“I HAVE BEEN VINDICATED!” Min. Farrakhan discusses Black/Jewish relations

The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Volume 1:
The Jewish Role in the Enslavement of the African


The Honorable Louis Farrakhan discusses Black/Jewish relations

The Final Call, May 4, 1992.

EDITOR’S NOTE: For seven long years, since he came to the defense of Rev. Jesse L. Jackson during Rev. Jackson’s 1984 presidential campaign, the Honorable Louis Farrakhan has been a target of attacks by members of the Jewish community and unjustly branded as an “anti-Semite.” Minister Farrakhan granted this interview to respond to those attacks in light of the recently published book The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, a research project by the Nation of Islam which documents Jewish scholars testifying to their own crimes against Black people and validating many of the truths that Minister Farrakhan spoke publicly.


FC: You’ve said you’ve been vindicated by the publication of the book The Secret Relationship between Blacks and Jews. Please explain what you mean. 

MLF: Since 1984, I’ve been charged by members of the Jewish community with being an anti-Semite or, to be more specific, anti-Jewish. I have taken offense at that bigoted statement, for it appears that anyone who is critical of Jewish, or Israel’s, behavior is labeled an anti-Semite.

This is done to frighten the person or persons who are critical of Jews or Israel into silence. But Jews have the freedom to write or say what they please about anyone or anything. In the last several years, especially, people dare not speak out against any outrage done by Jews.

I am vindicated in that some of our brothers in the Nation of Islam saw how I was being treated by Jewish members of the press, the media in general, Jewish leaders of organizations, rabbis and teachers. Our brothers did the research and came up with evidence from highly respected Jewish scholars and rabbis that proves that Jews were involved in bringing our fathers into this shameful and wretched condition. Jews were involved in owning the ships and plantations, the sale and misuse of our people and women, the destruction of our minds; and they were involved in keeping us in the sad state in which some of their fathers put us. Jews, therefore, were opposed to and worked against every Black leader that came truly for our liberation. And, as it was in time past, so it is today.

So, my comments and statements were not anti-Semitic. They were the truth about Jewish involvement in our enslavement and in keeping us in the wretched condition that we find ourselves in today. That’s why we say that we are vindicated.

 FC: Why is it important to point out the involvement of Jews in our enslavement and our condition today? 

MLF: Jewish writers and scholars have pointed out to us and the world the involvement of Arabs, Africans and other Europeans in our enslavement, but there has been a deliberate effort to hide the hand of the Jews and their involvement. Our enslavement greatly increased the wealth of the Jewish community in the New World. We published this book, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, not out of hatred, but out of a concern that our people know the truth and that Jews, particularly the Jewish youth, know the truth; so that an old relationship that is not beneficial to us might possibly be changed into a relationship that is more equitable, fair and just.

 FC: You speak about an old relationship that has not been beneficial to us. Can you define what the Black/Jewish relationship has been in the past and what it is today? 

MLF: In my judgment, the old Black/Jewish relationship has been that of a master and slave. We have always gone to members of the Jewish community with our hat in our hand looking to them for substance.

Jews helped found most civil rights organizations. It is interesting to note that none of these organizations founded by Jews, or aided in its founding by Jews, dealt with the economic problems of Black people. The NAACP, the Urban League and others were steered away from economics and dealt mainly with social problems, vis-à-vis, breaking down social barriers.

Therefore, Jews fought alongside Blacks to break down barriers for Blacks, but we, in a weak economic position, were not able to take advantage of the breaking down of those barriers. But the Jews were able to do so.

In effect, they were our allies, but we were the vanguard of breaking down the barriers and they (Jews), women, gays and lesbians were able to take advantage of the breaking down of these barriers while Blacks, economically and socially, have gone backwards. Since the passing of the Voting Rights Bill and the Public Accommodations Bill, Black people have noticed a serious decline in the financial support of Jews supporting Black organizations.

 Then came the Bakke decision and other decisions which clearly flew in the face of laws that Black folk felt were progressive for us. That which Jews called quotas, we called righting the wrongs or opening a door to areas such as medical schools that we were not privileged to have access to in sufficient numbers.

 So, Blacks and Jews were at odds during this period of time and, of course, in 1983 when Rev. Jackson decided to seek the nomination of the Democratic party for the presidency of the United States and we aligned ourselves with him, then the great pain in Back/Jewish relationships fully manifested.

 In fact, if we go back to before 1983 and observe what happened with Andrew Young when he was the UN ambassador and he visited the PLO representative, the Jews saw to it that Andrew Young was pushed out of office and this angered Back people.

 Then, with the Rev. Jackson’s political thrust, we came fully into the picture. The Back-Jewish relationship at that point had soured and was steadily souring. With my emergence and speaking the way I spoke, Jewish leaders put pressure on Back leaders to denounce me and this made us painfully aware of how much control leaders of the Jewish community have over the spokespersons of Black people: preachers, politicians, educators, doctors, lawyers, businesspersons, artists, and our athletes and entertainers.

So, any person who could be an effective spokesperson for our hurt had to tie into the agenda of the Jewish community or they would be effectively silenced.

 FC: How should leaders of the Jewish community respond to the writings in this book? 

MLF: If Jews are aware of how they profited, and still do, from our wretched condition, and if they are aware of what some of their fathers did to bring us into this condition, then a Jew that has some conscience or a real disposition toward fairness and justice might be moved to aid in the redressing of this grievance. However, what will be the response of the Jewish community? If they follow their pattern historically, they will be even more incensed and work even harder for the destruction of the leadership of Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam.

 FC: What about those who would say, “The enslavement of Black people was done by my forefathers and that has nothing to do with how we feel today”? 

MLF: I could agree with that if the present generation of Jewish leaders were not so hostile to those Black leaders whom they do not control. The present generation of Jewish leadership is fighting the liberation movement of Black people tooth and nail. The present generation of Jews control the wealth of musical, artistic and sports talent in the Black community.

 Jews control the medical associations, the bar associations, the Psychiatric [sic] associations, and all of the major educational and scientific associations. Blacks who are trying desperately in these associations to move up, find they are fighting Jews at the top. And unless they submit totally, they are in serious trouble within these associations.

 So, the present-day Jews have benefited from what their fathers did to our fathers to put us in the mental and psychological condition that we are in, and their writers, teachers, scholars and movie producers, businesspersons and script writers work to keep us in the psychological and mental condition of subservience. I can’t say that this generation has shown that they are any better than their fathers. However, I believe if the younger Jews knew the truth, they might do better.

 FC: During the period of slavery there was a lot of savage treatment of Black people…

MLF: I think that that’s a true statement. …. [Jews] were a part of the  mechanism that brought us into slavery, they share in the guilt of the savage mistreatment of us… If you read what they have written, for example, Jewish slave owners degraded our women and were not slack in the sexual mistreatment of our females. How much more brutal can you get? If you don’t whip me with a lash, but you take our women and daughters and abuse them, that’s abuse….

 Many of the Southern Jews would rather have seen slavery maintained than abolished. They fought against the abolitionists. They fought for slavery, because slavery maintained their position of economic strength and power, particularly on the East Coast and in the South. Many Jews today will fight the liberation movement of Blacks for precisely the same reason, to maintain their position of wealth and power.

 FC: The Honorable Elijah Muhammad was your teacher and of course he received some opposition from the Jewish community, but it didn’t seem to be as extensive as the opposition that has come against you or as vocal and violent. Why has this been the case? 

MLF: The Honorable Elijah Muhammad never mentioned Jews directly in his criticism of white people. He classified all whites as devils, regardless of their faith.

Many Jews opposed him, but they opposed him through the Black organizations and leaders over whom they held control and influence. Jews at that time did not have to come out themselves and attack the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, nor did he attack them.

Now most of those organizations don’t have the power that they once had, nor do the leaders of these organizations have the same degree of the power over the masses that their predecessors once had. Plus, Black leaders are more enlightened today than were their predecessors.

I am different in that I defended Rev. Jackson in what he said and then got into a direct confrontation with members of the Jewish community. They see me as more of a threat to them specifically than they did the Honorable Elijah Muhammad.

 FC: Has the focus in recent years on the Black/Jewish relationship benefited our people? 

MLF: We helped to make manifest something that Blacks in leadership have known all along: that practically all of our leadership has been and is today controlled by members of the Jewish community. This is not good for us as a people.

The fact that some Jewish leaders and politicians were not able to get Black leaders to condemn or repudiate me in the manner they decided frightened those Jews, causing them to charge that the Black community gradually was being filled with the spirit of anti-Semitism. However, as you read the history of Black-Jewish relationships, you can’t find Black people painting swastikas on synagogues or defiling the religious houses of Jews in any manner. You can’t find us attacking Jews or boycotting Jewish stores and trying to do things to hurt the Jewish community. You just can’t find that in our history. But Volume 1, 2 and 3 of our research will show that we have more right to paint Jews as anti-Black than they have to paint any of us as anti-Semitic or anti-Jewish. We have overwhelming proof that they have worked against the best interest of Black people, while they have no proof at all that we have worked or are working to deter their legitimate progress in any way.

 FC: The term “anti-Semitic” has been used to paint a broad stroke over anyone who speaks contrary to what Jews would like for them to speak. Can you define for us what you think the term “anti-Semitic” really means and how does it differ from the way Jews use the term? 

MLF: The term as it is used now is bigoted, because the Jews are acting as though they are the only Semitic people. If the Arabs are Semites, and they are, and we have friendly relations with the Arabs then wouldn’t it be proper to say that we are anti-Jewish rather than anti-Semitic?

The term is conveniently used by members of the Jewish community to stop criticism, as I said earlier, and it changes in its definition as the need arises. Many of those who are referred to as Jews are not Semitic people at all; they are Europeans.

 FC: Where does the current situation then leave Blacks who also claim to be Jews? 

MLF: Most Blacks who are Jews with whom I come into contact feel the suffering of their people and they feel the racism directed against them by their brethren in faith who are Caucasians. We feel the same thing as Muslims.

