghead' Arabs.
Because humans are not perfect, all people need to be criticized as well as praised. The lesson of Antisemitism is to criticize Jews reasonably based on the facts and realities of their power and agenda. It is NOT to suppress all criticism of Jews and elevate Jews to flawless god-like superior race who are beyond criticism. Turning Jews into god-men is to repeat the mistake of Antisemitism, for it makes Jews the new Nazis and reduces all non-Jews into less-than-human servants of Jews who must constantly prove their worth to their Jewish masters as running dogs.
The lesson of Antisemitism is then not only to reject something like 'Aryanism' but to reject Semitism. Aryan supremacism deemed the Germanic-Nordic races to be more human than others, and therefore, those people could be allowed anything under the sun. What did it matter if they invaded nations and caused the suffering and deaths of millions of people? They were more human than other peoples, and so they had the right to do as they saw fit.
The logic of Semitist supremacism is no different. Since Jews are god-men, they can do as they please with Wall Street, Hollywood, American law, American education, American foreign policy, and etc. And if it leads to fall of the European peoples and untold suffering of Arabs and Muslims, what does it matter? Just as Winston Smith learned to love Big Brother, we've learned to love Big Jew.
This is all, of course, very ironic.
October 19, 2012
Snapperheadsoup makes some good points. My special worry concerns the distance that has opened up between our governing elites and the people they govern. This is a development that has largely occurred in the decades after WWII, which happens to be simultaneous with the period during which Ashkenazi Americans (let's not talk about "Jews") became the dominant ethnic group in our society. Correlation is not causation but it sure raises a flag. In a democracy it is not a healthy sign when the people who are recruited into our elite gateway institutions do not reflect the full ethnic and geographical diversity of the people they lead. It leads to the kind of political divisiveness we are experiencing today.
As for solutiions I propose the principle of affirmative action for all. The Ivy League should recruit a pool of talent (lets not call them the best and the brightest as though the two were the same) which reflects the full geographic and ethnic diversity of America. In the meantime it might help if Ashkenazi Americans took the lead in representing the interests of ordinary Americans the way they did a hundred years ago, back when they still worked in factories. Our trade, immigration, and tax policies need to be fundamentally reworked and more attention needs to be paid to the problems caused automation to insure that all Americans, not just a few, share in the fruits technological progress. This is just my opinion.
PS I'm still a Jew lover.
October 19, 2012
Snapperheadsoup appears to labor under some misconceptions, on two key points in particular: He seems to construe anti-Semitism as "any criticism of Jews", whereas in fact it obviously means criticism of Jews motivated by prejudice and bias against Jews, i.e. UNJUST criticism of Jews. An absence of anti-Semitism is therefore perfectly compatible with criticism of Jews, as long as the criticism is just, exactly like snapperheadsoup would like to have it. That some Jews and some non-Jews go beyond this to proscribe ANY criticism of Jews in the name of combatting anti-Semitism is an abuse of the term anti-Semitism, and obviously a disservice to Jews and everyone else as well. That this happens does not, however, mean that it is universal - as snapperhead assumes it is - nor that it is a proper use of the term anti-Semitism. Snapperheadsoup would do well to start using the term in its proper sense, instead of joining those abusing it, and thereby ending up taking sides against the Jews as a group on seeing the undesirable consequences of abusing the term!!!
And snapperheadsoup would to well to examine more closely his notion of Jewish "power". In claiming that "it is immense, especially in finance, high-tech, law, academia, media, entertainment, government, and so on" he seems to be confusing Jewish "power" with Jewish "accomplishment," or does he mean to tell us that Jews have attained their positions in these various pursuits unfairly? If so, perhaps he could give us some details of how this was done. If not, what is his alternative? Does he want to bar Jews specifically from working for success in the areas he enumerates? And why only Jews? What kind of a world is he proposing to create in order to decrease Jewish participation in those areas of life???
Finally: If snapperhead had stopped about half way through his long comment he would have done much better than to lay out for all to see - in the second half - the absurdities of his attempt to explain the various troubles he enumerates as consequences of his assumed "deificaton" of the Jews.
