Final Call DePOPULATION SECTION • October 5, 2021

depopulation: (dē-pŏp′ye-lā′-shŭn)

To reduce sharply the population of, as by disease, war, or forcible relocation. A reduction over time in a region’s population can be caused by sudden adverse events such as outbursts of infectious disease, famine, and war or by long-term trends, for example sub-replacement fertility, persistently low birth rates, high mortality rates, and continued emigration.

 

Click to access FC.10.5.2021.DePOP_.Coverage.pdf

FC.10.5.2021.DePOP.Coverage

White Supremacist Jews & the Ku Klux Klan

White Supremacist Jews & the Ku Klux Klan

Nation of Islam Research Group


“[T]here can never be any peace structured on injustice, thievery, lying and deceit and using the
name of God to shield your dirty religion under His holy and righteous name.”

—The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan

“Lying is your mother tongue.”

—Jesus to the Jews

It was a horrifying scene in Fairfield, Illinois, on that August day in 1924. A 74-year-old Jewish man named Emmanuel “Manny” Steiner, an immigrant clothing merchant, was paraded down the city’s main street by 40 hooded and robed Ku Klux Klansmen as 15,000 whites looked on. They brought the man to a city park in broad daylight and had him stand before them. That’s when one of the Klansmen—a Christian minister—pulled off his hood and spoke directly to Steiner:

The Knights of the Ku Klux Klan respect and revere you….As a citizen there is no better….On behalf of the klansmen of Wayne County, who hold you in high esteem and regard, we present you with this token [a basket of 50 red roses], realizing that you are a man. We hope that as you go down the twilight trail you will remember with kindness and generosity the men in the masks.

The Klansmen then knelt and prayed, after which they rose and in solemn procession filed past Steiner to take their turn shaking his hand. The men who the Southern Poverty Law Center declared to be “the historic symbol of racist terrorism” were not there in Fairfield to lynch or burn this Jew alive, or to cut off his body parts to display in a jar at the local Five & Dime, as they had done to 5,000 innocent Black Americans. They were instead honoring the Jewish merchant on his “golden business anniversary.”

“Manny,” as he was lovingly known, was no insignificant figure—he was a city councilor, a bank director, the treasurer of the Masons and the Odd Fellows, and a long-time member in good standing of his people’s St. Louis synagogue. And Steiner received this high honor from the white terrorists as his wife, children, and grandchildren proudly looked on.

August 23rd of 1924 was declared “Steiner Day” and was reported to be “the greatest outpouring of people in the history of Wayne County.” Congressmen and senators sang his praises before all partook in a massive barbeque of 60 sheep, 20 sides of beef and 50 hams (presumably kosher). It was a white supremacist Ku Klux Klan extravaganza for a Jew that even the Klan’s national founder and grand wizard, William Simmons, was never granted. But how could this be?

The history of white Jewish supremacy has been skillfully concealed for generations. And their planned and enforced ignorance has led Jews to an aggressive self-deception that has led them to believe that there were no Manny Steiners in their history. It is a Jewish racial delusion that is today crashing down around them.

The attack on a British rap artist has put white Jewish supremacy under the spotlight. The headline in the Daily Mail was forthright: “Wiley accused of antisemitism after likening Jews to Ku Klux Klan.” Bro. Wiley’s “crime” was as trivial as those “crimes” alleged against the 5,000 massacred Blacks—but no less deadly. He tweeted: “There are 2 sets of people who nobody has really wanted to challenge Jewish & KKK but being in business for 20 years you start to understand why.”

The Jewish reaction was beyond bizarre. Within hours Brother Wiley was banned by Twitter and Facebook, Instagram deleted him, YouTube suspended him, his Jewish manager dropped him, and, most fiendish, the Metropolitan Police opened an official investigation! Jews even forced the respected Black news outlet The Voice to remove the interview they did with Bro. Wiley seeking his perspective! It was all the proof anyone ever needed that the power of white supremacist Jews is all-pervasive and indisputable.

Joe Glaser controlled 70% of the Black entertainers in America

Brother Wiley was addressing two very significant issues that have long been an ugly part of the entertainment industry: (1) the exploitation of Black artists by white Jewish managers, agents, lawyers, and record executives; and (2) the Ku Klux Klan-like racism of white Jews in that business. In his now purged Voice interview the “grunge rapper” was circumspect:

 

“The things that need to change is the way that the system was set up, why all of these families are rich, or all of these people have heritage, not just England, like, worldwide….They still see us as slaves. Slavery hasn’t stopped it’s just dressed up in a million pound record deal …”

The first issue is an old complaint that was voiced most sharply by the early jazz musicians. Jewish gangster Joe Glaser controlled 70% of the Black entertainers in America and robbed every last one of them, including Louis Armstrong, Billie Holiday, and Duke Ellington. The Jewish Chess brothers robbed the blues greats blind, including Bo Diddley, Chuck Berry, and Muddy Waters. Jimi Hendrix was milked by Jewish thief Brian Epstein; murderer Phil Spector ripped off singer Darlene Love and his own wife, Ronny Spector; and Arthur Goldberg infamously stole millions from Little Richard. Prince had epic battles with Warner Brothers and began appearing with the word “SLAVE” written on his face. Michael Jackson publicly called Tommy Mattola (a Jewish convert) a “racist who exploited black talent.” Pharrell Williams complained that “It’s really weird: They own the fields where you and God have laid the seeds; you do the harvesting, but they have the ownership.” Wild & Out’s Nick Cannon claims “I created a billion-dollar brand” for Shari Redstone’s (nee’ Rothstein) Viacom, and “my ownership was swindled away from me….[T]hey have been mistreating and robbing our community for years.”

The problem with all these cases is that none of these Black performers apparently read or understood the real contract terms. In the Jewish world in which these Black gentile artists operate, the ancient Jewish “holy book” Talmud supersedes all other contracts and agreements. The 42-volume Talmud is thousands of years old and all-encompassing and binding in every respect. Its tractate (section) Bava Kamma 113b clearly states that Jews have every right to cheat gentiles in business. Bava Kamma 113a further stipulates that where a lawsuit arises between a Jew and a Gentile, it is permissible for the Jew to use lying and deception to achieve advantage. Blacks are just the latest to get tripped up by these strange Jewish Talmudic codes that have for many centuries caused often-violent rifts between Jews and Gentiles across Europe. There are no known cases of a Jewish manager being ripped off by a Black entertainer, and it is equally rare that a Jewish exploiter ever had to pay a criminal penalty for this open racial larceny, so obviously the more favorable Talmudic law is in full effect. It is only when Blacks come to understand the reality of these satanic Jewish ground rules that Blacks and Jews might come to a better, more equitable, relationship.

