Sens. Ossoff and Warnock Must Sever their Leo Frank Connection

Sens. Ossoff and Warnock Must Sever the Leo Frank Connection

Jews in America and particularly in the South have been energized by the election of Jon Ossoff to the Senate, the first Jew from Georgia to have that distinction. He was buoyed by the strong appeal to Black voters of fellow candidate the Rev. Raphael Warnock, who, as one commentator said, “had the coattails that delivered Ossoff’s win.” Their victories have given the Democrats a voting majority in the senate that, it is said, will remove legislative obstacles to the Biden agenda. The added benefit is the “rekindling” of the storied Black–Jewish alliance that some claim was the driver of the civil rights movement.

In their self-congratulatory euphoria Jews have promoted an entirely misleading narrative of a collegial history of Black–Jewish togetherness, commonality, and coalition that raises more eyebrows than smiles among rank-and-file Blacks who know better. Their melodramatic dreamscape often casts Ossoff as the second coming of another Jewish Georgian named Leo Frank, the B’nai B’rith president who was convicted of the 1913 murder of 13-year-old Mary Phagan, one of the many Gentile child laborers at the Jewish-owned Atlanta pencil factory he managed. The murder led to Frank’s trial, conviction, and his ultimate lynching, which is said to be the “worst incidence of anti-Semitism in American history.” The Ossoff cheerleaders have posed the 2021 election of a Jew as a “new era” in race relations that finally “heals the wounds” of Southern Jews who have lived under the pain of the Leo Frank affair for more than a century. Moment magazine’s slant is typical of that sentiment: “The wolves of hate had hunted Black and Jewish Georgians for too long. In 1915, the lynching of Jewish-American Leo Frank…gave way to a resurgence of the Klu Klux Klan.”

Georgia Jewish slave trader Leah Minis

But the Jewish rehashing of the Leo Frank case is simply a cunning corruption of an unfortunate history: raising Leo Frank from the dead may be therapeutic but it also whitewashes a history of Jewish racial treachery in the South that Blacks—and especially Sen. Warnock—should “Never Forget.”

Georgia Jewish slave trader Levi Shetfall

Jews and Black slavery have been connected in Georgia since its earliest colonial settlement in the 1700s. Jews had enjoyed a full freedom in the colony, but abandoned the place, according to historian Rabbi Jacob Rader Marcus, because “Negro slavery was prohibited, the liquor traffic was forbidden.” When the colony’s leaders relented and permitted slavery, Jews returned and bought, sold, and worked enslaved Africans without reservation. Every one of the founders of Georgia’s Jewish community was a slave owner and they regularly placed advertisements in Georgia newspapers seeking to buy and sell human beings and soliciting help hunting down freedom-seeking “runaways.” For nearly two centuries Blacks and Jews in Georgia had a relationship, but it was no “coalition.” According to Steven Hertzberg, “There is little evidence to suggest that any of Atlanta’s Jews desired a greater amelioration in the condition of blacks”; rather, they “clearly benefited from the system of white supremacy.”

By the time of the trial of Leo Frank for the rape and murder of Mary Phagan in 1913, Jews had grown wealthy and satisfied with profits they derived from the slavery and Jim Crow systems, and they saw Blacks as no more than menial laborers and domestic servants. Atlanta industrialist and Chamber of Commerce official Oscar Pappenheimer was also one of the owners of the National Pencil Company, where Leo Frank committed the murder. In 1906, Pappenheimer actually wrote to the Atlanta Constitution to make a “practical suggestion” for “negroes”:

Georgia Jewish slave traders Mayer & Jacobe.

“I propose the registration of negroes in the southern states 14 years of age and more….Each person so registered should possess…a certificate…in which should be entered description, date and place of birth and, at each registration, record of abode, employment, conduct and reference….[T]hese certificates would before long be of great value to industrious, well-behaved people. Let others decide whether it be legal to pass laws bearing on this subject with reference to the colored race only…”

Pappenheimer’s “suggestion” was nearly identical to that which Adolf Hitler enforced against Jews thirty years later. This overt and public race hate from such a prominent member of Atlanta’s Jewish elite represents the racial mentality of the Jews of the South at the time of the Leo Frank case.

The actual racial history of Jews helps us to understand why it was so easy for them to go to such great lengths to pin the Phagan murder on a Black man—indeed, two Black men! They claim that the “real killer” was a Black man named James Conley, a sweeper at the factory, but the ugly reality is that the evidence overwhelmingly points to Leo Frank as the murderer of Mary Phagan.