October 19, 2012
"So, even though Jews don't have absolute power, we are absolutely powerless to criticize Jews, and that means Jews might as well be absolutely powerful."
Perhaps the most absurd statement of the Turtle's ridiculous rant, a rant which says far more about himself(herself) that he might realise. What exactly are Jews going to do to those who criticize them? Be really,really mean? Not listen to them? Throw a bagel? I mean, compared to what Muslims might do or have done? There are serious discussions about our modifying the First Amendment to accommodate Muslim sensitivities regarding cartoons or videos. THAT'S real power.
They might kill us!
Our Zionist-driven policy on Iraq? Turtle, you are the posterchild for everything you claim to be disparaging. And I don't think you even realise it. How on earth do these Jews enforce this power? What do they do to non-obeyers? Think it through. The Jews tell Bush to invade Iraq. He says no. They say. OK, next election we won't vote for you. We'll vote for Obama. And next time you want to send that aid to Israel, we'll say no. That'll show you.
But I think that I know what you will say. Those clever Jews don't operate in such obvious ways. What they do is to turn anti-Semitism into the Crime of Crimes. The worst thing anybody can do. And anything negative about the Jews and Israel is regarded as anti-Semitism. Those crafty bastards. So we are all cowed by this. We can't bring ourselves to say anything, to avoid being accused of this terrrible crime. All of us, that is, except the brave Turtle, who rises above the cowards to call it how it is. Using, of course, a pseudonym..
October 19, 2012
Antisemitism is evil, but not all antisemites are. Orwell is a case in point. So is Zofia Kossak-Szczucka (1889-1968), a founder of the Polish resistance organization Zegota. She regarded the Jews as "political, economic and ideological enemies of Poland", but considered it her duty as a Pole and a Catholic to save as many as possible. She survived Auschwitz and was honored poshumously by Israel as one of the Righteous Among Nations.
October 19, 2012
"Snapperheadsoup appears to labor under some misconceptions, on two key points in particular: He seems to construe anti-Semitism as 'any criticism of Jews', whereas in fact it obviously means criticism of Jews motivated by prejudice and bias against Jews, i.e. UNJUST criticism of Jews."
Actually, the term 'antisemitism' has changed over the yrs. In the 19th century and early 20th century, it was often used as a positive term by people who didn't like Jews. They were proudly antisemitic, i.e. opposed to Jewish power that was seen as essentially devious, subversive, and alien.
But then, the term took on negative connotations, and after WWII and the Holocaust, it was pure poison. To be labeled an 'anti-Semite' meant something like NAZI!!
In a perfect world, the term 'antisemitism' should mean as Saksin defines it, but we are not living in that world. Terms gain meaning not only by technical definition but by PRACTICE. In practice, the term 'antisemitism' applies to just about anyone who dares to take critical notice of Jewish power. Why is there almost no politician who will criticize Israel though Israel has committed horrible crimes? Why is there no discussion of the Lavon Affair and USS Liberty? Why was there total silence when Israel bombed Gaza and killed 1000s of women and children? Obama said Gaddafi had to be brought down to end the slaughter in Libya, but when Jews began to massacre tons of Palestinians, Obama was as silent as Bush when Israel bombed the hell out of Lebanon. Israel destroyed an entire nation because of two abducted soldiers.
Why is it that a Jewish director like William Friedkin gets to make a movie as foul as RULES OF ENGAGEMENT which says no Muslim is to be trusted—even a young Muslim girl is a would-be-terrorist—and blown away with machine guns, while there have been no movies critical of Zionist oppression of Palestinians? name just one Hollywood movie about Jewish involvement in communist mass murder and Zionist ethnic cleansing and apartheid policies against Palestinians.