“6. He likes the devil because the devil gives him nothing.  7. Why does he like the devil?  8. Because the devil put fear in him when he was a little boy.” —English Lesson No. C1, The Supreme Wisdom

Wiley compared his exploitative business relationship with Jews to the experience Blacks have had with the terrorist Ku Klux Klan—and that exposure is what truly brought Jews to apoplexy. The Jews have been so successful in concealing their history of anti-Black violence and anti-Black hatred that it is found in but one publication—in a 73-page chapter in The Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews, Volume 2, released by the Nation of Islam in 2010. The chapter is titled “Jews, Lynching, and the Ku Klux Klan,” and it documents from Jewish sources some horrifying truths about their significant role in the American white supremacy movement.

Bernard Postal

But that is not a new revelation. Before the Civil Rights era, Jews readily called public attention to their unkosher KKK connection. In 1928, the Jewish Tribune newspaper actually published an article titled “Jews in the Ku Klux Klan,” in which the Jewish author, Bernard Postala B’nai B’rith official—boasted that Jews have had “a considerably more important hand [in the KKK] than Jews know about…” Postal reveals: [T]he attorneys for the dragons, kleagles and other officials have not infrequently been Jews….[T]here are unquestionably Jewish members of the Klan in many states.

The role of Jews in the KKK is surprising to no one who understands how Jews aided, reinforced, and profited from slavery and the trade in slave-produced commodities like sugar, tobacco, and especially cotton. And they performed their civic duty admirably. Prominent Jews fought to establish, maintain, and strengthen America’s slave codes and later Jim Crow laws. There were over 100 Jewish mayors and literally hundreds of Jewish public officials in the slavery and Jim Crow South. Jews served as police chiefs and as sheriffs, and as elected officials they faithfully upheld and reinforced White Supremacy and racial discrimination.

Reminder: The Ku Klux Klan gave their Jewish supporter “Manny” Steiner 50 roses in broad daylight. This is what they did to Blacks at night.

The Jew Klux Klan

Some important background: The Ku Klux Klan emerged in the post-Civil War and post-slavery era known as Reconstruction. Their role was entirely economic, namely, to force the emancipated Blacks from pursuing anything other than a plantation life as growers, cultivators, and pickers of that almighty crop that generated over eighty percent of the American economy—cotton. It was not easy for whites to wean themselves off a 300-year addiction to free Black labor and the violent means they had always used to maintain chattel slavery. They were not going to accept that Blacks would simply walk away from the central role that had built their world-leading empire.

Jews were particularly interested in how this post-war labor situation would resolve itself. Jewish businessmen flooded into the South to restart a collapsed and war-ravaged economy, with a particular focus on the cotton business. Jewish scholar Dr. Michael R. Cohen confirms and expands upon that core theme in his 2017 book titled Cotton Capitalists: American Jewish Entrepreneurship in the Reconstruction Era. He wrote that “Jews clustered in the cotton industry, and as a staggering number of Jews operated dry goods and general stores, Jews became deeply enmeshed in the nation’s—and perhaps the world’s—most important industry.” And so the re-enslavement mission of the Ku Klux Klan and the business aspirations of the Jews actually harmonized.

But it was even deeper than that. Dr. Cohen’s reference to the “staggering number” of Jewish-run general stores is key, because those ubiquitous country stores became the region’s ATMs—the hub of the sharecropping system in which ex-slaves were forced into low-wage service to the Jews’ cotton economy. The Jewish stores brought in the tools, the mules, the seed, and the finance, and likewise became the regional depots for the millions of cotton bales from Black sharecroppers all over the South. It is the ugly truth of how the Jews got so rich in America, and how the Blacks got stalled in abject poverty. So while the Ku Klux Klan and the Jewish business class were bosom buddies, Blacks were their perennial victims. When Black leaders—like Booker T. Washington, W.E.B DuBois, and Marcus Garvey—spoke up about this nasty economic injustice, they too were bludgeoned with the “anti-Semite” label. Today all those Black truth-tellers would have been banned from social media.

Were the Jews behind the formation of the Ku Klux Klan? Yes.

Early leaders of the Tennessee-born Klan sailed all the way to England to seek investment from an exiled Confederate Jewish banker named Judah P. Benjamin. A Louisiana  plantation owner with 140 enslaved Africans, Benjamin had arranged Jewish financing for the Confederate Army, a financial deal that extended the carnage for more than a year and earned him an honored portrait on their 2-dollar bill! The KKK emissaries told Benjamin of the “negro threat” to the South and that they needed horses and weapons to “control” Blacks and to reestablish the highly profitable slave system. Benjamin eagerly invested.

 

Another Jewish congressman, William M. Levy of Louisiana, said that freeing the slaves caused “despair and danger,” and he warned that “innocent maidens [and] helpless infants” were in imminent peril. It was Levy’s white supremacist rant in Congress in 1877 that put Rutherford B. Hayes into the presidency, ending Reconstruction and Black hopes of ever becoming truly free in America.

The respected Jewish scholar Harry Simonhoff wrote about the KKK with incredible irony. It had “A lingering tradition of religious tolerance [that] made it possible for Jews and Catholics to be members of the night-riding group.” Isaac Hermann of Sandersville, Georgia, was a Confederate veteran and a full-fledged Klansman. A Jewish scholar described him as a leader in the movement to “protect the whites against the Negro…” Philip Isenbaum of Mississippi identified himself as the “Grand Cyclops” of the Ku Klux Klan when he signed an 1871 notice threatening a lynching death for the white officials who had recommended “a big black nigger” for a position of authority. Isenbaum warned them to “beware, beware, beware, beware.” The father of Bernard Baruch, the influential banker who advised presidents from Wilson to Roosevelt, was a proud robe-wearing Klansman. The Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, who was himself a Klansman, was invited to join by a Jew.

These are not just Southerners caught up in “southern traditions.” The most prominent Jew in America was New Yorker Rabbi Morris Raphall: he was the highest paid clergyman in America and in his most famous oration he declared to the world that God Himself supported slavery! Another Jewish leader asserted that “the Negro forms the mud at [the] base” of civilization. There were many Jews who believed as did Frank J. Cohen, editor of the Jewish Sentiment newspaper, when he said, in perfect harmony with Klan doctrine:

“The white man will rule by fair means or by foul….God Almighty never created the negro the white man’s equal and even an act of Congress will not change the trend of nature or swerve the white man from his determination to retain his supremacy.”

John Cohen was the longtime editor of the Atlanta Journal. He was the son of a rabbi and described as “high in the councils of the Ku Klux Klan.” He “whipped whites into a frenzy” of race hate that ultimately led to the Atlanta Massacre of 1906, in which 50 Blacks were murdered and 150 were wounded, forcing over a thousand to flee the city. White gangs met and organized at the O.H. Silverman Co. building, and pawnbrokers Morris and Samuel Greenblatt, at 123 Peters Street, supplied guns and ammunition.

In 1905, Cohen’s paper promoted Thomas Dixon’s racist novel Clansman, the book that became the inspiration for the most racially destructive movie ever made—The Birth of a Nation. So vicious was this Jewish-financed film that when it was released in 1915 it became the main driver in the rebirth of the Ku Klux Klan. It made so much money for its east coast distributor that he went to Hollywood and started the largest movie studio in history. His name was Louis B. Mayer and his studio was Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, which became the fount of many of Hollywood’s racist movie images.