There are some of our Arab brothers who just don’t have good feelings for Black people and there are some of our Indian brothers who are Muslims who don’t necessarily like Black people and vice-versa. So, we have this racism in Islam, Christianity, and in Judaism. It is an ugly thing that has to be uprooted today in all religions in order for us to relate to each other as brothers.

 FC: In your lectures, you have dealt with the question of Jews being the chosen people. Who are the chosen people? And if those who claim to be the chosen people are not the chosen ones, then why are they making such claims? 

MLF: A man may choose a wife and if that relationship does not work out, he may divorce that wife and choose another. God chooses people to serve as instruments of His Will. Maybe in this way, the Jews were chosen. However, when you are chosen you have a responsibility. If you do not carry out your responsibility, God doesn’t keep his choice there. He takes His choice somewhere else. It seems as though all of those who have been chosen to carry the light of God to those who walk in darkness have in some way failed.

 The Jews have not shared the light of God that they received freely with the Gentiles. So, God raises up others. Here you have a Christian population, and I am speaking mainly of Caucasians, who have spread the gospel all over the earth, but with what intention in mind?

 So the cross, or Christianity, has been used as an instrument of white supremacy. They have spread the gospel, but not for the Kingdom of God; more for the maintenance of the kingdom of white supremacy.

 The Arabs came into the light of Allah and the Qur’an and spread Islam to the known world at that time, but they became corrupt and began to lose their power and a new hemisphere was discovered and now it is populated with over a half a billion people or more who have never heard the message of Muhammad and have a version of the message of Moses, Jesus and the Prophets that contains truth, but it is not altogether true.

As a result, the Western hemisphere has grown up as a bastion of white supremacy and racism that has seen the darker people, or the original inhabitants of this hemisphere, just about destroyed.

So, now God takes His choice from a people that were no people at all. They were rejected and despised according to the Scripture. The Scripture says that they would be a foolish people, but God would choose them and make them His people and He would be their God. He refers to them in the Scriptures of the Bible as “the lost sheep.”

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), said that the sun of Islam would rise from the West in the latter days and we know that Prophet Muhammad was born in Arabia, not in the West, but yet Muhammad, in the Qur’an, was called a “light-giving sun.”

That means there would be a Muhammad coming up out of the West from among a people who were no people, foolish, despised and rejected, and God would choose them for His glory.

 We believe that that people are the Black people of the Western hemisphere and specifically the Black people in the United States of America. We have been chosen by God, not to walk around with our chest puffed out in arrogance and vanity, but chosen out of our suffering and affliction that we, in whose hearts is a love for God and humanity, might do a service to the totality of the human family after a service is done by God for us.

This is why Jesus’ first mission was to the lost sheep and then he told his disciples to, “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel.” I believe that that good news is among us today and that good news will have to be preached by us after our hearts are purified of the rancor and bitterness that comes from our sojourn in slavery and our evil mistreatment.

We must now come up out of that and recognize that that was our furnace of affliction to purify us for God’s ultimate service.

 FC: Do you fear any retribution for your position with regard to Black/Jewish relations? 

MLF: The Jews refer to me as Hitler, and any Jew who knows what Hitler did to members of the Jewish community would believe that I had that same thought in mind for them because I am critical of them. Any Jew who would feel that I am a new Hitler would want death for me.

I am not only hated by Jews, but what does Mr. Bush and the government and its powers think of me? What does the Arab world, the leadership in particular, think of me because I believe in Elijah Muhammad and in Master Fard Muhammad as the great Mahdi? There is a whole camp of hatred against me.

The scriptures refer to our people, and most all human beings, as lost sheep, easily led in the wrong direction but hard to lead in the right direction. The wickedly wise are not good leaders of the sheep, they are evil misleaders of the sheep and this is why Jesus is referred to in the scripture as the “Good Shepherd.” He leads the sheep in a direction that is beneficial to the sheep and out of harm’s way.

I can definitely say I am in the valley of the shadow of death and if God is not with me I am finished. But He, Allah (God), has prepared a table for me in the midst of my enemies. My cup runneth over and He (God) anoints my head with wisdom until my cup runs over. I don’t fear that evil will come to me. Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life and I plan to dwell in the house of the Lord. 

 FC: Is the relationship between the United States and Israel detrimental to the United States? 

MLF: I would say that any lobby that effectively sways the representatives of the people against the will of the people is robbing the people of true representation and is robbing the people of democracy.

In that case, these lobbies are detrimental to the democratic process and any person who uses their monies and organizational strength to punish those whose views are different from theirs, even though that leader’s views may be representative of his own people, those kinds of persons are detrimental to that group and are ultimately detrimental to America. My personal feeling is that the way the Senate and Congress responds to the needs of Israel and the way Congress fails to respond to the needs of the American people shows that the strength of the Jewish lobby is detrimental to the good and well-being of the citizenry of the United States.

 FC: Are there any closing comments? 

MLF: This book, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, is being sent to Jewish leaders, to Black leaders and Black politicians for an honest comment in hopes that a proper dialogue will begin based on truth.

What I am in favor of creating through this writing is an honest dialogue where a new relationship, if any is to be formed, can be formed based on equity, justice and fairness; a relationship that’s mutually beneficial and profitable to both Jews and Blacks.

 For members of the Jewish community to say that this book is slander when it came from their own pens shows the lengths to which members of the Jewish community will go to hide the truth.

The truth will come forward as both the Scriptures of the Bible and Qur’an teach. The Bible teaches that nothing that is done in the dark will remain there, it will be brought out into the light.

 The Qur’an says, “Though it be the weight of an atom hidden in a rock and the rock buried in the earth, yet will Allah bring it forth.”

This is the day when all of our defects will be manifested and you will find nations kneeling down before the record of their deeds and we have to bow down before the book of our deeds as well. The Jews, Arabs, Africans and America as a nation will have to kneel down before the record of their deeds, for we are living in the Day of Judgment and justice.

So, those whose deeds of good are light and their deeds of evil are heavy, it is they who should tremble today in the presence of God. But those whose attempts are to do good and yet have evil in their lives, if our good outweighs our evil then God promises that He will admit us into His mercy, and hopefully, we will be able to see the hereafter.

 FC: Thank you, Minister Farrakhan.


Click Here to Download the PDF: IHaveBeenVindicatedInterviewFC1992a


The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan: Iran Press Conference, 2018

TRANSCRIPT [complete]

Press Conference, November 8, 2018, Tehran, Iran

Final Call News description: The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan delivers a powerful message in Iranian capital, Tehran, during a press conference at Press TV’s headquarters, November 8, 2018. More info and updates at tinyurl.com/tehranfcn.

@2:49 The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan: As-Salaam Alaikum [Peace be upon you]. Bismillah, ar-Rahman, ar-Rahim. In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. I bear witness that there is no God but He. And we thank Him in America for Allah’s intervention in our affairs in the Person of Master Fard Muhammad, the Great Mahdi, Who came among us to start us in the process of being resurrected from a mental, moral, spiritual, economic, political, cultural, and social death that we can stand before you today as Muslims; as our fathers when they were brought out of Africa—many of them were already Muslims. But the enemies of Islam knew that if we kept our faith, they could never make us permanent slaves. So the aim of the enemy was to strip us of our names, our language, our culture, our history, our religion, our God, and grow us up in America with no knowledge of self, no knowledge of our origin in this world. But thanks for the coming of Master Fard Muhammad and raising up among us the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, I can come before you today and say As-Salaam Alaikum and my name is no longer the slave name that I once had. I didn’t realize when my Teacher named me Farrakhan that he was subtly connecting me to you. Because when I came to Iran the last time I was here, I noticed a village or a town in southern Iran named Farrakhan. I saw my name again and again in this country, and I said, Well, maybe this country is the place that I should be particularly at a time like this. I’m honored—

[Translator interrupts mid-sentence to translate the above.]

7:21: I’m exceedingly honored to be here at this time. And I want to thank the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, for the privilege of an audience with him. I want to thank my host, the Expediency Discernment Council, Dr. Mohsen Rezaei and Dr. Fouad Izadi, who extended the invitation to me to come to Iran at this time to deliver a speech at Tehran University.

8:53: I also was invited to the holy city of Qom to speak to the students there and to meet with the Grand Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi. And my stay, and our stay, has been very, very rewarding. And I thank the people of Iran, all those with whom we had contact, for their wonderful, brotherly reception of us.

9:55: I must say, I have not enjoyed reading the press commentary on my visit here. But I guess I should not expect any different from a Zionist-controlled press, especially my being in the Islamic Republic of Iran. I want to thank Bro. Taleb Zadeh and his lovely wife, Zainab, for their help of us since we have been in the Republic.

Allah says in the Quran that the people who have been writing about me—it says: they altered the word of Allah after they knew it out of its place [HQ 2:75-79; 4:44-46; 5:41]. So if they would alter the word of God Himself, what chance do have that my word, my character, my reputation would not be altered by these same Satans? What is it that you fear about Louis Farrakhan? It is that God has blessed us to know the truth of Shaitan [Satan]. This is the day that Shaitan must be unmasked and revealed to the world. That mission has been given to me. It’s a very dangerous assignment. But Satan, or Shaitan, has deceived the whole world. In the Quran [HQ 7:12-18], Allah is having a discussion with Satan, and Satan is saying to God: Because You have judged me as one who is erring and caused me to remain disappointed, I am going to lie in wait for them in your straight path and I will make all of them deviate. And Allah said, whoever follows you, I will certainly fill hell with you all.

What is the straight path of God? Is it not the truth of His revelation that has inspired Judaism, Christianity, and Islam? So Satan has poisoned Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and that is why Imam Mahdi has to come to expose Satan and cleanse and purify religion that we as human beings may once again be as we should be: brothers and sisters in love with one another.

Allah has guided us. And 23 years ago I was blessed to be the one through whom the Million Man March was organized in America, where through my voice I called for a million and nearly two million Black men showed up in Washington, DC, for the Million Man March.