Jews have long complained of Nazi antisemitic propaganda, but then, why does Jewish Hollywood make movies where Muslims are nothing but subhuman terrorists? Why does Hollywood regularly dehumanize Russians as gangster thugs when many 'Russian' gangster bosses have actually been Jewish and closely tied to Israel. And what about the 'comfort women' industry in Israel that uses Slavic women as sex slaves? Why do we care more about what Japanese did to Asian women in WWII than what Zionist Jews are NOW doing to Slavic women who serve as sex slaves in Israel? Indeed, if anyone pointed out such matters, he or she would not only be denied promotion but be fired and blacklisted in the Jewish-controlled media industry. And any politician who dares to bring up the subject will be targeted by Jewish money in politics. THIS is why there is so little criticism of Jewish power in the government, colleges, and media(most of which is owned by Jews).
I mean the issue of Jewish power has turned into an open joke:
Both Jewish writers admit that Jews control the media(and many other powerful institutions), but many gentiles dare not speak the truth out of fear of being called an 'anti-Semite'., which is a kiss of death in American society where a loathsome creatures like Abe Foxman gets to lord over all of us as the new McCarthy—but this time, with the full blessing of ACLU and Jewish lobby.
Why do goyim fear the term 'antisemitic' so much? Because of Jewish control of media, law firms, courts, and etc.
Jews are rank hypocrites. Jewish professors tell Asian-American students that 'white privilege' —meaning white GENTILE privilege—is a great evil that 'minorities' should fight 'evil racist white power', and so, many Asian-American students have become anti-white puppets of Jewish academics. But on the other hand, Jews in the big media tell white gentiles that Yellow Peril is the big threat. So, Jewish Hollywood is remaking RED DAWN as YELLOW DAWN with Chinese disguised as North Koreans invading and killing Americans. (Imagine if an non-Jew made a film about evil Zionist globalists invading and taking over US? Maybe such film should just be called Mission Accomplished.) And Jewish Hollywood have dehumanized Muslims even worse. So, even as Jews bitch about scapegoating and antisemitism, they just love to scapegoat other people. They love pitting Christians vs Muslims, whites vs Asians, white liberals vs white conservatives. Jewish Hollywood depicts most Southern white conservatives as subhuman rednecks with no redeeming facet. Many Arab-Americans have said the only job they can get in Hollywood is as Terrorists. And in movies like TAKEN and TAKEN II—and Mamet's SPARTAN—white Americans are told that Muslims are sexual slavers who are kidnapping and raping white women. (These are the same Jews who tell us that BIRTH OF A NATION and THE SEARCHERS are 'racist'.) But in fact, most white European women abducted into sex slavery are victims of Zionist gangsters. Israel is one of the biggest centers of sexual slavery, most of it white meat sold to perverts from all over the world. Yet, even feminists don't speak out against this evil. Not only are many feminists Jewish Zionists but non-Jewish feminists fear Jewish power like anyone else. So, Zionists enslave white women in Israel, BUT Jewish Hollywood fearmongers white America by making movies that show all those swarthy 'Muzzie' men enslaving white women.
Now, if a Muslim-American or Wasp-American film director made a movie like TAKEN with Jewish sex slavers, wouldn't you guys bitch and whine about 'antisemitism'? So, why are you silent when Jewish Hollywood defames Muslims as a bunch of sex slavers and yellows as the neo-Mongol horde just itching to invade American and kill people?
"And snapperheadsoup would to well to examine more closely his notion of Jewish 'power'. In claiming that "it is immense, especially in finance, high-tech, law, academia, media, entertainment, government, and so on" he seems to be confusing Jewish 'power' with Jewish 'accomplishment,' or does he mean to tell us that Jews have attained their positions in these various pursuits unfairly?"
This is semantics of Jewish lawyer trickery. Okay, so you wanna be the new Alan Dershowitz.
Accomplishment and power can often be the same. If someone is an accomplished businessmen and becomes rich, he gains power. If someone becomes a Harvard University president, he or she becomes powerful. Regardless of whether the power was justly earned or not, power is power. Should the US go around the world and say, '"We are not powerful, we are just accomplished." That would be so lame, not to mention laughable.
Is Jewish power justly earned? In many cases, yes. Jews, especially Ashkenazi Jews have higher IQ, and so they're bound to succeed more in science, law, business, technology, academia, finance, and etc. Similarly, blacks have risen very high in sports due to their natural biological advantages. They are naturally tougher, faster, and better coordinated. So, almost all of the 100 m sprint finalists have been of West African descent in the last 30 yrs. And blacks totally own certain positions like running back and most defensive linemen positions in football.