In 1896 a Jewish white supremacist named Adolph Ochs (pronounced ox) bought the New York Times and began publishing racist articles and editorials indistinguishable from Klan attitudes and beliefs. The Times freely used terms like “nigger,” “coon,” and “darkey” to describe Blacks, and it made a conscious point of never capitalizing the word Negro. The Ku Klux Klan capitalized “Negro” in its publications years before the New York Times would.

According to scholars, businesses showed their ideological solidarity with the racial terrorists by choosing names beginning with three K’s, and several Jewish merchants are found following that custom, especially in Klan strongholds: Kaufman’s Kampus Klothes, Kaufman’s Kosher Kafe, Harry Karp’s Kool Kwality Klothes, and Kadetz Kosher Kafe. In Columbia, South Carolina, there was Kohn’s Korrect Klothes and in Boise, Idaho, Kirshbaum’s Klever Klothes.

When Blacks gained a measure of political power in Wilmington, North Carolina, Jews were among the leaders that rallied the mob of whites in 1898 that massacred as many as 300 Blacks. According to the Encyclopedia of Southern Jewish Communities, Nathaniel Jacobi organized business owners to threaten to fire their Black employees.

“At a public meeting, both Jacobi and [Solomon] Fishblate spoke to a growing mob and supported a declaration that whites should rule Wilmington and North Carolina. This meeting later resulted in the violent Wilmington Race Riot of 1898, in which white mobs terrorized the city’s black population and forcibly installed Democratic Party rule.…Jews like Fishblate and Jacobi supported this effort to overturn ‘black rule,’ showing how much Jews had assimilated into the local culture of white supremacy.”

 

It is well known that the Nazis forced Jews to carry “Jewish passports” stamped with an identifying letter “J”. The most prominent and wealthy Jew in Atlanta, Oscar Pappenheimer, actually proposed a similar plan for all Southern Blacks—30 years before Hitler! His close business associate was a man named Leo Frank, the president of the Atlanta B’nai B’rith. Frank advocated that Blacks be barred from giving testimony in court because, as Frank’s lawyer said, “If you put a nigger in a hopper he’ll drip lies.” When charged with murder, Leo Frank—the Father of the Anti-Defamation League—argued that murder is a “negro crime” and so he, a white man, could not be guilty.

Attorney Dale Schwartz, a national board member of B’nai B’rith’s Anti-Defamation League, grew up in a merchant family in Georgia that knowingly sold disguises to Ku Klux Klan members. He said that “whenever we sold a lot of white sheets we knew there was going to be a Klan meeting.” Said one Jewish merchant: “I used to sell ’em the sheets, and Sam the tailor made them into robes. Let me tell you we had a good business going.” A Jewish storeowner reportedly paid the Klan initiation fees for his employees.

 

In the early 1900s the most prominent Jew in America was Louis Marshall. A top attorney, he was founder and first president of the American Jewish Committee. Lesser known was that he was also the “main legal advisor” to the American Breeders Association, a pre-Hitler organization of whites committed to eugenics and the racial cleansing of America. Marshall opposed the anti-lynching bill proposed by the NAACP and fought to undermine it, calling it “unconstitutional” and a violation of “state’s rights.” He defended the KKK as a secret fraternal organization like his own.

The fact is, one is hard-pressed to find any Jew of any historical significance voicing any support for Black freedom, justice, or equality. The reality is that white supremacy is as Jewish a tradition as is corned beef and Hanukkah. Racism works for Jews—it is highly PROFITABLE and has sustained them over many centuries and in many lands. Find those societies in history where Black slavery forms the economic foundation—the Caribbean, Brazil, Mississippi Delta, South Africa, Rhodesia, Surinam, India—and Jews will be there also, not as an oppressed underclass but as a thriving and vital community. White supremacy will continue to uphold Jews and their white gentile partners as long as Blacks continue to play a passive and supporting role, giving them unfettered access to our children’s minds and a controlling interest in our Black talent and labor. 

What we see in Wiley, in Jay Electronica, in Nick Cannon, in Ice Cube, in Tamika Mallory, in DeSean Jackson, in Professor Griff, and what we see in all of those who have endured this latest round of Jewish lynchings, is NOT “anti-Semitism”—but our strongest and most conscious voices demanding to be free.

 


The Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews series is available at the Final Call: https://store.finalcall.com/collections/the-secret-relationship-between-blacks-and-jews

 

The Leo Frank Hoax: Interview With the NOI Research Group

Interview With the NOI Research Group:

The Jewish Hoax of Leo Frank

The emergence of Donald Trump after the contentious 2016 presidential election has heightened racial rhetoric and tensions in America. The controversies over the national anthem, the police shootings of unarmed Blacks, and the Civil War monuments have forced a reexamination of the history of racial oppression in America.

Jewish people were particularly incensed by the protesters who displayed Nazi symbols and chanted “Jews will not replace us.” Within the angst-filled Jewish commentary a largely unfamiliar name was invoked over and over. That name was Leo Frank—a Jewish B’nai B’rith leader who was lynched in 1915 for the murder of a young Gentile girl, a crime his supporters say he did not commit. A Black man, Jews say, was the real murderer, and they present Frank as a Jewish martyr who paid the ultimate price as a victim of white racism and bigotry. Frank’s killing is considered by Jews to be “the worst case of anti-Semitism” in America’s history.

But a new book by the Nation of Islam probes the Leo Frank case and casts serious doubt on that century-old Jewish point of view. NOI researchers say the commonly believed story of Leo Frank is based on falsified data, cunning propaganda, and outright deception, and has little at all to do with the known facts of the case. Further, that falsified Jewish history is being dishonestly used by Jewish leaders for political and racial advantage. We sat down with the researchers of The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3, subtitled “Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man,” to learn more about this largely unknown case.

Describe for us the murder and how it developed into such an explosive case.

Leo Frank managed a pencil factory in Atlanta, Georgia, and he was also the president of the southern regional chapter of B’nai B’rith, the most prominent Jewish secret society. Thirteen-year-old Mary Phagan was one of about 120 child laborers working in the factory. She operated a machine that attached the metal band that holds the rubber eraser to the wooden pencil. 

On Saturday April 26, 1913, when the factory was deserted, the little girl came to the office of Leo Frank to get her pay of $1.20. In very much the same way as Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein is accused of doing, Frank used his power as the factory boss to lure her to a back area and attempt to sexually assault her. Mary resisted and in the struggle Frank struck her and knocked her unconscious, and then strangled her to death. He left a trail of clues leading to himself, so within a few days of the murder he was arrested. He was later tried, convicted, and ultimately sentenced to death. After two years of legal appeals Frank was kidnapped from his Georgia prison cell and lynched. He is claimed to be the only Jew ever lynched in America.

Jews also claimed that somebody else committed the crime and that Frank was unfairly tried and that he was the victim of “anti-Semitism.” The case became an international cause célèbre for Jews—as infamous as the O.J. Simpson case. And just as with the O.J. case the story of Leo Frank has immense racial overtones.

