1

No. 4.- Autumn 2016 malgré-nix Editor: Pip Argot

Friend Pip Argot of Facebook and/or comment at newcaledonianbroadsheet@gmail.com


Dr. William Luther Pierce
National Vanguard
Hello. A few days ago, I spoke with a friend who
is a historian and a writer and who is interested in
may of the things we discuss... on these weekly
broadcasts.
He congratulated me on the growing influence of
American dissidence voices. He said - and I quote -
"Many more people than you realize listen to your
broadcasts. They mail the texts to many other
people... I meet many people at universities - and in
other countries - as well as here in southern-
California, who listen to your broadcasts and talk
about them with each other."
My response was: "Then where are these people
when I need them? Why don't I hear from more of
them? Don't they realize that I can't continue doing
these broadcasts all by myself for ever? The
country is going down the drain... and all these
people that you mentioned are doing is talking about
my broadcasts and sitting on their hands! Why don't
they help me? are they afraid that they'll be kicked
out of the country club if they associate with me?"
My historian friend said that "it isn't fear" that
keeps these people from contacting you... "it is their
moral concerns." "n the past," he said, "your
broadcasts were very harsh... very brutal... you
talked about ethnic cleansing and approved of
genocide and other things that these people find
shocking!" - he said. "They won't support any cause
unless they feel that it is a just cause! They think
that you are willing to hurt too many people... they
feel that you hafve no Christian constraint...they
would rather commit suicide than become associated
with an unjust cause...!" - my friend told me.
I responded to him: "Don't these people believe
that making a decent world for future
generations of our people is a just cause!? Don't
they believe that preventing the extinction of our
race and our civilization is a just cause!?"
My friend really didn't have a good answer for
that. But I gathered from his response that he
believes my approach to our problems is too
rough! too uncivilized! too un-Christian! for the
people he talks with... and it makes them
uncomfortable.
Then he congratulated me on becoming more
acceptable in the last year than I was before. He
said that I do talk now about the issues in a way that
is easier for these people to relate to - and he
thought that that had a lot to do with the fact that
"What Is Moral?"
Dr. William Luther Pierce
(2002)
more people were listening to the programs now and
discussing them with their friends...
Since this conversation with my friend a little
more than a week ago... I've been thinking hard
about what he said... I think I believe that I
understand what he said - but I don't relly agree with
him. I don't really believe that it is very meaningful
to say that Christian constraints make thaq
academics and other perceptive people that he
knows hold back from the necessarily unpleasant
solutions to our race's problems.
"The strength of God will enable us, a small
but faithful band, to overcome the multitude of
the faithless."
Robert Guiscard1
In the first place, most of these people aren't
really Christians! - they were raised in a Christian
environment... and Christian moral doctrine may
still have a subconscious effect on them - but most
of them are fairly intelligent and sophisticated
people.
I believe that a reasonably high percentage of the
pilots and other military officers that the current
government - and a long line of governments before
this have sent to blast Afghan villages to
smithereens - or to bomb a European city like
Belgrade - or to carpet-bomb German cities are
Christians. - a higher percentage anyway than
academics and other people that my friend talks
with...
I also think that most of them have no qualms of
conscience about what they do for a living... and
these pilots - most of them - are not Neanderthal
rednecks or bloody-minded sadists... - they are
university graduates who are loving husbands and
caring fathers...
"Jewish persecution only followed after
Christian first were persecuted."
Father Charles Coughlin2
In the past Christians - American Christians -
repeatedly have shown themselves quite capable of
doing the most atrocious and bloody thing without
hesitation.
The key, I believe, is social rather than religious
or moral... the concern, I believe, is not about
whether a cause is just or not - whatever that means
- but, whether it is socially acceptable or not. That
is " socially acceptable" in the peer group to which
the person belongs, who claims to be concerned
about the justness of my cause.
To tell the truth I don't believe that I have
changed - or moderated - or softened my message
during the past year. I always have tried to tell the
truth - the whole truth and nothing but the truth
- and I don't hold back from stating unpleasant facts
1
Robert Guiscard (c.1015 – 17 July 1085) was the
most remarkable of the Norman adventurers
remembered for the conquest of southern Italy and
Sicily. On the death of Humphrey in 1057, Robert
Guiscard caused himself to be elected leader of the
Normans to the detriment of the two sons of his
brother...
2
Father Charles Coughlin (1891-1979), leader of the
anti-Semitic Christian Front, was a controversial
Canadian-American Roman Catholic priest based in
the United States near Detroit at Royal Oak,
Michigan's National Shrine of the Little Flower
church, who became one of the most revered figures
in the Depression era of American history.
or conclusions any more today than I did a year ago!
I do try to avoid being unnecessarily offensive! I
don't ordinarily use the word nigger in talking
about racial matters, for example, because it makes
so many people flinch - and I can be completely
clear in what I want to say with out using that word.
But that is no more true today than it was five
years ago. I've always tried to be unnecessarily
offensive.
"We can have peace and security only so
long as we band together to preserve that most
priceless possession... our inheritance of
European blood."
Charles Lindbergh3
I think that what has changed is not my message
but the social environment. I believe that the social
environment of most of the writers and professors
and others who talk about my broadcasts - but won't
talk with me!! - has shifted enough during the past
couple of years, so that hard facts about race - and
the Jews - are a little more acceptable than before.
I think that reality is quite not as de plus as it was
a year or two ago.
You know I believe that I know these people
about as well as anyone. I never was very fashion
conscious myself - even before I began saying
unfashionable things. I never worried much about
whether I was wearing the latest style in cufflinks or
neckties... and occasionally my socks wouldn't
match... I probably would have been classified as a
"nerd" by most fashion-conscious people of today...
but I was a university professor! and I generally
behaved in a socially-approved manner... I could
even figure out which fork to use for the salad in
most cases... and I didn't slurp my soup... or wipe
my greasy fingers on my shirt or tablecloth...
If there was as difference between me and most
of my peers... I think it was this: they took the
conventions and taboos by which we live a little
more seriously than I did. I think that I appreciate
these things more now than I did then... now I
understand that conventions and good manners and
politeness and gentlemanly behaviour are important
in a structured well-functioning society... but they
are not the most important things! Honesty and
facing reality without evasion are more important
than politeness!
In the early-1960s, we all saw the society in which
we live coming unraveled... we all could look ahead
and see that very bad things were likely to be
encountered just down the road if present trends
continued... but it was not entirely acceptable to talk
frankly about these things! - that is, it made many of
my peers uncomfortable to talk frankly about where
racial integration was taking America! - it made
them even more uncomfortable to talk about the
Jewish role in the dangerous policies being pursued
by the government... I think that social conditioning
was more important than Christianity or any other
ethical considerations in imposing these constraints.
We didn't feel personally threatened by Blacks!
and the people who were personally threatened
were the White manual workers at the bottom of the
White social ladder, who reacted to the threat in
ways that seemed very vulgar and uncouth to us - to
us Blacks were still the underdogs... - and it seemed
uncharitable to most of my peers for Whites to
3
Charles Lindbergh (1902-1974), an American
aviator, made the first solo nonstop flight across the
Atlantic Ocean on 20-21 May 1927 in his famous
airplane, The Spirit of St. Louis.