But power is never gained purely meritocratically. Every group—Irish, black, Mexican, Asian, gay, etc—has its form of 'tribal networking'. Why should this be any different for the Jews? Anglos has the Old Anglo-Boys' Network, and Jews have the New Jewish-Boys' Network. So, when Jews on Wall Street really messed up royally, they had Jews in the media to protect them. And Jews in government—Obama was 'made' by Jews from day one—bailed out Wall Street, and virtually no Wall Street Jew has been prosecuted. Imagine if Wall Street were owned by Asian-Indians. Jewish media and Jews in government would have gone after it with full force. But the New Jewish Boys' Network covered it all up. No one got in trouble like the goy boys at Enron did. Power corrupts. It always has and always will. To say that Jews are not tempted by corruptions of power as other peoples are is to say Jews are morally superior, even to suggest Jews are perfect and worthy of worship. I don't worship any man or any group.
There was Bernie Madoff, but why had he been able to get away with his BS for so long? He had lots of powerful Jewish friends in high places, and he was making them fabulous money. And even when his crime became too big to cover up, the Jewish media's spin was that the main victims of Madoff were poor helpless Jews, which was a total lie.
October 19, 2012
Hey, I have an idea. How about we open up the private journals of all the Jewish politicians, artists, writers, etc, etc. and see what they said about non-Jews. But of course, Jews were full of nothing but love and compassion for goyim. I mean that's why the Talmud calls gentiles dogs.
But then, we don't have to look to private Jewish diaries. Just look at Hollywood movies. We know lots of Jews are anti-Muslimite, anti-Christianite, anti-Souther-white-male-ite, anti-Asianite, anti-Russianite, and etc.
Just look at the kinds of racial and ethnic stereotypes Hollywood peddles in this day and age.
October 19, 2012
j P Allen says:
"A person in the past who didn't perfectly share the mores of contemporary people? Shocking. It's amazing, how people in the past did not exactly align themselves with our conceptions of proper etiqitte, correct thought, and allowable emotion. I never cease to be amazed."
Being anti-Semitic used to be the default position. It took no courage in the "good old days" to hate Jews.
Orwell comes off as less than courageous when he embraced Jew hatred.
October 19, 2012
"Why is it that a Jewish director like William Friedkin gets to make a movie as foul as RULES OF ENGAGEMENT which says no Muslim is to be trusted—even a young Muslim girl is a would-be-terrorist—and blown away with machine guns, while there have been no movies critical of Zionist oppression of Palestinians? name just one Hollywood movie about Jewish involvement in communist mass murder and Zionist ethnic cleansing and apartheid policies against Palestinians."
Say what you will, but the above comment by snapperheadsoup is antisemitic no matter how one defines it.
That Jews are vilified every day of the week in the media, especially in Arab countries and in Europe.
Attacks and killing of Jews goes on today in places like France and Sweden.
Their excuse is always "Palestine" but the reality is that their aim is the murder of Jews, including little girls as happened recently in France.
This poster is either out to lunch, or more probably a pro Arab Jew hater.
October 19, 2012
I read snapper's diatribe several times because I wasn't sure whether he was a true anti-semite. This line sort of tipped the scales though:
This is semantics of Jewish lawyer trickery. Okay, so you wanna be the new Alan Dershowitz.
Jewish lawyer trickery? As opposed to Christian lawyer trickery? What about Muslim lawyer tricker? As I grow older I am more and more convinced that the vast majority of rabid anti-Zionists are actually virulent anti-semities. Israel has provided them a way to keep their hands clean, but they never fail to eventually reveal what their true motives are.
