RSS
In our modern era, there are surely few organizations that so terrify powerful Americans as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B’nai B’rith, a central organ of the organized Jewish community.
Mel Gibson had long been one of the most popular stars in Hollywood and his 2004 film The Passion of the Christ became among the most profitable in world history, yet the ADL and its allies destroyed his career, and he eventually donated millions of dollars to Jewish groups in desperate hopes of regaining some of his public standing. When the ADL criticized a cartoon that had appeared in one of his newspapers, media titan Rupert Murdoch provided his personal apology to that organization, and the editors of The Economist quickly retracted a different cartoon once it came under ADL fire. Billionaire Tom Perkins, a famed Silicon Valley venture capitalist, was forced to issue a heartfelt apology after coming under ADL criticism for his choice of words in a Wall Street Journal column. These were all proud, powerful individuals, and they must have deeply resented being forced to seek such abject public forgiveness, but they did so nonetheless. The total list of ADL supplicants over the years is a very long one.
Given the fearsome reputation of the ADL and its notorious hair-trigger activists, there was a widespread belief that my small webzine would be completely annihilated when I first launched my recent series of controversial articles in early June by praising the works of historian David Irving, a figure long demonized by the ADL. Yet absolutely nothing happened.
During the next three months my subsequent articles directly challenged nearly every hot-button issue normally so fiercely defended by the ADL and its lackies, so much so that a friendly journalist soon described me as the “Kamikaze from California.” Yet despite my 90,000 words of text and the 13,000 comments I had attracted, the continuing silence of the ADL was absolutely deafening. Meanwhile, my articles were read more than half a million times, with the following being a list of the most provocative pieces:
- The Remarkable Historiography of David Irving
June 4, 2018 • 1,700 Words • 570 Comments - American Pravda: The JFK Assassination, Part II – Who Did It?
June 25, 2018 • 8,000 Words • 985 Comments - American Pravda: Oddities of the Jewish Religion
July 16, 2018 • 7,800 Words • 1,637 Comments - American Pravda: The Bolshevik Revolution and Its Aftermath
July 23, 2018 • 6,900 Words • 913 Comments - American Pravda: The Nature of Anti-Semitism
July 30, 2018 • 5,500 Words • 666 Comments - American Pravda: Jews and Nazis
August 6, 2018 • 6,800 Words • 554 Comments - American Pravda: Holocaust Denial
August 27, 2018 • 17,600 Words • 2,323 Comments - American Pravda: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
September 10, 2018 • 11,000 Words • 2,355 Comments
When divine wrath fails to smite the heretic and terrifying enforcers of official dogma seem to have suddenly lost their taste for battle, others gradually begin to take notice and may grow emboldened. Eventually leading pro-Russian and Libertarian websites such as Russia Insider and LewRockwell began republishing some of my most controversial American Pravda articles, thus bringing my factual claims to the attention of broader audiences. After the conclusion of the my series, I began directly ridiculing my strangely timorous ADL opponents, publishing a short column entitled “Has the ADL Gone Into Hiding?” which led the redoubtable Paul Craig Roberts to describe me as “the bravest man I know.”
Apparently the combination of all these factors at long last grew too worrisome for the ADL, and stirring from their secret hiding place, its activists have now finally released a short and rather milquetoast response to my material, one which hardly much impresses me. A few days ago, they Tweeted out their column, together with a photo of their new nemesis.
California businessman Ron Unz has long been funding anti-Israel activists. Now, he’s embracing hardcore #antiSemitism, denying the Holocaust & claiming Jews run the media & worship Satan. Learn more from our experts: https://t.co/KnngID3YCh
— ADL (@ADL_National) October 8, 2018
The ADL may boast an annual budget of $60 million and have many hundreds of full-time employees, but its research skills seem sorely lacking. I discovered that they opened their rebuke by denouncing me as a notorious “anti-immigrant activist.” This seems an extremely odd claim given that I have published perhaps a quarter-million words on that contentious topic over the last twenty-five years, nearly all of it online and fully searchable, and my views have never been characterized in that fashion. To cite just one example, my article “California and the End of White America” appeared as a 1999 cover-story in Commentary, the flagship publication of The American Jewish Committee, and surely anyone reading it would be greatly puzzled by the ADL’s description. Indeed, just a few years earlier, I had been a top featured speaker at the October 1994 pro-immigrant protest in downtown Los Angeles, a 70,000 strong political rally that was the largest such gathering in American history to that date.
Over the years, my political activities have been the subject of many thousands of articles in the mainstream media, including a half-dozen front-page stories in the New York Times, and these would provide a similar picture, as did the New Republic cover story chronicling my California successes. Moreover, my views on immigrants haven’t changed all that much over the years as demonstrated by my more recent articles such as “The Myth of Hispanic Crime,” “Immigration, Republicans, and the End of White America” and “A Grand Bargain on Immigration?” Perhaps the intrepid ADL investigators should acquaint themselves with a powerful new technological tool called “Google.”
I was equally unimpressed that they so hotly denounced me for substantially relying upon the writings of Israel Shahak, whom they characterized as viciously “anti-Semitic.” As I had repeatedly emphasized, my own total lack of Aramaic and Hebrew necessarily forces me to rely upon the research of others, and the late Prof. Shahak, an award-winning Israeli academic, certainly seems a fine source to use. After all, famed linguist Noam Chomsky had lauded Shahak’s works for their “outstanding scholarship,” and numerous of our other most prominent public intellectuals such as Christopher Hitchens, Edward Said, and Gore Vidal had been similarly lavish in their praise. Furthermore, one of Shahak’s co-authors was Norton Mezvinsky, a prominent American academic specializing in Middle Eastern history, himself hardly an obscure figure given that both his brother and sister-in-law served in Congress and his nephew later married Chelsea Clinton. And as far as I’m aware almost none of Shahak’s explicit claims about the Talmud or traditional Judaism have ever been directly challenged, while the online availability of his first book allows those so interested to conveniently read it and decide for themselves.
The ADL similarly denounced me for taking seriously the theories of Ariel Toeff, another Israeli academic. But Prof. Toeff, son of the Chief Rabbi of Rome, certainly ranks as one of the world’s leading scholarly authorities on Medieval Jewry, and working together with his graduate students and other colleagues, he had devoted many years of effort to the research study in question, drawing upon extensive primary and secondary sources produced in eight different languages. I found his 500 page book quite persuasive, as did Israeli journalist Israel Shamir, and I have seen no credible rebuttals.
Now the work of all these prominent academics and intellectuals may not necessarily be correct, and perhaps I am mistaken in accepting their factual claims. But I would need to see something far more weighty than a casual dismissal in a few paragraphs contained within an anonymous ADL column, whose author for all I know might have been some ignorant young intern.
Those glaring flaws aside, most of the ADL’s remaining catalogue of my numerous heretical positions seemed reasonably accurate, though obviously presented in a somewhat hostile and derogatory fashion and sorely lacking any links to my original pieces. But even this desultory listing of my mortal transgressions was woefully incomplete, with the ADL strangely failing to include mention of some of my most controversial claims.
For example, the authors excluded all reference to my discussion of the thoroughly documented Nazi-Zionist economic partnership of the 1930s, which played such a crucial role in laying the basis for the State of Israel. And the ADL similarly avoided mentioning the nearly 20,000 words I had allocated to discussing the very considerable evidence that the Israeli Mossad had played a central role in both the JFK Assassination and the 9/11 Attacks. Surely this must be one of the few times that the ADL has deliberately avoided leveling the charge of “conspiracy theorist” against an opponent whom they might have so easily slurred in that fashion. Perhaps they felt the evidence I provided was too strong for them to effectively challenge.
The worrisome incompetence of ADL researchers becomes particularly alarming when we consider that over the last couple of years that organization has been elevated into a content gatekeeping role at America’s largest Internet companies, helping to determine what may or may not be said on the most important Social Media platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.
My local paper is the San Jose Mercury News and a couple of weeks ago it published a major profile interview with Brittan Heller, the ADL Director tasked with policing “hate speech” across the America-dominated portions of the Internet. She seemed like a perfectly pleasant young woman in her mid-thirties, a Stanford English major and a graduate of Yale Law, now living in Silicon Valley with her husband and her two cats, Luna and Stella. She emphasizes her own experience as a victim of cyber-harassment from a fellow college student whose romantic overtures she rejected and the later expertise she had gained as a Nazi-hunter for the U.S. government. But does that resume really provide her with the god-like knowledge suitable for overriding our traditional First Amendment rights and determining which views and which individuals should be allowed access to some two billion readers worldwide?
There is also a far more serious aspect to the situation. The choice of the ADL as the primary ideological overseer of America’s Internet may seem natural and appropriate to politically-ignorant Americans, a category that unfortunately includes the technology executives leading the companies involved. But this reflects the remarkable cowardice and dishonesty of the American media from which all these individuals derive their knowledge of our world. The true recent history of the ADL is a remarkably sordid and disreputable tale.
In January 1993, the San Francisco Police Department reported that it had recently raided the Northern California headquarters of the ADL based upon information provided by the FBI. The SFPD discovered that the organization had been keeping intelligence files on more than 600 civic organizations and 10,000 individuals, overwhelmingly of a liberal orientation, with the SFPD inspector estimating that 75% of the material had been illegally obtained, much of it by secret payments to police officials. This was merely the tip of the iceberg in what clearly amounted to the largest domestic spying operation by any private organization in American history, and according to some sources, ADL agents across the country had targeted over 1,000 political, religious, labor, and civil rights organizations, with the New York headquarters of the ADL maintaining active dossiers on more than a million Americans.
Not long afterward, an ACLU official who had previously held a high-ranking position with the ADL revealed in an interview that his organization had been the actual source of the highly controversial 1960s surveillance on Martin Luther King, Jr., which it had then provided to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. For many years Hoover had been furiously denounced in the national media headlines for his use of tapes and other secret information on King’s activities, but when a local San Francisco newspaper revealed that an ADL spying operation had actually been the source of all that sordid material, the bombshell revelation was totally ignored in the national media and only reported by fringe organizations, so that today almost no Americans are aware of that fact.
I am not aware of any other private organization in American history that has been involved in even a sliver of such illegal domestic espionage activity, which appears to have been directed against almost all groups and prominent individuals—Left, Right, and Center—suspected of being insufficiently aligned with Jewish and Israeli interests. Some of the illegal material found in ADL possession even raised dark suspicions that it had played a role in domestic terrorist attacks and political assassinations directed against foreign leaders. I am no legal expert, but given the massive scale of such illegal ADL activities, I wonder whether a plausible case might have been made to prosecute the entire organization under RICO statutes and sentence all of its leaders to long prison terms.
Instead, the resulting government charges were quickly settled with merely a trivial fine and a legal slap on the wrist, demonstrating the near-total impunity provided by massive Jewish political power in modern American society.
In effect, the ADL seems to have long operated as our country’s privatized secret political police, monitoring and enforcing its ideological doctrines on behalf of Jewish groups much as the Stasi did for the Communist rulers of East Germany. Given such a long history of criminal activity, allowing the ADL to extend its oversight to our largest Social Media platforms amounts to appointing the Mafia to supervise the FBI and the NSA, or taking a very large step towards implementing George Orwell’s ” Ministry of Truth” on behalf of Jewish interests.
In his 1981 memoirs, the far right Classics scholar Revilo P. Oliver characterized the ADL as “the formidable organization of Jewish cowboys who ride herd on their American cattle” and this seems a reasonably apt description to me.
Although I had long recognized the power and influence of the ADL, a leading Jewish-activist organization whose leaders were so regularly quoted in my newspapers, until rather recently I had only the vaguest notions of its origins. I’m sure I’d heard the story mentioned at some points, but the account had never stuck in my mind.
Then perhaps a year or two ago, I happened to come across some discussion of the ADL’s 2013 centenary celebration, in which the leadership reaffirmed the principles of its 1913 founding. The initial impetus had been the vain national effort to save the life of Leo Frank, a young Southern Jew unjustly accused of murder and eventually lynched. Not long before, Frank’s name and story would have been equally vague in my mind, with the man half-remembered from my introductory history textbooks as one of the most notable early KKK victims in the fiercely anti-Semitic Deep South of the early twentieth century. However, not long before seeing that piece on the ADL I’d read Albert Lindemann’s highly-regarded study The Jew Accused, and his short chapter on the notorious Frank case had completely exploded all my preconceptions.
First, Lindemann demonstrated that there was no evidence of any anti-Semitism behind Frank’s arrest and conviction, with Jews constituting a highly-valued element of the affluent Atlanta society of the day, and no references to Frank’s Jewish background, negative or otherwise, appearing in the media prior to the trial. Indeed, five of the Grand Jurors who voted to indict Frank for murder were themselves Jewish, and none of them ever voiced regret over their decision. In general, support for Frank seems to have been strongest among Jews from New York and other distant parts of the country and weakest among the Atlanta Jews with best knowledge of the local situation.