attack Blacks for wanting to better their positions... -
the media-generated image of sweaty, unshaven Ku
Klux Klansmen and other rednecks screaming
insults at peacefully marching Black demonstrators
was an unpleasant one tha made us squirm. We
certainly didn't want to put ourselves in the same
boat with the Ku Klux Klan and other working -
class Whites who were behaving in such an
ungentlemanly manner.
I not only understood the feeling of my peers
back in the 1960s... - I shared it!! Standing on a
street corner and screaming insults at Blacks or
shouting "White Power" while shaking one's fist or
giving a roman salute was not only rude and
impolite... it was low-class.
I believe that is what made us most
uncomfortable. Despite all of the pretensions to
democracy and egalitarianism, America was and
still is a very class-conscious society... - and that is
not necessarily a bad thing! I think that in a well-
ordered society it is reasonable to expect that the
more-privileged and influential members of the
society to have a stricter and more-refined mode of
behaviour - and to hold themselves aprat from those
with less-strict codes... - and in the early-1960s,
America still had a reasonably well-ordered society.
As I already mentioned, I was a little less reverent
for things such as the polite behaviour expected of
academics and professionals than most of my peers
were... - and so, while many of them joined
conservative think tanks and respectably
conservative debating societies, I decided to say
what I thought needed to be said - polite or not! The
consequence of that decision was that the Jewish
media immediately began doing a hatchet job on
me. - portraying me as the sort of person that any
member of polite society would be ashamed to
associate with.
And so I spent the next 35 years as an outcast of
sorts. It didn't bother me a great deal because the
luxury of being able to tell the whole truth was
a bit intoxicating.
Of course, I always tried to sway other
professionals to tell the whole truth, too. - and a few
of the m did. - but not many were willing to take
that step. That's beginning to change a little now.
But not, I think, because I have become more polite
or more moral... - I think that it is because the threat
that we all could see back in the 1960s is no longer
distant and theoretical... - it is looming darkly over
all of us now... not just over the manual workers at
the bottom of the White social ladder.
But I must say that even as more professionals are
skewing up their courage and choosing truth
instead of the country club... I am becoming more
impatient with those who still hold back from a full
commitment to the struggle for the survival fo
our race and our civilization.
I don't mean to seem condescending or
offensive... - but I do think that is time to quit
making excuses that claim moral reservations. It is
time to face the fact! that what is holding you back
is not morality but fear - the fear of being labeled a
"hater" or a neo-Nazi by the media. - the fear of
being thought uncouth or low-class for finally
admitting that those low-class Whites who were
screaming obscenities at Black demonstrators in the
1960s... - and who were using the word nigger were
right!!!
We didn't have to stand on street corners and do
things in a low-class way that the Klan did... - but
we were obliged to do something. We were obliged
to whatever our positions and our abilities enabled
us to do most effectively. And most of dodged that
obligation!!!
Lets talk about morality and just causes for a
moment: I believe that the most common moral
reservation I hear from the shirkers is that eh
solutions to the problems that I talk about entail the
punishment of the innocent with the guilty.
Intelligent people tell me that they agree we should
have a separation of the races - "but" they protest,
not all Blacks will go voluntarily to some African
country. And many of those who won't want to go
are hard-working, law-abiding Blacks. And the
same is true for the Mestizos who won't want to go
back to Mexico or El Salvador. And what about the
mixed-race children whose mothers were persuaded
by Hollywood or MTV to let Blacks impregnate
them? How can we possibly have a White
society again without hurting millions of
people!? And my answer is... - that we can't!!!
And you must decide whether it is more moral to
stand aside and permit Western Civilization and the
race that built that civilization over the millennia to
become extinct in the very near future - or to hurt
many people - White as well a s non-White - to
ensure that both the race and the civilization survive.
When our ancestors arrived in America from Europe
in the 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th centuries they
encountered intense opposition from the Indians4 -
which was natural enough - since the Indians were
here first and didn't want us taking their land. But
after the first few massacres of White settlers by
Indians.5 Our ancestors rolled up their sleeves and
4
That was in America, where there was a genocidical
war of extinction laid waste against the Native
population. In Canada, however, the western interior
was conquered not by violence but by love
relationships tendered between the French
Canadienne voyageur and fur trapper - and provides
us with a much more beautiful history than in the
United States. The Méacutetis are the underlying
foundation stone of Western civilization in North
America - and predate the American conquest to the
time of Jacques Cartier's first voyage in 1534, being
cemented later, in 1609, by Samuel de Champlain's
tripartite mercantile trade treaty and political entente
with the Wendat (called Huron) and other tribes - the
barter of aboriginal women as interpreters and guides
being of equal importance as the barter and war
alliances.
5 Mohawk attacked a band of Wappinger and
1) Paspahegh Massacre: On 9 August 1610, Lord De
la Warr sent 70 men to attack the Paspahegh
Indians. They destroyed their main village near
Jamestown, killing between 16 and 65 people.
The wife and children of the village chief were
captured and shortly afterwards put to death .
2) Jamestown Massacre: On 22 March 1622,
Powhatan (Pamunkey) killed 347 English men,
women and children throughout the Virginia
colony, almost one-third of the English population
of the Jamestown colony, in an effort to push the
English out of Virginia.
3) Wessagusset Affair: In 1623, several
Massachusetts chiefs were lured to Wessagusset
under peaceful pretenses and put to death. Other
Indians present in the village were also killed.
4) Pamunkey Peace Talks: On 12 May 1623, the
English poisoned the wine at a "peace conference"
with Powhatan leaders, killing about 200; they
physically attacked and killed another 50.
5) Wethersfield Attack: On 23 April 1637, during
the Pequot War, Wongunk chief Sequin attacked
the Puritan town Wethersfield, Connecticut with
Pequot help. About 30 settlers were killed,
including women and children.
6) Mystic Massacre: On 26 May 1637, In the
Pequot War, English colonists commanded by
John Mason, with Mohegan and Narragansett
allies, launched a night attack on a large Pequot
village on the Mystic River in present-day
Connecticut, where they burned the inhabitants in
3
virtually exterminated the Indians. And I don't
think they had to do a lot moral agonizing about it
first! And it wasn't a gentlemanly war, either. We
deliberately left small pots and infected blankets for
the Indians to find... knowing that they Indians had
no natural resistance to the disease. When we raided
Indian villages we killed everybody - young and old,
male and female., just like they did when they
raided a White settlement.
To our ancestors the choice was...: get rid of the
Indians or give up and go back to Europe. I doubt
that moral qualms led many to go back to Europe -
so as not to have to kill Indians. To virtually all of
them, it was more moral to conquer the land for
their descendants and to increase the territory and
the power of their race, than to let the Indians keep
the land.
Theirs was the morality of survival - the
morality of life.
A couple of things have changed since those
days...: First, we have a much stronger sense of
identity - a much stronger sense of racial
community, then than now; when it was a matter of
Whites versus Indians everyone knew whose side he
was on...! Second, we lived much closer to nature
then..., we had not been softened by so much
security and so many comforts - and reality was
something we had to deal with every day in order to
survive.