October 20, 2012
Dear Jack Shafer,
Thank you for providing a brief introduction to these long articles by professional antisemites. Thank you, Bookforum. If that wasn't your plan, why not limit "comments" to genuine comments on an article? Limit length and ban links? Since Arts and Letters Daily picked up what they thought was an article by Shafer about Orwell, you have ended up publishing unrelated antisemitic essays, complete with links, all over the English speaking world. Fifteen years ago "snapper" would have had to xerox his stuff and try to hand it out from a soap box in Union Square. You've made him an international author. Mr. Shafer, Bookforum, why let yourselves be used this way? Revise the comment policy.
October 20, 2012
Dear Mr. Shafer:
Isn't there also evidence of anti-Irishism in Orwell's diaries? If so, why isn't Orwell's anti-Irishism worth mentioning? Granted, "anti-Irishism" isn't a word, but, then, who did more to explain to us the political utility of the non-existence of certain words than Orwell?
October 20, 2012
J.p.allen is correct. I have recently read the letters of Renoir and he refers to "the Jew Pissarro" and states that he is tired of painting for Jews because they never pay.
As for USprofessor - the article by Mr Shafer is a very selective hatchet job on one of the leading minds of the 20th century - despite mr Arnon's comment. Orwell was shot through the neck, literally, for defending his beliefs,
and metaphorically stabbed in the back by Victor Gollancz, his publisher, for writing about them. Although intellectually he was prophetic he was still of his time.
And he wrote that it was important that he wrote what he believed while he could, because he feared that soon he would not be able to.
USprofessor is evidence of that!
October 20, 2012
Patrickirish has posted another antisemitic comment.
"Orwell was shot through the neck, literally, for defending his beliefs,
and metaphorically stabbed in the back by Victor Gollancz, his publisher, for writing about them."
Golancz was a Jew and a socialist.
"Sir Victor Gollancz (9 April 1893 – 8 February 1967) was a British publisher, socialist and supporter of left-wing causes."
antisemites like Patrickirish will always point to some Jew as an evil presence in whatever it is they are discussing.
October 20, 2012
Patrickirish has posted another antisemitic comment.
"Orwell was shot through the neck, literally, for defending his beliefs,
and metaphorically stabbed in the back by Victor Gollancz, his publisher, for writing about them."
Golancz was a Jew and a socialist.
"Sir Victor Gollancz (9 April 1893 – 8 February 1967) was a British publisher, socialist and supporter of left-wing causes."
antisemites like Patrickirish will always point to some Jew as an evil presence in whatever it is they are discussing.
October 20, 2012
I read snapperhead's comments with great amusement.
Is he seriously giving justification to bigotry?
It is also true that bigotry never has a single target. What other bigotry some snapperhead subscribe to?
Further, posting links to what amount to no more than opinion pieces (which can easily be construed as deliberately taken out of context) is hardly the mark of a someone with a disciplined and educated mind.
It isn't as if these there has been a presentation of serious academic discussion of bigotry nor has there been any evidence of a plethora of serious academics who would agree with Snapperhead's assertion that somehow, bigotry directed against Jews is understandable if not inappropriate.
Finally, the notion Jews 'control' anything is quite absurd.
The United States has a population of 308 plus million people.
There are about 6,500,000 Jews. Let's assume they vote as a single bloc (which of course they don't).
About 25% of Americans identify themselves as evangelical. Let's assume they too vote as a single bloc in support of Israel (which they don't).
That leaves slightly less than 75% of Americans whose vote is up for grabs, so to speak.
So why do poll after poll indicate a high level of American support for Israel? Maybe because that is a moral and ethical stance.
If Americans wanted to change their support of Israel in favor of nations who call for genocide (and let's be clear- there is no such as a disproportionate response to calls for genocide) any political candidate from any political party would have no trouble at the ballot box.
For some reason, that hasn't happened.
Have you ever noticed how those who deny or justify the Holocaust are the same people who would love to see another?
October 21, 2012
I agree with PatrickIrish that "the article by Mr Shafer is a very selective hatchet job on one of the leading minds of the 20th century." The truth of course is that all ethnic stereotypes have their kernels of truth. This is no less true of Ashkenazis than any other group, as Ashkenazis themselves are perfectly aware. That Orwell should be "exposed" and condemned half a century later for what were likely honest impressions recorded in his diary, serves no useful purpose. Unless you think fanning the flames of bigotry is useful.