You mentioned Harvey Weinstein—his method of targeting young girls seems chillingly similar to the Leo Frank scenario.

Very much so. Frank found himself in the identical predicament that Weinstein is in. According to testimony at his 1913 murder trial, many of Leo Frank’s own female employees testified about how he had tried to corner them and about how he had proposed sexual acts to them. One by one these teenagers took the witness stand and spoke of his lewd behavior. One employee said he had looked through a keyhole to find Frank performing oral sex on a woman—right in the factory! Another said Frank had offered her money for sex. The testimony was so explicit that the judge had to clear the courtroom of women. What’s worse, after this barrage of salacious stories, Frank’s lawyers argued that his behavior was not wrong—that it was a sign of more liberal times! One even said, “Deliver me from one of these prudish fellows that never looks at a girl and never puts his hands on her…” Another telling similarity between Harvey Weinstein and Leo Frank is that all the girls that Frank hunted down were all Gentiles, and that caused much resentment among the white men of Georgia. Weinstein, at least so far, seems to have adopted that familiar M.O. in his targeting of young women.

What does the case have to do with Black people?

The Leo Frank case is much like the Plessy-Ferguson or Dred Scott case is to Black people—it is a pillar of Jewish identity. And from the very beginning of this landmark Jewish case, Blacks were intimately involved. At first, Jews said a Black night watchman at the factory named Newt Lee was the real murderer. He was arrested and almost lynched, until he was found to have an iron-clad alibi. Then the Jews said that the real murderer was another employee, a Black man named James Conley, who was a sweeper at the factory.

The night watchman you mentioned, Newt Lee—how was he implicated in the case?

Newt Lee was working that night and in the early morning, during his rounds, it was Lee who found the body in the basement. He alerted the police and they—seeing a Black man near a dead white body—immediately arrested him. Incredibly, Frank’s own legal team actually planted a bloody shirt at Newt Lee’s home to make him look guilty. At the same time Lee’s factory time card, which gave him a strong alibi, was mysteriously altered to show that he had had the time to commit the crime. Only Frank and his crew of lawyers and hired detectives had the ability to frame Newt Lee like that. When the newspaper reported that a bloody shirt was found at Lee’s home, it almost got an innocent man lynched. Luckily for Lee, Frank’s legal eagles and private eyes did such a sloppy job at planting the shirt that the police were not fooled at all and suspected Frank even more. This is the point in the case where the people of Atlanta came to believe—and rightly so—that Leo Frank was the murderer.

Tell us more about James Conley. What is his involvement in the Leo Frank case?

James Conley was the most pivotal individual in the whole case. He was a 29-year-old Black man and a janitor at the pencil factory, and the Jews say he essentially teamed up with Atlanta, Georgia’s white police and white prosecutors to falsely charge and condemn his employer, Leo Frank. For a century Conley has been portrayed as an enemy of the Jewish people—maybe the first “Black anti-Semite.”

James Conley, falsely charged with the murder of a white gentile girl.

And because there is a Black man in the midst of such a historical Jewish tragedy, it was incumbent upon us to ferret out the truth of the matter. Was Conley a murderer, or was he being set up to take the fall for Leo Frank’s crime? Black scholars—up until now—have left Conley hanging, as it were. He is owed a fair analysis. Is he the first “Black Anti-Semite” or an innocent victim of a Jewish smear campaign?

How did James Conley go from factory janitor to “black anti-Semite”?

Conley says that on the day of the murder Frank ordered him to be a lookout stationed on the first floor as Frank—a married man—“Weinsteined” young females in his second-floor office. Conley said that he had performed that lookout service for Frank several times before, so he was well familiar with the assignment. When an unsuspecting Mary Phagan came in that day to get her pay, she went upstairs to her boss’s office not knowing she was walking into Frank’s trap.

Moments later Frank called Conley upstairs in a panic, explaining that he had accidently struck and killed the girl. Frank then ordered him to help him conceal the body in the basement and swore him to secrecy. As a Black man in 1913 lynch-mob Georgia, Conley did as he was told. But as the case became a front-page sensation, Conley came to believe that Leo Frank was about to scrap their agreement and pin the murder on him. So Conley confessed to the police about his role in helping Frank conceal the body.

His statement was so detailed and the details matched the physical evidence, and thus Conley became one of the strongest witnesses against Leo Frank. It must be noted that a grand jury with five Jewish members (including at least two from Frank’s own synagogue) indicted Leo Frank before Conley came forward. So the evidence clearly pointed to Frank’s guilt before Conley said a word. But once Conley spoke up, Frank and his legal team—and Jewish leaders and scholars for the last 100 years—have used every bit of their wealth, power, and clout to pin the murder of Mary Phagan on the Black man James Conley.

Why is the Nation of Islam interested in this case, a Jewish case?

Leo Frank, the only Jew ever lynched in American history. He murdered a 13-year-old white gentile girl and tried to blame his crime on two Black men.

When studying the historical relationship between Blacks and Jews, we find that the 1913-1915 Leo Frank case is a turning point—a watershed moment. It is claimed that Leo Frank’s lynching caused Jews to feel more sympathy for the oppressed condition of Blacks in America. They say it compelled Jews to join the Civil Rights Movement and caused them to form the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith (ADL). They say it led to the rebirth of the Ku Klux Klan as an “anti-Jewish” organization.

In fact, none of that is true. But what IS true is that the Leo Frank case is the first use of “Black anti-Semitism” as a Jewish battle cry, and it marks the beginning of a hundred-year campaign by Jewish leaders to aggressively control and curtail Black progress. Jews insist that Blacks ignore the lengthy history of Blacks and Jews prior to the case and begin our relationship with them at the moment of Frank’s lynching in 1915—when we presumably were “united” in this tragedy. And if you examine the literature on the Black–Jewish relationship, it most often begins right at the very point of the Leo Frank case—as if nothing of historical significance preceded it.

Also, Leo Frank was not of the rank-and-file Jewish citizenry. As the B’nai B’rith president he was arguably the most important Jew in the South. Jews considered him as having, in effect, diplomatic immunity within the white rulership of the Jim Crow South, so his arrest, trial, and conviction shocked, offended, and activated Jews at the highest level. And they have sought to exonerate Frank ever since, but at Black people’s expense.

How did all the propaganda affect your approach to this case?

Our first view of the Leo Frank case accepted the prevailing opinion of Jewish scholars that Frank was innocent and wrongly convicted of murder, but there were red flags about how the case was being presented. We had to wade through reams of propaganda in order to get to the raw data, the primary documents. But once we did, it became clear that not only was Frank guilty of the rape and murder of Mary Phagan, but he and his Jewish defenders had taken anti-Black racism to an entirely new level.