Furthermore, although Lindemann followed the secondary sources he relied upon in declaring that Frank was clearly innocent of the charges of rape and murder, the facts he recounted led me to the opposite conclusion, seeming to suggest strong evidence of Frank’s guilt. When I much more recently read Lindemann’s longer and more comprehensive historical study of anti-Semitism, Esau’s Tears, I noticed that his abbreviated treatment of the Frank case no longer made any claim of innocence, perhaps indicating that the author himself might have also had second thoughts about the weight of the evidence.
Based on this material, I voiced that opinion in my recent article on historical anti-Semitism, but my conclusions were necessarily quite tentative since they relied upon Lindermann’s summary of the information provided in the secondary sources he had used, and I had the impression that virtually all those who had closely investigated the Frank case had concluded that Frank was innocent. But after my piece appeared, someone pointed me to a 2016 book from an unexpected source arguing for Frank’s guilt. Now that I have ordered and read that volume, my understanding of the Frank case and its historical significance has been entirely transformed.
Mainstream publishers may often reject books that too sharply conflict with reigning dogma and sales of such works are unlikely to justify the extensive research required to produce the manuscript. Furthermore, both authors and publishers may face widespread vilification from a hostile media for taking such positions. For these reasons, those who publish such controversial material will often be acting from deep ideological motives rather than merely seeking professional advancement or monetary gain. As an example, it took a zealous Trotskyite leftist such as Lenni Brunner to brave the risk of ferocious attacks and invest the time and effort to produce his remarkable study of the crucial Nazi-Zionist partnership of the 1930s. And for similar reasons, we should not be totally surprised that the leading book arguing for the guilt of Leo Frank appeared as a volume in the series on the pernicious aspects of Jewish-Black historical relations produced by Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam (NOI), nor that the text lacked any identified author.
Anonymous works published by heavily-demonized religious-political movements naturally engender considerable caution, but once I began reading the 500 pages of The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man I was tremendously impressed by the quality of the historical analysis. I think I have only very rarely encountered a research monograph on a controversial historical event that provided such an enormous wealth of carefully-argued analysis backed by such copious evidence. The authors seemed to display complete mastery of the major secondary literature of the last one hundred years while drawing very heavily upon the various primary sources, including court records, personal correspondence, and contemporaneous publications, with the overwhelming majority of the 1200 footnotes referencing newspaper and magazine articles of that era. The case they made for Frank’s guilt seemed absolutely overwhelming.
The basic outline of events is not disputed. In 1913 Georgia, a 13-year-old pencil company worker named Mary Phagan was last seen alive visiting the office of factory manager Leo Frank on a Saturday morning to collect her weekly paycheck, while her raped and murdered body was found in the basement early the next morning and Frank eventually arrested for the crime. As the wealthy young president of the Atlanta chapter of B’nai B’rith, Frank ranked as one of the most prominent Jewish men in the South, and great resources were deployed in his legal defense, but after the longest and most expensive trial in state history, he was quickly convicted and sentenced to death.
The facts of the case against Frank eventually became a remarkable tangle of complex and often conflicting evidence and eyewitness testimony, with sworn statements regularly being retracted and then counter-retracted. But the crucial point that the NOI authors emphasize for properly deciphering this confusing situation is the enormous scale of the financial resources that were deployed on Frank’s behalf, both prior to the trial and afterward, with virtually all of the funds coming from Jewish sources. Currency conversions are hardly precise, but relative to the American family incomes of the time, the total expenditures by Frank supporters may have been as high as $25 million in present-day dollars, quite possibly more than any other homicide defense in American history before or after, and an almost unimaginable sum for the impoverished Deep South of that period. Years later, a leading donor privately admitted that much of this money was spent on perjury and similar falsifications, something which is very readily apparent to anyone who closely studies the case. When we consider this vast ocean of pro-Frank funding and the sordid means for which it was often deployed, the details of the case become far less mysterious. There exists a mountain of demonstrably fabricated evidence and false testimony in favor of Frank, and no sign of anything similar on the other side.
The police initially suspected the black night watchman who found the girl’s body, and he was quickly arrested and harshly interrogated. Soon afterward, a bloody shirt was found at his home, and Frank made several statements that seemed to implicate his employee in the crime. At one point, this black suspect may have come close to being summarily lynched by a mob, which would have closed the case. But he stuck to his story of innocence with remarkable composure, in sharp contrast to Frank’s extremely nervous and suspicious behavior, and the police soon shifted their scrutiny toward the latter, culminating in his arrest. All researchers now recognize that the night watchman was entirely innocent, and the material against him planted.
The evidence against Frank steadily mounted. He was the last man known to have seen the young victim and he repeatedly changed important aspects of his story. Numerous former female employees reported his long history of sexually aggressive behavior toward them, especially directed towards the murdered girl herself. At the time of the murder, Frank claimed to have been working alone in his office, but a witness who went there reported he had been nowhere to be found. A vast amount of circumstantial evidence implicated Frank.
A black Frank family servant soon came forward with sworn testimony that Frank had confessed the murder to his wife on the morning after the killing, and this claim seemed supported by the latter’s strange refusal to visit her husband in jail for the first two weeks after the day of his arrest.
Two separate firms of experienced private detectives were hired by Frank’s lavishly-funded partisans, and the agents of both eventually came to the reluctant conclusion that Frank was guilty as charged.
As the investigation moved forward, a major break occurred as a certain Jim Conley, Frank’s black janitor, came forward and confessed to having been Frank’s accomplice in concealing the crime. At the trial he testified that Frank had regularly enlisted him as a lookout during his numerous sexual liaisons with his female employees, and after murdering Phagan, had then offered him a huge sum of money to help remove and hide the body in the basement so that the crime could be pinned upon someone else. But with the legal noose tightening around Frank, Conley had begun to fear that he might be made the new scapegoat, and went to the authorities in order to save his own neck. Despite Conley’s damning accusations, Frank repeatedly refused to confront him in the presence of the police, which was widely seen as further proof of Frank’s guilt.
By the time of the trial itself, all sides were agreed that the murderer was either Frank, the wealthy Jewish businessman, or Conley, the semi-literate black janitor with a first-grade education and a long history of public drunkenness and petty crime. Frank’s lawyers exploited this comparison to the fullest, emphasizing Frank’s Jewish background as evidence for his innocence and indulging in the crudest sort of racial invective against his black accuser, whom they claimed was obviously the true rapist and murderer due to his bestial nature.
Those attorneys were the best that money could buy and the lead counsel was known as the one of the most skilled courtroom interrogators in the South. But although he subjected Conley to a grueling sixteen hours of intense cross-examination over three days, the latter never wavered in the major details of his extremely vivid story, which deeply impressed the local media and the jury. Meanwhile, Frank refused to take the stand at his own trial, thereby avoiding any public cross-examination of his often changing account.
Two notes written in crude black English had been discovered alongside Phagan’s body, and everyone soon agreed that these were written by the murderer in hopes of misdirecting suspicion. So they were either written by a semi-literate black such as Conley or by an educated white attempting to imitate that style, and to my mind, the spelling and choice of words strongly suggests the latter, thereby implicating Frank.
Taking a broader overview, the theory advanced by Frank’s legion of posthumous advocates seems to defy rationality. These journalists and scholars uniformly argue that Conley, a semi-literate black menial, had brutally raped and murdered a young white girl, and the legal authorities soon became aware of this fact, but conspired to set him free by supporting a complex and risky scheme to instead frame an innocent white businessman. Can we really believe that the police officials and prosecutors of a city in the Old South would have violated their oath of office in order to knowingly protect a black rapist and killer from legal punishment and thereby turn him loose upon their city streets, presumably to prey on future young white girls? This implausible reconstruction is particularly bizarre in that nearly all its advocates across the decades have been the staunchest of Jewish liberals, who endlessly condemned the horrific racism of the Southern authorities of that era, but then unaccountably chose to make a special exception in this one particular case.
In many respects, the more important part of the Frank case began after his conviction and death sentence when many of America’s wealthiest and most influential Jewish leaders began mobilizing to save him from the hangman. They soon established the ADL as a new vehicle for that purpose and succeeded in making the Frank murder case one of the most famous in American history to that date.
Although his role was largely concealed at the time, the most important new backer whom Frank attracted was Albert Lasker of Chicago, the unchallenged monarch of American consumer advertising, which constituted the life’s blood of all of our mainstream newspapers and magazines. Not only did he ultimately provide the lion’s share of the funds for Frank’s defense, but he focused his energies upon shaping the media coverage surrounding the case. Given his dominant business influence in that sector, we should not be surprised that a huge wave of unremitting pro-Frank propaganda soon began appearing across the country in both local and national publications, extending to most of America’s most popular and highly-regarded media outlets, with scarcely a single word told on the other side of the story. This even included all of Atlanta’s own leading newspapers, which suddenly reversed their previous positions and became convinced of Frank’s innocence.
Lasker also enlisted other powerful Jewish figures in the Frank cause, including New York Times owner Adolph Ochs, American Jewish Committee president Louis Marshall, and leading Wall Street financier Jacob Schiff. The Times, in particular, began devoting enormous coverage to this previously-obscure Georgia murder case, and many of its articles were widely republished elsewhere. The NOI authors highlight this extraordinary national media attention: “The Black janitor whose testimony became central to Leo Frank’s conviction became the most quoted Black person in American history up to that time. More of his words appeared in print in the New York Times than those of W.E.B. Du Bois, Marcus Garvey, and Booker T. Washington—combined.”
Back a century ago just as today, our media creates our reality, and with Frank’s innocence being proclaimed nationwide in near-unanimous fashion, a long list of prominent public figures were soon persuaded to demand a new trial for the convicted murderer, including Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, and Jane Addams.
Ironically enough, Lasker himself plunged into this crusade despite apparently having very mixed personal feelings about man whose cause he was championing. His later biography reveals that upon his first personal meeting with Frank, he perceived him as “a pervert” and a “disgusting” individual, so much so that he even hoped that after he managed to free Frank, the latter would quickly perish in some accident. Furthermore, in his private correspondence he freely admitted that a large fraction of the massive funding that he and numerous other wealthy Jews from across the country were providing had been spent on perjured testimony and there are also strong hints that he explored bribing various judges. Given these facts, Lasker and Frank’s other major backers were clearly guilty of serious felonies, and could have received lengthy prison terms for their illegal conduct.
With the New York Times and the rest of the liberal Northern media now providing such massive coverage of the case, Frank’s defense team was forced to abandon the racially-inflammatory rhetoric aimed at his black accuser which had previously been the centerpiece of their trial strategy. Instead, they began concocting a tale of rampant local anti-Semitism, previously unnoticed by all observers, and adopted it as a major grounds for their appeal of the verdict.
The unprincipled legal methods pursued by Frank’s backers is illustrated by a single example. Georgia law normally required that a defendant be present in court to hear the reading of the verdict, but given the popular emotions in the case, the judge suggested that this provision be waived, and the prosecution assented only if the defense lawyers promised not to use this small irregularity as grounds for appeal. But after Frank was convicted, AJC President Marshall and his other backers orchestrated numerous unsuccessful state and federal appeals on exactly this minor technicality, merely hiring other lawyers to file the motion.
For almost two years, the nearly limitless funds deployed by Frank’s supporters covered the costs of thirteen separate appeals on the state and federal levels, including to the U.S. Supreme Court, while the national media was used to endlessly vilify Georgia’s system of justice in the harshest possible terms. Naturally, this soon generated a local reaction, and during this period outraged Georgians began denouncing the wealthy Jews who were spending such enormous sums to subvert the local criminal justice system.
One of the very few journalists willing to oppose Frank’s position was Georgia publisher Tom Watson, a populist firebrand, and an editorial he reasonably declared “We cannot have…one law for the Jew, and another for the Gentile” while he also later lamented that “It is a bad state of affairs when the idea gets abroad that the law is too weak to punish a man who has plenty of money.” A former Georgia governor indignantly inquired “Are we to understand that anybody except a Jew can be punished for a crime.” The clear facts indicate that there was indeed a massive miscarriage of justice in Frank’s case, but virtually all of it occurred in Frank’s favor.
All appeals were ultimately rejected and Frank’s execution date for the rape and murder of the young girl finally drew near. But just days before he was scheduled to leave office, Georgia’s outgoing governor commuted Frank’s sentence, provoking an enormous storm of popular protest, especially since he was the legal partner of Frank’s chief defense lawyer, an obvious conflict of interest. Given the enormous funds that Frank’s national supporters had been deploying on his behalf and the widespread past admissions of bribery in the case, there are obviously dark suspicions about what had prompted such a remarkably unpopular decision, which soon forced the former governor to exile himself from the state. A few weeks later, a group of Georgia citizens stormed Frank’s prison farm, abducting and hanging him, with Frank becoming the first and only Jew lynched in American history.
Naturally, Frank’s killing was roundly denounced in the national media that had long promoted his cause. But even in those quarters, there may have been a significant difference between public and private sentiments. No newspaper in the country had more strongly championed Frank’s innocence than the New York Times of Adolph Ochs. Yet according to the personal diary of one of the Times editors, Ochs privately despised Frank, and perhaps even greeted his lynching with a sense of relief. No effort was ever made by Frank’s wealthy supporters to bring any of the lynching party to justice.