October 21, 2012
I am sorry you are offended Mr Arnon, I thought the juxtaposition of the literal and metaphorical rather droll! I have read most of what Orwell wrote and he actually took the shafting by Mr Gollancz rather well and certainly did not ascribe Gollancz's embrace of Totalitarianism to his Jewishness, nor his disappointing behaviour. Orwell was not an anti-Semite and I am surprised that those who choose to besmirch him should react so violently to his defenders! Very interesting, and of course, instructive. Irrational abuse doesn't intimidate any more Mr Arnon. Those who read this site are interested in the use and abuse of language - as was Orwell. Please try to stick to what is being discussed, calmly and thoughtfully - or limit your posting to those violent anti-Christian sites that people like you infest.
October 21, 2012
Your remark, "The truth of course is that all ethnic stereotypes have their kernels of truth." is interesting, to be sure.
That said, the Irish, Poles and Black communities (just to name a few) might not share your profound insights.
October 21, 2012
My, my. PatrickIrish sees violence popping up all over the place.
"I am surprised that those who choose to besmirch him should react so violently to his defenders!"
"...limit your posting to those violent anti-Christian sites...."
(In other words, don't post where I might see it.)
It seems the definition of a violent person = someone who disagrees with PatrickIrish.
The fact also remains that Orwell's private language regarding Jews is vile stuff, regardless of whether written yesterday or a half-century ago. If PatrickIrish and lukelea are upset that their hero is being knocked off his pedestal, too bad for them.
October 21, 2012
Once you scratch the surface the amount of anti semites in modernism is alarming, who did not meet Ezra Pound, from Marianne Moore to Robert Frost, . Perhaps it has to do with the orthodoxy & rigidity of the Old Testament ??
October 21, 2012
I was brought to this article from Daily Arts & Letters who flagged it as "Orwell the anti-Semite". No room for doubt there.
Reading Mr Schafer I sense his mind is equally made up. George Orwell, whatever he wrote was anti-Jew. That is plain fact for Mr Schafer.
However, there is more to this than Orwell's known disgust at certain behaviour's and personalities. Malcolm Muggeridge thought Orwell was anti-Semitic and said so in a televison documentary in conversation with Cyril Connelly, one of Orwell's oldest friends from school days. Connelly did not demure. However, Rayner Heppenstall and Arthur Koestler and other Jewish friends and associates believed otherwise; this despite Heppenstall for one having had epic private rows with Orwell.
One reason for this contradiction - for it was I think this consciousness of this about himself that made him a great writer - is that George Orwell did not exist. He has no existence except as a fictional alter ego of Eric Blair. It is this fictional Blair becoming Orwell that should be a serious consideration in viewing Orwell's achievement. Orwell was late arriving; only after Paris, Wigan and especially, Spain did this invented self appear. The previously existing E. A. Blair exemplified the pre-First World War (1914-18) world that Blair knew dimly from his childhood. Reflections of this 'different age' pepper his work. In it he grew up in an Imperialist country in a class determined from birth to serve it. He writes that at that time, his early teens, Ruyard Kipling, the great poet of Empire, was "a sort of household God", one later ejected, but somehow never forgot for his impact on Orwell's political outlook. Kipling he later reasoned, had understood the world better than the 'parlour socialists' who sniggered at him because Kipling understood that in the end brute force wins against pieties.
Orwell never served in the Indian Imperial police in Burma. That was Blair. It was Blair that went afterwards to Paris having seen through the imperialist racket (that employed and nurtured Blair's family); it was Blair who recoiled in disgust at the world of tramping, casual labour, begging and so on, drawn by a fascination with dirt that leads many to misunderstand this essentially literary device that placed the emerging Orwell outside the disinterested observers such as Mass Observation. Hence his frank remarks about the working class people he encountered in the north of England, every bit as difficult to read as that Mr Schafer quotes on the young Jew in the passage on hop picking. Blair spared no one.