First, when Frank was suspected of the crime, the wealthy Jewish owners of the pencil factory immediately hired the best attorneys as well as two of the most prominent American private detective firms—the Pinkerton and Burns agencies—to investigate the murder. Both agencies concluded exactly what the Atlanta police had found—that Leo Frank was the murderer of Little Mary Phagan. Frank was indicted by a grand jury that included five Jews, some being prominent members of Frank’s own synagogue.

In fact, Atlanta police began to suspect Frank because a strange series of “clues” popped up that appeared to point to a Black employee of Frank’s named Newt Lee, a night watchman at the factory who had discovered the girl’s body hidden in the basement. Police officers found that “evidence” had been planted to frame Lee and that attorneys and private security personnel working for Frank were the likely culprits. Frank produced Lee’s factory timecard that was obviously and suspiciously altered to show that Lee had time to commit the crime. Only Frank could have engineered that clumsy caper and it fooled no one. Next, police searched Lee’s home and found a bloody shirt in his laundry bin—but it was right after being told by Frank’s attorneys that “evidence” might be found there. The bloody shirt episode became the single incident that solidified police suspicion of the pencil factory manager, and the police arrested Frank and charged him with murder. And the Black man he tried to frame, Newt Lee, became a solid witness for the prosecution in the murder trial.

 

Leo Frank’s History of Racist Hate

As the president of the Atlanta chapter of the Jewish organization B’nai B’rith, Leo Frank was arguably the most important Jewish leader in the South. And so his exoneration became a matter of Jewish national security. Such a high-ranking Jew on trial for the shocking murder of a Gentile child, Jews believed, would be too harmful a burden for American Jews. In 1913, the group’s Anti-Defamation League had just been formed in Chicago and they were seeking a way to heighten publicity and donations for their cause. Such ulterior Jewish motives seem to have blinded many Jews to the actual facts of the murder and the surrounding issues that led Frank’s own detectives to accuse him of such a heinous crime.

The physical and circumstantial evidence all pointed unfailingly to Frank and even the ADL’s own expert, Steve Oney, had to admit, “I think there was a reasonable case against Leo Frank.” So “anti-Semitism” was not the driver of Frank’s prosecution. And as the case against him mounted, Frank made a fateful and hateful decision that his defense against the murder charge would be pure unadulterated anti-Black racism.

Frank publicly and openly referred to Blacks as “niggers.” His defense attorneys used the word “nigger” and other racist slurs dozens of times in court. His main attorney attempted to impeach the damning testimony of Black witnesses by telling the jury: “If you put a nigger in a hopper, he’ll drip lies.” One Black witness, Frank’s lawyers told the jury, “is a plain, beastly, ragged, filthy, lying nigger” who came from “a law-breaking race.”

The defense attorneys tried to explain away the planted bloody shirt incident but only exposed just how deep in the gutter they were willing to go. Luther Rosser was questioning the medical examiner on the witness stand:

Rosser: The shirt had the odor of blood on it when you first got it, didn’t it?

Yes.

Rosser: Then, wouldn’t the odor of blood have killed the odor of nigger?

No.

Rosser: Then, if a nigger had just put on his shirt and had taken it off in an instant, your nose would “get him”?

Have you ever smelled a negro, Mr. Rosser?

Rosser: More than you ever smelled. I was smelling them before you were born.

Frank’s legal team argued in court (and long after) that Blacks should not be believed—simply because they were Black—and that “negro testimony” was by definition inferior and unreliable. Further, Leo Frank argued that murder, rape, and robbery were “negro crimes” and thus, as a white man, he could not have committed the murder of Mary Phagan. And those arguments—which would have horrified Martin Luther King—were not simply trial gaffes or personal opinions: the national Jewish leadership campaigned for two years after Frank’s conviction using those profoundly racist “arguments” as their legal strategy.

 

Leo Frank: The Harvey Weinstein of Atlanta

But the testimony of Black witnesses was not Frank’s only problem. The National Pencil Company was filled with young women and girls—child laborers working long hours at starvation wages. It seems that Frank had a Harvey-Weinstein-Dominique-Strauss-Kahn-like habit of pressuring these vulnerable girls into sexual situations. One hundred years before the #MeToo revolution twenty of the young female factory employees swore under oath to the sexual harassment they suffered at the “lascivious” hands of Leo Frank. They testified that Frank ogled them, brushed up against them, touched their breasts, made lewd and suggestive remarks, and invaded their dressing room without knocking. Their testimony was so powerful that none of Frank’s attorneys dared to cross-examine them—not one. A white man confessed that he and Frank brought women to and had alcohol in the factory after hours.