There is no real doubt that Frank murdered Mary Phagan. Four separate investigative agencies—including the two detective firms hired by Leo Frank himself—concluded that Frank was guilty of the murder. A grand jury with five Jewish members indicted him. At least two of those Jewish men were members of Frank’s synagogue and one of them was a B’nai B’rith official! A 12-man jury of his fellow white men needed only a couple of hours to reach a unanimous guilty verdict. Once Blacks and whites decide to examine the ample evidence in the case, the conclusion that Frank was guilty is unavoidable.

What makes the Leo Frank trial problematic for Blacks?

Jews worked hard to pin the murder on two separate Black men. And then the Jewish leaders argued publicly and openly that (1) testimony from witnesses was invalid if they were Black, and that (2) Frank was innocent because murder and rape were “negro crimes.” Had the Jews succeeded in establishing those profoundly racist legal doctrines, crimes in America from then on would have been color-coded, and Blacks would be considered legally incapable of telling the truth! The fact that it was the Jewish community that advanced this wickedness makes the Leo Frank case a landmark case and irreversibly alters our understanding of the Black–Jewish relationship. 

Atlanta Constitution newspaper headline. Frank declared murder a “negro crime” and thus pronounced himself innocent.

Plus, the conduct of the trial by Frank’s defense was appalling. During jury selection Frank’s attorneys eliminated all the Blacks because they wanted to have an all-white jury; they attacked Blacks in open court, calling them “niggers” and “smelly” and “liars.” Frank’s attorney said that if you “hang a nigger in a hopper he’ll drip lies.” He asked one witness if he “ever smelled a nigger.” He told the court that they had “never known of a nigger” to leave sausage on a plate. Frank’s attorneys said that unlike the Jews Blacks were “a law-breaking race.”

Their defense appealed almost entirely to the “racial responsibility” of the all-white jury to exonerate a fellow white man. It is a testament to the sheer power of Jews that they were able to take a trial that may have been the most atrocious example of anti-Black race hate in the American judicial system and turn it into their most egregious example of anti-Semitism. Now Leo Frank is even being promoted as a Jewish civil rights icon, even though pure white supremacy was his courtroom defense! Yes, the Leo Frank trial was and is problematic for Blacks.

Was there a cover-up in this case?

A whole lot is being covered up in this case. Most people who have heard of the case have been told that Frank was in effect dragged out of a synagogue and tried at a Klan rally. But that was not the case at all. Frank, after all, was a prominent white man and a respected community leader in Atlanta—and he was treated as such by the police, prosecutors, and press. Jews in the South were honored members of the white community. They helped create the court system that enforced the legal inferiority of all Blacks. They never, ever had to face the racism that Blacks suffered.

Most people are not being told that there was blood and hair evidence, that Frank changed his alibi several times and lied constantly to police, that he was a womanizer who sexually harassed his girl employees, and that he claimed he couldn’t remember simple things. He hired private detectives that went around planting evidence and bribing witnesses to change their testimony. At his own trial Frank refused to be sworn on the Bible. Yes, there is a LOT that Jewish writers have covered up about the case, including Frank playing the race card to play to the white jurors’ prejudices about Black men. Most damning of all are the racist extremes that Frank and his B’nai B’rith associates were willing to go to free Leo Frank.

How did the Nation of Islam Research Group become aware of the Leo Frank Case?

Since at least 1959, Jewish leaders have targeted the Nation of Islam for destruction. And since 1983, Jews in America have ill-advisedly attacked The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan, labeling him an “anti-Semite,” and they have unleashed a barrage of hatred and slander against The Minister and ALL Blacks who love and respect him. Minister Farrakhan’s response was to send his scholars into the libraries to examine the actual history of Jews and their historical behavior with respect to Black people, and it is an ugly picture indeed. Their extensive involvement in the trans-Atlantic slave trade and the marketing of the products of slavery was documented for the first time, as was their deep involvement in the Jim Crow South. When The Minister published this secret history in 1991 and again in 2010, it shocked most Blacks and Jews.

The reaction of Jewish leaders was to deny, deny, deny—but ironically most of the scholarship used by the NOI had come from Jewish historians, rabbis, and Jewish leaders themselves. We only quoted high-ranking and well-respected scholars like Korn, Wiznitzer, Marcus, Raphael, Brackman and others who had documented horrible truths about Jewish slave-trading, but had only shared that knowledge among themselves.

Even with that damning historical evidence, Jewish leaders insisted that the Nation of Islam was misleading the world. Blacks, they said, ought to look at the Leo Frank case as the BEST example of the plight of Jews in America. And it is they who demand that Blacks view Jewish history through the prism of Leo Frank.

And so we respected that Jewish request and performed the most extensive analysis of the case ever done. But the result is an even more devastating a blow to the propaganda that passes for Jewish history. In 536 pages, we show that most of what is believed about the case is a carefully crafted lie.

What makes the Leo Frank case relevant today? Why should anyone care about this case, this history?

The Leo Frank case marks the spot in Jewish history where they in effect weaponized the charge “anti-Semitism” to punish and destroy their enemies. It is the point when Jews moved to commandeer Black leadership to make Blacks serve Jews’ political purposes. The Messenger of Allah, The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad, says that in effect the civil rights movement was foisted upon us and is really a “hypocritical trick,” used to deceive us and defer our movement toward a full and complete freedom. The Leo Frank case is one of those tricks.

For example, Leo Frank’s crime happened at a very significant time for American Jews. The Federal Reserve was being established, as was the ADL. Both the Ku Klux Klan and the civil rights movement developed with the great assistance of Jews. So the Leo Frank case offered a chance to generate a victim-of-“anti-Semitism” storyline as cover for these other moves they were making at the time.

Was anti-Semitism involved in the Leo Frank Case? If so, how so?

Incredibly, this case is seen as the most egregious case of anti-Semitism in the history of America. Yet the records prove that anti-Semitism was almost entirely absent from the trial and its aftermath. The first time religion was introduced into the trial was through the bigotry of Frank’s own mother. She made a nuisance of herself at the trial, even standing up and cussing out the prosecutor, calling him a “Christian dog.”

We document at least three cases where Leo Frank hired people to incite “anti-Semitism” in his trial so that he could “play the anti-Semitism card” in his effort to free himself. So flagrant is this deception that we must ask how and why it has been allowed to stand for so long. It only proves that Blacks must examine history for themselves, no matter how strongly held the prevailing opinion and dogma may be. How the case has long been spun proves that some of the greatest liars in world history are historians—promoters of the Western world’s fairy tales.

When we Googled Leo Frank we found that he is being constantly referenced in articles and commentaries on today’s issues. Why are today’s Jews so passionate about the Leo Frank Case?

The Leo Frank case allowed Jews to reinvent and redefine themselves in America. Before the Frank case Jews were firmly a part of the slave-trading class of racial oppressors in a society that scapegoated Blacks and accepted the Jewish people as fellow Caucasians. Leo Frank gave them a chance to wipe that slate clean and start over in a biblical role as an American victim—the “despised and rejected” (Isaiah 53:3) for 400 years in a land not their own (Genesis 15:13).

