The Superiority of the Jew

The world is full of kosher right wing types like John Bryant, Charles Murray and others who like to imagine that Jews are a kind of superior breed, possessed of greater intelligence than the rest of humanity, a sort of kosher aristocracy to be revered as living Gods. The argument goes that since Jews constitute a disproportionate number of Nobel Prize winners, scientists, doctors, lawyers, etc. that this must constitute proof of superior Jewish intelligence. (That Jews have also constituted a disproportionate number of communists and political revolutionaries is, however, not adduced as proof of their inherent political tendencies.) The success of Jews is attributed to individual Jewish ability, not to Jewish national cohesion or Talmudic ethics. A comparison may be helpful to illustrate the process. The U.S. government is honeycombed at all levels by the neo-conservatives and their agents. The neo-conservatives are Israel First Jews. Does anyone in his right mind believe that the neo-conservatives dominate the U.S. government because neo-conservatives are inherently more intelligent than non neo-conservatives? Of course not. Neo-conservatives dominate the government because of an organized Jewish apparatus to plant their men in controlling positions so that Israel will always control the U.S. government regardless of who is in power. Now let us ask the obvious question. If Jews would conspire to plant their men in the U.S. government, why would they not conspire to promote their own in private industry the same way? Answer: They would-and do.

Jews provably have the ability to destroy the careers of those who oppose them. If they can use their power to destroy others, why can't they use the power to promote themselves over equally capable gentile competitors? Answer: They can and do. Jews are not a master race. They are master manipulators. A non-Jew shall succeed because of his own efforts. A Jew shall succeed because he is a member of a "nation-within-the-nation". The Jew will have a vast network of Jewish defense and self-help organizations standing behind him. If he gets in trouble anywhere in the world, Jewish international organizations shall leap to his defense. He will have the help of his brother Jews, who have been taught since infancy that they must always help a brother Jew, while deceiving, swindling and cheating the non-Jew. The Jew is smart, but he also has the capital of hundreds of years of effort behind him. He has friends in the office of every politician and high leader. He never stands alone, friendless.

This is the secret of the Jews success. He is like the soldier armed with a rapid-fire weapon versus the soldier armed with a tomahawk. The outcome is a foregone conclusion. The Jew is the master of superior organization, tribal unity and dual ethics. His superior intelligence is a hoax.

* * * * *

The Satanic Reality

It is typical of many analysts to read the Protocols of Zion forward, into the future, as a predictively valid document. This is understandable given what has happened in the world since they were published. But it is equally important to read them backwards, as a fulfillment, in part, of what had already taken place in the world. The Protocols first appeared in 1901, in a book published by the Russian Sergius Nilus. The standard ‘refutation’ of the Protocols is that they are a plagiarism of a book by Maurice Joly (in reality a Jew named ‘Joel’) published in 1864 entitled Dialogues aux Enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu. It is undeniable that certain passages in the Protocols are indeed, word for word identical with the material in the Protocols. It is also unquestionably true that much of the material in the Protocols does not appear in the Dialogues at all. Thus, there is overlap, but there is not identity of composition.

The Protocols had similarities, not merely with Joly's dialogues, but with many other examples of revolutionary literature produced in the same period. Mrs. Nesta Webster in her appendix on the Protocols in her book Secret Societies and Subversive Movements lists the various books where Protocols like materials were emerging in the 1859-1869 period.

1859 Cretineau Joly's book published containing documents of Haute Vente Romaine

1860 Alliance Israelite Universelle founded

1864 1st International taken over by Karl Marx

1864 Alliance Sociale Democratique of Bakunin founded

1864 Maurice Joly's Dialogue aux Enfers published

1866 1st Congress of Internationale at Geneva

1868 Goedsche's Biarritz (parallels quoted by Mr. Lucien Wolf)

1869 Gougenot Des Mousseaux's Le Juif, etc.

1869 Bakunin's Polemique contra les Juifs

Clearly, it is much too simple to ascribe the Protocols simply to Maurice Joly and his book. Similar material was emerging from many different sources during the 1860-1870 decade. As to the undoubted similarities between the Protocols and Joly's book it begs the question as to whether the one is a forgery of the other-or whether both Joly and the unknown authors of the Protocols got it from an older source common to both. In reviewing the revolutionary literature of 1860-1870 we should also remember that this literature was the successor to a great revolutionary outbreak of ten to twenty years previous-the continent wide revolutions of 1848. Webster quotes Gougenot Des Mousseaux in "Le Juif", that in December 1865 he had received a letter from a German statesman saying:

‘Since the revolutionary recrudescence of 1848, I have had relations with a Jew who, from vanity, betrayed the secret of the secret societies with which he had been associated, and who warned me eight or ten days beforehand of all the revolutions which were about to break out at any point of Europe. I owe to him the unshakeable conviction that all these movements of ‘oppressed peoples’, etc. are devised by half a dozen individuals, who give their orders to the secret societies of all Europe. The ground is absolutely mined beneath our feet, and the Jews provide a large contingent of these miners…’

The opinion of the statesmen is confirmed by the events of that pivotal year. In all the countries of western Europe the revolutions of equality and democracy were led by the Jews. The communist playwright, Heinrich Heine in Germany and Louis Brandeis in Prague, were two such examples. As is generally the case when the Jews stage a revolution, they are generally too candid about their role in it. Thus, when the Jews staged their great Bolshevik revolution in Russia, Jews world-wide boasted of their role in it. Today, they generally deny that they ever made any such statements. Ten to twenty years after the revolutions of 1848, a vast revolutionary literature, later reflected in the 1901 Protocols, emerges documenting the plans and objectives of those who emerged briefly into the open two decades before.