Eight of the TWENTY #MeToo girls and young women who testified under oath of the “lascivious character” of Leo Frank.

Later, the Jewish advertising magnate who financed Frank’s many legal appeals, Albert Lasker, admitted that after he and colleagues met the B’nai B’rith president for the very first time: “It was very hard for us to be fair to him, he impressed us as a sexual pervert.” Little Mary Phagan, it was proven in court, had mightily resisted Frank’s sexual advances before being knocked unconscious and then strangled.

Of course, none of this Jewish race hate and sexual violence made it into the voluminous Leo Frank literature. But that has changed. The Nation of Islam’s The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Volume Three: The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man is a 536-page study referenced with thousands of footnotes and illustrated with maps, diagrams, and graphics that touch on every aspect of this controversial case. And though it was received enthusiastically by scholars of the case, it was banned from being sold on Amazon.com in 2019. Ron Unz offered his view that “It honestly seemed like one of the most thorough and detailed studies of a controversial historical event I’ve ever read, far superior to even the vast majority of top academic works.”

The great niece of the murdered girl is also named after her great aunt. Mary Phagan-Kean has studied the case for years. She wrote a book on the subject titled The Murder of Little Mary Phagan and maintained that Leo Frank was in fact the murderer and that to ignore the mountains of damning evidence is a calumny against her family and the cause of justice. Mrs. Phagan-Kean has endorsed the findings of the Nation of Islam:

“Nation of Islam volume is the most well-researched book published regarding the rape and murder of little Mary Phagan to date. The Phagan family appreciates the detail Nation of Islam brought to the case analysis.”

Those who can find something redeemable in the Leo Frank legend must necessarily ignore the Jewish racism and sexual violence that permeated the case. And that is just the beginning. The history of Jewish racism goes well beyond the Frank case—it was at the core of Jewish life in Atlanta, in Georgia, and throughout the South.

Before Rev. Warnock’s impressive senate victory he had aligned himself with a Jewish man of great character when he said:

“The Nation of Islam is significant….Its voice has been important even for the development of Black theology, because it was the Black Muslims who challenged Black preachers and said that ‘you’re promulgating … the white man’s religion. That’s a slave religion. You’re telling people to focus on heaven; meanwhile, they’re catching hell.’ And so we’ve needed the witness of the Nation of Islam, in a real sense, to put a fire under us and keep us honest about the meaning of the proclamation coming from our pulpits.” (See video below)

Bro. Warnock may not have known it at the time of his stated “significance” of the Nation of Islam but his 2013 analysis mirrors the testimony of the civil rights martyr Andrew Goodman, who was killed in the battle for justice along with James Chaney and Michael Schwerner. Goodman thoughtfully wrote:

…it is true that the white man (and by this I mean Christian civilization in general) has proved himself to be the most depraved devil imaginable in his attitudes towards the Negro race….The source and cause of this need for reaction  can be attributed to white contempt and neglect. The historical contempt that the white race held for the Negroes has created a group of rootless degraded people. The current neglect of the problem can only irritate this deplorable state of affairs. The Black Muslims should constitute a warning to our society, a warning that must be heeded if we are to preserve the society. The road to freedom must be uphill, even if it is arduous and frustrating.  A people must have dignity and identity. If they can’t do it peacefully, they will do it defensively.” 

Rep. John Lewis—as did Rev. Warnock and Andrew Goodman—understood the significance of the Nation of Islam.

Senator Warnock’s witness of the Nation of Islam and the ultimate sacrifice of Andrew Goodman proves that his role models for leadership are solid and enduring. If there ever was a Black-Jewish coalition, Goodman—a very good man—was at the core. In today’s moment of great trauma and division leaders of great moral and intellectual character are desperately needed to correct a nation and a world on the brink of collapse.

Both Sens. Ossoff and Warnock, and nearly all of the unsuspecting public, have been brutally hoodwinked by a disingenuous Jewish leadership that has chosen to make Leo Frank—an unrepentant race hater, child rapist and murderer—into a Jesus figure for the Jewish people. If Jon Ossoff and the Jewish world choose to take Leo Frank as their model of racial climate change—as many Jews have demanded they do— Bro. Warnock and his Black supporters should shake Ossoff off his coattails and sprint in the opposite direction.