Actually, I've over-simplified this example of
Whites versus Indians... by the 19th century, some
East Coast White Liberals had decided that they
were on the Indian's side! they were White's who
had been safely established in the cities for a couple
of generations - and softened thereby. And they
didn't have to face Indians on the frontier.
their homes and killed all survivors, for total
fatalities of about 600–700.
7) Staten Island Massacre: In July 1640, 80 Dutch
soldiers under Cornelis van Tienhoven attacked a
village of Raritans on Staten Island over stolen
pigs. Van Tienhoven intended only to demand
payment, but his men wanted to massacre the
Indians and he eventually consented.
8) Pavonia Massacre: On 25 February 1643, the
Tappan, who fled to New Amsterdam seeking the
protection of New Netherland governor, William
Kieft. Kieft dispersed them to Pavonia and
Corlears Hook. They were later attacked, 129
being killed. This prompted the beginning of
Kieft's War, driven by mercenary John Underhill.
9) Hutchinson Massacre: In August 1643, as part of
Kieft's War in New Netherland, near the Split
Rock (now northeastern Bronx in New York
City), local Lenape (or Siwanoy) killed Anne
Hutchinson, six of her children, a son-in-law, and
as many as seven others (servants). Susanna, one
of Hutchinson's daughters, was taken captive and
lived with the natives for several years.
10) Massapequa Massacre: In 1644, John
Underhill's men killed more than 100 Indians near
present-day Massapequa.
The list just goes on-and-on almost endlessly -
Indians killing settlers and retaliation massacres by
American colonists... but it isn't until the Lachine
Massacre, on 5 August 1689, that race relations
sour so violently in Québec as in the English
Colonies, when 1500 Mohawk warriors attacked the
small settlement of Lachine, New France and killed
more than 90 of the village's 375 French residents,
following widespread French attacks on Mohawk
villages in present-day New York. Nonetheless, this
was a singular incident and completely unlike what
was happening in the United States at the time.
4
They wrote books... gave lectures to groups of
gentlemen... and preached Sunday sermons to the
credulous that idealized the Indians as noble
savages... ignored the horrible atrocities committed
by the Indians against White settlers... and
emphasized White depravations against the Indians.
Fort5uneately, by the time their activities began
to have much effect on public opinion and
government policy... the Indians were pretty well
finished! otherwise, the population of the United
States today might look much like that of Mexico.
Today, the process is somewhat similar - but in
reverse. Back in the 1960s, nearly all of us already
were too soft, too comfortable, too secure... - and the
propagandists for a new morality - the morality of
surrender and death - already had poisoned our
souls.
We had to treat the Blacks "fairly," we believed.
We must not accuse the good Jews along with the
bad Jews... along with the Zionists. We must not
advocate anything that would punish the innocent
with the guilty. We had to have a "just cause"
before we could do anything.
But now! with the hour of decision at hand... with
the grim reality of racial extinction before us... some
of us are beginning to understand! that the morality
of survival is a higher morality than the morality of
fairness.
I hope that the books I have written - and the
lectures and sermons I have been giving - as
unpolished... as ungentlemanly as they are... have
had some small part in bringing this understanding
to some of our people.
It's time now for an end to the polite chatter at
fashionable dinners and cocktail parties to give way
to hard-headed talk and planning aimed at saving
our people... and saving our civilization no matter
what it takes... no matter how unfair we must be ion
claiming this planet for our descendents.
Perhaps, the polite and gentlemanly Americans
holding back now may find some much needed
courage in news of developments in polite circles
overseas. In Britain, for example, the Jews and their
hangers on in the government and the media have
been complaining bitterly for the past month about a
remark the French Ambassador Daniel Bernard6
made at a vey polite dinner party in London (on 19
December 2001): Ambassador Bernard described
Israel as quote "that shitty little country" - and asked
quote "Why should wee be in danger of Third World
War because of these people?"
The Jews are bemoaning the fact that not only did
Bernard have the courage to make that comment but
that others at the dinner party agreed with him!
"Try and imagine how much brainwashing
it would take to convince all the Asians living
in Asia, that they need to go ahead and
replace themselves (in Asia) with North
African Muslims?
Now imagine that they were so totally
brainwashed that they really believed it
would be racist not to??
If you manage to do that...: Welcome to the
world of the White anti-Whites."
I'll quote from a story in the December 23rd issue
of the London newspaper The Independent:
"Representatives of Britain's Jews fear that polite
society is embracing anti-Semitism... and making it
appear acceptable. It is being nurtured, they say,
around the dinner tables of London's chattering
6
Ambassador Daniel Bernard (1941-2004), French
diplomat who served as the Ambassador to the
United Kingdom and Algeria
classes, where Jew and Israel bashing has, according
to some, become [unintelligible]."
Joe Rogerman, the president of the Board of
Deputies of British Jews said: "Anti-
Semitism is raising its head again. It has become
acceptable for the first time in fifty years. People
who have a respectable veneer can express these
views in public... and now get support rather than
condemnation. I think much of what is expressed is
anti-Zionist in content... but within that is a very
strong anti-Semitic element."
"Every time we do something, you tell me
Americans will do this and will do that. I
want to tell you something very clear. Don't
worry about American pressure on Israel;
we, the Jewish people, control America. And
the American's know it."
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
And its not just polite society in Britain and in
France that is beginning to talk at least a bit more
frankly about the world's Jewish problem -
academics, journalists, government officials and
intellectuals throughout the Muslim world from Iran
to Indonesia, are showing increasing willingness to
speak out not just about Israel - and not just about
so-called Zionists... but about all Jews... about Jews
as a race whose monomaniacal scheming imposes
an enormous danger to the whole world.
There always has been an undercurrent... - in
official circles it was denounced. The Jews in
America would complain to the U.S. government
whenever an anti-Israel cartoon appeared in an
Egyptian newspaper! or the foreign minister of Syria
made an anti-Jewish comment in public.
The U.S. government would obediently threaten
the offending country with unpleasant consequences
if the offensive behaviour continued. And the
appropriate officials in that country would promise
to crack down up it.
That situation has been changing during the p[ast
couple of years, however, and especially since
September 11th. Now the governments throughout
most of the Muslim world no longer are trying to
suppress criticism of the Jews but are participating
in the effort to inform their people of the Jewish
menace.
The influential Saudi Arabian daily newspaper al-
Watan published a long two-art article last month,
on December 8th and 9th (2002), that I might have
written myself...! it talked about the Jew's ambition
to control the world from ld Testament times to the
present. It went into their scheming before the First
World War... - to use the war to advance their
interests... - and it went into Jewish media control in
depth, pointing out that the Jews everywhere worked
to undermine the racial and national solidarity of
their host countries.
al=Watan like all of the newspapers in Saudi
Arabia is financed by the government. And at least
one major Islamic newspaper in the United States,
Muslims, published in New York had been
reprinting the text of several of these American
dissident voices broadcasts.
The chattering classes in America may be a bit
behind those in France and Britain and Saudi
Arabia... but I do have hopes that they will begin
catching up soon.