Although I have now come to regard the NOI volume as the most persuasive and definitive text on the Frank case, I naturally considered conflicting works before reaching this conclusion.
For nearly a half-century, the leading scholarly account of the incident had probably been Leonard Dinnerstein’s book The Leo Frank Case, first published in 1966, and Dinnerstein, a University of Arizona professor specializing in Jewish history, entirely supported Frank’s innocence. But although the work won a national award, carries glowing blurbs from several prestigious publications, and has surely graced the reading lists of endless college courses, I was not at all impressed. Among other things, the book appears to be the original source of some of the most lurid examples of alleged anti-Semitic public outbursts that apparently have no basis in reality and seem to have been simply fabricated by the author given his lack of any citations; the NOI authors note these stories have been quietly abandoned by all recent researchers. Even leaving aside such likely falsifications, which were widely cited by later writers and heavily contaminated the historical record, I found the short Dinnerstein work rather paltry and even pitiful when compared to that of its NOI counterpart.
A far longer and more substantial recent work was Steve Oney’s 2003 And the Dead Shall Rise, which runs nearly 750 pages and won the National Jewish Book Award, the Southern Book Critics Circle Prize, and the American Bar Association’s Silver Gavel, probably establishing itself as today’s canonical text on the historical incident. Oney had been a longtime Atlanta journalist and I was favorably impressed by his narrative skill, along with the numerous fascinating vignettes he provided to illustrate the Southern history of that general era. He also seemed a cautious researcher, drawing heavily upon the primary sources and avoiding much of the falsified history of the last century, while not entirely suppressing the massive evidence of bribery and perjury employed by the Frank forces.
But although Oney does mention much of this information, he strangely fails to connect the dots. For example, although he occasionally mentions some of the funds spent on Frank’s behalf, he never attempts to convert them into present-day equivalents, leaving a naive reader to assume that such trivial amounts could not possibly have been used to pervert the course of justice. Furthermore, his entire book is written in chronological narrative form, with no footnotes provided in the text, and a large portion of the content being entirely extraneous to any attempt to determine Frank’s guilt or innocence, contrasting very sharply with the more scholarly style of the NOI authors.
To my mind, a central element of the Frank case was the massive financial temptations being offered by Frank’s Jewish backers, and the huge number of Atlanta citizens, both high and low, who apparently shifted their positions on Frank’s guilt in eager hopes of capturing some of that largess. But although this obvious theme was heavily emphasized in the NOI book, Oney seems to mostly avoid this obvious factor, perhaps even for personal reasons. Print publications have suffered massive cutbacks in recent years and I noticed on the book flap that although Oney is described as a longtime Atlanta journalist, he had subsequently relocated to Los Angeles. Once I checked, I immediately discovered that Oney’s book had became the basis for an independent film entitled The People v. Leo Frank, and I wonder whether his hopes of capturing a sliver of Hollywood’s vast lucre may not have encouraged him to so strongly suggest Frank’s innocence. Would an account of Leo Frank as rapist and murderer ever be likely to reach the silver screen? The quiet influence of financial considerations is no different today than they were a century ago, and this factor must be taken into account when evaluating historical events.
The NOI authors devote nearly all of their lengthy book to a careful analysis of the Frank case provided in suitably dispassionate form, but a sense of their justifiable outrage does occasionally poke through. In the years prior to Frank’s killing, many thousands of black men throughout the South had been lynched, often based on a slender thread of suspicion, with few of these incidents receiving more than a few sentences of coverage in a local newspaper, and large numbers of whites had also perished in similar circumstances. Meanwhile, Frank had received benefit of the longest trial in modern Southern history, backed by the finest trial lawyers that money could buy, and based on overwhelming evidence had been sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a young girl. But when Frank’s legal verdict was carried out by extra-judicial means, he immediately became the most famous lynching victim in American history, perhaps even attracting more media attention than all those thousands of other cases combined. Jewish money and Jewish media established him as a Jewish martyr who thereby effectively usurped the victimhood of the enormous number of innocent blacks who were killed both before and after him, none of whom were ever even recognized as individuals.
As Prof. Shahak has effectively demonstrated, traditional Talmudic Judaism regarded all non-Jews as being sub-human, with their lives possessing no value. Given that Frank’s backers were followers of Reform Judaism, it seems quite unlikely that they accepted this doctrine or were even aware of its existence. But religious traditions of a thousand years standing can easily become embedded within a culture, and such unrecognized cultural sentiments may have easily shaped their reaction to Frank’s legal predicament.
Influential historical accounts of the Frank case and its aftermath have contained lurid tales of the rampant public anti-Semitism visited upon Atlanta’s Jewish community in the wake of the trial, even claiming that a substantial portion of the population was forced to flee as a consequence. However, a careful examination of the primary source evidence, including the contemporaneous newspaper coverage, provides absolutely no evidence of this, and it appears to be entirely fictional.
The NOI authors note that prior to Frank’s trial American history had been virtually devoid of any evidence of significant anti-Semitism, with the previous most notable incident being the case of an extremely wealthy Jewish financier who was refused service at a fancy resort hotel. But by totally distorting the Frank case and focusing such massive national media coverage on his plight, Jewish leaders around the country succeeded in fabricating a powerful ideological narrative despite its lack of reality, perhaps intending the story to serve as a bonding experience to foster Jewish community cohesion.
As a further example of the widely promoted but apparently fraudulent history, the Jewish writers who have overwhelmingly dominated accounts of the Frank case have frequently claimed that it sparked the revival of the Ku Klux Klan soon afterward, with the group of citizens responsible for Frank’s 1915 lynching supposedly serving as the inspiration for William Simmons’ reestablishment of that organization a couple of years later. But there seems no evidence for this. Indeed, Simmons strongly emphasized the philo-Semitic nature of his new organization, which attracted considerable Jewish membership.
The primary factor behind the rebirth of the KKK was almost certainly the 1917 release D.W. Griffith’s overwhelmingly popular landmark film Birth of a Nation, which glorified the Klan of the Reconstruction Era. Given that the American film industry was so overwhelmingly Jewish at the time and the film’s financial backers and leading Southern distributors came from that same background, it could be plausibly argued that the Jewish contribution to the creation of the 1920s Klan was a very crucial one, while the revenue from the film’s distribution throughout the South actually financed Samuel Goldwyn’s creation of MGM, Hollywood’s leading studio.
In their introduction, the NOI authors make the fascinating point that the larger historical meaning of the Frank case in American racial history has been entirely lost. Prior to that trial, it was unprecedented for Southern courts to allow black testimony against a white man, let alone against a wealthy man being tried on serious charges; but the horrific nature of the crime and Conley’s role as the sole witness required a break from that longstanding tradition. Thus, the authors argue not unreasonably, that the Frank case may have been as important to the history of black progress in America as such landmark legal verdicts as Plessy vs. Ferguson or Brown vs. Board. But since almost the entire historical narrative has been produced by fervent Jewish advocates, these facts have been completely obscured and the case entirely misrepresented as an example of anti-Semitic persecution and public murder.
Let us summarize what seems to be the solidly established factual history of the Frank case, quite different than the traditional narrative. There is not the slightest evidence that Frank’s Jewish background was a factor behind his arrest and conviction, nor the death sentence he received. The case set a remarkable precedent in Southern courtroom history with the testimony of a black man playing a central role in a white man’s conviction. From the earliest stages of the murder investigation, Frank and his allies continually attempted to implicate a series of different innocent blacks by planting false evidence and using bribes to solicit perjured testimony, while the exceptionally harsh racial rhetoric that Frank and his attorneys directed towards those blacks was presumably intended to provoke their public lynching. Yet despite all these attempts by the Frank forces to play upon the notorious racial sentiments of the white Southerners of that era, the latter saw through these schemes and Frank was the one sentenced to hang for his rape and murder of that young girl.
Now suppose that all the facts of this famous case were exactly unchanged except that Frank had been a white Gentile. Surely the trial would be ranked as one of the greatest racial turning points in American history, perhaps even overshadowing Brown v. Board because of the extent of popular sentiment, and it would have been given a central place in all our modern textbooks. Meanwhile, Frank, his lawyers, and his heavy financial backers would probably be cast as among the vilest racial villains in all of American history for their repeated attempts to foment the lynching of various innocent blacks so that a wealthy white rapist and murderer could walk free. But because Frank was Jewish rather than Christian, this remarkable history has been completely inverted for over one hundred years by our Jewish-dominated media and historiography.
These are the important consequences that derive from control of the narrative and the flow of information, which allows murderers to be transmuted into martyrs and villains into heroes. The ADL was founded just over a century ago with the central goal of preventing a Jewish rapist and killer from being held legally accountable for his crimes, and over the decades, it eventually metastasized into a secret political police force not entirely dissimilar to the widely despised East German Stasi, but with its central goal seeming to be the maintenance of overwhelming Jewish control in a society that is 98% non-Jewish.
We should ask ourselves whether it is appropriate for an organization with such origins and such recent history to be granted enormous influence over the distribution of information across our Internet.
Related Reading:
The ADL is one of the many tentacles of the only legal mafia: Jews Inc.
Stock value based on earnings per share is overvalued and has been dropping. More to come.
Don’t forget to tune in for the beginning of the end. That’s when the fun really starts.
This is eye-opening stuff. Ron Unz completely shattered my previously naive view of the world. I resisted questioning the official narrative for as long as possible. After Ron opened my eyes I have followed up listeing to and reading the works of E. Michael Jones. Jones’ book Barren Metal: A History of Capitalism as the Conflict between Labor and Usury is life-altering, mind-boggling, and will destroy and good thoughts you had about capitalism and money. I’d be curious for Ron’s take on this book.
This is one of your most valuable pieces. The only criticism I’d make is that there is a rather awkward marriage between the general attack on the ADL in its current form and your reference to its past. You don’t really relate that past so much as simply recount the Leo Frank case. As matters stand what we have here are two distinct articles; one on the modern ADL and the other on the Leo Frank case.
Surprised to see no mention of the ADL’s economic threats against Iceland for their attempted circumcision ban:
https://www.adl.org/news/press-releases/adl-urges-iceland-drop-bill-banning-male-circumcision
Ron Unz has demonstrated the importance and effectiveness of saying truth to power while remaining indifferent to name-calling. His is one of the few efforts I’ve seen that may actually derail the efforts by the ADL and the SPLC to gain dictatorial control of political content online (and how lethal would that be?).
Speak the truth, and shrug when you are called an anti-Semite, a hater, a racist, a bigot…
This article is extremely well done, and is very effective and highly convincing.
This is a bomb shell.
It will enter History as the Liberation of intellectual research after a century of step by step obfuscation and massive mind control.
Luther was right, his battle against The Masters of the Lie is finally vindicated.
Bravo, Ron Unz!
Recently, the Power got Jonathan Pollard released. I’ll bet the ghosts of 100s of American agents who were shot in Eastern Europe as the result of his betrayal would want to lynch him. Bill Clinton got Marc Rich off the hook.
According to the book RED MAFIYA, the FBI and NYPD were hamstrung in their operations against the Russian Mafiya(that was overwhelmingly Jewish in the US) due to pressures from Jewish groups.
https://archive.org/stream/RedMafiyaHowTheRussianMobByRobertI.Friedman2000/Red%20Mafiya-%20How%20the%20Russian%20Mob%20by%20Robert%20I.%20Friedman%20(2000)_djvu.txt
Amazing article. Thank you.
It looks like the ADL hasn’t changed its stripes since inception. Their only mission seems to be enforcement of Jewish supremacy and unaccountability over the cattle. The goyim will be:
- Propagandised.
- Outspent.
- Divided and conquered.
- Intimidated.
- Bribed.
- Propagandised, again – just in case the “official” story doesn’t fit the intended historical narrative.
Unfortunately for them, all of this is coming to an end and the worm has turned. We live in interesting times.
Examine both, the ADL and ADL-Foundation financial statements.
Is this panhandling “non-profit” cash cow, involved with creative accounting practices, or what?
source: https://www.adl.org/who-we-are/annual-reports-financial-information
Scientology perhaps?
What do we know about the lynch mob? Was anybody prosecuted? Who were the leaders? Provocateurs?
After Wilson’s reelection in 1916 on his campaign platform of “keeping american out of the war”, and after the Balfour agreement had been safely signed in 1916, the push was on to get the US into the war to conquer Palestine for the jews. One of the big questions was whether the South had been sufficiently castrated by reconstruction to get the southern Scotts-Irish to be willing to die in a war for Israel. Of course the jews employed Hollywood along with Edward Bernays’s propaganda techniques to convince the southerners to fight. Birth of a nation was one of the cogs in this wheel.
https://jamesperloff.com/2014/04/12/hollywood-tricks-traps-and-tactics/
Ron, you write: “Thus, the authors argue not unreasonably, that the Frank case may have been as important to the history of black progress in America as such landmark legal verdicts as Plessy vs. Ferguson”
This is the firs time I’ve ever seen someone cite Plessy, which laid the legal groundwork for Jim Crow by allowing ostensibly separate but equal public accommodations, as a landmark in “black progress.”