You can’t be a slave-trading white supremacist people and maintain your image as God’s “Chosen.” So Leo Frank as a victim of a brutal lynching allows Jews to claim that the Jewish people as a whole were victims, rather than the victimizers that history proves they actually were. That is why most popular histories ignore the Jewish role in America between Columbus’s voyage in 1492 and the Civil War and Reconstruction of the mid- and late 1800s. They have hidden that history and demanded that we begin noticing the Jewish presence in America in the 1910s. In very much the same way that Jesus started time over again, Leo Frank the martyred hero allows Jews to claim that their American birth certificate reads August 17, 1915—the day Frank was lynched.

The case has been made into a play titled Parade, which seems to be performed all over the world.

Alfred Uhry, playwright and promoter of the Leo Frank hoax.

A society’s founding fables must be constantly reinforced if its citizens are going to react according to the wishes of its rulers. The Parade script provides that reinforcement for Jews. It is written by Alfred Uhry, the same Jewish man who wrote that unwatchable slavery nostalgia movie Driving Miss Daisy. Even in the three-word title, Uhry gives you the Black man’s job and function—a driver—without a reference to his humanity or even to his name. He is a servant to the more important Jewish woman, “Miss Daisy,” who has both a name and a respectful title. This is how Hollywood has misrepresented us, and, again, reinforced racial relationships. Uhry won a Tony for Parade because it tells Jews that they are the primary victims of America, and that Blacks are among their oppressors. He falsely represents James Conley as the murderer of Mary Phagan and he portrays Blacks as having aligned with whites specifically to persecute “the Jew.” Absurd.

Alfred Uhry’s claim to fame: Driving Miss Daisy. Considered to be a prime example of Hollywood’s demeaning racist roles.

Plays have to be examined, just like the Confederate statues. The ADL started out looking at plays, movies, books to ferret out and eliminate the defamation of Jews—it is in their founding charter. So those old movies have to go. Hamilton has to be reassessed. Over time, Black actors—much like the NFL’s Black athletes—will refuse these demeaning negro roles and “take a knee,” as it were. This would force Jews to play those demeaning roles in burnt-cork blackface—just like they used to. Parade defames Black people and cannot be allowed to stand.

 What do you think Alfred Uhry’s motive was?

Parade play is the main source of false Leo Frank propaganda.

Parade is a Jewish fairy tale—no more truthful than the story of Santa Claus or Washington’s cherry tree. In a sense Alfred Uhry does us a service, because Blacks must know how the theater and movies have been manipulated by Jews to effectively scapegoat our people. Parade demonstrates just how far they will go to make Blacks the villains. Leo Frank pointed his crooked finger at two Black men, which almost led to their lynching. He also accused a white Gentile man of the crime, and Frank’s team of thugs tried to hire a Black woman to poison the main Black witness. The lengths they went to free Leo Frank were beyond belief. None of Frank’s criminal acts make it into the Parade fairy tale.

In fact, Parade uses precisely the same formula as the 1915 film The Birth of a Nation, which told the world that Blacks were a lethal threat to American civilization. It should come as no surprise that Jews were the financiers, promoters, and distributors of that movie, which is so racist that it is still used by the Ku Klux Klan as a recruitment film.

How many other books written about this case? Any movies? The NOI’s book would make a fantastic movie!

There are about a dozen books and hundreds of articles on the Leo Frank case—nearly all of them following the racist Jewish storyline of an innocent Leo Frank who paid the ultimate price for a rape and murder committed by a Black man. A TV movie with Jack Lemon and Charles Dutton was produced in 1988, and a PBS “docudrama,” The People v. Leo Frank, was made in 2009. A movie that corrects the history and that tells the story of those who purposely twisted the case would make a very powerful feature film.

We’ve always understood that the Jewish people were the “best friends” of Blacks throughout our history. How did we get it so wrong?

If we examine the origin of Black people’s belief that Jews were our friends and allies in our freedom struggles, we find they use the Myth of Leo Frank as their “proof.” Until the Nation of Islam’s books on the Black–Jewish relationship, Black scholars have not dared to look carefully into that claim. Unfortunately, they have allowed Jewish scholars to simply invent a false history and bum rush it into all our history books.

For instance, in many books on lynching Leo Frank is the only person named as a victim, even though more than 4,000 Blacks were brutally lynched in America! And just like that, Leo Frank—a white man—is made the symbol of American racial terrorism. In some books the KKK is made into an anti-Jewish phenomenon and racism is merely an afterthought to the Klan—even though no other Jews were ever lynched. Through the Leo Frank case, Jews have simply stolen our history—like Jacob stole the birthright of his brother Esau in the Bible. They’ve swapped their photo for ours and used our I.D.s, to the point that we, Blacks, have been duped into believing a false history. As Malcolm X once famously said, “we’ve been took, hoodwinked, bamboozled.”

What is most striking about the case is how every aspect of the Jewish community rallied around Leo Frank—from the rank and file with their letter-writing campaigns to the upper echelon of Jewish leadership. Their persistence is to be admired, even though the hard evidence clearly shows Leo Frank to be as guilty as sin.

Yes. For them it was not about his guilt or innocence but in pushing a “cover” narrative that Jews can use to advance their own political and economic agenda. It is a narrative that helps them stick together as a people and—even more important—it runs interference as they pursue their political and economic agendas. It is now clear that most Jewish leaders and supporters may have known that Frank was the murderer of Mary Phagan. But their mangling of BLACK history is unacceptable. For Frank to be innocent a Black man must be guilty—and that is unacceptable.

It is also fascinating how Jews and white Gentiles seem to have split over this case.

Yes. This case marks the point where Jews turned most viciously against white Gentiles. The Jewish people had been so well accepted in the South by the Gentiles that some Jews actually believed that Dixie was the Jewish Promised Land. It was in the South where Jews had made an incredible fortune in cotton and slavery. So white Gentiles were completely blind-sided by this Jewish scorched-earth effort to free Leo Frank at all costs. Jews even slandered the whole state of Georgia with the charge of “anti-Semitism,” which, we found, was non-existent; indeed, our research shows just the opposite: Southern whites have always been philo-Semitic.

For instance, nearly all the previous writings on the case claim that a white mob stormed the trial chanting, “Hang the Jew or we’ll hang you!” In many books and articles these are the only words quoted in the whole case. Yet, there was no mob! There was no chanting! Frank partisans simply made it all up. We have a section in the book that lists all the authors that published some version of that lie, including the ADL, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the lawyer Alan Dershowitz, and newspapers like the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and many, many others.

That ONE SINGLE LIE is what Jews have pointed to for over a century to prove that they faced violent oppression in America. Yet it has no basis in fact at all. Quite remarkable.

Your use of primary documents makes this book groundbreaking—was it difficult in your research to access the original sources?

The original documents of the Leo Frank case are really an unexplored treasure trove that unlock the most confidential operations of the Jews’ highest leadership circles. As the Jewish leaders fought to free Leo Frank, a considerable amount of data about their private activities poured into the public record—information that is so extensive and so revealing that its very existence is unique in the annals of Jewish history. In much the same way as the slave-sale advertisements in our book Jews Selling Blacks unmask Jewish slave-dealing in the harshest way, so too does the Leo Frank case offer a unique window into the thinking and strategizing of the leaders of the Jewish people.