Thanks for being with me again today.
2002
The Case for the Khazarian Jews
An abstract from a letter Benjamin Freedman wrote
to his friend Dr. David Goldstein on 10 October 1954.
In the letter, Mr. Freedman who was a former Zionist
details the origins of the Jewish lineage which goes
back not to the Middle East but back to Europe and the
Khazarian Empire. Which means today's Jews are not
descendants of anyone or anything from Biblical Lore.
This includes Abraham, the Hebrews, the Israelites, the
Lost Tribes and so on. By connecting the Jewish
lineage back to Europe means the Jews cannot
legitimately point to a single ancient ancestor who ever
set foot on the soil of Palestine in the era of Bible
history.
Mr. Freedman’s research, which was extensive,
means the Israeli claim to Palestine and other areas of
the Middle East is not founded in any historical fact or
evidence. His research says the Jewish claim to
Palestine is unfounded since they are not Israelites but
European Khazars.
Benjamin Freedman’s research has been validated
by other researchers and also by a recent DNA study
released in 2012 by Dr. Eran Elhaik, an Israeli born,
Jewish researcher from John Hopkins Medical
University. Elhaik's scientific DNA study also points
the Jewish lineage back into Europe and not Palestine
or any other area within the Middle East.
You will probably also be astonished as the 150
million Christians years ago, when I electrified the
nation with the first publication by me of the facts
disclosed by my many years of research into the
origin and history of the so-called or self-styled
Jews in Eastern Europe.
My many years of intensive research established
beyond the question of any doubt, contrary to
generally-accepted beliefs held by Christians that
the so-called or self-styled Jews in Eastern Europe
at any time in their history in eastern Europe were
never the legendary Lost Ten Tribes of Bible lore.
That historic fact is incontrovertible. Relentless
research established as equally true that the so-
called or self-styled Jews in Eastern Europe at no
time in their history could be correctly regarded as
the direct lineal descendants of the legendary Lost
Ten Tribes of Bible lore.
The so-called or self-styled Jews in Eastern
Europe in modern history cannot legitimately point
to a single ancient ancestor who ever set even a foot
on the soil of Palestine in the era of Bible history.
Research also revealed that these so-called or
self-styled Jews in Eastern Europe were never
Semites! are not Semites now! nor can they ever be
regarded as Semites at any future time by any
stretch of the imagination.
Exhaustive research also irrevocably rejects as a
fantastic fabrication the generally accepted belief by
Christians that the so-called and self-styled Jews of
Eastern Europe are the legendary chosen peoples so
very vocally publicized by the Christian clergy from
their pulpits.
Maybe you can explain to me, my dear Dr.
Goldstein, the reason why and just how the origin
and history of the Khazars in Khazar kingdom was

so well concealed from the world for so many
centuries?
What secret mysterious power has been able for
countless generations to keep the origin and history
of the Khazars in Khazar kingdom out of history
textbooks and out of classroom courses in history
throughout the world?
The origin and history of the Khazars in Khazar
kingdom are certainly incontestable historical facts.
Thes incontestable historic facts also establish
beyond any question of doubt the origin and history
of the so-called and self-styled Jews in eastern
Europe.
The origin and history of the Khazars in Khazar
kingdom and their relationship to the origin and
early history of the so-called and self-styled Jews in
eastern Europe was one of histories best kept secrets
until wide publicity was given in recent years to my
research on this subject.
Do you not think, my dear Dr; Goldstein, that it is
time this whole subject was dragged out of its hiding
place?
In the year 1948, in the Pentagon in Washington
(D.C.), I addressed a large assembly of the highest
ranking officers of the United Stases army -
principally in the G-2 branch of the military
intelligence on the highly explosive geo-political
situation in eastern Europe and the Middle East.
Then as now, that area of the world was a
potential threat to the peace of the world and to the
security of this nation that I explained to them fully
the origin of the Khazars in Khazar kingdom. I felt
then as I feel now that without a clear and
comprehensive knowledge of that subject that it is
not possible to understand or evaluate properly what
has been taking place in the world since 1917 - the
year oi the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia - it is
the key to that problem.
Upon the conclusion of my talk a very alert
lieutenant-colonel present at the meeting informed
me that he was the head of the history department of
one of the largest and highest scholastic-rated
intuitions of higher education in the United States...!
He had taught history there for sixteen years... he
had recently been called back to Washington for
further military service. To my astonishment he
informed me that he had never in all his career as a
history teacher or otherwise heard the word Khazar
before he heard me mention it there.
That must give you some idea, my dear Dr.
Goldstein, of how successful that mysterious secret
power was with their plot to block out the origin and
history of the Khazars in Khazar kingdom in order
to conceal from the world, in particular Christians
the true origin and history of the so-called and self-
styled Jews in eastern Europe.
The Russian conquest in the 10th-to-13th centuries
of the little known Khazars apparently ended the
existence for all time of the little known to history
800,000 square mile sovereign kingdom of the so-
called and self-styled Jews in eastern Europe,
known then as the Khazar kingdom.
Historians and theologians now agree that this
political development was the reason for that
important change in the wordings of the
[unintelligible] by [ ] Samuel in the 11th century and
for the policy adopted by the so-called and self-
styled Jews that the law of revocation in advance
was not made public.
Will you be patient with me as I review here as
briefly as I can the history of that political
emergence and disappearance of a nation from the
pages of history.
Prior to the 10th century, the Khazar kingdom had
already been reduced by Russian conquests to an
area of about 800,000 square miles. As you can see
on the map [from the Jewish Encyclopedia] the
territory of the Khazar kingdom in the 10th century
was still by far the largest of any nation in Europe.
The population of the Khazar kingdom was made
up for th most part of Khazars with addition of
remnants of the populations of the 25 peaceful
agricultural nations which had inhabited this
approximately 1 million square miles before their
conquest by the invading Khazars.
In the first century B.C., the Khazars had invaded
eastern Europe from their homeland in Asia. The
Khazars invade3d eastern Europe by the land route
between the north end of the Caspian Sea and the
south end of the Ural Mountains.
The Khazars were not Semites! they were an
Asiatic Mongoloid nation. They are classified by
modern anthropologists as Turko-Finns racially.
From time immemorial the homeland of the
Khazars was in the heart of Asia. They were a very
warlike nation. The Khazars were driven out of
Asia finally by the nations in Asia with whom they
were continually at war.
The Khazars invaded eastern Europe to escape
further defeats in Asia. The very warlike Khazars
did not find it difficult to subdue and conquer the 25
peaceful agricultural nations, occupying
approximately 1 million square miles in eastern
Europe.
In a comparatively short period the Khazars
established the largest and most powerful kingdom
in Europe... and probably the wealthiest, also.
The Khazars were a pagan nation when they
invaded eastern Europe. Their religious worship
was a mixture of phallic worship and other forms of
idolatrous worship practiced in Asia by pagan
nations. This form of worship continued until the 7 th
century. The vile forms of sexual excesses indulged
in by the Khazars as their form of religious worship
produced a degree of moral degeneracy the Khazar
king could not endure.