I pray that the translation will be as I say it, and if you are interested in all that I have said since I have been in this country, it will be made available to you. My private meetings and my public meetings—if it is granted, you may have it. Because whatever I say in private, I am not afraid to say it in the public.

The theme of the Million Man March was based on 3 principles: atonement, reconciliation, and responsibility. And I have used those three principles all over the world to try to bring together disparate groups who belong as one. But atonement means that we must acknowledge our wrong to one another, seek atonement for the wrong, ask forgiveness for the wrong, and reconcile our differences so that we may stand as a united front in the face of Shaitan.

The Muslim world is in deep trouble. The Muslim world needs a process that will cause us to reconcile our differences and come together as one ummah. In that way Satan will never destroy our nations and our community as long as we resolve our differences and come together as one ummah, one community.

I am here at this moment in time because my brothers and sisters here are facing the wrath of the President of the United States and the government of America in these harsh sanctions that are being imposed on the government and people of Iran. The world said they did not want Iran to possess nuclear weapons, so an agreement was made between the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the government of the United States of America, England, France, Germany, China, and Russia. Every investigative body during the years of this treaty arrangement said that Iran had never violated one aspect of that agreement. In America, they said that they gave Iran billions of dollars but they never said that they were holding over a 150 billion dollars of Iranian money and they were supposed to give it back during the treaty arrangement—but has Iran gotten that money back yet? Can anybody answer that question for me? Iran fulfilled what she signed to do on that paper, but America has not.

And with the advent of our new president, President Donald Trump, he did not like the arrangement, so unilaterally he ripped it up and now has imposed, according to what I have read, the harshest sanctions ever imposed on any nation. Allah says in the Quran [HQ 17:64]: the devil promises only to deceive.

So here we are. Why did you come, Farrakhan? Because this is my family, along with my family in America, my family in Africa, my family in the Caribbean, my family in Asia. Though I am born in America, I am a citizen of the world because of my Islam. As the hurricanes destroyed parts of Texas, and Florida, and Puerto Rico, wherever we could offer our help to our brothers and sisters and those who were white, or Asian, or Hispanic, we did what we could to help. So why should not we come to Iran to encourage the believers, to strengthen them, to encourage them that Allah is trying us but if we are steadfast under trial, we will surely get the favor of God and we will be victorious.

So my enemies are saying that maybe I should stay in Iran, not come back to America. I want to warn you, you speak as the foolish: America is mine. America is ours. Our sweat and our blood built America. How dare you say that we have no place there. How dare you say that we cannot criticize your evil and point it out to you.  I am more of a patriot than most of you who bow down to evil and it is only truth that will make America better. And I speak that truth and I will be back in America to speak it again.

29:23: I warn you in the name of The Two that back me—Imam Mahdi and al-Massi, the Messiah—I’m coming home, to face whatever you have for me, but I hope you will be ready to face whatever my backers have for you. Now you may ask me your questions.

31:25 (The Minister’s answer to question by a reporter of IRIB News Agency, “What do you think about U.S. foreign policy in [the] Middle East?”): When you are a drug addict, you say whatever you need to say, do whatever you need to do, to satisfy your addiction. The Middle East is rich, rich, rich with oil. And any great industrial nation is in need of the fuel that fuels the industry of that nation. America and England and others have always wanted access to the oil of this region, and their foreign policy is aimed at that objective.

In Iran, Mohammad Mossadegh, in a democratically fostered election, became the head of Iran, and he wanted the oil that comes from the earth in Iran to be of benefit to every citizen of Iran to give those citizens a decent quality of life. So the policy of my country became the idea to get Mossadegh out of the way, which a CIA plot did overthrow Mossadegh and give you in his place the Shah of Iran. Through the Shah of Iran the oil became a possession of America and the west, and the Shah was rich and powerful; and those that went along were rich, but the Iranian people suffered. People who did not like what was going on were persecuted, put to death, and among them was a man named Khomeini. He was exiled from his home into Turkey and France and Syria and Iraq, but 39 years ago the students erupted, because while he was away he was making cassette tapes and spreading his word and the word was taking root in the Iranian people and the Iranian Revolution began.

Now, if we fast-forward to 2018, the policy of our government as brought to Saudia Arabia by President Trump, who asked the king of Arabia, King Salman, to call all the Sunni nations together in Riyadh and he would come and address them. And when President Trump went to Riyadh, I saw him with pictures of new jet fighter planes, showing it to the king. And then they announced a $110 billion-dollar sale of weapons to Saudi, the United Arab Emirates, billions of dollars for weapons. But if you listen carefully to his speech, he was making toxic the division between Sunni and Shia and aiming those weapons subtly toward Iran and then openly saying to all of those nations they should reject their brother, Iran.

My Teacher, the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, taught me years ago that the policies of our government would bring about a war in the Middle East that would be a trigger to the greatest war that has ever been, the War of Armageddon, spoken of in the Bible. [40:33] My teacher wrote an article warning America in a time of great confusion over who is going to be president—either a Democratic president or a Republican—and we saw that played out two years ago. And the Honorable Elijah Muhammad taught us that we were living in that which is called the lull before the storm. No matter who wins the election, that President would have to guide America through the most difficult time in world affairs. Mr. Trump is that leader today. And Elijah Muhammad taught me that I should say to him: you would be wise, Mr. Trump, to delay the storm as long as you can. Because the longer the storm is delayed is to not only America’s advantage but is to the advantage of the world.

These sanctions are the predicate for a new war. A reporter asked my teacher, “Is America going to remain in the Middle East?” And my teacher said, America is going to come out of the Middle East. And when they asked about war, he said yes, there would be war. And he said bloodshed in this area would be much. I am begging our president and the government that supports him to be very, very careful because if the trigger of war in the Middle East is pulled by you using your surrogates at the insistence of Israel, then the war will trigger another kind of war, which will bring China, Russia, all of the nations into a war. And it bothers me to say this to you, Mr. President, but the war will end America as you know it. So when these Iranians chant “death to America, death to Israel,” no chant can bring about your death, but it is your policies that are eroding trust for you in the world, favor for you in the world. And now you’re pulling apart, confused. And if you do this, you will bring about—not the Iranian chant—you will bring about the death of the greatest nation that has been on this earth in the last six thousand years. I am a warner to you. I am a friend to America, not an enemy. But if you do not heed the warning and correct your path, death will come.

My host tells us that there are many questions, so they’ve asked me to make my answers short, but if you listen to what I’ve said I’ve answered most all your questions already. But you may ask and I’ll do my best to answer very short.

48:11: (“Minister Farrakhan, I’m from Fars News Agency. Uh, I would like to ask you, ‘What has the Nation of Islam done so far to disclose the smear campaign of the United States against Iran and what has it done so far for the Muslims that have been suffering in Yemen and Syria?’”): You know, my dear Sister, truth is the best weapon against a false smear. You just heard me. The Quran says [HQ 21:17-18]: Had We wished to take a pastime before Ourselves, We would have done it. Nay, We cast Truth at falsehood till We knock out its brains. That is my assignment: to speak Truth. The smear that’s on you is the smear that’s on me. So all of us who want change, if we are too cowardly to write the truth, too cowardly to speak the truth, too cowardly to live for the truth, and too cowardly to die for the establishment of the truth, then you’re too cowardly to have the smear removed from you.

May I respectfully say what is going on in Yemen is a crime against humanity: American planes, American bombs are being used. What is going on with the Rohingya Muslims is a crime. What is going on with the Uighur Muslims in China is a crime. Wherever Muslims are persecuted, wherever human beings are persecuted, there has to be an uprising against persecution. Because persecution is worse, the Quran [HQ 2:191] says, than slaughter. We must arise. We must throw a stone that we have in our hand against persecution, against the wickedness of the tyranny of governments. Speak the truth, if you know it! Rise against it, if you can! But everybody who loves truth and seeks justice and peace must rise up against the forces of evil, injustice, and falsehood. Nobody outside can do it for you if you’re not willing to do it for yourself.

The power of the press. What good is a press if the press won’t write truth. If we are afraid to speak the truth, to correct anything that is wrong in government—that’s the beauty of the press. Nobody can give you that courage. You must have the courage to speak truth to bring about the change that you seek. Next question please.

54:20 (Press TV correspondent: “‘Death to the United States’ is not a slogan chanted by the Iranian government against the U.S. government or the U.S. people, but it’s a slogan chanted by the Iranian people against the American leaders.”): I know.

54:34 (Press TV correspondent continues with question: “So, and it’s not just about the 1979 Islamic revolution, but it’s way back before: if you turn the pages of history back to 1953, and you clearly mentioned it when the United States reinstated monarchy in Iran, so it’s clear that the Iranian people have a, had a very dark memory about what the United States did back then. So ‘Death to the United States’ is not a slogan chanted by the government, so the United States, [if] it wants to re-impose sanctions, it’s re-imposing sanctions against the Iranian people, not the Iranian government.”): That’s correct.

(Press TV continues with question: “So the western media outlets, especially the United States media outlets, are accusing you these days of leading ‘Death to the United States.’ I just read a couple of news items about you and how the western media is accusing you of chanting the ‘Death to the United States.’ I want to ask you this question, Would you—are you willing to chant the slogan of ‘Death to the United States,’ because you are a person who is living in the United States and you are a person who is exposed to some of the policies that are done and conducted against you [and] carried out against you in the United States. The Black community in the United States is humiliated and you are a Black person and at the same time you’re a Muslim, and as you see Muslims these days are exposed to some of the wrong policies committed by the United States. So would you chant this for the—”) [56:17]: No, I will not do that. I will not do that. I would ask, Who sent you to ask that question. You seem to be one of those who are paid at Press TV to provoke that. That’s not my chant—listen to me. No, listen to me: you asked me a question. Your question is, your question—. I heard you. I heard you. But I also heard something else about you that I don’t like. You want me to chant, because they lied on me and said I led a chant. I know that chant came from the people of Iran and this sanction is what’s hurting the people of Iran. They have a right to chant it. But I am not a chanter—I’m a worker for God and the truth will undo falsehood and the righteous will win against the wicked. Not with a chant, but with actual words and deeds. I just, I don’t—I don’t like your attitude, man. I don’t like that. You know, I have to say this: I’m not just listening to your questions, God is showing me your motives. And I’m addressing with anger your motive. I know the question—I don’t like it. Now, I’ll take one or two more questions, but if you have not heard me yet, then I’m wasting my time. Is there another question?