Clearly, the Protocols are but a continuation of a pre-existing revolutionary tradition. They did not flow from the minds of the Czarist secret police, regardless of who really put them together. That the Protocols are part of a continuum is demonstrated by their unfolding in the century to come as well as by their roots in the past. Their origins remain mysterious. The taboo surrounding them remains in place. The satanic reality of their operation in the real world remains beyond dispute.

* * * * *

Case Studies of Hollywood Bolsheviks

Lionel Stander, a Jew born in the Bronx, was a Hollywood leading man of the `30's and `40's who usually starred in ‘heavy’ roles because of his gruff voice and masculine attributes. He was also a life-long Marxist and probable Communist Party member. When he was exposed around 1940 his career went into a nose-dive. For forty years until 1980 he survived as a stage actor and by working in foreign films. In 1980, he got the role as the butler in Robert Wagner's and Stefanie Powers long time hit series, Hart To Hart. Stander died at the end of the decade. It is unlikely that many, if any, viewers of the TV show had any idea of the real background of the crusty old butler. Stander was hardly unique. Another Jew actor and brother communist was Zero Mostel. Mostel made himself famous by trying to strangle counsel for the House UnAmerican Activities Committee during his "Fifth Amendment" testimony. Hollywood has always been a hornet's nest of communist Jews. Many, like Stander and Mostel, were character actors rather than leading stars. Herschel Bernardi, the long time voice of Charlie The Tuna in the Starkist commercials, was another New York Jewish communist.

Hollywood has always been the perfect conduit for communist propaganda because of its ethnic "common denominator" with the pre-WW2 Soviet Union. Communist Jews have always had a soft spot for big capitalist dollars in movie land while preaching revolutionary socialism to the masses. It is a pattern that has not changed in Hollywood to this day.

* * * * *

Point of Order

"Have you now, or ever been, a supporter of the state of Israel?"

That was one question that Joseph McCarthy never asked when conducting his famous investigations. But, in retrospect, it was precisely the right question. Joseph McCarthy dealt with an evil which had already passed its apex when he began his investigations. But the greater evil, the one which subsumed its communist brother had only just been born into the world in 1948. McCarthy dealt with the evil which was and failed to forsee the evil which was to come. He can hardly be blamed for that. All statesmen fail to forsee the future. Joseph McCarthy began his investigations when the world's chief anti-communist, Adolf Hitler, had just been defeated. His defeat meant that Jews could not be identified as communists. All that McCarthy could do was to identify communists without identifying the power behind communism.

Joseph McCarthy could at least ask: "Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Part?" But no one can ask: "Are you now, or have you ever been, a supporter of the state of Israel?" In that one question-and its absence-lies the present tragedy of these United States.

* * * * *

Hitler's Real Crime

Adolf Hitler, as every revisionist knows, has been falsely accused of murdering ‘six million’ Jews. But was not his real crime one of excessive leniency? One need merely compare Hitler's actions with those of the Jews in Russia. Hitler's was unbelievably mild in his treatment of the Jews. In Soviet Russia, Jewish commissars murdered in excess of thirty million people by the most barbarous methods conceivable. They were starved to death, worked to death, mutilated and dismembered, shot, drowned and frozen. The torture chambers of the Jewish NKVD would have made the Marquis De Sade proud. Every known human right was violated. Hitler, by contrast, only drove the Jews out of Germany before the war, confiscated their wealth and threw relatively small numbers of them into relatively humane work camps. They had it much easier than the victims of the Jewish commissars. Even during the war, the large numbers of Jews shot in Russia were no worse than the casualties the Germans suffered after the war. Several million German civilians were slaughtered during the post-war expulsions and mass rapes. But many of the Jews in Russia in Russia had it coming because of their illegal partisan warfare against German troops. So what did Hitler do that was so terrible? The Arabs of Palestine who were ruthlessly expelled into the desert in 1948 probably wish that Hitler had killed more of their tormentors. The peoples of Eastern Europe, enslaved by their Stalinist Jewish overlords, also probably wished that Hitler killed more Jews. The Jews were the victims of Hitler's policies, surely. But they were not innocent victims. They had it coming. As their present day brutalization of the Palestinians and their assault on white countries all over the world show, they have it coming now more than ever.