In the 7th century, King Bulan, ruler at that time
of the Khazar kingdom, decided to abolish the
practice of phallic worship and other forms of
idolatrous worship and make one of the three
monotheistic religions - about which he knew very
little - the new state religion.
After a historic session with repreentatives of the
three monotheistic religions, King Bulan decided
against Christian and Islam and selected as the
future state religion the religious worship then
known as Talmudism... and now known and
practiced as Judaism.
This is even well-documented in history. King
Bulan and his 4000 feudal nobles were promptly
converted by rabbis imported from Babylonia for
that event.
5
Phallic worship and other forms of idolatry
were thereafter forbidden.
The Khazar kings invited large numbers of rabbis
to come and open synagogues and schools to
instruct the population in the new form of religious
worship. It was now the state religion. The
converted Khazars were the first population of so-
called or self-styled Jews in eastern Europe.
So-called or self-styled Jews in eastern Europe
after the conversion of the Khazars - the descendants
of the Khazars converted to Talmudism (or as it is
now known Judaism) by the 7th century mass
conversion of the Khazar population.
After the conversion of King Bulan, none but a
so-called or self-styled Jew could occupy the
Khazar throne. The Khazar kingdom became a
virtual theocracy. The religious leaders were the
civil administrators, also.
The religious leaders imposed the teaching of the
Talmud upon the population as their guide to living.
The ideologies of the Talmud became the axis of
political, cultural, economic and social attitudes in
activities throughout the Khazar kingdom.
The Talmud provided civil and religious law.
It might be very interesting for you, my dear Dr.
Goldstein, if you have the patience to allow me to
quote for you here from Volume Four, pages 1-to-5,
of the Jewish Encyclopedia: Khazar is pronounced
like the first syllable of "cos-tume" with the word
"zar" added on to it. It is correctly pronounced "cos-
zar"
The Jewish Encyclopedia has five pages on the
Khazars but I will skip through them.
Kha'-zars - a people of Turkish origin whose life
and history are interwoven with the very beginnings
of the history of the Jews of Russia. Driven on by
the nomadic tribes of the steppes and by their own
desire for plunder and revenge.
In the second half of the 6th century, the Khazars
moved westward. The kingdom of the Khazars was
firmly established in most of south Russia long
before the foundation of the Russian monarchy by
the Varangian. At this time the kingdom of the
Khazars stood at the height of it power and was
constantly at war.
At then end of the 8th century, the king of th
Khazars and his grandees, together with a large
number of his heathen people embraced the Jewish
religion. The Jewish population in the entire
domain of the Khazars in the period between the 7th
and the 10th centuries must have been considerable.
About the 9th century, it appears as if all the Khazars
were Jews - and that they had been converted to
Judaism only a short time before.
It was one of the successors of Bulan named
Obadiah, who regenerated the kingdom in strength
and the Jewish religion. He invited Jewish scholars
to settle in his dominions - and founded synagogues
and schools. The people were instructed in the
Bible, Mishnah and the Talmud - and in the divine
service of the [Hassanein].
In their writings the Khazars used the Hebrew
letters - the Khazar language is predominated...
Obadiah was succeeded by his son Isaac, Isaac by
his son Moses (or Manasseh II), the later by his son
Nicea, and Nicea by his son Aaron II. King Joseph
hisself was the son of Aaron... and ascended the
throne in accordance with the law of the Khazars
relating to succession. The king had twenty-five
wives... all of royal blood... and sixty concubines...
all famous beauties. Each one slept in a separate
tent and was watched by a eunuch. This seems to
have been the beginning of the downfall of the
Khazar kingdom.
6
The Russian Varangians established themselves
at Kiev - until the final conquest of the Khazars by
the Russians. After a hard fight the Russians
conquered the Khazars. Four years later the
Russians conquered all the Khazarian territory east
of the (sea of) Azov.
Many members of the Khazarean royal family
emigrated to Spain, some went to Hungary, but the
great mass of the people remained in their native
country.
The greatest historian on the origin and history of
the so-called and self-styled Jews in eastern Europe
was Prof. H. Gr...ts, himself a so-called or self-
styled Jew. Prof. H. Gr...ts points out in his famous
History of the Jews that when so-called or self-
styled Jews in other countries heard a rumour about
so-called or self-styled Jews in the Khazar kingdom
they believed these converted Khazars to be the Lost
Ten Tribes.
These rumours were noi doubt responsible for the
legend which grew up that Palestine was the
homeland of the converted Khazars.
On page 141 in his History of the Jews, Prof. H.
Gr...ts states: The Khazars professed a coarse
religion which was combined with sensuality and
lewdness... - after Obadiah came a long series of
Jewish chagins, or kings, for according to a
fundamental law of the state only Jewish rulers were
permitted to ascend the throne.
For some time the Jews of other countries had no
knowledge of the conversion of this powerful
kingdom to Judaism... - and when at last a vague
rumour to this fact reached them, they were of the
opinion that Khazarea was peopled by a remnant of
the former Ten Tribes.
When the Khazars in the first century B.C.
invaded eastern Europe, their mother-tongue was an
Asiatic language referred to in the Jewish
Encyclopedia as the Khazar languages. They were
primitive Asiatic dialects without any alphabet or
any written form.
When King Bulan was converted in the 7th
century, he decreed that the Hebrew characters he
saw in the Talmud and other Hebrew documents
was thereupon to become the alphabet for the
Khazar language. The Hebrew characters were
adopted to the phonetics of the spoken Khazar
language.
The Khazars adopted the characters of the so-
called Hebrew language in order to provide the
means for providing a written record of their speech.
The adoption of the Hebrew characters had no
racial, political or religious implication.
The western European uncivilized nations which
had no alphabet for their spoken language adopted
the alphabet of the Latin language under comparable
circumstances.
With the invasion of western Europe by the
Romans, the civilization and the culture of the
Romans was introduced to these uncivilized areas.
Thus the Latin alphabet was adopted for the
language of the French, Spanish, English, Swedish
and many other western European languages. These
languages were completely foreign to each other yet
they all used the same alphabet.
The Romans brought their alphabet with their
culture to these uncivilized nations exactly like the
rabbis brought the Hebrew alphabet from Babylonia
to the Khazars when they introduced writing to them
in the form of the Talmud's alphabet.
Since the conquest of the Khazars by the Russians
- and the disappearance of the Khazar kingdom - the
language of the Khazars is known as Yiddish.
For about six centuries the so-called and self-
styled Jews in eastern Europe have referred to
themselves while still resident in their native eastern
European native country as Yiddish by nationality.
They identified themselves as Yiddish rather than as
Russian, Polish, Galician, Lithuanian, Rumanian,
Hungarian or by the nation of which they were
citizens.
They also referred to the common language they
all spoke as Yiddish, also. There are today in New
York city, as you know, my dear Dr. Goldstein,
many Yiddish newspapers, Yiddish theatres, an d
many other cultural organizations so-called or self-
styled Jews from eastern Europe which are
identified publicly by the word "Yiddish" in their
title.
Before it became known as the Yiddish language,
the mother-tongue of the Khazars added many
words to its limited ancient vocabulary as necessity
required. These words were acquired form the
languages of its neighbouring nations with whom
they had political, social or economic relations.