In creating Orwell, Blair tried to find some persona that could shake off the habits of his class and social world view, a decent (Orwell's almost favourite word it seems at times when reading him, a shorthand for moral courage) humane person who could look at the world honestly and not flinch. To see through all the 'smelly orthodoxy's' that clamoured for attention. But behind this mask Blair lived on. He refused to go away and people were surprised to find Orwell in the first person was less easy going and more challenging than his words might have led them to expect. "A gloomy sort of chap" was P.G. Wodehouse's verdict.
Mr Schafer takes Blair as the real Orwell. Orwell emerged from the tension as between the Old Etonian, ex-colonial policeman Blair and the wounded Spanish Civil War veteran that left traces on his ruined face that Raymond Williams for one, disagreeing with him on almost every major political point, said we could never do without.
October 21, 2012
It's amazing how quickly snapperhead transitions from
1. NOT making sweeping (therefore dehumanizing) judgments about certain races, to
2. Justifying his own remarks about "Jewish POWER" as if some powerful Jews meant that the whole race had some kind of upper-case "POWER", and finally to
3. "Jewish Hollywood", "semantics of Jewish Lawyer Trickery", "Jewish sex slavers", "Wall Street Jew", and on and on.
If you don't mean to attack, insult and dehumanize a race of people, you usually don't write this way. Substitute "Chinese", "White", "Black" or "Latino" for every reference he makes to "Jews" and it's obvious that:
1. He's a guy with a racist chip on his shoulder the size of Nebraska, and
2. He's gottten good at writing introductory paragraphs that obfuscate his true position and goal; but that his stock in trade is selling -yes, dare I say it- antisemitic fantasies of Jewish power (complete with the obligatory "they're genetically smarter than us" BS, which has been proven false), while parroting a few nice little politically correct slogans in the first couple paragraphs to suck intelligent people into having an actual debate with him.
Like someone said, what he should be doing is standing on a soap box in Union Square.
Lukelea, by the way, is a frequenter of all blogs and fora linked to by Arts & Letters Daily, and is a rabid "lover of the Jews", by which I mean someone who thinks they're all children of the devil who could still be saved at Judgment day. He/she/it is the ultimate antisemite whackjob of the internet, save Brother whats-his-face the itinerant street preacher/nazi.
October 21, 2012
@ chevyclutchfoot -
"Lukelea, by the way, is a frequenter of all blogs and fora linked to by Arts & Letters Daily, and is a rabid "lover of the Jews", by which I mean someone who thinks they're all children of the devil who could still be saved at Judgment day. He/she/it is the ultimate antisemite whackjob of the internet, save Brother whats-his-face the itinerant street preacher/nazi."
Pure libel and untruth from beginning to end as a simple Google search will show. I am a long-time and steadfast supporter of the state of Israel and of the Jewish people, being a convert to reform Judaism.
October 21, 2012
Here's a somewhat over-the-top but still interesting attack on Orwell from an Irish-American writer:
I think Dolan's Irish perspective has identified a major aspect of Orwell's personality — he was basically an English patriot, which has its upsides but also has its downsides if you are a loyal Irishman.
Of course, Orwell's anti-Irishism is not something widely discussed. After all, anti-Irishite isn't even a word, so it's easy not to think in that category, while it's easy to think in categories for which we have words.
October 21, 2012
Also surprising that Fritz takes issue with the concept of language as violence but I do think the use of that word was wrong. It has the potential to encourage arguments about the need to limit speech, something I disagree with. Disappointing that he stoops to personal abuse also, but it is as it is. I do disagree with Larkers - I don't think there is any need to separate Blair from Orwell, there is no marked inconsistency in attitude or viewpoint. But Larkers is interesting and worth reading. Orwell lived in a different age. Animal Farm is a given now, then it was almost unpublishable. The same with much of what was in his diary. Who obsesses about the number of eggs their hens lay today?
October 22, 2012
I thought I'd be long gone before reading anything like snapperheadsoup's comments. I now want to go back and read this article and all of its comments, and I'm not going to be surprised if the comments are the better read.
October 29, 2012
There's something hinky about people, Jewish or not, who obviously spend A LOT of time obsessing about what used to be called "the Jewish question."