We examined the newspaper accounts, court records and filings, interviews, private investigators’ reports, and Jewish leaders’ private correspondence. Plus, we accessed a significant amount of information held in private archives and libraries, material that previous authors and researchers missed or purposely ignored. All of that is uncovered in the book.

The Nation of Islam goes against the scholarly grain in its revelations about the case—any backlash?

We expect that there will be much Jewish objection, but there is not much that can be disputed, given that the book’s thesis is supported so strongly by official documents and legal records. It is unlikely Jewish leaders will like seeing this history exposed. The Jewish newspaper Forward published an article this summer in which it interviewed Boston University professor Dr. Jeffrey Melnick. He is author of a book about the Leo Frank case, Black–Jewish Relations on Trial. He begins his interview with a surprising admission: “I’m clearly in a strange position of agreeing with a lot of what the Nation of Islam has to say…” In fact, Dr. Melnick was asked directly whether he felt Frank was really guilty. He answered, “I studied all I could and I can’t figure it out still.” Dr. Melnick still has his job, and yet we are still “anti-Semites”! Ironically, Jews falsely throwing around the “anti-Semitism” charge all started with the Leo Frank case.

Our book is so detailed and our range of source material is so extensive that Jews have “chosen” to sit this one out, and they cannot find a negro to push out front to repudiate it. Just as with the two previous volumes of The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews series, Jewish historians have shown that they are not equipped to deal with scholarship at this level. The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan demands intelligence and accuracy and, above all, TRUTH. While Jewish leaders were viciously slandering him, The Minister sent his scholars into the libraries—not into the gutter. Had we responded from the gutter, it would have been how traditional academia trained us. Min. Farrakhan gave us the intellectual weaponry to prevail in our research.

For those who are already students of the case, what does the Nation of Islam say in the book that is new?

We really bring an entirely new approach to the case. For instance:

  • We show how Frank’s lawyers maneuvered to force “anti-Semitism” into the courtroom where none existed.
  • There were two mysterious notes left next to the body that were written by the murderer. We hired a handwriting expert to analyze the notes and we found many clues that lead right to Leo Frank.
  • We chronicle how the national Jewish leaders took over the case, concocted a public relations campaign filled with racist lies and slander—with the Jewish-owned New York Times at the helm—and foisted it onto the public.
  • We analyzed Frank’s trial defense, which was explicitly racist and openly anti-Black.
  • We look deeply into the shady motives behind Governor John Slaton’s commutation of Frank’s death sentence.
  • We examined in detail not only the dubious pardon that the state of Georgia gave Leo Frank in 1986 but also the dubious claims of Alonzo Mann, who came forward after 70 years of silence to say he saw Conley with the body of Mary Phagan. It turns out that his new statements hurt Leo Frank far more than they help him.
  • We look at the illegal actions of Frank’s hired private eyes, who intimidated witnesses, planted evidence, and even hatched a murder plot against James Conley.
  • We look into the Jewish leaders who came to Frank’s defense and their real motives for taking on this case and a man they knew was guilty.
  • We looked into the group who is claimed to have lynched Leo Frank—The Knights of Mary Phagan—and uncovered some very strange and suspicious details that raise questions about who actually lynched the man.
  • We found that Frank’s stay in prison was almost luxurious—not the “anti-Semitic” nightmare that has been claimed.

Our goal was to introduce the case to a new generation who are more and more interested in this so-called Black–Jewish relationship and how it has affected Black progress. And to do that effectively we had to get to the bottom of who killed Mary Phagan. Was the murderer a Black man or a Jew?

It is only a matter of time before the falsehoods and lies that we have uncovered change the history of the Leo Frank case—and thus the Black–Jewish relationship—forever.

You seem to be saying that Leo Frank may not have been lynched by white gentiles at all…?

We believe that it is still a mystery who actually lynched Leo Frank. Nearly every account of Frank’s lynching says that a vigilante group called the Knights of Mary Phagan committed the act. But beyond a single mention of this group in the New York Times two months before the lynching, no record exists of this group anywhere. The Times was owned by a Jewish southerner named Adolph Ochs, who had actually joined the Leo Frank propaganda campaign. So the so-called Knights of Mary Phagan may have been planted to make a Gentile group take the fall for a lynching that was very likely committed by Jews themselves.

That may seem outrageous, but by the time of his lynching many people—including his Jewish supporters—came to believe Leo Frank was better dead than alive. Frank had such an offensive personality that his main Jewish supporter said that when he first met Frank, he impressed him as “a sexual pervert.” Think about that: Leo Frank was that repellant to his friends and advocates at his very first meeting with them! The man was Albert Lasker and he paid millions (in today’s money) for Frank’s defense, but he privately admitted that he was not even convinced that Frank was innocent. Frank’s repulsive personality just did not jibe with the angelic international image Frank’s public relations team had created for him—that of a humble, innocent, and suffering Jesus figure. That whitewashed image of the man conflicted with the actual character of the man and so, by the time of his lynching in August of 1915, the man himself had outlived his usefulness.

A measure of how expendable Leo Frank was to the Jewish community might be gleaned from his gravesite in New York. It is a remarkably tiny and non-descript headstone for someone who is considered a beloved Jewish martyr. Aside from that, Frank was a president of the B’nai B’rith. One would think that someone who had reached his level of significance would be honored by a grave as magisterial as those surrounding his. We think that it is a sign of Jewish contempt for the man himself. But Frank’s image—as manufactured as it is—lives on.

Are there any surviving members of the Frank family? How do they feel about the NOI’s recent book on the case?

Aside from his wife, Lucille Frank, and mother, there were no other immediate family members involved in the trial. Frank was buried in Brooklyn, where he grew up, and nothing more was heard from his family since.

His victim, Mary Phagan, has relatives who have taken up her cause. They have always believed that Frank was guilty. Interestingly, Mary’s grand niece was named after her—Mary Phagan Kean. As a young girl herself, she learned of the tragedy and began her own quest for the truth. Ms. Kean wrote a book published in 1987 titled The Murder of Little Mary Phagan and she, like us, examined the official records of the case. She concluded that Leo Frank was her great aunt’s murderer. We would venture that the Phagan family might appreciate the detail we have brought to our case analysis. At least we hope they would.

[….]

Thank you!