58:30 (REPORTER from Al Jazeera English, “nice to meet you. …. Sir, my question has to do with the fact that you as a civil rights leader yourself. Um, I was wondering what your impressions were of the anti-government, anti-corruption economy-related protests that we’ve seen here in Iran. And did you have any discussions about that during your visit with officials here?”): Thank you, al Jazeera, for your question. In many of my commentaries, I was telling us to look within ourselves. Because your focus on the west is not hurting the west, but our focus on ourselves and the corruption that’s eating away at our faith is what is weakening the ummah. So I always spoke wherever I went, that we must look within ourselves. The greatest jihad is not with somebody else. The greatest struggle is against the Shaitan of self that turns you away from Truth and Faith and makes you an instrument of the enemy. Yes, I talk about it everywhere I go because the greatest enemy that we have is not the enemy outside—it’s the enemy within. And that’s what the Quran warns us against, the enemy within.

One more question please.

1:01:45 (REPORTER: …. “There’s a lively debate here in Iran about the extent to which religious injunctions should be a matter for the state and the security forces and how much it should be something personal. I was wondering if you could speak a little on that?”): Would you help me to understand your question more?

(REPORTER from ASB continues question: “For instance, should religious obligations be something that is enforced by the government, or is it something that should come from within?”): The Quran has arguments for every occasion. The Quran gives us laws that a Muslim observes not out of force from government but out of the force of conviction of faith. Whatever country you live in, there are laws. And the laws of the country are of no value unless they are enforced by those who have the law to enforce, and a citizen of the country should be respectful of those laws. So America says: we are not a government of men, we are a government of laws. And it is law that orders the society. This is a different experiment in Iran. If you live under the Shah, you didn’t live under the laws of Quran. I was a Christian and I still love my Christian family and roots. I—[translator respectfully interrupts to translate the above].

In the Nation of Islam in America, we have laws. We who believe in Allah and believe in the Prophet Muhammad and believe in our Teacher, the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, and believe in Quran, we try our best to live those laws—not by force of government but by the force of our faith.

So when you break the law, there are those who enforce the law; we try our best to live our law because that is what protects the society that we have. I have watched in the Muslim world when we try to impose Sharia on a people that have lived under western influence, we sometimes do not realize you have to give a people who have lived a reckless, ‘free’ life [the] time to reform. So our Teacher taught us so beautifully and he punished us when we broke the law—not with physical harm, but he deprived us of the right to be in our society for a time of 90 days, a year if it’s adultery. But the whole idea was, to bring us up so that the law is not a burden—we learn to love being righteous. And I pray, I pray that in the exercise of law, we do not misuse our power and authority then we become tyrants. So there’s a delicate balance that has to be achieved.

Thank you. I want to thank all of you.


(One last question @ 1:08:50 from an ANCHOR, Press TV: “…. As we’re speaking, actually, there were live feeds from Instagram, from YouTube, that are being blocked right now as we’re speaking, live feeds of this press conference. What is it, Minister Farrakhan, that you think that your message here in the Islamic Republic of Iran that has that type of effect, that right now even this feed is being blocked. And what can you as an African American who’s lived in the United States tell the people of Iran who have been fighting or trying to deal with their independence almost forty years against the United States? What could they learn from your experience?”): My dear Sister, truth uncovers a lie. Truth unmasks deceit. And when you have been a deceiver and this media [pointing with a sweep of his hand to all the media microphones lined up before him] has been used to control what comes to the masses and a man arises—not by his own power but by the power of God to speak the truth—then all of these [pointing to the media microphones] become the enemy of deceit if it’s used properly. And all of these can be turned against the speaker of truth.

They fear what I’m saying. They fear the passion that I speak the truth with. They fear that allowing the word to enter the ear of the people unobstructed will bring about the transformation of the human mind. So truth becomes the enemy in a world built on lies.

I’m so sorry that the people are deprived. Because once you know me for yourself, you can judge me properly. Once you hear me for yourself, you can make that determination. And to my brother, I hope—I’m not mean to offend him, but, you know, to ask me to chant is to make me say something that pleases the Zionist press that already took my words out of their place to make it difficult for me to go back into my own country. So for my brother to ask me to do that, and for me to even entertain it is foolish on my part, but it’s wicked on his. May God bless you all.


Farrakhan Spoke the Truth about the Talmud

On February 25, 2018, The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, spoke to a worldwide audience from Chicago, Illinois. In his now controversial lecture, Minister Farrakhan discussed one of the viciously anti-Christian passages in the Babylonian Talmud, a central text in the Jewish religion. The passage (Gittin 57a) condemns Jesus Christ to an eternal punishment of being “boiled in excrement.” The video clip below is being presented by Fox News and the National Review as a violation of Twitter’s “hate” policy. They are using it to have The Minister’s Twitter account closed down:

The Nation of Islam Research Group asked Talmudic expert Michael Hoffman to view the clip and give his opinion on the veracity of The Minister’s statement about the Talmud. His response is below:


Farrakhan Spoke the Truth about the Talmud

By Michael Hoffman

©2018 RevisionistHistory.org

The Babylonian Talmud tractate Gittin, which Minister Louis Farrakhan quoted truthfully and accurately in his Saviours’ Day speech last February, is concerned in part with the fulfillment of Jesus Christ’s prophecy concerning the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem by the Romans, due to the transgressions of the Jews:

“Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him. And He said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down…Therefore when you see the Abomination Of Desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains” (Matthew 24: 1-2; 15-16).

The “Abomination Of Desolation” was the Roman Army. Jesus was warning that in less than forty years it would advance to besiege Jerusalem, and that His followers were to flee to safety, which is what they did, leaving the unbelieving Jews to suffer the consequences.

Because the creed of Orthodox rabbinic Judaism is one of unrelenting revenge, the Roman General Titus, who personally directed the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., is forever an object of hatred, second only to Jesus himself. The rabbis of Orthodox Judaism have never forgiven Titus for commanding the legions who fulfilled Christ’s prophecy and destroyed the Temple at Jerusalem, along with the Jews who maintained that corrupt and doomed system. The revenge of the rabbis upon Titus is to tell nonsensical lies about him in the Talmud.

Few Christians or Muslims are aware that in the Babylonian Talmud Jesus shares his place in hell with the Roman Titus, who is depicted as being chastised for the destruction of the Temple by being burned to ashes in hell, reassembled, burned, reassembled and burned again—for eternity (Gittin 56b). In another depraved lie, Jesus is portrayed as being punished for “leading Israel astray” by forever remaining seated in a cauldron of boiling excrement in hell (Gittin 57a). According to the law (halahca) of Talmudic Judaism, “Anyone who mocks the words of the sages will be sentenced to boiling excrement (צוֹאָה רוֹתֵחַת).”

The typical rabbinic and Zionist response to the truthful description by Minister Farrakhan and others of what the Talmud teaches about Jesus, is to lie and say that in this passage the Talmud is referring to “another Jesus,” rather than Jesus of Nazareth: “Many commentaries suggest that some or all talmudic references to Jesus refer to another person” (Koren Talmud Bavli [Jerusalem: 2015], vol. 21, footnote to p. 319).

According to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), “To agitate Christian readers, anti-Talmud writers often attempt to portray the Talmud as demeaning the figure of Jesus.”

By the ADL’s reasoning, “anti-Talmud writers” are never scholars who are dispassionately committed to the discovery of the truth about what the Talmud teaches, but rather, they are only agitators who, from impure motives, seek to “portray” the Talmud as “demeaning” Jesus.

How the ADL arrived at this conspiracy theory is not revealed, but the undercurrent of intimidation is clear: those who speak or write candidly and accurately concerning how Jesus is defamed in the Talmud are seeking to “agitate Christians.” No reputable person would want a career-killing stigma like that attached to his statements and most Christians and Muslims are thereby intimidated from pursuing the truth about the Talmudic depiction of Jesus. Moreover, according to the ADL, “the Talmud only refers to Jesus in a handful of places, and though these references may not reflect the courteous ecumenicism of the modern world, neither are they particularly inflammatory.” (Anti-Defamation League, The Talmud in Anti-Semitic Polemics [New York: 2003], p. 11).

The ADL expects us to believe that depicting the Christian Savior being boiled in feces is not inflammatory, while any critical observation that Mr. Farrakhan dares to utter concerning Judaism is nothing but inflammatory. The hypocrisy is all too familiar.

Long-standing denials by Talmudists and Zionists and their gentile apologists concerning the supposed absence of Jesus in the Talmud, are slowly being discredited after having held sway for centuries. David Klinghoffer elucidated this development in his essay, “What the Talmud Really Says About Jesus”:

“…the scandalous passages indeed refer not to some other figure of ancient times but to the famous Jesus of Nazareth. What exactly is so scandalous? How about Jesus punished in Hell for eternity by being made to sit in a cauldron of boiling excrement? That image appears in early manuscripts of the Babylonian Talmud, as does a brief account of Jesus’ trial and execution—not by the Romans but by the Jewish high court, the Sanhedrin.” (Publishers Weekly, January 31, 2007).

Mr. Klinghoffer says that the “Jewish community” has been content to let the evil sayings of the Talmud about Jesus “remain obscure and unknown.” His claim is erroneous. The rabbinic “community” actively teaches these viciously bigoted statements about Jesus within their religion, while denying to the world that they are present in their sacred texts. These inconvenient facts must not be suppressed. The admission by Klinghoffer and other Judaic intellectuals that Jesus Christ is indeed targeted in the Babylonian Talmud, has brought with it no substantive analysis of the long record of rabbinic denials and falsification that preceded his revelation, and which continue in some instances, up to the present time. Mr. Klinghoffer is eager to have us pass over Judaism’s system of dissimulation as quickly as possible.