And whatever the misdeeds of the ADL, and I well remember the scandal over illegal surveillance, comparing the organization to the Stassi makes you sound as unhinged as people who call Trump a nazi. Can you point to a person who was imprisoned or tortured by the ADL?
You also write: “I am not aware of any other private organization in American history that has been involved in even a sliver of such illegal domestic espionage activity”…perhaps you should read up on Scientology, which broke into FBI offices (!!!) and ended up getting tax-exempt status from the IRS after a years-long campaign taking on various branches of the US government.
That said, your summary of the Leo Frank case is fascinating. And while I was deeply skeptical about a NOI source, you make it sound entirely credible and discreditable to the media, the incipient ADL and the factions in the Jewish community that waged the campaign on his behalf.
Bravo Ron.
What a mind blowing and wonderful series.
Please keep it up and may you be safe.
The Frank case reminds me of a murder in tsarist Russia, of which a jew was the suspect.
If I remember correctly, 200 rabbi’s wrote to the tsar that it was impossible that a jew had committed this murder.
The tsar gave in ‘what am I against 200 rabbi’s ?’.
Alas, right now, the number of ‘accidental’ deaths, ‘suicides’, murders, etc. that obviously benefited Israel is so long that, while in each case doubt exists, the list itself removes all doubt about Israeli involvement.
There was a website with the murders Perez was accused of, but it seems to have disappeared.
About the ADL, the Dutch equivalent, CIDI, also is not very bright.
Wilders, as anti Muslim as possible, and pro Israel, was accused of being an antisemite because he’s against the EU.
CIDI replaced the also good looking woman in her thirties, Esther Voets, by a similar woman, with about the same IQ.
Excellent! It is fascinating to watch intrepid Ron goading the ADL snake!
Jeff Blankfort, a fervent anti-Zionist from California, had been the only one that went against ADL and won, in the case of ADL’s illegal surveillance of anti-Zionists and anti-Apartheid activists. Indeed ADL was a strong supporter of South African apartheid. Those with Facebook account can read Jeff’s running commentary on Israel, Jews and ADL.
Anti-Semitism — The Movie
I’m still sticking with the Streisand effect. I don’t think the ADL wants this kind of attention. Over a hundred years old with untold billions poured into it; I’m thinking they are not as dumb as they look.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
Bravo Ron! Yet another masterpiece in sequence! Congratulations – you now have the distinction of being counted among those whom the ADL despises! Welcome to this illustrious club!
so for no
Somewhat ironically, this invites the argument that white Southerners hated Jews so much that in order to convict Frank they were even willing to break with an anti-black legal tradition and create this legal precedent.
God bless the brave, courageous Ron Unz, indefatigable reader and researcher, and keep him safe from harm, in these days as his writing puts him more deeply at risk
Ron Unz may be one of the key voices today, to help oppose the dangerous, deceiving censorship monster represented by Google and its allies, using the ADL as a self-serving weapon
Regarding the Google – Alphabet gangsters, one of the ugly things noted about them, e.g., by military analysts on Veterans Today, is their notes about Google-Alphabet’s literal mercenary and regime change division under Jared Cohen, CIA-tied operatives formerly called ‘Google Idea Groups’ and now ‘Jigsaw’.
Google’s mercenaries are directly charged by VT with being involved in smuggling chemical weapons from Turkey into Syria to stage the false-flag ‘chemical attacks’ unjustly blamed on Assad, child abduction and killing, and related murder of CIA targets and a journalist.
One wonders how much and how easily, Google – Alphabet is willing to let loose its crew of regime change mercenary killers, upon writers and journalists in the USA … and maybe it has already done so.
(For those who would sneer at the Veterans Today reference, given the site’s sometimes odd articles on space aliens etc, mixed in with important unique intel material, such as its exposure of the Edward Snowden CIA hoax, another ‘American Pravda’ media scam
Veterans Today site principal Gordon Duff, once admitted on a broadcast, that a third of VT material he publishes is intentionally false, this is how VT’s military and intel veterans are allowed to publish the true material without getting murdered. By ‘poisoning their own well’ and ‘self-discrediting’ via space-alien etc stories, they can publish material such as that on Google Inc’s mercenary killers, with names and details of murderous operations.)
Btw – After I gave a link to Ron Unz’s recent series of articles to the rebel Canadian Jew Henry Makow – with his own wide following – Makow has also been publishing links to Ron Unz’s series as well
Ron Quixote.
Bravo, Mr. Unz.
re:
The Internet is only one of the ADL’s venues of disproportionate and pernicious influence:
“Law Enforcement Trainings”
https://www.adl.org/who-we-are/our-organization/signature-programs/law-enforcement-trainings
Holocaust Indoctrination:
https://www.adl.org/educational-programs-training/holocaust-education
Subversion of Roman Catholic education :
https://www.adl.org/holocaust-education/bearing-witness-program
ADL put the “war” in Culture Wars:
Subversion of Sexual Mores
https://www.adl.org/education/resources/backgrounders/adl-lgbt-community-a-commitment-to-equal-rights
Circling back to Internet concerns, ADL is at the forefront of media censorship initiatives, arrogating to themselves the right to decide what Americans may and may not view, read, think:
ADL Applauds Google and YouTube in Expanding Initiative to Fight Online Hate
https://www.adl.org/news/press-releases/adl-applauds-google-and-youtube-in-expanding-initiative-to-fight-online-hate
—– SHUT IT DOWN! —–
A splendid and concise summation of the Leo Frank case as I can imagine. Thanks to Ron Unz.
As a schoolboy when The Leo Frank Case came out, I was curious how light it was also. It’s fairly easy to see why now: Right on the heels of the Civil Right Act someone thought a “We Suffered More” reminder had to be put into circulation, pronto. We’re all in this together and all that.
I’m not especially surprised it was Nation of Islam that put the better book out. They had good cause. Now on my reading list.
I felt a strong sense of nostalgia reading this excellent Ron’s piece for the times a century ago when justice could win. Everything is totally opposite now.
@Ron Unz
Please look into Webster Tarpley for his interesting take on the cause of WW1 and WW2 and also 9/11. He is a respected historian who has written a lot about similar topics with more of a focus on the Wasps in America. Especially the Bush family.
These articles by RU are the best reads anywhere on the net — calm, exacting, thorough, fact-laden, logically rigorous and ultimately explosive in their impact. They venture into regions no one else seems willing to go –Ron-David v ADL-Goliath.
I’d like to see an examination of how Jews made the disgusting practice of circumcision mainstream in America. I do not have the time or resources to examine it, but from what I have learned I suspect that it was foisted on gentile American as a female health measure by Jewish ObGyns. Earlier references to Kellogg are a red herring that have no link to its current acceptance.
God Bless Iceleand, and God Bless Ron Unz.
If most institutions are built on lies and opportunistic legends, then there wouldn’t be anything particular to ADL.
It’s like realizing that Democrats are founded by 3 Jews without pointing that Republican … too !
Jewish involvement in the KKK would make an interesting film – working title The Kosher Klan.
Not that Hollywood, as constituted, would ever make it.
Mr Unz you never cease to amaze. A unique blend of scholarship and journalistic writing style. Even time I read one of your articles I’m moved to write to my alma mater and ask for a tuition refund.
As they use to say in Radio Days: “Keep those cards and letters com’n folks.”
Excellent, Mr. Unz.
Just as the police and prosecutors in the Old South would not allow a child rapist to walk free in order to blame an innocent black, the same forces in Old Europe did not blame innocent Jews for ritual murder of Gentile children and allow the truly guilty to go free and prey upon others.
Here’s an old piece by M.C. Piper on the ADL which may be of interest to readers: ADL Spying Exposed Nationally – http://www.libertylobby.org/articles/1993/19930426roy_bullock.html
It was also covered in his excellent survey of treachery, The Judas Goats – http://shop.americanfreepress.net/store/p/60-The-JUDAS-GOATS-The-Enemy-Within.html
Trying to interpret that, presumably not wholly complinentary, I have come up with the thought that you regard the ADL as quite nicely characterised as a windmill. Right?
Another great article Ron, although as Colin Wright also indicates, I feel the two parts of the article linking the Frank case to the present day role of the ADL as the Stasi like policer of public discourse is only loosely tied together. The evolution of the latter role deserves one or two articles on its own and I am sure the evolution of the ADL as a leading cheerleader for Israel would be at the heart of it.
One recent snippet I do remember about the international role of the ADL was that it was identified as the origin of a letter threatening Jews in the Donbass in April 2014 and distributed to Jews outside their synagogues, which led to John Kerry and the West kicking off about the anti-semitic nature of the Donbass rebellion. Given the views of the Azov batallion and Svoboda, that was really a case of mistaken identification (or maybe not)
“A black Frank family servant soon came forward with sworn testimony that Frank had confessed the murder to his wife on the morning after the killing, and this claim seemed supported by the latter’s strange refusal to visit her husband in jail for the first two weeks after the day of his arrest.”
This is called hearsay, and is inadmissable.
You’ve totally gone off the deep end.
We should ask ourselves whether it is appropriate for an organization with such origins and such recent history to be granted enormous influence over the distribution of information across our Internet
We should also ask whether it is wise to allow so much of the media—newspapers, advertising, broadcasting, cinema—to be owned and run by a community which makes little secret of its hostility to America’s founding peoples and their religion. Just a few months ago, The Forward published a clear statement of that hostility, in the context of an attack on Stephen Miller and immigration policy:
‘Miller, on the other hand, wholeheartedly embraces and embodies an ideology that many American Jews see as a threat to their own well-being, given that it promotes a vision of America as a white Christian nation.’
Whites’ well-being would be best served by America remaining overwhelmingly white. Jews’ well-being demands the end of white America, and Jews are formidable opponents.
To see what the Zionists have done and are doing in their satanic goal of a Zionist controlled NWO, read THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION, there you will see the Zionist game plan for their NWO, they are not even hiding their plans, anyone who reads the Protocols will see it laid out right before their eyes.
May God help America as it will need divine intervention to survive the satanic Zionist attack on America.
The ADL, the self appointed moral policeman of the US, sure has an interesting history. It’s backers today seem to be following in the footsteps of it’s founders. Only with more power backing them up. Which is a scary thought when you consider how much support they drummed up then for a man they knew was guilty of raping and murdering a child.
plenty of people from the top to the bottom have been trying to wake up Americans about the organised jews menace in the US for a long time…at least 100 years of it. the Federal Reserve which is neither Federal or a reserve but is mostly a privately held jews bank…the media monopoly..,the New York Times was founded by Americans but bankrupted (imo) by jew in the 1890s and jews bought and have controlled it ever since..ABC CBS NBC were all founded by former russian jews..Ted Turner tried to buy CBS in the 80s but the jews would have nothing of thier media being non-jew owned……a note of NYT and CBS (viacom)..both are public companies but that is a ruse.as they both have 2 classes of shares 1 for the public the other for ownership in both cases the ownership is held by the jewish family that actually controls it…neither one ever criticises the zionist regime while never stopping criticising everyone else in the ME
Excellent article. I think every effort, however small, should be made to defy and destroy groups like the ADL, as they have been a consistent threat to 1st Amendment rights in the US.
As an American who has been spoon-fed the “woe-is-us” narrative of Jewish sufferings both real and imagined, I must say my ossified brain has been stretched to the point where I’m inclined to expunge the Judeo from “Judeo-Christian” once and for all and trust that Almighty God will sort them out at the appropriate time. Meanwhile, I will keep a suspicious eye on their ongoing mischief. Thank you Mr. Unz for a most informative series.
Ron, this of all your thrillers should be turned into a film script. But I fear that the persuasive effect of your devotion to truth will be undermined if you don’t shore up your credibility on some of your other heretical eruptions.
I set aside your curiously anachronistic view that Israel in 1963 would have dared assassinate a US President. It is your dilettantish approach to 9/11 that demands correction as a “has Ron Unz gone mad” message to me from an otherwise sympathetic investment banker prompted me to note.
You cannot on your record be accused of naiveté. But you seemed to take seriously that the one man with the clearest motive for promoting the 9/11 attacks should be believed when he denied responsibility shortly afterwards when Mullah Omar was being pressed to give him up. And later of course he had the US government doing all the publicity for him.
It is much more to the point that Khalid Sheik Mohammed hasn’t blamed Israel is it not?
But that is incidental compared with your failure to turn your physicist’s intellect on to the one crucial question. That is whether the WTC buildings could only have collapsed as they did if they were prepared beforehand for demolition and the demolition charges set off at appropriate times. Apart from considering that Mossad might conceivably have facilitated the Arabs’ attack for which there is negligible actual evidence, the serious charge of Israeli crime has to depend on the official version’s science being radically wrong and demonstrably so. It goes without saying that the underresourcing and other limitations of the Commisdion of Inquiry could be explained by the wish to provide cover fot the CIA, FBI and White House. Scientific investigation deserves your attention.
Simply not true.
There was a long tradition of White Southern elites treating Jews as equals.