Languages of all nations add to their vocabularies in
the same way.
The Khazars adapted words to their requirements
from the German, the Slavonic and the Baltic
languages. The Khazars adopted a great number of
words from the German language. The Germans
had a much more advanced civilization than their
Khazar neighbours - and the Khazars sent their
children to the German universities.
The Yiddish language is not a German dialect!
Many people are led to believe so because Yiddish
has borrowed so many words from the German
language. If Yiddish is a German dialect acquired
from the Germans than what language did the
Khazars speak for 1000 years when they existed in
eastern Europe before they acquired culture from the
Germans? The Khazars must have spoken some
language when they invaded eastern Europe! What
was that language? When did they discard it? How
did the entire Khazar population discard one
language and adopt another all of a sudden? The
idea is too absurd to discuss.
Yiddish is the modern name for the ancient
mother-tongue of the Khazars with added German,
Slavonic and Baltic adopted and adapted numerous
words. Yiddish must not be confused with Hebrew
because they both use the same characters as their
alphabets. There is not one word of Yiddish in
ancient Hebrew nor is their one word of ancient
Hebrew in Yiddish.
As I stated before... they are as totally different as
Swedish and Spanish which both likewise use the
same Latin characters for their alphabets.
The Yiddish language is the cultural common
denominator for all the so-called or self-styled Jews
in eastern Europe. To these so-called and self-
styled Jews in eastern Europe the Yiddish language
serves them like the English language serves the
populations of the 48 states of the Untied States.
The cultural common denominator of the 48 states is
the English language - or wherever they may
emigrate and resettle. The English language is the
tie which binds them to each other. It si the same
with the Yiddish language and so-called or self-
styled Jews throughout the world.
Yiddish serves another very useful purpose for
so-called or self-styled Jews throughout the world...
- they possess in Yiddish what no other national,
racial or religious group can claim! Approximately
90% of the world's so-called or self-styled Jews
living in 42 counties of the world today are either
immigrants from eastern Europe or their parents
emigrated from eastern Europe. Yiddish is a
language that is common to all of them as a first or
second language according to where they were born.
It is an international language according to them.
Regardless of what country in the world they
may settle they will always find co-religionists who
also speak Yiddish. Yiddish enjoys other
international advantages to obvious to describe here.
Yiddish is the modern language of a nation which
has lost its existence as a nation.
Yiddish never had a religious implication,
although using Hebrew characters for its alphabet.
It just not be confused with words like Jewish... -
but it is very much used in that way.
Directly north of the Khazar kingdom at the
height of tits power a small Slavic state was
organized in 820 A.D. on the south shore of the Gulf
of Finland where it flows into the Baltic Sea. This
small state was organized by a small group of
Varangians from he Scandinavian peninsula on he
opposite shore of the Baltic Sea. The native
population of this newly-formed state consisted of
nomads Slavs who had made their home in the area
from earliest recorded history.
This infant nation was even smaller than our state
of Delaware. This newly-formed state, however,
was the embryo which developed into the great
Russian Empire. In less than 1000 years since 820
A.D. this synthetic nation expanded its borders by
ceaseless conquest until it now includes more than
9,500,000 square miles in Europe and Asia - or
more than three times the area of continental Untied
States... - and they have not stopped.
During the 10th, 11th, 12th and 13th centuries the
rapidly expanding Russian nation gradually
swallowed up the Khazar kingdom - its' neighbour
directly top the south. The conquest of the Khazar
kingdom by the Russians supplies history with the
explanation for the presence - after the 13th century -
for the large number of the so-called or self-styled
Jews in Russia.
The large number of so-called or self-styled Jews
in Russia and in eastern Europe after the destruction
of the Khazar kingdom where they were no longer
known as Khazars but as the Yiddish populations of
these many countries. They so refer to themselves
today.
In the many wars with their neighbours in Europe
after the 13th century Russia was required to cede to
her victors large areas which were originally part of
the Khazar kingdom - in this manner Poland,
Lithuania, Galicia, Hungary, Rumania, and Austria
acquired from Russia territory originally a part of
the Khazar kingdom. Together with this territory
these nations acquired a segment of the population
of so-called or self-styled Jews descended from the
Khazars who once occupied the territory. These
frequent boundary changes by the nations in eastern
Europe explains the presence today of so-called or
self-styled Jews in all these countries who all trace
their ancestry back to the converted Khazars, their
common language, their common culture, their
common religion, and their common racial
characteristics classify them all beyond any question
of doubt with the Khazars who invaded eastern
Europe in the first century B.C. - and were
converted to Talmudism in the 7th century.
The so-called or self-styled Jews throughout the
world today of eastern origin make up at least 90%
of the world's total present population of so-called
or self-styled Jews.
The conversion of King Bulan amd the Khazar
nation in the 7th century accomplished for
Talmudism (or for Judaism as Talmudism is called
today), was the conversion of Constantine in the
western European nations accomplished for
Christianity.
Christianity was a small, comparatively
unimportant religious belief practiced principally in
the eastern Mediterranean area until the conversion
to the Christian faith of the large populations of the
western European pagan nations after the conversion
of Constantine.

Talmudism (or for Judaism as Talmudism is
called today) was given its greatest stimulus in all its
history with the conversion of the large pagan
Khazar population in the 7th century. Without the
conversion of the Khazar population it is doubtful
that Talmudism (or for Judaism as Talmudism is
called today) could have survived.
Talmudism - the civil and religious code of the
Pharisees most likely would have passed out of
existence like the many other creeds and cults
practiced by the peoples in that area before, during
and after Phariseeism assumed its prominent
position among these creeds and cults in the time of
Jesus.
Talmudism, as Phariseeism was called later,
would have disappeared with all its contemporary
creeds and cults but for the conversion of the
Khazars to Talmudism in the 7th century. At that
time Talmudism was well on its way to complete
oblivion.
In the year 986 A.D., the ruler of Russia,
Vladimir III, became a convert to the Christian
faith in order to marry a Catholic Slavonic princess
of a neighbouring sovereign state. The marriage
was otherwise impossible. Vladimir III thereupon
also made his newly acquired Christian faith the
state religion of Russia replacing the pagan worship
formerly practiced in Russia since it was founded in
820 A.D.
Vladimir III and his successors as the rulers of
Russia attempted in vain to convert its so-called or
self-styled Jews, now Russian subjects, to Russia's
Christian state religion and to adopt the customs and
culture of the numerically predominant Russian
Christian population... - the so-called or self-styled
Jews in Russia refused and resisted this plan
vigorously. They refused to adopt the Russian
alphabet in place of the Hebrew characters used in
writing their Yiddish language. They resisted the
substitution of the Russian language for their
Yiddish mother-tongue. They opposed every
at3eempt to bring about the assimilation of the
former sovereign Khazar nation into the Russian
nation. They resisted with every means at their
disposal.
The many forms of tension which resulted
produced situations described by historians as
massacres, pogroms, persecutions, discrimination, et
cetera.