Christians and Muslims are rightly offended at the disgraceful libels, pornographic scurrilities and hate speech in the Talmud. Louis Farrakhan, virtually alone among public figures in America, has had the courage to defend Jesus against these obscenities.


Author Michael Hoffman

Michael Hoffman is a former reporter for the New York Bureau of the Associated Press and the author of nine books, including Judaism Discovered and Judaism’s Strange Gods.

Mr. Hoffman reviewed the Nation of Islam’s The Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews, Volume 2, for his publication Revisionist History newsletter (1 September-October 2010).


Mr. Hoffman reviewed the Nation of Islam’s The Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews, Volume 2 for his publication Revisionist History newsletter (1 September-October 2010).

Rabbi’s Words Connect Jewish Talmud to Anti-Black Violence, Police Killings

Student Minister Demetric Muhammad, NOI Research Group

The Bible and the Holy Qur’an describe the creation of man as a sacred act. The Holy Qur’an states that Allah (God) created man of Black mud. The Bible states that man is created in the image of God. 

In the Bible David states that “you are all gods, children of the Most High God.” David’s son Solomon states, “I am Black but beautiful, oh you daughters of Jerusalem.”

What emerges from these various scriptural passages is a picture of humanity as divine, beautiful and Black.

The image of Black people in America has always been controversial. A pure and honest examination of scripture and world history reveals a persistent negative image portrayal of Black people. In fact, the Times of Israel reported just a few days ago that the Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Israel referred to Black people as monkeys. His office defended him by stating that the Chief Rabbi was only quoting a passage from the Talmud.

During the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan’s magnificent Saviours’ Day 2018 message, he cited instances that had taken place in Israel where spray-painted on churches were the graffiti words “Jesus was a monkey.” The Minister’s audience was shocked at learning of the Jewish hostility for Jesus coming out of Israel.

Most of the Minister’s audience is oblivious to the existence of the Jewish Talmud, the source where the Chief Rabbi learned to refer to Black people as monkeys.

“Jesus was a monkey” scrawled on Christian monastery in Israel.

It was the Jewish Talmud—a voluminous collection of rabbinical interpretations of the Torah—that introduced to the world the Hamitic Curse as an explanation for the origins of black skin and physical features. Even staunch critic of the Nation of Islam Harold Brackman of the Simon Wiesenthal Center tells us in his doctoral dissertation, “The Ebb and Flow of Conflict: A History of Black–Jewish Relations Through 1900,” that

There is no denying that the Babylonian Talmud was the first source to read a Negrophobic content into the episode by stressing Canaan’s fraternal connection with Cush. The Talmudic glosses of the episode added the stigma of blackness to the fate of enslavement that Noah predicted for Ham’s progeny…

The Minister also reminded his attentive Saviours’ Day audience of the many scandalous depictions of President Barack Obama by racist cartoonists, who portrayed him and his lovely wife, Michelle Obama, as monkeys or apes.

Rep. Todd Rokita

Indiana Representative Todd Rokita has sponsored a resolution that condemns our beloved Minister “for promoting ideas that create animosity and anger toward Jewish Americans and the Jewish religion.”

As a Black man, I find Congressman Rokita’s resolution ridiculous, offensive and wicked. It is especially offensive because he has never issued a resolution to condemn those who “promote ideas that create animosity and anger toward Black or African Americans.”

If he did, he would understand the sentiments being expressed by Minister Farrakhan and Black Americans who know all too well that in America no group has been the victim of “ideas that create animosity and anger” more than the American-born Black man and woman.

The record of history is clear: Minister Farrakhan’s words have never produced harm, suffering or the loss of life among the Jewish people. But the globally exported view that Jewish leaders have of Black people has been deadly!

In fact, a direct line of correlation can be drawn from the recent police killing of Stephon Clark in Sacramento, California, to the Jewish Talmud’s views of Black people as subhuman.

In an eye-opening and groundbreaking 2014 study titled “The Essence of Innocence: Consequences of Dehumanizing Black Children we learn about how Black children, especially Black boys, are on the receiving end of harsher punishments and longer prison sentences when they enter the criminal justice system. The abstract of the study defines its scope with the following:

The social category “children” defines a group of individuals who are perceived to be distinct, with essential characteristics including innocence and the need for protection. The present research examined whether Black boys are given the protections of childhood equally to their peers. We tested 3 hypotheses: (a) that Black boys are seen as less “childlike” than their White peers, (b) that the characteristics associated with childhood will be applied less when thinking specifically about Black boys relative to White boys, and (c) that these trends would be exacerbated in contexts where Black males are dehumanized by associating them (implicitly) with apes.

In describing a central aspect of their research and results, the authors state:

In this research, White participants who were subliminally exposed to images of apes before watching a video of police beating a Black man were more likely to endorse that beating, despite the extremity of the violence. Participants did not, however, endorse the same beating when the suspect was White or when they had not been primed with the ape image. In a follow-up study, Goff et al. coded newspaper articles about death-eligible criminal cases in Philadelphia for ape-related metaphors. They found that the frequency of ape-related imagery predicted whether or not criminals were executed by the state. Of importance, in neither study was racial prejudice (explicit or implicit) a significant predictor. That is, dehumanization uniquely predicted violence and its endorsement.

The researchers, whose article appears in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, cite the histories of Emmett Till and George Stinney Jr. to highlight the importance of their study tounderstanding the all-too-frequent phenomenon of violence against Black children:

In 1944, a Black 14-year-old, George Junius Stinney Jr., became the youngest person on record in the United States to be legally executed by the state (electrocuted without the benefit of a lawyer, witnesses, or a record of confession; Jones, 2007). And, notoriously, in 1955, a 14-year-old Black boy named Emmett Till was dragged from his bed, disfigured, and lynched for allegedly whistling at a White woman (Crowe, 2003). What psychological context could explain this treatment of children?

Prior to participating in this profound research report, one of the researchers, Phillip Atiba Goff, conducted research to examine the impacts of Blacks being associated with apes and monkeys. His team of researchers produced a report titled “Not Yet Human: Implicit Knowledge, Historical Dehumanization, and Contemporary Consequences.” Among their conclusions, the researchers state:

…the implicit association between Blacks and apes can lead to greater endorsement of violence against a Black suspect than against a White suspect. Finally, in Study 6, we demonstrated that subtle media representations of Blacks as apelike are associated with jury decisions to execute Black defendants.

This scientific study brings to light the danger of the Talmudic dehumanization of Black people that the Israeli chief rabbi articulated. And long before the Chief Rabbi of Israel, the revered twelfth-century rabbi Moses Maimonides, in his Guide for the Perplexed—considered the “greatest work of Jewish religious philosophy”—reinforced the racism of the Talmud when he said Black Africans were “irrational animals,” “lower than the rank of man but higher than the rank of the apes.” Whether it is classifying Blacks as subhuman “strange creatures” or associating black skin with a divine curse, the Talmudic view of Black people is bizarre, ignoble and grotesque. For Black people, it is a deadly view.

The danger of the Talmudic view of Black people becomes especially important when we consider the globally exported and highly influential entertainment and pop culture industry of America. At the center of American popular culture is the motion picture industry, better known as Hollywood. Author Neal Gabler discusses thehistory of Hollywood in his book An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood. Prof. Gabler’s description of the Jewish founding, control and influence of Hollywood is illuminating. He writes:

What is amazing is the extent to which they succeeded in promulgating this fiction throughout the world. By making a “shadow” America, one which idealized every old glorifying bromide about the country, the Hollywood Jews created a powerful cluster of images and ideas—so powerful that, in a sense, they colonized the American imagination….Ultimately, American values came to be defined largely by the movies the Jews made.

As to what role the Talmud has played in the creation of this “powerful cluster of images and ideas” that have “colonized the American imagination, we reference the words of Pulitzer Prize-winning author Herman Wouk.   In his book This is My God: The Jewish Way of Life, he wrote:

The Talmud is to this day the circulating heart’s blood of the Jewish religion.  Whatever laws, customs or ceremonies we observe — whether we are Orthodox, Conservative, Reform or merely spasmodic sentimentalists — we follow the Talmud.  It is our common law.

The powerful images and ideas that include the Talmudic dehumanization of Black people have been referenced and described by screenwriter Dalton Trumbo when he wrote:

[Hollywood made] tarts of the Negro’s daughters, crap shooters of his sons, obsequious Uncle Toms of his fathers, superstitious and grotesque crones of his mothers, strutting peacocks of his successful men, psalm-singing mountebanks of his priests, and Barnum and Bailey side-shows of his religion.

Jewish authors Barry Schwartz and Robert Disch, of the book White Racism: Its History, Pathology, and Practice, point exclusively to Hollywood as the fount from which the sewage of anti-Black racism and dehumanization have flowed and infected the world:

This statement should surprise no one, since Hollywood, more than any other institution, has been responsible for the glorification of the South, past and present, and for creating the image of black inferiority. It created the lying, stealing, childish, eyeball-rolling, feet-shuffling, sex-obsessed, teeth-showing, dice-shooting black male, and told the world this was the real Negro in the U.S.A. It invented the Negro “mammy” whose breasts were always large enough to suckle an entire nation, and who always loved old massa’s chilluns more than she loved her own. The men of Fake-town have brainwashed America and the entire world with the brush of white supremacy.

According to a report titled Diversity in Film and Television, authored by the diversity-monitoring entity called Media Scope, scientific studies have proven that the constant exposure to dehumanizing images of Black people in the media negatively impacts how whites view Blacks.  The Media Scope report states:

Considerable public concern has arisen over the issue of media diversity, as it is generally accepted that mass media has strong social and psychological effects on viewers. Film and television, for example, provide many children with their first exposure to people of other races, ethnicities, religions and cultures. What they see onscreen, therefore, can impact their attitudes about the treatment of others. One study found, for instance, that two years of viewing Sesame Street by European-American preschoolers was associated with more positive attitudes toward African and Latino Americans. Another study found that white children exposed to a negative television portrayal of African-Americans had a negative change in attitude toward blacks.