That is why David Levy Yulee and Judah P. Benjamin, for example, were able to rise to positions of such prominence in the antebellum south.
Until 1820, Charleston had the highest percentage of Jewish residents of any American town.
In 1640 Barbados, which in many ways provided the template for the society of the American deep South (many of the first settlers of South Carolina were from Barbados), became the site of the first openly Jewish community in the Anglo-Saxon world after Edward I’s 1290 expulsion order.
Jews were prominent everywhere the slave trade was important: importation points such as Barbados, Jamaica, Leeward Islands, Charleston, and Savannah, and slave trading centers such as Newport Rhode Island and New York City.
If Southern Whites hated Jews so much that they were willing to exonerate guilty Blacks and in order to frame innocent Jews, wouldn’t this have already happened sometime during the almost 3 centuries (1640 – 1913) the three peoples had been living together before the Leo Frank case?
Leo Frank was convicted despite the White South’s prejudice against Blacks, and also despite the White South prejudice in favor of Jews.
Southern antisemitism came into being after 1913 as a consequence of the ADL’s behavior during the Leo Frank case.
Mr Unz,
What’s this I hear about you showing up for this?:
https://mises.org/events/symposium-new-and-alternative-media-ron-paul
November third.
The scope of Scientology’s behavior and actions is much narrower, primarily focused on maintaining its riches via its tax exempt status and the occasional promotion of Dianetics and keeping its members in the fold.
Not even a close comparison.
Thank you, that was worth watching.
They dared attack a US Navy ship four years later. For two solid hours. And strafe the lifeboats.
“What is so chilling and cold-blooded is that they could kill as many Americans as they did in confidence that Washington would cooperate in quelling any public outcry.” – Admiral Thomas Moorer, US Navy & Chairman, Joint Chiefs, Aug. 24, 1983
“Two notes written in crude black English had been discovered alongside Phagan’s body, and everyone soon agreed that these were written by the murderer in hopes of misdirecting suspicion. So they were either written by a semi-literate black such as Conley or by an educated white attempting to imitate that style, and to my mind, the spelling and choice of words strongly suggests the latter, thereby implicating Frank.”
This reminds me of the crudely written message left at the site of one of the Ripper murders that seemed to implicate Jews but was written in such a way as to suggest a coarse anti Semitism instead.
Many people believe that Jack the Ripper was a Polish Jew named Aaron Kosminski and the fact that Jews vehemently deny this adds weight to the charge of his guilt.
I’d love to see Ron put his inimitable research skill to the this topic.
Mr Roberts was right about you Mr Unz. Furthermore, you do more for the Jews who hate you than they know.
The miraculous survival of Ron Unz with his head in the lion’s mouth is due to factors that go beyond ADL’s span of control. The big thing that’s changed is CIA’s relationship with one of its favorite cutouts. The ADL is not The political police — it’s one of many organizations to which CIA delegates criminal repression. CIA still has the armed forces reserves, illegal moles in government agencies at all levels, crooked cops, extremist groups, and transnational organized crime.
Now CIA is busted for systematic and widespread universal-jurisdiction crimes including torture, use of banned biological weapons, aggression by sending armed bands of irregulars, and armed attacks on the domestic civilian population as a pretext for increased repression. Russian intelligence actually knows how to do HUMINT, as opposed to criminals ops, and they are using their take to indict CIA. CIA impunity is a problem for the world, and the world is on it. Gina Haspel’s got her tit caught in this wringer.
So CIA has decided to blame Israel for some CIA crime. They pull the Cleavon Little Blazing Saddles Act, “He’p me, He’p me!” CIA is just a poor terrified hostage, that’s it. Mighty Israel is making poor little CIA do bad stuff with that finger gun.
ADL is on the razor’s edge. If they were to crush Dr. Unz like a bug, the Mockingbird media’s response might not be ANTISEMITE!!!11!!!. It might be, “See? It’s those dirty Israelis censoring our American Freedoms with their Jewy dirty tricks.”
I have my differences with Unz, & do not trust him. He absolutely refuses to discuss, or permit to be discussed on his website, SOLUTIONS for the ails we Americans.
Unz went as far as removing my comments – on the necessity to Restore Our Republic! Whether or not he agrees with my political analysis. – – Why did he remove (censor them)? If he is so intelligent and well educated, why did he not enter open debate-discussion, on just what happened on November 22, 1963 (not only who committed the crime, but the reasons for the crime)? I repeatedly offered to present an article on the subject (and sent Unz a copy of one such article that I and others have circulated).
However: Unz’ recent articles are informational, cutting edge, read by many thousands, and well worth reading.
This article deals with information we Americans must learn. This information will help us regain our sovereignty.
Possible, but again, Ron Unz does the thing where he cites from authority — the authority being some author or himself, but doesn’t really lay out any information himself to explain why exactly it is so convincing. He just states that it is convincing. He also does so without laying out any evidence, or doing any skeptical analysis of the sources, because as these are fringe sources there is likely a lot wrong — with grains of truth perhaps, but still, much will be paranoid and simply insane. Any true analysis would sift through the sources with a skeptical bent. That would be more convincing than what is here.
Oddly enough, Unz does the same thing as his purported enemies. Many people take what the ADL says as truth and don’t do a fine-grained analysis of it. Many people cite conventional wisdom from various establishments as ending arguments, without going into the details.
It is possible that class hatred of Leo Frank led the white southerners to conveniently overlook the black janitor who others have said was the real murderer. We certainly know the reality of crime statistics in the current day and it isn’t a far stretch to say that many lynchings were in fact justified and many of those lynched were in fact guilty.
It is also possible that Leo Frank murdered the girl.
If you don’t go into the details of the case, if you just go about arguing from reputation, drawing on the biases of the readers, against Jews, for blacks, what have you, then it becomes he said she said. It’s nothing.
For a look at possible Stasi-like activity on the part of the ADL, see John T. Flynn’s WWII-era pamphlet, THE SMEAR TERROR — if you can find it. Would be a good candidate for Ron’s library of HTML books.
Hearsay can be admitted sometimes. Plus standards of evidence change over the years.
The real evidence was physical. Mary has shoulder length wavy reddish blonde hair. Frank had 2-3 inch Caucasian straight dark hair. Some of his hair was found on her head shoulders and chest.
There were only 2 men in the factory that day, a White and a black. Frank was arrested and tried because of the physical evidence he left on Mary.
Frank was known to the girls who worked in his factory as a grabber groper and harasser. “ Never be alone with Mr Frank “ was the motto of the girls who worked in his factory.
And yet their anti-Semitism wasn’t enough to keep a Jew (from New York, no less) to open up a pencil factory in their midst and employ young white girls to work for him. Nor to allow that Jew to buy a house in the best neighborhood and employ black servants, or to go to social events with their Christian neighbors.
Yep, Jim Crow era Atlanta must’ve been a regular Auschwitz.
Thank you for contributing such valuable work, that we may fathom with greater depth the most politically-incorrect topic of our time. The Frank debacle isn’t one with which I’d been intimately familiar, but you’ve convinced me he was certainly guilty. The EIR piece was also enlightening. I hadn’t previously known the proximity of connection between the ADL and Pollard.
Took them less than a week to respond to your previous piece. I must say, they are the undisputed masters of dark comic relief.
Read my post 56. The reason Frank was arrested and tried is that he left physical evidence in Mary; his dark Caucasian hair.
He left his hair on Mary’s head shoulders and chest. Had a black man left his hair on Mary the race of the murder rapist would have been obvious.
Since a White man left his hair on Mary, they arrested the only White man who had access to Mary that day.
Anybody who thinks that Frank might have been innocent had better read the prosecutor’s very meticulous and detailed closing statement in this case. Frank’s alibi was as full of holes as a swiss cheese.
https://leofrank.org/library/arguments-of-hugh-dorsey-in-leo-frank-case.pdf
Only one of Atlanta’s five major newspapers was even slightly impartial in this case. The rest were fervent supporters of Frank’s innocence. The outright abuse of the prosecution team in the media, both locally and nationally (before and after the trial) was truly remarkable and unprecedented.
Here is a curious bit of information I recently came upon. After Frank’s death sentence was commuted by Georgia governor John Slaton to life imprisonment, a unique request was made by Frank’s legal team (and apparently granted) that Frank be allowed to have his own furniture from home in his cell and a servant from home be allowed to come into his cell to clean it up.
This request must have been considered a wee too extreme and might have been part of a slowly evolving tipping point. The citizens of Atlanta must have started realizing that the next step would have been a full pardon of Frank by the now fully bribed Georgia governor Slaton.
Needless to say, the citizenry quickly ended this possibility.
God works in mysterious, but wondrous ways. No matter what, Truth will rise above falsehood like oil above the water. Knowledge of truth is what sets a man free, and proclamation of it even freer. You can’t put the light under the bushel. “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled”. American ‘Pravda’ is a momentous event that I am hopeful will have enormous importance. God bless you Ron.
They’ve found the ripper murderer thru DNA. It was a chief suspect Aaron Kosmenski Jewish immigrant. The police saved the clothing of all the victims.
DNA was taken from the clothing in hopes that as so often happens in stabbing a the murder cut himself. The shawl of Catherine Eddowes had blood of the murderer on it as well
as her own
DNA was taken from a descendant of Kosmenski. It matched the DNA on Catherine Eddows shawl.
Kosmenski was known to be insane. He’d attacked women in daylight on public streets before. After the 5th victim was found Kosmenski was out in a mental hospital and the killings ceased.
Jack was the immigrant Jew Kosmenski as proved by his DNA on the victim’s shawl.
Who killed Swedish prime minister Palme, and prime minister to be Anna Lyndh ?
Lyndh wanted an EU economic boycott of Israel.
Why did Hammarskjöld have a plane accident ?
Churchill had no problem in killing Polish president in exile Sikorski.
De Gaulle for a long time in WWII refused to fly.
David Irving, ‘Accident – The death of General Sikorsky’, 1979, München (German translation)
Sikorsky had survived an amazing number of plane accidents already:
Jan Ciechanowski, vormals polnischer Botschafter in den Vereinigten Staaten, ´Vergeblicher Sieg’, Zürich 1948 ( Defeat in Victory, New York, 1947)
I wish Ron would censor Jeff Stryker.
Not trust in what ?
Does he write lies ?
You may disagree with him in his political views, but this has nothing to do with what I see as trust.
These is an entertaining melee to watch.
Not unlike the soldiers of Red Cloud against Forty Kearny, Unz pesters the ADL for a while until their ego takes a bruise and they decide to peek their heads out for a counterattack.
Thereup0on they are surrounding and destroyed in a yet more powerful intellectual sally.
The tides have turned on them. Their doom is written across the pages for all to see.
Yes, and Ron’s routine as “dragon slayer” is either self-refuting (his tilting at windmills has made all the splash one would expect i.e none) or insufferably self-aggrandising (he is such an amazing and legendary hero that the battle was over in one blow.)
Or perhaps it is just all a joke – a funny way to collect the world’s anti-Semites onto one site…does even one of this series of articles make sense? Nevermind when combined.
That’s all well and good, but why did Jews want to save Leo Frank in the first place? Perhaps I’m missing something
Ron, I can’t think you enough for your exposure of what is true and factual.
Now, unz.com has taken us so far on this journey toward re-calibrating the scales of justice, but don’t stop now. Where do we go from here? Whatever it is it will be non-violent and legal and just and defensive. But, Ron, you have the moment. As a group (you, your readers, Phil Giraldi, etc.) we should not lose the moment. Now is the time to stand up to these bullies. And not just by writing comments at the end of an article. I assume that many people reading this today would be willing to get involved in an organized resistance (think 1960s civil rights). I’m not a leader, but I am prepared to follow. Anyone else? Because we can only get so many people to read unz.com (or read at all). It’s time to condense Ron’s body of work and take it to the masses.
That’s very interesting. I’ll admit that nearly all of my knowledge of the case comes from the three books I referenced. If what you’re saying is correct, it’s quite odd that the NOI authors failed to mention that item, given their very heavy research into the media coverage and other contemporaneous primary documentary evidence.
What was your source for that information?
Wife also divorced him as soon as possible.
Read quotes from the trial transcripts in a book in either UCLA or USC library in Los Angeles.
Mel Gibson ruined his own career.
When will your whining cease? People don’t like Nazi rhetoric and if you go around spewing it the way that Ron Unz does, then you’re going to be ostracized. This isn’t the ADL sabotaging your career. It’s you being a pathetic human being that no one wants to deal with.
One for all and all for one. Another reason was probably capitalists vs labor.
The capitalists were still on top in 1913. But the labor movement was growing in power. A capitalist not just exploiting 10 to 16 year old girls working 12 hour days 6 days a week for $1.25 a week was just the thing to spur a labor movement in the south as well as the rest of the country.
That was also during the big movement for compulsory school thru 8 th grade.
I doubt Jewish employers were any worse than other employees at the time. Turning it into a Jew vs anti Semite thing kept the factory exploitation of children out of the newspapers.