In Russia at that period of history it was the
custom as in other Christian countries in Europe at
that time to take an oath, vow or pledge of loyalty to
the ruler, the nobles, the feudal land-holders and
others in the name of Jesus Christ. It was after the
conquest of the Khazars by the Russians that the
wording of the Kol Nidre (or All Vows Prayer) was
altered. The new altered version of the Kol Nidre
(or All Vows Prayer) as referred to in the Talmud as
the law of revocation in advance.
The Kol Nidre (or All Vows Prayer)7 was
regarded as a law. The effect of this law of
revocation in advance obtained for all who recited it
each year on the Day of Atonement Divine
dispensation for all obligations acquired under oath,
vows or pledges to be made or taken in the coming
year.
The recital fo the Kol Nidre (or All Vows Prayer)
on the eve of the Day of Atonement released those
so-called and self-styled Jews from any obligation
under oath, vows or pledges entered into during the
7
Cf. the Islamic Taqiyya deception - Lie to strengthen
Islam: (Qur'an, Sura 3:26; 3:54; 9:3; 16:106; 40:28).
Taqiyya is an Islamic juridical term whose shifting
meaning relates to when a Muslim is allowed, under
Sharia law, to lie.
next twelve months! The oath, vows and pledges
made or taken by so-called and self-styled Jews
were made or taken with tongue-in-cheek for twelve
months.
The altered version of the Kol Nidre (or All Vows
Prayer) created serious difficulties for the so-called
and self-styled Jews when its wording became
public property. It apparently did not remain a
secret very long, although the Talmud states the law
of revocation in advance was not made public.
The altered version of the the Kol Nidre (or All
Vows Prayer) soon became known as the Jew's
Vow and cast serious doubt upon oaths, vows or
pledges given to Christians by so-called and self-
styled Jews.
Christians soon believed that oaths, vows or
pledges were quite worthless when given by so-
called or self-styled Jews. This was the basis for
discrimination by government, nobles, feudal land-
holders and others who required oaths of allegiance
and loyalty from those who entered their service.
An intelligent attempt was made to correct this
situation by a group of German rabbis in 1844. In
that year they called for an international conference
of rabbis in Brunswick, Germany. They attempted
to have the Kol Nidre (or All Vows Prayer)
completely eliminated from the Day of Atonement
ceremonies - and entirely abolished from any
religious service of their faith.
They felt that this secular pro-opt to the Day of
Atonement ceremonies was void of any spiritual
implication and did not belong in any synagogue
ritual. However, the preponderant majority of the
rabbis attending that conference in Brunswick came
from eastern Europe; they represented congregations
of Yiddish-speaking so-called and self-styled Jews
of converted Khazar origin in eastern Europe. They
insisted that the altered version of the Kol Nidre (or
All Vows Prayer) be retained exactly as it was then
recited on the Day of Atonement. They demanded
that it be allowed to remain as it had been recited in
eastern Europe since the change by [unintelligible]
Samuel six centuries earlier. It is today recited in
exactly that form throughout the world by so-called
or self-styled Jews.
Will the 150 million Christians in the United
States react any differently when they become more
aware of its insidious implications? How genuine
can the implications, inferences, and innuendoes of
the so-called brotherhood and interfaith movements
be under these circumstances?
These so-called movements are sweeping the
nation like prairie fires... - if the Talmud is the axis
of the political, economic, cultural and social
attitudes and activities of so-called or self-styled
Jews participating in these two so-called
movements... how genuine are their oaths, vows or
pledges taken or given in connection with these two
so-called movements by so-called or self-styled
Jews??
It would be a superlative gesture of brotherhood
or of interfaith if the national conference of
Christian and Jews succeeded in expunging from the
Talmud all anti-Christ, anti-Christian and anti-
Christianity passages.
At a cost of many millions of dollars the national
conference of Christians and Jews succeeded in
expunging form the New Testament passages which
so-called or self-styled Jews regarded as offensive
to their faith. A great portion of the cost was
supplied by so-called or self-styled Jews.
Christians might now supply funds to expunge
from the Talmud passages offensive to the Christian
faith. Otherwise the so-called brotherhood a nd
interfaith movements are merely mockeries...!!!
7
The national conference of Christians and Jews
might look into the millions of dollars being
invested today by so-called or self-styled Jews to
ensure that the Talmud shall remain the axis of
political, economic, cultural and social attitudes and
activities of by so-called or self-styled Jews today
(and future generations). Violating the basic
principal of brotherhood and interfaith so-called or
self-styled Jews are spending millions of dollars
each year to establish and equip quarters where the
teachings of the Talmud can be indoctrinated into
the minds of children from the time they are able to
read and write.
This concludes the Benjamin Freeman letter... I
hope you found it as interesting as I did. I
encourage everyone to do their own research - and
to draw their own informed conclusions!
.
The Holocaust Lie of Six Million Jews
Anyone who dares oppose the deliberate lie that
six million Jews - the Eternal Victims of the
Holocaust - were supposedly gassed in Nazi
concentration camps is immediately branded and
anathematized as the ultimate evil - Anti-Semitic.
The Holocaust Lie has been turned into a civil
religion... a spiritual and financial wellspring of
Jewish power placing billions-upon-billions of
reparations money into the hands of greedy Zionist
supremacists.
In 1900, Rabbi Weis claimed that their were six
million Jews bleeding and suffering for Zion; in the
10th Edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica (1902),
under the entry for Anti-Semitism, it claims that
over six million Jews were suffering and being
degraded in Russia and Rumania; it has been
claimed that from 1890 to 1902 six million Jews
have been exiled from Russia - and by 1910 it had
been declared over-and-over again that Russia
intended systematically exterminate its six million
Jews...; twenty-two years before Hitler came to
power and six years before World War 1 - the
Zionist Congress of 1911 claimed that European
leaders were planning to exterminate six million
Jews; between 1914 and 1918, many American
newspapers appealed for help for the plight of more
than six million Jews "starving" in the European
war-zone... but said nothing of the native-born
European peoples, and, by 1921, it was claimed that
six million Jews in Russia faced extermination; in
1931, once again, six million Jews were facing
starvation... and, by 1932, six million Jews had
perished in the Soviet famine; by 1936, six million
Jews were being threatened with concentration
camps (or gulags) in Russia.
From time immemorial, the Jews have known
better than any other how falsehood and calumny
can be exploited. Is not their very existence founded
on one great lie... that they are a religious
community, whereas in reality they are a race?
Schopenhauer called the Jews "the Great Master of
Lies." Those who do not realize the truth of that
statement, or do not wish to believe it, will never be
8
able to lend a helping hand in helping Truth to
prevail.
The eternal struggle between the people and the
hatred amongst them is being nurtured by a small,
rootless, international clique that is turning the
people against each other... that does not want them
to have peace... an international element at home
both nowhere and everywhere... who do not have a
soil where they have grown up... conducting their
usurious business everywhere... but the people are
bounded to their native soil... bounded to the
possibilities that that state offers.