These disrespectful images of Black people, which permeate all forms of entertainment, serve a hidden role in psychologically programming the hatred of Black people into the thinking of all who are exposed to them. Hard-wired, now, into the thinking of even some in the Black community is the Hollywood-created, Talmudic-based image of Black humanity as subhuman, evil and shameful.

The negative stereotypes and images of Black people that have long been staples of Hollywood movie production are mirror reflections of the Jewish Talmud’s “ideas that create animosity and anger toward Black or African Americans.” Research studies have proven the dangerous effect of those views. Yet Congressman Rokita has done nothing to interfere with the proliferation of these ideas that remain in Hollywood and the music industry.

The significance of what we have presented in this essay is the role that the Talmudic view of Black people has played in what happened to Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice, Michael Brown, DeAunta Terrell Farrow and most recently Stephon Clark. All of these were young Black males who were murdered by either police or a private citizen who looked at these beautiful young men and saw them as older, menacing and threatening. And now we understand how these corrupt images of Black males got into the minds of their murderers.

I say that if Congressman Rokita will not sponsor a resolution to condemn all who promote “ideas that create animosity and anger toward Black or African Americans,” he proves that his sensitivity to dangerous ideas only applies to the Jewish community. He proves that at the heart of his condemnation of Minister Farrakhan is his hatred of the Minister for loving the long-vilified and dehumanized Black people enough to challenge all who mean us harm!

Why Do Jews Hate Jesus & Mary?

Why Do Jews Hate Jesus & Mary?

Muslims & Christians Revere Jesus and Mary; Jews hate them both.

The recent attacks on the Nation of Islam and the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan have focused attention on the larger issue of Christian-Jewish relations. In a major address at the Nation of Islam’s Saviours’ Day convention on February 25, 2018, Minister Farrakhan presented the harshly anti-Christian words of the Babylonian Talmud—a book revered and followed by today’s Jews, but little known among Christians. Not only is it the source of the most racist of religious teachings—the Curse of Ham—the Talmud says, among many other vile things, that for “leading Israel astray” Jesus is forever remaining seated in a cauldron of boiling excrement in hell. Farrakhan also revealed that the followers of this strange Jewish doctrine attacked a Christian monastery in Israel and painted “Jesus is a monkey” on the walls and further desecrated the church by burning the door.

“Jesus is a monkey” painted on the walls and burnt door of a Christian monastery in Israel.

The “boiling in excrement” passage in the Jewish holy book is highly offensive to all decent people and especially Christians. But it is just as repulsive for Muslims because of the high honor that the Holy Quran bestows upon Jesus and Mary of the Bible. Geoffrey Parrinder explains in his book Jesus in the Qur’an:

“The Qur’an gives a greater number of honourable titles to Jesus than to any other figure of the past. He is a ‘sign’, a ‘mercy’, a ‘witness’ and an ‘example’. He is called by his proper name Jesus, by the titles Messiah (Christ) and Son of Mary, and by the names Messenger, Prophet, Servant, Word and Spirit of God. The Qur’an gives two accounts of the annunciation and birth of Jesus, and refers to his teachings and healings, and his death and exaltation. Three chapters or suras of the Qur’an are named after references to Jesus (3, 5 and 19); he is mentioned in fifteen suras and ninety-three verses. Jesus is always spoken of in the Qur’an with reverence; there is no breath of criticism, for he is the Christ of God.” [i]

Nation of Islam named by Minister Farrakhan for the mother of Jesus, Mosque Maryam.

The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan is most devout on that critical subject. In 1988, he dedicated the main Nation of Islam mosque in Chicago and named it “Mosque Maryam” after Mary, the mother of Jesus. Minister Farrakhan explained that Mary, according to the Holy Qur’an, is referred to as “the best of women”—the example for all women. Indeed, she represents the standard of what a righteous woman is.[ii]

Since their immigration to the New World, Jews have enjoyed a more cordial relationship with Gentiles than they had in Europe. Both communities chose to leave their often violent intertribal conflicts in the Old World, as they sought the benefits of whiteness that came with the highly profitable systems of slavery and sharecropping

But now many Christians are rethinking their relationship with Jews on a spiritual level. What they are finding out about the viciously anti-Christian teachings of the Jewish faith is shocking indeed. Below is a summary of the filthy Jewish teachings about Mary, Mother of Jesus, in the Talmud. It is provided by Michael Hoffman in his all-encompassing 1102-page book examining the Talmud, titled Judaism Discovered: A Study of the Anti-Biblical Religion of Racism, Self-Worship, Superstition and Deceit (Coeur d’Alene, ID: Independent History and Research, 2008).

Insults Against Blessed Mary

The Talmud says Jesus’ mother was a whore: “She who was the descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters.” In Shabbath 104b it states that Jesus’ mother, “Miriam the hairdresser,” had sex with many men. (BT Sanhedrin 106a)

The Talmud fabricates an incident that “proves” that Jesus “is a bastard,” that he is the son of a niddah (a child conceived during a woman’s menstrual period). 

The Talmud says that the rabbis questioned Mary and promised her “eternal life” if she would admit how Jesus was conceived. Here is the fabricated exchange:

“He said to her, ‘My daughter, if you will answer the question I will put to you, I will bring you to the world to come’ (eternal life). She said to him, ‘Swear it to me.’

“Rabbi Akiba, taking the oath with his lips but annulling it in his heart, said to her, ‘What is the status of your son?’ She replied, ‘When I entered the bridal chamber I was niddah (menstruating) and my husband kept away from me; but my best man had intercourse with me and this son was born to me.’ Consequently the child was both a bastard and the son of a niddah.”

Other vile passages describe Jesus as the “inciter,” who has “brought forth witchcraft from Egypt.” They refer to his mother as “Miriam the hairdresser,” a woman of loose morals who cheats on her husband, having sex with many men. Hoffman references Peter Schäfer, Jesus in the Talmud (Princeton University Press, 2007):

“If the Talmud takes it for granted that Jesus’ mother was having sex with someone other than her husband, then it follows that Jesus was a mamzer, a bastard. In order to be categorized as mamzer it didn’t matter whether his biological father was indeed his mother’s sex partner, and not her legal husband, the supposed fact that she had committed adultery made Jesus’ legal status dubious. ….”

None of this satanic Jewish hatred of Jesus and Mary seems to bother such Christian theologians as Pat Robertson, John Hagee, and even Billy Graham, all rabidly pro-Israel Zionists, whose belief in the Jews as “the Chosen People” is and was absolute. The current Christian president, Donald Trump, can be added to that list. Their apparent excusing of the Talmud, which condemns their Saviour—and His mother—to eternal damnation is itself inexcusable.

How incredible it is that in 2018, it is a Muslim—The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan—who is the most strident defender and protector of the faith of Jesus and Mary against the Talmudic slander of the Jews. That he does it from the Nation of Islam’s Mosque Maryam is divine irony. Perhaps when the satanic Jews show up with their “anti-Semitism” slander against Farrakhan, we will finally make them answer for the despicable way they have treated Jesus and His Mother Mary, and the family of God. 



Some Talmud citations concerning Christianity

  • Christians are allied with hell, and Christianity is worse than incest. (Babylonian Talmud, tractate Avodah Zarah 17a)
  • Going to prostitutes is the same as becoming a Christian. (BT Avodah Zarah 17a)
  • Those who read the Gospels are doomed to hell. (BT Sanhedrin 90a)
  • When the Messiah comes, he will destroy the Christians. (BT Sanhedrin 99a)
  • Jews must destroy the New Testament bibles of the Christians (BT Shabbat 116a). The Israelis burned hundreds of them in occupied Palestine on March 23, 1980.


[i] https://noirg.org/articles/is-the-jewish-talmud-anti-black-and-anti-christian-part-1/

[ii] Sources: http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/Minister_Louis_Farrakhan_9/article_8156.shtml, http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/National_News_2/article_8147.shtml


Editor’s note: The name “Jesus” is Greek. There is no “J” letter in the Hebrew language, and the letter “J” did not appear in the English language until several hundred years ago. Yoshua is his name in ancient Hebrew. In the Holy Qu’ran his proper name in Arabic is Isa. Prophet Isa was not a European. He never lived in Europe. He never missioned in Europe; nor did he speak any European languages. We use the appellation “Jesus” because of its popularity in the consciousness of the people, not because of its authenticity.

1 Maccabees 3:48
“And laid open the book of the law, wherein the heathen had sought to paint the likeness of their images”

Jews & the AFRICAN Slave Trade: Lecture by Dr. Leonard E. Barrett, Sr.

In 1974, Dr. Leonard E. Barrett, Sr., professor of religion at Temple University, spoke at Fisk University in Nashville about the Jewish involvement in the slave trade, confirming the information and data in the Nation of Islam book series The Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews. The conference was called the National Consultation on Black-Jewish Relations and was jointly sponsored by the Department of Religious and Philosophical Studies at Fisk and the American Jewish Committee.




Dr. Barrett: When Dr. Lincoln’s secretary informed me that, about this, my first reaction was to say no. But in that I enjoy being in the thick of things, I complied. It was only later when Dr. [Bertram] Korn contacted me and asked me that I stop over at [Reform Congregation] Keneseth Israel for a copy of his book, upon which his lecture is based, that I realized how deeply I did get myself in the thick of things. First of all, you have no paper as you see but an outline. I was really at a loss to know exactly what to do so I decided to read his book. And it was for me a great treat. Although it was not [?] meeting then at this first meeting, I learned from this monograph that this man is a learned scholar in American Jewish history, a prolific writer, and an avid researcher. His book American Jewry and the Civil War is well written, readable, and informative. The two chapters which deal with the black-Jewish relations in America are enlightening, objective, well researched. And I would highly recommend it to those professors teaching courses in black studies and particularly to those who need resources on the Jewish perspective of American history.