Just my opinion
I have already translated into French :
1) Ron Unz, un kamikaze en Californie
https://numidia-liberum.blogspot.com/2018/10/ron-unz-un-kamikaze-en-californie.html
2) American Pravda : Juifs et Nazis
https://numidia-liberum.blogspot.com/2018/08/american-pravda-juifs-et-nazis.html
3) Ron Unz – Pourquoi on cache aux Juifs les raisons de l’antisémitisme
https://numidia-liberum.blogspot.com/2018/10/ron-unz-pourquoi-on-cache-aux-juifs-les.html
4) La malhonnêteté, l’hypocrisie, la haine des autres et le subterfuge dans la religion juive par Ron UNZ
https://numidia-liberum.blogspot.com/2018/10/la-malhonnetete-lhypocrisie-la-haine.html
and I am going to translate American Pravda: The ADL in American Society
Even Lindemann admitted that anyone with the evidence him that that was against Frank would be very likely to find himself in court. Apart from what has already been mentioned, and his propinquity to the scene of the crime, which was a machine room across the hall from his office
1) Before the body was discovered, Frank telephoned the watchman Lee to ask if everything was all right at the factory, although he had never done this before.
2) Frank initially denied to detectives that he knew who Mary Phagan was although he made up her wage packet and had to walk past her work station whenever he went to the toilet
3) Frank altered Lee’s time sheet to make it look as if he could have committed the murder.
His actions were not that of an innocent man.
We should look at Leo Frank affair in the context of Jewish tradition and expectations vis-à-vis the gentile legal system and society in general.
Since 1264 in Poland Jews were protected under the Statute of Kalisz. This statute was reaffirmed and ratified by subsequent Polish monarchs Casimir III of Poland in 1334, Casimir IV of Poland in 1453, and Sigismund I of Poland in 1539. Basically Jews in Poland where form 80% of all World Jewry came form has significant autonomy and legal protection. The most important was the first point of the Statute of Kalisz:
which basically indemnified Jews in non Jewish courts and legal system. Jews were outside of the law of gentiles while at the same time believing they were under a constant threat of persecution from gentiles. It is interesting that the Statute of Kalisz (point 35) imposed the Good Samaritan law on gentiles making it their duty under the penalty of 30 shillings to give aid to any Jew being attacked.
On the one hand Jewish organizations that represents Jews and define their role in gentile host society had no other choice but to follow the centuries old tradition which was the total denial of Leo Frank guilt because Jews may not be judged by gentiles. On the other hand Leo Frank case was really godsent. It helped to antagonize Jews agains their new American host and cast them in the same role of poor persecuted Jews of France, Poland or Russia. Leo Frank served the same role as Dreyfuss in France and Mendel Beilis in Russia: organize and increase the cohesion of Jewish diaspora under the threat of anti-Semitic gentile host, reduce assimilation and defection. Basically nothing new, the same old shtick that worked so well for Jews to keep them Jewish over the centuries.
The Kaliforinan kamikazi strikes again.
Thank you sir.
The cat is out of the bag but still locked in this room; it’s our duty to let it out.
We have all the evidence and can see the going ons in the occupied territory of Gaza and the world.
Please take a public stand; stand for morality, ethics and expose the criminals everywhere.
Thank you again, Mr. Ron Unz
P.S. and say a prayer for the little 13 year girl, forced to work, raped and killed.
That’s extremely interesting. Both the NOI and the Oney books mention that the trial transcript disappeared from the Fulton County courthouse sometime during the 1960s, forcing the authors to rely upon the Brief of Evidence, a far less comprehensive account of the proceedings prepared for the Appeals process. However, they suggest that most of the important presentations were presented in great detail in the local newspaper coverage.
If other copies of the full transcript existed at various major research libraries, it’s a shame that none of the researchers were aware of these or made use of them.
Thank you, Ron Unz, for providing sourced information that is almost impossible to obtain from any other reliable and acceptable source. I suspect that the ADL’s strategy of ignoring Ron Unz and the Unz Review is the only practical one available to the ADL Large-scale attacks on Unz and the Unz Review would only advertise the Review’s existence and draw further readers, many of whom would find at least some of the Review’s many counter-narratives convincing, particularly in light of the meticulous research which Mr. Unz and other regular contributors provide.
She also refused to be buried next to him at the family grave plot.
Mel Gibson was right…
Mel Gibson ruined his own career.
Clearly that is an obvious lie. That is how the Talmudic Jew culture works – just lie and lie and lie.
Create chaos – get in a gentile’s face and lie – and then get the Jew controlled media to repeat the lie over and over.
The Talmudic Jews can not help themselves – they will be ostracized again.
Think Peace — Art
In my comment #78 I tried to address this question. If they did not they soon would cease to be a distinct ethnic minority. This was Jewish modus operandi that kept them what they are.
Perhaps because they are not likely to admit any Jew could commit a crime, the tribe must stick together at all costs. Why do they fawn over Roman Polanski when court transcripts clearly show he drugged, raped and sodomized a child while she cried and said “no”? You won’t find a single Jew in Hollywood who denounces him.
The exception, of course, is when a Jew commits the crime against another Jew. If Bernie Madoff had stolen from anyone but Jews, I believe he would be spending his twilight years on a yacht somewhere while his team of lawyers dragged out endless appeals.
FYI…Re….Jeff Blankfort
As an example of Jewish gate keeping by the so called anti Zionist Jews, Phil Weiss banned Jeff from mondoweiss site for commenting on the Nazi-Zionist collaboration.
That caused a wholesale exodus of most of us non Jews to a friendfeed blog set up for us deserters.
Jeff commented there and said that he although he inquired as to his banning he never got an answer .
I am all in for cleansing. Cleansing of Zionism, and not Jewishness. Ron Unz has put down a marker I abide with, being part Jew or semite. Israel belongs in hell, it is a robber barony, better exterminated, like the pests they are. These individuals are not human, they are Gollum’s, pityful bastards better put down. They have forefeighted their rigth to lif, by their choice of government.
“Ceterum censeo Israelum esse delendam.”
Fuck it.
I thank Ron Unz for this terrific learning experience.
1993, when news reached me about the SFPD bust of an ADL headquarter, I was very occupied by work, subsequently inattentive. Since then, with full disclosure, I forgot about the crime.
Noting Ron’s having wondered about possible espionage-prosecution under RICO, I cannot allow for any reason why it was not prosecuted.
Uh, except for the obvious fact that ADL was unaccountable under the rigged Hebrew law ‘o the land.
Mary Phagan was a very pretty girl.
She was killed by a sexual predator.
Seems an obvious icon for #MeToo.
An American Anne Frank, except no dastardly Nazis took Mary Phagan to a hospital to try to save her life.
Jews were prominent in the slave trade, also a topic NOI has researched.
Failure to gather the wagons around Frank might have exposed more Jews to unpleasant accusations.
(Tony Martin is introduced by Michael Hoffman; Must See video)
Many, many of today’s Jewish elite have southern roots and made the nucleus of their fortunes in the South before movin’ on up to New York; Atlanta had the second largest population of Jews in USA at time of War between the States.
I don’t know much (I really don’t care about celebrities) about Gibson’s case but I distinctly recall Jewish organizations objecting to Passion of the Christ for a pretty evident reason of Jews being portrayed as, well…you know, people who betrayed Christ. Plus, what’s so “Nazi” about stating the obvious fact of Hollywood being a thoroughly Jewish enterprise which was set up by Jews with everything which comes with the territory. There is even a book about that, and not one if my memory doesn’t fail me. There is also no denial of the US being a unique nation in terms of being a hub of the Holocaust Industry–a Joint Venture between US Jewish organizations and said Hollywood. Holocaust in US was completely monetized and industrialized and, in fact, they should have tried IPO on Wall Street for that. In fact, American Jewry is primarily responsible for trivializing and discrediting Holocaust–I am not Holocaust denier, despite the fact that I do have issues with numbers, but 26 standing ovations by the US Congress for Israeli leader who got to this session even without proper protocol and humiliated POTUS, however contemptible he was, kinda gives a feel of what is going on.
Oh, dear. It seems that Ron’s non-stop spew of Nazi rhetoric is riling up the less intelligent of his followers. I’m sure some violence is next. The story about lynching a Jew gets them rock hard for blood.
Anyway, you halfwits may take down a few innocents, but it’s your own death warrants you’re signing here.
maddoff ripped off plenty of non Jews. His big scores came from pension funds and municipal and national health endowments and pension funds. A lot of his money came from European cities endowment funds for the support of the health system and other municipal responsibilities.
Elderly jewish women dripping with jewelry were bussed in to weep and wail about maddoff. The real money in investments doesn’t come from ordinary millionaires. It comes from retirement funds and municipal, university state and national investment funds. The ripoff of the Europeans might have been the reason the SEC finally went after him.
“the ADL maintaining active dossiers on more than a million Americans”— that should be the focus of our attention.
Do the Jews have goat pictures of every politician in America?
We MUST find out!
Think Peace — Art
The way the entertainment Jews and everybody else in the auditorium stood up and gave Polanski a standing ovation for his lifetime award in absentia at the academy awards was an acknowledgement and cheer for the boot in our face. He sodomized her because he asked her if she was on the pill. She wasn’t so he turned her over. In what world are 13 year olds on the pill?
The entertainment industry world.
E Michael Jones devoted an entire chapter of his book “The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit”, published in 2007, to the Frank case.
Just sayin.
Thanks, Mr. Unz; you’ve become a hero to me, even though you are mistaken on the immigration question.
“We should ask ourselves whether it is appropriate for an organization with such origins and such recent history to be granted enormous influence over the distribution of information across our Internet.”
Love the understatement.
Since “it is hard for a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it”, when may we expect an article on the pivotal role of usury?
Excellent advice.
Someone here recently berated me for hating all Jews because I constantly refer to all the Fifth Column’s manipulations as the Jews .
My real reason for doing that is to help in some small way to de-sensitize the Jew taboo…….which is what Unz does in a large and magnificently factual way.
Bravo Unz!
Thanks for observing my comment.
Your question, “Not trust in what?” indicates you did not read, or understand my short comment.
I quote my own relevant and crystal clear comment.
“He absolutely refuses to discuss, or permit to be discussed on his website, SOLUTIONS for the ails we Americans.
Unz went as far as removing my comments – on the necessity to Restore Our Republic!”
<b>Censorship invites distrust. Why do we approach alternate media outlets in order to raise our voice, rather than the New York Times and other mainstream outlets?
I also attempted the corrective “I am not an anti-Semite; I like Arabs.” The educated Mr Unz also refuses to tackle that one. Hint – the overwhelming majority of Jews are not Semites (peoples from the Middle East). Can you see reasons for Zionist Oligarchs to misdirect our most basic media of communication, (language), in order to cover up Their Racist Apartheid anti-Semitism? What was the point of Orwell’s 1984? If Jews are peoples from the Middle East, (Semites), then they may claim rights to some portions thereof? Zionism against Palestinians and other Arabs is a racist Apartheid anti-Semitic (not to mention imperialist), crime.
Koestler’s The 13th Tribe explains the origins of most Jews (including my Mother’s family).
https://www.bing.com/shop?q=the+13th+tribe+by+arthur+koestler&FORM=SHOPPA&originIGUID=65B0E41E58AF48B884A6320840579C65
God Bless!
Long life to you & Unz.
Webster tarpley is an idiot and preposterous liar, as I demonstrate here.
In attempting to place this remarkable accounting of the racist roots of ADL in a broader historical context, what appears to be happening is a broad and epic backlash to the hubristic control of the mainstream narrative. It so denounces and ridicules common human decency and universal human rights that rational minds question its plausibility. People who are attacked for exposing injustice get mad, and that anger spreads against theADL, the major perpetrator of the repression, to Zionism, its supportive ideology, to Israel, the international sponsor and enforcer of apartheid, and then to Judaism and Jews in general, for not policing their own zealots. Along with anti-zionism and anti-Israeli voices (such as BDS), genuine anti-semitism is getting louder and louder, which both validates the chronic victim script of Judaism and places great responsibility on those Jews who have not spoken up against Zionism, Israeli apartheid, and the submission of American power structures – media, congress, corporations, before the Zionist agenda. Jews: you have a responsibility to speak up and police your own, as Mr. Unz is doing, because you have relative credibility within your community in relationship to gentile voices. It is important to remember that there is a small and growing contingent of such courageous Jewish voices that speak out against Zionism, and those voices are becoming louder as polls show Jewish millennials losing faith in Israel due to its apartheid policies. Because Jews play such a large role in American banking, corporate, media, and political life, when the multiple massive financial bubbles we are living in burst, Jews are likely to get a large share of the blame, and rightly so, because they will bear an outsized portion of the responsibility. This will be true not only economically, but geopolitically, in Israel. Because Israel has made a two-state solution impossible, they will soon be confronted with a majority Arab state. Things are unraveling fast. I predict that confrontation with destiny is less than ten years away, and Mr. Unz is propelling a broad-based and quickly spreading public awakening.
Excellent article regarding the Leo Frank case by Ron Unz.