The Myth of the Holocaust
Sylvia Stolz is the former defense attorney for
"holocaust revisionist" Ernest Zündel. She was
disbarred and taken out of a Munich courtroom and
jailed for 2 1/2 years because of an arbitrary
"special statute" within the law unconstitutionally
prohibiting "Free Speech" when dealing with this
"unique crime"... as demonstrating evidence to the
contrary of popular opinion is both superfluous and
criminal. Thus, the two pillars of persecution of
"holocaust revisionism" are: 1) justification of
popular opinion, and 2) the "unique crime" of
having a different opinion than the uniformed
brainwashed hoi polloi.
This quote by Johann Gottfried von Herder is
the very essence of being human: "To think what is
true, to sense what is beautiful and to want what is
good, hereby the spirit finds the purpose of a life in
reason." This implies the ability to identify and
label lies, the ability to identify and label the
inhumane, the ability to identify and label injustice.
It also implies character traits which are of particular
importance in our age: The knowledge of our
immortality and steadfastness and incorruptibility.
With such character we might be able to shape a
world in which we are allowed to speak the truth
without punishment.
Regardless of your world-view, your religion or
philosophical orientation with regard to the
criminalization of "holocaust denial."
Doctors are banned from practicing medicine
because of their anti-immunization views, and
journalists are punished for publishing opinions
different than what the agents of Zio-media
propaganda want them telling us... but they are not
jailed. However, banned evidence and banned
legal defense in the case of "holocaust denial"
violates Freedom of Speech.
According to French historian Jacques Beynac,
who supports the official account of the holocaust,
quoted in Le Nouveau Quotidien de Lausanne, a
Swiss newspaper in 1996: "When it comes to the
existence of Nazi "gas chambers," all one can do is,
to point out the absence of documents, of physical
traces and similar types of material evidence."
Another historian, Ernst Nolte wrote in his book
The Casual Nexus: "The witness testimonies are for
the most part based on hearsay and assumptions.
The few eye-witness testimonies we have are in
partial contradiction with one another, and raises
questions regarding overall credibility."
“If you force us yet again to descend from the face of the Earth to the depths of the Earth – let the Earth roll toward the Nothingness.”
"It is completely irrelevant whether the
holocaust really did or did not happen. It is illegal
to deny it in Germany, and that is all that counts
in court."
Judge Mienerzhagen, during the trial of
Ernest Zündel
(not stated in the transcripts) but in the
Berliner Tageszeitung, 9 February 2007
International Red Cross records refute the
"official" death toll. Sealed and guarded since the
end of WWII at Arolsen, Germany, the Official IRC
records reveal that the actual Concentration Camp
total death toll was 271,301 - and not six million.
Yet, though the number of dead at Auschwitz was
revised in 1989 from 4.1 million to 1.5 million... the
"official" account of the cabalistic fable of six
million dead and dying Jews remained unchanged.
American gas chamber expert Dr. Fred A.
Leuchter visited all sites and testified that the
supposed gas chambers were incapable of
supporting the use of hydrogen cyanide gas for mass
executions or otherwise. No "Prussian blue"
staining was found on walls in any of the supposed
death chambers. In fact, the only forensic evidence
of gassing that was found was related to delousing,
where Zyklon B was used on clothing and bedding,
to stop the spread of typhus.
The truth does not fear investigation... still,
questioning the Holocaust will land you in jail in
many countries (which support the usurious
Khazarian-mafia banksters which promote the lie
deluding the masses of sheeple). Why can't we ask
questions? Why is Holocaust dogma defended with
such vitriole? Because, as Vladimir Lenin said: "A
lie told often enough becomes the truth." And, as
the war criminal and Zionist stooge Winston
Churchill said: "History is written by the victors."
"To find out who rules over you , simply find
out who you are not allowed to criticize."
Voltaire
Israeli Prime Ministers who were
Terrorists and War Criminals
Israeli Prime Ministers who were Terrorists
and War Criminals - proponents of racism,
apartheid, ethnic cleansing and genocide:
1 - David Ben-Gurion: he commanded the ethnic
cleansing of approximately 750,000 Arabs during
the destruction of hundreds of Palestinian villages
in 1948. Most of the victims were noncombatant
dirt-poor farmers and their families who lived in
mud huts, had no weapons, and thus couldn't
resist even if they had wanted to.
2 - Levi Eshkol: he presided over the ethnic
cleansing of 250,000 Palestinian refugees, most
of them noncombatant farmers and their families.
3 - Menachem Begin: he was the preeminent
terrorist in the Middle East... until Ben-Gurion
and Eshkol surpassed him. He killed Brits, Arabs
and Jews with reckless abandon, including
civilians, and was also involved in the Deir
Yassin massacre and other acts of terrorism such
as the bombing of the King David Hotel.
Excerpt from “The Right to Exist: a Poem-Letter to the German Author (Günter Grass)”
by Hungarian-born Israeli-Zionist Itamar Yaoz-Kest
concerning the insane Israeli “We Go Down, Everything Goes ” hate rhetoric against humanity.
4 - Ariel Sharon: a murderous war-hawk, he was
responsible for massacres at Qibya, Sabra and
Shatila.
5 - Benjamin Netanyahu: he was responsible for
the deaths and mutilations of thousands of
children during Operations Cast Lead, Pillars of
Defense and Protective Edge. He called for
"mass expulsions among the Arabs of the
occupied territories" and presided over multiple
Gazan massacres.
6 - Yitzak Shamir: he had Britain's Lord Moyne and
Sweden's Count Folke Bernadotte assassinated
for seeking to have Arabs treated as equals of
Jews, and was also involved in the Deir Yassin
massacre and other acts of terrorism. He was a
leader of a Jewish terrorist group known as the
Stern Gang, which carried out a string of
assassinations.
7 - Ehud Barak: a cross-dressing assassin, he
participated in death squads that killed women,
policemen and a Christian poet known as "The
Conscience."
8 - Golda Meir: she threatened to destroy the world
with nukes during a BBC interview and more
than once insisted that Palestinians "did not exist"
as a people - and so could not return and reclaim
the land stolen from the Palestinians. She also
ordered Operation Wrath of God, which resulted
in the civilian deaths attributed to Ehud Barak's
death squad and other botched assassinations,
such as the one in Lillehammer, Norway, that
resulted in the death of an innocent writer.
9 - Shimon Peres: he aggressively pursued nuclear
weapons and succeeded in delivering them,
creating the nuclear weapon program that allowed
other Israeli leaders to threaten the world with
nuclear blackmail (the "Sampson Option")..
10 - Yitzak Rabin: he was a war-monger who signed
an order for the children of Lydda to be ethnically
cleansed "quickly, without attention to age."
11 - Yigal Allon: he served in the Haganah's
underground Special Night Squads which
specialized in ambushes, and tortured and killed
"without compunction."
12 - Ehud Olmert: he presided over the 2006
invasion of Lebanon, which killed 1300 people
and displaced more than a million others. He
included Israel as a nuclear superpower along
with the US and Russia.
13 - Moshe Sharett: he was a staunch proponent of
compulsory population transfer (ethnic
cleansing).
Note: 10% of the Arabs killed by the Israeli's in
1948 were Christian and 10% of the Arab property
confiscated by Israel belonged to Christians. Israel's
massacres forced 100,000 Palestinian Christians to
become refugees.