I’ve enjoyed the conference so far, but somehow or the other I feel, as I am going to respond to this paper, that I’m in the same position of not long ago: I delivered a paper “The blacks and the Jews: a search for a bridge of understanding,” and the JDLs were there. [laughter; audience laughter] When I was through with that lecture, there was no bridge [laughter; audience laughter], and the river was flowing all over. [audience laughter] However, the JDL came to me and said I do not agree with what you said altogether, but to be truthful you have been so clear on the point that I am going to ask you to lecture to our group. I said no thank you. [laughter; audience laughter]

Jewish participation in black servitude in the New World had eluded me for a long time. But their currencies of Jewish names [of?] the part of the world in which I was born kept suggesting to me that some kosher or unkosher relationships between blacks and Jews might have been rather common somewhere in the history of black-Jewish contact, or else there would not have been so many black Cohens [pronounced Kohanes], and [?], Samuel, Levys, Abrahams, Lindas, only to name a few.

My brief oration for this conference has opened a new world of insights for me, the most important of which is that the Jews were a rather important factor in black servitude in the New World and probably one of the greatest benefactors of that peculiar institution. To properly understand and appreciate the black-Jewish relations in early American history, one must go beyond the boundaries of these United States, which are, which were, or, which are, which were an insignificant part of European colonial expansion in the 16th and 17th centuries. Furthermore, to get a picture of the relationship one must even start from the beginning—the so-called age of discovery. It is this dimension I believe that can best open the history of the Jewish participation in the founding and the development of the New World, which, of course, its central economy was slavery.

In this connection may we reflect on the following: One—it was the scientific knowledge of the Jewish scholars which so perfected the art of navigation that voyages across the Atlantic from Europe became possible. In this connection it was Abraham Zacuto [or Zacut], professor of mathematics and astronomy at the University of Salamanca in 1473, who devised the astronomical and diagrams. And it was José [Vizinho?], astronomer and physician to John the Second of Portugal, along with Moses the mathematician and two Christian scholars, who discovered the nautical astrolabe, the measurement of the altitude of the sun and the distance of the ship from the equator that prepared the way for the voyages of Columbus.

Two—it is probably one of the greatest coincidences of history that Africa and the Americas, the two important ingredients in the slave trade, were discovered about a decade apart by Portugal and Spain, the two European countries which existed almost exclusively on Jewish wealth. A careful study of the documents of Spain and Portugal will prove that almost the entire New World’s enterprise was made possible by Jewish aid and it now appears that Christopher Columbus was little more than a managing director of Israel. [laughter; audience murmur] Our school textbooks taught us that the king and queen of Spain sold their jewels in order to obtain money to finance the adventures of Columbus, but it is now better known that the first voyage of Columbus was made possible not by the sacrifice of Isabella and Ferdinand but by the loan from Louis de Santangel, a Jewish financier of the king’s council of Spain. We are now aware that by the time of the second journey, 1492, the year of the Jewish expulsion from these parts, most of the Jewish wealth, which was confiscated, was used by King Ferdinand to finance the second journey. It is now fairly well documented that the interpreter and the physician of Columbus on his second voyage were Jewish men, and that the first man to set foot on the American soil from Columbus’ boat was Luis de Torres, a Jew, the Jewish interpreter of Columbus. But even more and this is without [a doubt?], Columbus himself was part Jewish. His mother, Susanna Fontanarossa [also spelled Fonterosa], was said to be a Jewess. I can be corrected by the eminent scholar here. If the above findings are correct, it is then correct to say that the so-called discovery of the New World was partly a Jewish enterprise and that it came into being almost providentially as a refuge for Spanish and Portuguese Jews, whose expulsion from Spain and Portugal coincided with the discovery. With the opening of the New World, the Jews were the first European to settle in them, and it was they who introduced much of the economic know-how to the new colonies and know-how that demanded slave labor. It is no exaggeration to state that the Jews were the first traders in the New World and that they also may have been the first planters. For as early as 1492 we find that the Portuguese Jews in St. Thomas, now the Virgin Islands, were the first large-scale plantation owners with as much as three thousand African slaves.

But if the Jews fared badly on the continent under Portugal and Spain as a result of the expulsion, they soon dominated the colonial expansion of the Dutch and the English. In addition, they probably used their talents and wealth to destroy the hegemony of Portugal and Spain in the New World. That’s something to look at, hmm? It is soon revealed that the Jews owned large shares in the Dutch East and West India Companies. And in the Dutch colonial expansion the Jews were so dominant that we read of a Cohen as one of the early governors of the Dutch East India Company. It is also revealed that these companies facilitated the Dutch American colonies and later drove the Portuguese from the slave castles of West Africa. El Mina [often called St. George’s Castle] and [Goree Island?] are two of them. Further, the Dutch and the Jews were so closely tied up in their colonial expansion and later in the slave trade that the two people were indistinguishable, were distinguishable only by quotation marks; that is to say, when references were made to the Jews as Dutchmen the word Dutchmen was generally in quotation marks.

We are already, we have already mentioned that by 1492 the Portuguese were in St. Thomas as planters. And by the time of 1550, the sugar plantations there had reached 60 in number. But the greatest involvement of Jews in the colonial period was to be found probably in Brazil. There the Jews transplanted techniques of the sugar industry either from St. Thomas or from the Madeiras, where the Jews had been engaged in the sugar trade for quite some time. Now, Brazil was by far the largest Portuguese colony, American colony in the colonial period, and the Jews took advantage of this new El Dorado. So large was it their refugees’ migration in the 16th century that Queen Joanna took measures to limit the migration of Jews in 1511. But the Jews proved so beneficial to the crown and country that the ban was lifted in 1577. Thus with the settlement of the Jews in Brazil, the first phase of its plantation industrial development began. By 1549 one of the earliest governors of Brazil was a Jew, Tomé de Sousa [also Thomé de Souza]. Incidentally, it was under another Jewish governor, Aires de Sousa Castro, that the largest African republic in the New World was brutally destroyed. The Republic of Palmares, which was made up of runaway slaves in Pernambuco, Brazil, was destroyed by this [insistence?] of this governor.

In 1644, the Dutch occupied Brazil and many rich Jews from Holland arrived. By the middle of the 17th century, all the large plantations belonged to the Jews. [Johan] Nieuhoff, who traveled in Brazil from 1644-49, wrote, “Among the free inhabitants of Brazil the Jews were the most considerably numbered, who had transplanted themselves hither from Holland. They had a vast traffic beyond the rest. They purchased sugar mills and built stately homes in the Receif [Recife?]. They were all traders, which would have been of great consequence to the Dutch Brazil had they kept themselves within the Jew bounds of profit.” Another writer speaking to this point said of them, “The profits they make after 9 or 10 years in these lands are so marvelous, for they all come back to Holland rich.” That could have been…I don’t believe that, but so on and so on.

Incidentally, it was soon after the Dutch captured Brazil that their trade in slaves began. Albert van Dantzig and Barbara Priddy in their book A Short History of the Forts and Castles of Ghana said of the Dutch: “In this respect their volte-face [about-face] is remarkable. At first when they did not have any plantation colonies, the Dutch Calvinists had maintained a holier-than-thou attitude, strongly condemning the popish practice of using slave labor. But as soon as they themselves realized the vast profits which could be derived from it, they readily discovered the appropriate texts in the scripture to justify it.” The capture of El Mina was done by the Dutch West India Company. And I am prepared to show that this company was dominated by Jews during the slave trade.

Thus as early as 1553, according to [Richard] Hakluyt’s Principal Navigations, Voyages, Traffiques & Discoveries of the English Nation, the first English voyage to El Mina was under the navigation of a Portuguese captain named Antonio Pinteado. This man was described as a renegade from Portugal, but a man of expert knowledge of the African and Brazilian waters, 1553. After reaching Elmina with his 140 men and after trading a lot of garbage for gold, the director in charge of the expedition, one [Thomas] Windham, wanted to go on to Benin for more loot. Pinteado, who knew the dangers of the African weather, counseled against such a trip, and a controversy developed. It was in this controversy that the real identification of Pinteado was revealed. I quote: “And being counseled of the said Pinteado, considering the late time of the year, for at that time to go no further but to make sale of their wares such as they had for gold, whereby they might have been great gainers; Windham, not assenting hereunto, fell into a sudden rage, reviling the said Pinteado, calling him a Jew, with other opprobrious words, saying, ‘This whoreson Jew has promised to bring us to such places as are not or as he cannot bring us unto, but if he do not I will cut off his ears and nail them to the mast.'” Hah, hah, a bloody man, hmm. [audience laughter] Here it is clear that as early as 1553 the Jews were in the service of the Portuguese African trade to Brazil and that of the English also. The quotation shows that Pintiado knew both the African and the Brazilian waters, and many scholars know that [unintelligible] the slaves were being taken to Brazil during the first half of the 16th century.

But to come back to my point of the Dutch West India Company. This company was in charge of the African-Brazilian slave trade. And we learn from the Dantzig-Priddy work quoted above that the Director-General of the El Mina castle in 1679 was one Herman Abrams. Huh, heh—that sounds all right to me. Hmhm. [audience murmur; huhhuh] The many slave castles of the Dutch West India Company can still be found along the Ghana coast till this day.