While I’m not familiar with the Webster Tarpley fellow you mention, of something that’s multi-faceted and involving multiple peoples, folks should have a solid understanding of the more purely Anglo-Saxon aspect of things as you allude.
A portion of that involves the centuries old A-S ideology of a future global ‘New Rome’ empire which historically they believed was to be centered upon a US/UK axis (with an emphasis on the United States) and dominated by the Anglo-Saxon people, namely powerful elements of their elites and hangers on.
I very much think the Bush’s (in particular Bush ’41), Clintons, the past PM’s Churchill and Blair, Queen Elizabeth II and other British royalty, as well as other Anglo-Saxonish elites and hangers on going back to the time of the 1776 American Revolution and before, are and have been very much aware of the New Rome ideology, and which may help in part to explain some of their past actions.
https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/the_new_rome_or_the_united_states_of_the_world_1853
https://archive.org/details/newrome00poes/page/n7
Mel’s outburst happened in the summer of 2006 during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. Mel was correct. Israel and Israel firsters are into the Seven nations to destroy mantra. He was protesting that. Our 500 BC media is quiet about that since it loves 500 BC more than the 21st century. The seven to destroy agenda comes from Deuteronomy 7.1-2 written in 500 BC.
Mel Gibson capitulated to jewish interests by removing the phrase “may his (Christ’s) blood be upon us and on our descendants” from the dialogue in “The Passion of the Christ”.
No it doesn’t. They would have preferred to find the black guilty but the evidence against Frank was too overwhelming.
I think you have to be a Southerner to understand how society worked back then. Blacks were at the bottom of the totem pole , Jews were acceptable in business dealings but not in gentile society. Well into my young adulthood Jews were excluded from mingling with upper gentile society. This was a hangover attitude from the Civil War and the Jewish carpetbaggers who flocked to the South to take advantage of a population in disarray . ….mainly the Blacks, who became quickly indebted to Jewish merchant stores by getting supplies on credit based on repaying when his crops came in ….often the newly freed black farmer ended up losing whatever small plot of land he had for not being able to pay the debt and was converted to a tenant farmer for the Jew. This was also the case with struggling white farmers but not as much as with the blacks.
Anti-defamation League Files Complaint Against Southern Resort Hotel
January 12, 1966
https://www.jta.org/1966/01/12/archive/anti-defamation-league-files-complaint-against-southern-resort-hotel
Had you written “New Zion ideology,” your assertion would’ve been much more convincing.
It is inadmissible in a court of law – which this forum is not.
Actually, the suspicions you seem to be raising were extensively discussed by the NOI authors.
They emphasize that Frank was apparently something of an egomaniac, with that tendency worsened by the massive national MSM coverage he had been receiving during his two years of appeals.
The NOI authors argue that Frank’s very wealthy and powerful Jewish backers might have feared that if he lived and perhaps eventually regained his freedom, his loose tongue and love of the media limelight might have eventually led to the discovery that he had been 100% guilty all along, which obviously would have created enormous problems for his supporters. Therefore, they speculate that these individuals either gave a green light to Frank’s killing or perhaps even helped ensure that it happened.
While they provide some intriguing bits of evidence in support of this hypothesis, I’d regard it as highly speculative at best.
I’ve mentioned it before here, but I think one of the most startling examples of the power of the ADL is the Zakim-Bunker Hill Bridge in Boston.
The bridge is near Bunker Hill. It has design elements which incorporate the monolithic memorial of Bunker Hill, once and for many years the tallest building in Boston. The memorial commemorates liberty and the birth of America, how is it possible that the regional head of the ADL could be hyphenated to that? Is there anything remotely similar? Some minority special interest group being hyphenated to a famous battle in nation’s fight for independence?
Critics of the decision were called antisemites.
The ADL is not invincible. I have wondered why more people don’t sue for being labeled anti-Semites. I can only guess it is the financial cost and fear of losing, although I think juries usually have good noses for sniffing out rot.
Anti-Defamation League Suffers Major Legal Defeat
Colorado Jury Orders Jewish Group to Pay $10.5 Million for Defamatory Statements
”In a legal decision rich with irony, a jury in a federal court case in Denver, Colorado, has found that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a powerful Jewish special interest group, had defamed a local couple. On April 28, 2000, the jurors awarded $10.5 million in damages to William and Dorothy Quigley. This is the first court verdict ever against the influential 87-year-old organization. The award, a quarter of the ADL’s $45 million annual budget, was substantially more than the Quigleys had requested.
At a 1994 news conference, the ADL had accused the Quigleys, a couple in the Denver suburb of Evergreen, of perpetrating the worst anti-Semitic incident in the area in ten years. The ADL accused them of launching a campaign against their Jewish neighbors, Mitchell and Candace Aronson, to run them out of town and threatening to commit acts such as painting oven doors on their neighbors’ home. Concluding a four week trial, the jury found that more than 40 statements by Saul F. Rosenthal, director of the ADL’s Mountain States chapter, were defamatory and “not substantially true.”
The Quigleys, who are Roman Catholic, and the Aronsons — neighbors on the same street two houses away — got along until the Aronsons’ large dog allegedly attacked the Quigley’s smaller dog. As the dispute escalated, Mitchell Aronson tuned in a police scanner to eavesdrop on private conversations by the Quigleys over their cordless telephone. The Aronsons’ nearly 100 hours of recorded telephone conversations violated the amended federal wiretap law, which makes it illegal to record conversations on a cordless telephone, to transcribe the material, and to use the transcriptions for any purpose.
The Aronsons sought help from the ADL, whose local director publicly denounced the Quigleys as anti-Semites. Director Rosenthal illegally used the tapes to charge at a news conference in December 1994 that the Quigleys were engaged in “a vicious anti-Semitic campaign.” He expanded on these charges later that same day in an interview on a Denver radio talk show.
Acting on complaints from the Aronsons, the local District Attorney filed ethnic intimidation charges against the Quigleys. But the county prosecutor later dropped the charges and, in an open letter, apologized to the couple, saying he had found no evidence that either had engaged in “anti-Semitic conduct or harassment.” The DA also paid the Quigleys $75,000 as part of an out-of-court settlement.
The numerous damage awards include one million dollars in economic and non-economic damages for William Quigley and $500,000 for Dorothy Quigley. The couple was also awarded more than $8.7 million in punitive damages and other, lesser amounts.”
The ADL is one of the many tentacles of the only legal mafia
Yes, it’s part of a system. Recently I watched WIZARD OF LIES, an HBO movie about Bernie Madoff directed by Barry Levinson and written by Jewish pros.
Pretty well done and well-acted, but it hardly showed anything about the operation. All it did was humanize the larger Madoff family as having had no clue. Also, with DeNiro as Madoff, even the arch villain is more personable than anything else.
Ron Unz is.
And you probably are too.
This is the part that you and Unz and the other denizens of this mad place don’t get. The ADL won the argument. They beat you thoroughly because you and your ideas are dumb trash. So, cry about it, I guess, but don’t delude yourself with dreams of pogroms.
The CIA has no love for or trust in the Israelis.
False Flag
A series of CIA memos describes how Israeli Mossad agents posed as CIA Agents to recruit members of the terrorist organization Jundallah to fight their covert war against Iran
https://foreignpolicy.com/2012/01/13/false-flag/
Buried deep in the archives of America’s intelligence services are a series of memos, written during the last years of President George W. Bush’s administration, that describe how Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents. According to two U.S. intelligence officials, the Israelis, flush with American dollars and toting U.S. passports, posed as CIA officers in recruiting Jundallah operatives — what is commonly referred to as a “false flag” operation.
The memos, as described by the sources, one of whom has read them and another who is intimately familiar with the case, investigated and debunked reports from 2007 and 2008 accusing the CIA, at the direction of the White House, of covertly supporting Jundallah — a Pakistan-based Sunni extremist organization. Jundallah, according to the U.S. government and published reports, is responsible for assassinating Iranian government officials and killing Iranian women and children.
But while the memos show that the United States had barred even the most incidental contact with Jundallah, according to both intelligence officers, the same was not true for Israel’s Mossad. The memos also detail CIA field reports saying that Israel’s recruiting activities occurred under the nose of U.S. intelligence officers, most notably in London, the capital of one of Israel’s ostensible allies, where Mossad officers posing as CIA operatives met with Jundallah officials.
“It’s amazing what the Israelis thought they could get away with,” the intelligence officer said. “Their recruitment activities were nearly in the open. They apparently didn’t give a damn what we thought.”
Interviews with six currently serving or recently retired intelligence officers over the last 18 months have helped to fill in the blanks of the Israeli false-flag operation. In addition to the two currently serving U.S. intelligence officers, the existence of the Israeli false-flag operation was confirmed by four retired intelligence officers who have served in the CIA or have monitored Israeli intelligence operations from senior positions inside the U.S. government.
There is no denying that there is a covert, bloody, and ongoing campaign aimed at stopping Iran’s nuclear program, though no evidence has emerged connecting recent acts of sabotage and killings inside Iran to Jundallah. Many reports have cited Israel as the architect of this covert campaign, which claimed its latest victim on Jan. 11 when a motorcyclist in Tehran slipped a magnetic explosive device under the car of Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, a young Iranian nuclear scientist. The explosion killed Roshan, making him the fourth scientist assassinated in the past two years. The United States adamantly denies it is behind these killings.
According to one retired CIA officer, information about the false-flag operation was reported up the U.S. intelligence chain of command. It reached CIA Director of Operations Stephen Kappes, his deputy Michael Sulick, and the head of the Counterintelligence Center. All three of these officials are now retired. The Counterintelligence Center, according to its website, is tasked with investigating “threats posed by foreign intelligence services.”
The report then made its way to the White House, according to the currently serving U.S. intelligence officer. The officer said that Bush “went absolutely ballistic” when briefed on its contents.
“The report sparked White House concerns that Israel’s program was putting Americans at risk,” the intelligence officer told me. “There’s no question that the U.S. has cooperated with Israel in intelligence-gathering operations against the Iranians, but this was different. No matter what anyone thinks, we’re not in the business of assassinating Iranian officials or killing Iranian civilians.”
“It’s easy to understand why Bush was so angry,” a former intelligence officer said. “After all, it’s hard to engage with a foreign government if they’re convinced you’re killing their people. Once you start doing that, they feel they can do the same.”
A senior administration official vowed to “take the gloves off” with Israel, according to a U.S. intelligence officer. But the United States did nothing — a result that the officer attributed to “political and bureaucratic inertia.”
The debate over Jundallah was resolved only after Bush left office when, within his first weeks as president, Barack Obama drastically scaled back joint U.S.-Israel intelligence programs targeting Iran, according to multiple serving and retired officers.
Israel regularly proposes conducting covert operations targeting Iranians, but is just as regularly shut down, according to retired and current intelligence officers. “They come into the room and spread out their plans, and we just shake our heads,” one highly placed intelligence source said, “and we say to them — ‘Don’t even go there. The answer is no.’”
The 2009 attack was just one in a long line of terrorist attacks attributed to the organization. In August 2007, Jundallah kidnapped 21 Iranian truck drivers. In December 2008, it captured and executed 16 Iranian border guards — the gruesome killings were filmed, in a stark echo of the decapitation of American businessman Nick Berg in Iraq at the hands of al Qaeda’s Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. In July 2010, Jundallah conducted a twin suicide bombing in Zahedan outside a mosque, killing dozens of people, including members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
“This certainly isn’t the first time this has happened, though it’s the worst case I’ve heard of,” former Centcom chief and retired Gen. Joe Hoar said of the Israeli operation upon being informed of it. “But while false-flag operations are hardly new, they’re extremely dangerous. You’re basically using your friendship with an ally for your own purposes. Israel is playing with fire. It gets us involved in their covert war, whether we want to be involved or not.”
The Israeli operation left a number of recently retired CIA officers sputtering in frustration. “It’s going to be pretty hard for the U.S. to distance itself from an Israeli attack on Iran with this kind of thing going on,” one of them told me.
While many of the details of Israel’s involvement with Jundallah are now known, many others still remain a mystery — and are likely to remain so. The CIA memos of the incident have been “blue bordered,” meaning that they were circulated to senior levels of the broader U.S. intelligence community as well as senior State Department officials.
What has become crystal clear, however, is the level of anger among senior intelligence officials about Israel’s actions. “This was stupid and dangerous,” the intelligence official who first told me about the operation said. “Israel is supposed to be working with us, not against us. If they want to shed blood, it would help a lot if it was their blood and not ours. You know, they’re supposed to be a strategic asset. Well, guess what? There are a lot of people now, important people, who just don’t think that’s true.”
Yes, but the other lesson is that the label of anti-Semitism is worth $10 millions. So if you got labeled and it sticks your worth drops by $10 millions. The weapon they have remains very powerful. To really disarm it we would have to come to the point where accusations of anti-Semitism would be just ignored with a shrug “so what.” In Soviet Union being called reactionary or revisionist would cost you job, freedom and even life but now nobody cares. This is the point we want to get to with the anti-Semitism.