More NOIRG articles on the Leo Frank Myth:

LEO FRANK: HAVE YOU EVER SMELLED A NEGRO?

https://noirg.org/articles/leo-frank-have-you-ever-smelled-a-negro/

JEWISH PLAY PARADE HAS BLACK ACTORS TELLING WHITE LIES

https://noirg.org/articles/the-musical-parade-corrupts-black-jewish-history/

LEO FRANK AND PARADE: A JEWISH FAIRY TALE GONE BAD

https://noirg.org/articles/leo-frank-and-parade-a-jewish-fairy-tale-gone-bad/

JEWISH FORWARD TAKES ON LEO FRANK MYTHOLOGY

https://noirg.org/articles/jewish-forward-takes-on-leo-frank-mythology/

 


Note: The Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews Series can be purchased here: https://noirg.org/store/ 

The Jewish Assault On Black Thinkers

Pulitzer Prize-winning author Alice Walker

Richard Cohen and the Antisemitism Industry Attack Alice Walker

Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen’s attack on Alice Walker, the Pulitzer Prize-winning writer, scholar, activist, and poet, exposes a repugnant Jewish mindset, one that our great athlete Lebron James just called a “slave master mentality.”

Lebron was speaking of the overwhelmingly Jewish owners of the NBA and the NFL, who—just as in slavery—force their intelligent, grown Black men into utter silence on social, economic, and political issues. This “relationship” exists in the literary world, where Blacks are policed by the likes of Richard Cohen, Alan Dershowitz, and that den of spies the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith.

Having no respect for Ms. Walker at all, massa Cohen is outraged that she has chosen to read a book by David Icke, and that she stated her choice of reading material publicly in a New York Times interview. Cohen, good citizen that he is, is reminding his fellow overseers at the Times of the Jim Crow law his own Jewish ancestors helped put into effect in 1833:

If any person shall teach any slave, negro
or free person of colour to read or write
either written or printed characters, or
shall procure, suffer or permit a slave, negro,
or person of colour to transact business
for him in writing, such person so offending
shall be guilty of a misdemeanor,
and, on conviction, shall be punished by
fine, or imprisonment in the common jail,
or both, at the discretion of the court.

True to the beloved slave-master model, Cohen won’t even dialogue directly with Alice Walker or her fans and admirers. To him, the respected author does not possess the capacity to analyze Icke’s writings and place them in proper perspective—namely, a Jewish perspective. Instead, Cohen addresses his complaint about Walker’s unlawful literacy to his New York Times brethren, whom he upbraids for not applying the whip with enough gusto.

These Jewish overseers have created a truly untenable dilemma. What if she had said she was reading Philip Roth, Margaret Mitchell, Norman Mailer or Saul Bellow, all of whom have been accused of racism in their writings? Would Cohen have been so quick to lead his Inquisition? Great American writers Mark Twain, H.L. Mencken, Toni Morrison, and James Baldwin have all been tarred by the Jews as “anti-Semites”—what shall we do with their writings? During his eight years President Barack Obama was besieged by Jewish accusations that he was “anti-Semitic,” with one Jewish newspaper publisher openly advocating that the Israeli Mossad assassinate him! What if Alice Walker had Obama’s Dreams From My Father on her nightstand? How about the writings of other American presidents, Mr. Cohen? Jefferson enslaved 200 Black human beings, Monroe, 75, Washington, 350, Madison, 106, and Hamilton also bought and sold Black Africans. So, no more civics classes (or Broadway plays) in all of America? Shall we burn ALL the books and writings of those prominent Americans in one great bonfire at the Washington Post under grand wizard Cohen?

The weaponization of the “anti-Semitism” charge has long ago passed into the realm of the bizarre. And their propensity to target Blacks of renown, Jewish leaders have learned, is most profitable, because it cynically exploits a latent Jewish racism that has always existed just below their liberal façade. It also allows them to keep the idea of Jewish “victimhood” front and center in the news without upsetting those whites with the power to counter-attack. But the “anti-Semitism” industry’s growing list of Black villains is as dangerous as it is absurd: Alice Walker? Toni Morrison? Mahatma Gandhi? Nelson Mandela? Desmond Tutu? Barack Obama? Martin Luther King? Oprah? The ADL, SPLC, and Simon Wiesenthal Center, with the prodigious assistance of Zionist imps like Alan Dershowitz and Richard Cohen, use these Black notables to frighten Jews and extort donations—the ADL now scamming annual revenues of $60 million.

Dr. Marc Lamont Hill

All Blacks would have to agree that Dr. Marc Lamont Hill’s recent presentation at the United Nations in support of Palestinian rights was incisive, scholarly, impassioned and impressively delivered. Even if one does not endorse his views on that subject, he proved that his voice is formidable. Jews in his home base of Philadelphia had a different take:

“The Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia strongly condemns hate speech in our community and throughout the world. When antiSemitic hate speech was expressed by Temple University Professor Marc Lamont Hill, we immediately took action with national and local partners. We have and will continue to condemn comments that reject the state of Israel and the Jewish connection to our homeland.” 

These Jewish groups abuse the “anti-Semitism” charge—even falsely inflating their statistics—in the very same way they abuse the memory of the Nazi Holocaust. Dr. Norman Finkelstein described this scheme in his book The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering, in a chapter he titles “THE DOUBLE SHAKEDOWN”:

Cloaking itself in the sanctimonious mantle of “needy Holocaust victims,” the Holocaust industry has sought to extort billions of dollars from these already impoverished countries. Pursuing this end with reckless and ruthless abandon, it has become the main fomenter of anti-Semitism in Europe.

Unfortunately, the mass of Jewish Americans has chosen to support these money-grubbing antisemitism peddlers—just as they did Jewish gangsters Arnold Rothstein, Bugsy Siegel, and Meyer Lansky—feigning ignorance of their crimes.

In speaking of the Jewish Holocaust and Black writers, Richard Cohen exposes the ugliest of Jewish double standards. What if Ms. Walker had said she had Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf on her reading list? No doubt, Cohen and crew would be apoplectic. As we all know, Mein Kampf is considered the very blueprint of anti-Jewish evil—the book that the Simon Wiesenthal Center calls “the basis for Hitler’s policies and for the Nazi genocide.” Yet, if one peruses the ADL website, one would find Mein Kampf with an introduction written by longtime ADL leader Abraham Foxman! The very same notorious head of that gaggle of spies who are determined to scapegoat every Black man and woman they cannot buy. The ADL’s excitement is palpable as it announces that Foxman’s Mein Kampf intro is “In response to a surge in digital downloads of e-book editions of Adolf Hitler’s biographical manifesto” and “in anticipation of the expiration of the book’s Bavarian copyright in 2015.”

Wow.

Only silence from Richard Cohen, and from the Simon Wiesenthal Center, which has tried to force Hitler’s book off Ebay, Amazon, and the shelves of university libraries. Turkey’s foreign minister received a protest from the Wiesenthal censors for its sale in his country, but neither Foxman’s Mein Kampf nor the ADL’s promotion of it has generated any concern. Instead, we get front-page Jewish outrage over what is on Alice Walker’s nightstand!

Enough is enough. The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan is the very worst nightmare for these shadow-lurking “anti-Semitism” peddlers. He has called for an open and public Showdown with them to either prove their false charges or shut down their corrupt and deceitful Anti-Semitism Industry for good. It is only when those who profit from lies, confusion, and discord are fully exposed that an honest and truthful discourse about real issues can begin.