Although the Jews along with the Dutch were expelled from Brazil in 1654, many of the richer Jews remained in Brazil under the Portuguese and simply converted from Judaism to Christianity and became known as New Christians. [laughter] Lovely. Christian Jews. Hmm. On the other hand, others simply left Brazil and went to New Amsterdam and also to Surinam, which for all intents and purpose was a slave state owned to a great extent by the Jews. In 1730 out of 344 sugar plantations on the island of Surinam the Jews owned 115 of them. The Bank of Amsterdam, heavily Jewish, had a mortgage of 60 million gulden on Surinam alone. There is only a little time to mention such countries as Martinique, where in 1655 we find the first large plantation in that island owned by one Benjamin Da Costa, a Jewish refugee from the Brazil along with 900 of his co-religionists, with their 1100 slaves. Or San Domingo, where sugar mills were introduced in 1587. The record shows that it was not until the Dutch “refugees”—in quotation [laughter]—arrived in the island that any degree of success was achieved in sugar. Anyone who knows French economy, economic history, will remember that about this time the Jews almost monopolized the sugar trade in France, which was controlled by the wealthy family of the Gradis of Bordeaux. In 1701 the Council of Trade in Paris states, “French shipping owes its splendor to the commerce of the sugar-producing islands and it is only by means of this that the navy can be maintained.” I need only recall to your attention the names of French-Jewish financiers who were the benefactors of this trade. Along with the Gradises, [?], Dupont, and the Rothschilds, etcetera.

When dealing with the English colonies one should first commence with Barbados and Jamaica. I have already dealt with Surinam, which in the colonial period was the pawn of both British and the Dutch. The Jews of Barbados and Jamaica formed the economic infrastructure of these islands. The Jews were in Barbados from the start of the penal colony, and they monopolized the trade of that island. And as Barbados was the pilot project for the West Indian sugar industry, we can rest assured that it was the Jews who developed this industry in the island, or partly so. In time there was a petition to the crown to have [sued?] them, and I don’t believe they would have asked for that if they were not in the business.

Jamaica was taken from the Spaniards in 1655. Its early [foreign?] inhabitants were both Spanish Christians and Portuguese Jews. On the invasion of the English the Spaniards fled to Cuba. The Portuguese, who were mostly Jews, remained in Jamaica and became British subjects. But by this time the Jews in the British colonies were well favored by a British proclamation that granted them wide privileges. This 1635 proclamation said, “Immediately on reaching the colony every person belonging to the Hebrew nation shall possess and enjoy every liberty and privilege possessed by and granted to the citizens and inhabitants of the colony and shall be considered English born.” In my mind there is no question that this proclamation of the 17th century was designed to get the Jews out of England, in which the Jews were almost totally disenfranchised, and existed only on the [faith?] of a true Christian. But the proclamation placed the Jews in a very strong position in the English colony. Some of these privileges were (1) they should not be compelled to serve in any public office. A very convenient privilege. Two: their person and property shall be placed under the special protection of the government. This was not so with the slave. [Three:] They should be allowed to practice their religion without hindrance along with the permission to erect synagogues, schools, and cemeteries. Four: the only prohibition to Jews in the colony was that they were prohibited to buy white slaves. That the African [unintelligible] as the [unintelligible]. And the reason for this proclamation was because they had proven themselves useful and beneficial to the colony.

The Jews in the colonies, then, were placed among the ruling class as far as privileged was concerned, and this was inevitable because the entire fabric of the colonial system was somewhat dependent on the mercy of Jewish financiers in England and in the colonies. In the 18th century Jews paid almost all the taxes in [of?] Jamaica, and this of course is because they were the ones who had it. I am giving you the background here so that you can interpret what I mean by when you talk about black-Jew’s relation you have to look carefully at what you’re talking about.

Now, from the time of Queen Elizabeth down through Cromwell the Jews were at court calling the cards in England. There was nothing more important than having friends at court. [laughter] King William the Third, after the Restoration, was so indebted to Francisco Lopes Suasso, Baron d’Avernas le Gras [alias Abraham Israel Suasso] of Holland, who is said to have loaned him 2 million gulden on his ascension to the throne, and as a result he invited the baron to settle in [the] Indies[?]. To this day the [Jews?] are [in?] Jamaica. [laughter] The entity known as the United States only became possible thanks to a chain of circumstances in which the Jews played no small part. If I may anticipate a little, it may be well said that the American colonies were only able to achieve independence by the help of wealthy Jewish firms which laid the economic foundation for the new republic.

The entry of the Jews in Amsterdam in 1654 must then be considered an epoch of great historical importance for both the United States and the Jews themselves. When the Dutch governor refused to give permanent settlement for the Jews to live and do business in the colony, he was soon sent a letter from the Dutch East India Company to cool it [laughter], and I quote, “because of the large amount of capital which they have invested in shares in this company.” Later, when Amsterdam became New York, there was no real problem for the Jews because the English proclamation which gave English-born status for the Jews was now enforced. By 1740 they were Englishmen by acts of Parliament. Rhode Island, with one of the most favorable constitutions, welcomed the Jews, as did Pennsylvania. So the Jews entered the United States not as a poor slave, but as free men ready to do business and that business was slavery and the slave trade. The ships of the State of New York will attest to this. Hmhmm.

But in the Southern states—and I’m coming to the end—South Carolina was favorable to the Jews from its beginning. The constitution drafted by John Locke at the end of the 17th century provided that any settled persons may form a religious organization. It seems that the Jews took advantage of this quite early. For to this day the word jewlined in South Carolina is synonymous with large plantation estates. Going farther south to Georgia, one finds that when James Oglethorpe set out to form that colony, 3 of the trustees were none other than 3 of the most wealthy Jews of England, namely Alvaro Lopez Suasso of the financial family mentioned above; Francis Salvador, director of the Dutch East India Company, famous financier, philanthropist, and owner of large tracts of land in South Carolina then; and Anthony da Costa, Jewish director of the Bank of England. How [?]. [laughter] [From?] Germany, they sent a shipload of Jews, both Sephardic and Ashkenazic, to the Georgian colony. This incident was highly embarrassing to Oglethorpe, but he could do nothing about it. He who pays the piper, calls the tune. [laughter] The Jewish participation in black servitude, then, cannot be underestimated. Slavery and slave trading was the economy par excellence of the Americas, and at the center of the economy were the Jews.

In the final analysis then, referring specifically to Dr. Korn’s paper, I have shown that from the beginning the Jews were parts and parcels of the peculiar institution, and that if the Jews had anything to do with it, we would still be in chains, I think. That’s hard but I’ll soften it later. [laughter] Now, a few voices here and there spoke against the inhumanity but the moral teachings of Judaism had no real influence on slavery. The number of slaves owned by the Jews in the colonial period cannot be taken on face value by referring only to those slaves owned by individuals and a few owners. Many of the plantations were run by absentee landlords, some of them Jews. I would suggest probably that the fact that many of the names given as Protestants and Catholic owners of plantations were in fact pseudonyms. [laughter] With regard to the census state data given by Dr. Korn these probably are somewhat unreliable. Roger Bastide, in his book African Civilizations in the New World, quoted research of [?] in Surinam, and alluded to the fact that the [?] and the Salamanca Cameroon communities of the Surinam bush came into being on account of the Jewish practice of sending many of their slaves to the bush on the day the slave assessors came to count the number of slaves owned by each Jewish planter. The slaves finally seized upon the practice to make sure of their freedom. [laughter; audience laughter] The thriving Maroon communities in Surinam, known as the Bush Negroes, are still living in Surinam today and have preserved their African customs since the 16th century. They have become a veritable anthropological laboratory for African retention, and the American census therefore should not be taken too seriously.

In every other respect I agree with Dr. Korn’s paper and see it as an objective presentation of the facts about the Jews and their relations to the blacks in this country. It is [?] points that Dr. Korn now supervises [?] Israel the Rabbi[?] it once held by David Einhorn, who was a great Jewish scholar, rabbi and abolitionist. My one conclusion is that the Jewish relationship with the black has been historically one of convenience. Blacks for the Jews meant business; and wherever it has been possible, this relation has been parasitic and only symbiotic when Jewish survival in the black community is involved. It is my conviction that the larger part of the Jewish community feels no real obligation to black suffering in these United States. The relationship continues to be a neutral one—neutral, [with an] ‘n’—and in no way a mutual one. The black community is in dire need of Jewish economic know-how and reparations for serving as a scapegoat of white hostility in the United States—which protected the Jews from serious repercussions, which would have been inevitable were not the black presence here to cushion it. If the Jews still have a divine mission, as I think they do; if they are still responding to a [bar?] of righteousness and justice, we must hope to expect the Jews to set some example in these days, when righteousness and justice seemed to have taken a vacation. But probably we need more prophets and less rabbis.

[laughter; audience applause]

[end of tape]

Read Rabbi Bertram W. Korn’s 1961 work, “Jews and Negro Slavery in the Old South, 1789-1865,” a publication of the American Jewish Historical Society. https://5j6062.a2cdn1.secureserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Jews-and-Negro-Slavery-in-the-Old-South-1789-1865_text.pdf

The BEST Religion

The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam teaches a profound lesson about THE BEST RELIGION:
The Honorable Elijah Muhammad said, “Brother, the best religion is, ‘Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.’ When you look at all of the teachings of Jesus, you can boil it down to this basic principal, ‘Do unto others.’”

And when we look at the essence of all religions we find this “Golden Rule” to be the common thread:


African Traditional Proverb • One going to take a pointed stick to pinch a baby bird should first try it on himself to feel how it hurts.


Baha’i Faith • Blessed is he who preferreth his brother before himself.


Buddhism • Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.


Christianity • Do unto others as you would have them so unto you.


Confucianism • Tse-kung asked, Is there one word that can serve as a principle of conduct for life? Confucius replied, It is the word ‘shu’ — reciprocity. Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire.


Hinduism • Do naught to others which, if done to thee, would cause thee pain: this is the sum of duty.


Islam • No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself.


Jainism • In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, we should regard all creatures as we regard our own self.


Judaism • What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow man. That is the entire Law, all the rest is commentary.


Shintoism • Be charitable to all beings, love is the representative of God.


Sikhism • Don’t create enmity with anyone as God is within everyone.


Taoism • Regard your neighbor’s gain as your gain and your neighbor’s loss as your loss.


Zoroastrianism • Whatever thou dost not approve for thyself, do not approve for anyone else. When thou hast acted in this manner, thou art righteous.