I remember that 1993 ADL raid in San Francisco quite well. Sam Donaldson was filling in as the ABC News anchor and the raid was his top story! I’m sure any video of this has long since been memory holed but I remember my jaw dropping at the time. I was subscribing to the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs and knew this was big, big stuff. Massive respect to Donaldson.
The books I read were 1930s books. It’s amazing what can be found in college libraries, even in colleges founded in the 20 th century. Often when a college is founded other college libraries donate books. Often really old books can be found.
What was the basis of the black servant’s assertion that Frank had confessed the murder to his wife?
Everybody lies. but that is not too important.
What I would like to find out is the yield on the latest issue of bonds.
>Things are unraveling fast. I predict that confrontation with destiny is less than ten years away, and Mr. Unz is propelling a broad-based and quickly spreading public awakening.
And may it be so JNDillard!
Thank you, Mr. Unz, for another thoughtful and intelligent analysis.
Incredibly, the Frank case brings to mind a book that millions of American schoolchildren were required to read and discuss in the classroom during their formative years: ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’.
This famous piece of politically-correct fiction (‘Mockingbird’) shares many similarities to the Frank case except that in ‘Mockingbird’, the fictional perp is an ignorant, white man (living in a racist, white Southern community) whereas in the non-fictional Frank case, a revised, politically-correct Jewish narrative would have us believe that a ‘falsely accused’ Jew was ‘scapegoated’ by bigoted whites who wanted to blame an innocent Jew for the unsolved murder of a white girl simply because–you guessed it–he happened to be Jewish. Oy vey.
Thank you for shedding light, Mr. Unz, on another self-serving kosher yarn.
Jewish narcissism and self-pity is without peer.
You may know that Zakim’s son, Josh, recently lost his bid to unseat Bob Galvin in the Massachusetts Democrat primary for Secretary of the Commonwealth.
The younger Zakim is a Boston City Councilor. Galvin has been the Secretary of the Commonwealth since 1994.
Mark Twain’s Life In The Mississippi has a couple chapters about Jewish store owners and money lenders cheating the freed blacks.
The problem was so bad that there was a plan to establish cooperative stores for everyone. Blacks and Whites. It never happened
Some of the Faulkner Robert Penn Warren and other southern writers feature a store owner running a Shylock business exploiting blacks.
I wonder if he really said it. The deputy sheriff who claimed Mel said it was a Jew. He probably followed Mel for days.
Please stop labeling people. It is showing your baby teeth.
The professional Jews don’t mind creating Jewish martyrs. It does seem far fetched
John McCain Sr was the admiral who gave the order to stand down, if I remember correctly. And Senator John McCain Jr was chairman of the Senate Banking Committee when many of the regulations meant to prevent media ownership concentrated in too few hands were gutted. Viacom and Sumner Redstone major beneficiaries and long time campaign donors.
So, of course, the media played up McCain’s funerals like he was the greatest patriot that ever lived when, in fact, he was truly a contemptible traitor. Actually, the way he was lionized is practically proof that he was a scoundrel. Call it the McCain Rule: the glory bestowed on a politician in death is in direct proportion to the infamy they deserve. If you don’t believe me, remember, the last great over-the-top national panegyric was for Ted Kennedy.
Let me put it in simpler terms–I originate from a very different culture and history than Ron Unz, for all my deepest respect to Ron. These were my people who were digging up Babyi Yar and liberated Auschwitz (yes, this wasn’t Obama’s uncle who did this–Russians/Soviets did liberating), among many other concentration camps. So, I do not deny Holocaust, albeit I do have issues with numbers since some clarity has to be established on numbers of Jews fighting as Red Army soldiers and officers among some other issues. Plus some other things, so no–there was no 6 million. But Holocaust did happen, same as it happened to dirty Slavs such as myself. But you missed my point completely–only in the US (plus in Western Europe) Jewish Holocaust (Armenian genocide by Turkey was the first official one) is viewed as a pivotal event of the WW II–it was not. It was just another atrocity. This one specifically designed against Jews. So, my only question is–what is the real number. It certainly is not 6 million but it is also, certainly, in low millions. 2-3? I don’t know. So, do you get my position?
1. Holocaust as deliberate elimination of Jews did happen. But it was one of several genocides.
2. What is the real number? I don’t know.
3. In the US Holocaust has long since stopped being a matter of history but is an industry designed to hammer mostly ignorant on real WW II history America into utter moral submission by means of guilt, both direct and by association. In US Holocaust is a Chutzpah. In Russia–it is totally different thing.
Simple as that.
From what I have just read about the mob it was not a mob as we imagine a mob. It was very professionally organized operation with few participants and some important people behind it who funded it. The whole operation was impeccably executed.
Since Leo Frank could have never been exonerated beyond a reasonable doubt and would remain a killer in the mind of majority there was no moral lesson or benefit to ADL having him lingering in prison and everybody saying or at least thinking that he was alive because of the power of Jews and that he really got away with murder. By having him extrajudicially killed he was instantly transformed into a victim of anti-Semitism and from a liability became an invaluable asset to the Jewish cause. There could not have been a better ending to this story. No playwrights of Greek tragedies or Shakespeare or Ibsen or Chekhov could have written it better. The play wrote itself. It was the only possible outcome. Were there playwrights behind the last act of the play that we do not know of? Obviously this is speculative. But because his extrajudicial killing was necessary to resolve the play I would not be surprised if some Jewish Iago character was a part of the cast.
Death warrants? Please explain what you mean.
He didn’t ruin his career. He went in the make that Aztec movie. That earned tens of millions
He’s been a producer and director ever sincePassion of the Christ. When he got old and wrinkled he had the sense to become a producer and director and make even more money than he did as an actor.
I admire Jack Nicolesen for playing realistic old men. I don’t admire Stallone Redford and Eastford for playing men in the prime of life in their 70s
Here’s a TV interview I did with Jeff Blankfort about 15 years ago. Mr. Blankfort knows his subject well.
Not to say any thing against S, but one letter commenter handles play havoc with selectively blocking commenters. When one blocks “e” for example, a few dozen other commenters get blocked because they end in e, or something like that — I couldn’t actually discern the pattern. “Rosie” was one that was blocked when “e” was.
How about a min handle length of 3 characters?
The servant over heard it. The servnts also told police that Frank called his Rabbi to the house as soon as he cane home that day. The Rabbi got there before the police did.
Something that would lead a reasonable man to believe Frank knew about the death before the police or anyone else did.
Wonder how much of a retainer the Quiggley attorney got before he agreed to take the case. Going up against the ADL was a big risk for both the Quigleys and their attorney
“perhaps you should read up on Scientology”
Track the origins of scientology, it is an offshoot of the same Judeo-Masonic esoteric/occult conspiracy, just the same as B’nai B’rith is, and Israel, Thule society, Mizraim and all these others. If you start following the Freemasonry conspiracy, it is the Judeo-Masonic conspiracy, the Zionist conspiracy, the banker’s conspiracy, the messianic conspiracy. It is exactly the same, only changing the cover organization every now and then. There is only one conspiracy that matters in this short history.
Crimson2 means ADL is compiling names and addresses and they’ll get us first.
No, Circassian genocide perpetrated by your people was the fist one.
Any drop of truth in the sea of falsehood would make bigger waves. The ‘controversial’ problem of the Jewish role in the ‘Russian Revolution’ cannot be understood without the ‘Statute of Kalisz’. One can ‘demonstrate’ that Jews were insignificant among Bolsheviks, but forget the Bund, the Mensheviks, the SRs, the Kadets (The Kadets “were unwaveringly committed to full citizenship for all of Russia’s minorities” and supported Jewish emancipation. The party drew significant support from Jews and Volga Germans and a significant number of each group were active party members” – from Wiki, no less).
Isn’t that the “Undzer Shtik”, aka ‘Jewish Mob, Jewish Mafia, Kosher Mafia, Kosher Nostra’? The ‘Khazarians’? Yes, the same ‘old shtik’. They hate Russians, they abhor Orthodoxy (why do they want to make up a Khazar- Zaporizhian-swidomite ‘Ukrainian’ pseudo-’Orthodoxy’?). Dreyfuss, Beilis, Frank, same old shtik (you would not disregard the role of Jacob Schiff, revealed by Ron).
“But because his extrajudicial killing was necessary to resolve the play I would not be surprised if some Jewish Iago character was a part of the cast.”
I think you are correct. That is completely logical and there could not be a better outcome for ADL than a lynch by Gentiles, as things went as they did.
Do you have a reference for that?
QUOTE: What was the basis of the black servant’s assertion that Frank had confessed the murder to his wife?
Presumably he “overheard” the confession, as domestic servants are wont to do.
If the servant actually heard Frank admit to the murder directly or by inference (“Honey, I really screwed up this time”), the overheard statement would be admissible in court as an “admission against interest” on the part of the out-of-court speaker (Frank). This is a long-established exception to the hearsay rule.
Of course, even if the testimony is admitted in court, the credibility of the witness and the meaning of the overheard statement would remain subject to challenge.
McCain was no patriot, he was a disgusting yellow runt.
”There are those who wrap themselves in flags and blow the tinny trumpet of patriotism as a means of fooling the people. ”
George Galloway
I think the relevance of the Frank case, as presented by RU, is not only that it was the foundational event of the ADL but that it also represents a paradigm of how the ADL controls and distorts public narratives by inventing untrue “facts,” suppressing actual facts and genuine information, and creating and then playing on stereotypes—mainly, the Jew as victim of antisemitism.
Thank you.
Thus, given that Conley was subjected to 16 hours of cross-examination, I don’t see his assertion as being inadmissible hearsay. The bugaboo with hearsay is its admittance without the benefit of cross-examination.
Ted Kennedy was far from perfect, but he was a damned sight better than John McCain.
Please.
These two are in separate universes.
“The worrisome incompetence of ADL researchers”
I do take it that Mr. Unz realizes that the ADL is about slander campaigns which are designed to stick with the credulous and biased public, say, maintenance of the decades long perception management of the public through the owned Western propaganda media, so that he is not really surprised about the lack of research they do? Or perhaps some study of the methods of propaganda is useful.
Crimson joo
Back to spew?
Everyone hates jews right?
You’re all such moral, upright people!
How can this be?
Cue the violins and weeping.
Distort, distract and defame.
Mafiya=judaism
Go tell it to a Palestinian criminaljoo
Re Renfro 115: “The CIA has no love for or trust in the Israelis.” Truer words were never spoken. The Government of Israel makes itself useful, that’s all. If you need something done that a psychopath on PCP won’t do, you can always just go to Israel. They’ll do anything. 911 is the conclusive proof.
This is simply a case where the GOI might be more useful as scapegoat and punching bag than as a henchman. Recall that KCIA once had the Mossad agents’ current job of bribing US legislators for compromise (Tongsun Park!). That kind of role entails a beating and retrenchment.
The Bush family’s hokey little set piece: “What’s a Neocon, Daaad?” “Israel.” is just one of the tricks they periodically pull out of the bag. It gets the press to hyperventilate because the wrong faction is in power, and diverts from the real issue: Because of Section 202, whoever’s in power is a kleptocratic dictator. Because if CIA does it, they get away with it, illegal or not.
“To really disarm it we would have to come to the point where accusations of anti-Semitism would be just ignored with a shrug “so what.” . . . . This is the point we want to get to with the anti-Semitism”
Why?
I don’t agree.
Shouting “Fire!” in a theater is a crime.
So s ould be the frivolous charge of antisemitism.
In fact, the problem nowadays is that the charge is greeted basically with a shrug—a shrug that the accused person is an antisemite and and comprehension that one must speak in a PC fashion to avoid any offense against PC rules.
That is, the assumption is that one must and should self-censor to avoid the AS accusation, even when it comes to, say, a factual description of what, say, Jews have done to Palestinians.
So, I think that it behooves victims of AS charges to fight back and nail the AS crowd.
So that *they* become the ones to watch their tongues and self-censor, not their victims.
Here’s part 1 of a TV interview I did with Jeff Blankfort about 15 years ago. Mr. Blankfort knows his subject well.
@Ron Unz
The go-to primer on the ADL is this publication by Executive Intelligence Review, The Ugly Truth About The ADL, that the provides the historical background to the origins of this operation, an operation that must be seen within the context of the British Empire’s continuing attack against the United States of America.
https://archive.org/details/TheUglyTruthAboutTheAdl_217/page/n0
Such a work actually provides a further context upon which many Jews have actually been dupes and agents of the very prejudice that they profess to oppose but are in fact agents of an evil that should be understood as ‘oligarchy’ that treats man as a beast, and ensures that Jews act as such, rather than to express the wisdom of Genesis that man is made in the image of God.
One must think of ADL writings as pieces of text based on a propaganda format, the main ingredient being the repetition of powerful words which must trigger solidly implemented associations in the Western mind, trigger words like: anti-semitism, extreme-right, Nazis, Hitler, genocide, etc.
So they are variations on the same theme, designed to trigger and maintain associations.
It would be all too boring and unconvincing if they said the same lines over and over again, so there needs to be some variation, some custom material apparently targeted at the subject in question (the writings of Mr. Unz and his sources in this case), some appearance of reason, and of course, the trigger words.