 

UPCOMING: Part 2: Before Leo Frank: The Secret Relationship Between Georgia’s Blacks and Jews

Listen to the audiobook produced by the American Mercury of The Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews, Vol. 3: Leo Frank: The Lynching of a Guilty Man:

Now an Audio Book: The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 1


 

The Rev. Raphael Warnock’s statement on the significance of the Nation of Islam:

 


 

Jews Targeted Black Self-Help Long Before Farrakhan

In 1942, one can imagine the dedicated 9-year-young musical prodigy named Louis Walcott walking purposefully through his tree-lined Boston neighborhood with his violin case in hand. Within a couple of years he would be awed by a performance of Beethoven by the Jewish violin grand master Jascha Heifitz, and even work his way backstage for a prized autograph. It would be another 13 years before the young man would even learn of the Nation of Islam and attend a lecture by The Man—Elijah Muhammad—who would forever change Louis’s life as he had changed the lives of countless millions of others.

Understanding where young Louis Walcott was in 1942 and what he was doing is critical to our understanding of the attacks on The Minister and the Nation of Islam in 2018. For while young Louis was but a boy in Boston perfecting his violin technique, 82 Black American Muslims in Chicago were being attacked in their place of worship and arrested for no other offense than practicing their chosen faith. We know this because of a recently uncovered secret memorandum written in 1942 titled “Temple of Islam Infiltration,” which boasts that a “Negro employed by us” proved “quite instrumental” in an FBI raid on the Chicago mosque. That “us” in the memo was the Jewish Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, a.k.a. the ADL.

ADL leader Arnold Forster, admits NOI is not “anti-Semitic.”

Other secret memos from the ADL would later come to light wherein its Jewish leader, Arnold Forster, admitted privately that “we have no documentable evidence of anti-Semitism on the part of the Temples of Islam movement or Elijah Muhammad.” Yet Jewish organizations publicly labeled the NOI as “anti-Semitic” and instigated the arrest of its members. So why have these allegedly victimized and ever-persecuted claimants to the title of “God’s Chosen People” hired “infiltrators” to initiate FBI raids and mass arrests of a religious group of Black self-help advocates? Why are Jews, who in 1942 were comfortably ensconced in the American middle class, even interested in the activities of a Black religious organization that worked almost exclusively in the inner-city ghettos?

Jewish studies professor Dr. Marc Dollinger offers a startling explanation:

“Despite the Nation of Islam’s political marginalization, American Jewish Committee officials still feared [Elijah] Muhammad. His charismatic personality, willingness to confront racism in the most dramatic rhetorical terms and ability to inspire even non-believing African American listeners concerned Jewish leaders. The Nation of Islam leader, they feared, could earn the respect of his black audiences, even if they chose not to join his movement.”

Thus, in 2018 Dr. Dollinger provides the insight necessary to finally understand the Jewish motives for their sustained campaign of pure wicked, violent hatred of Minister Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Blacks have always believed that Jews were in alliance with Blacks for the purpose of “confronting racism,” but the actions of the Jewish leaders going back now 76 years tell us the opposite. Dollinger is clearly suggesting that the elimination of anti-Black racism was a threat to Jews.

It is all the more shocking because in 1942, as ADL leaders were targeting American Blacks, Nazis were ordering Jews to wear the yellow Star of David on their outer clothing. The Holocaust Museum says that in Poland in 1942 the Nazis “killed at least 434,508 Jews in gas chambers with carbon monoxide gas…” Nearly a million others, they say, were rounded up at Auschwitz and “exterminated” with “Zyklon B (prussic acid) gas.” In 1942, 265,000 Jews from the Warsaw ghetto, they say, were deported “to the Treblinka killing center.”

And yet American Jewish leaders amidst this slaughter of their own Jewish people were boasting of having launched precisely the same kind of Nazi operation against a Black self-help religious group in America—a group that had no relationship to or conflict with the Jewish people!

The question is Why?

A deeper look into the history of Blacks and Jews in America finds other disturbingly racist schemes by the Jewish leadership that predate both the 1930 beginning of the Nation of Islam and the “Final Solution” of Hitler’s Third Reich. And the threat of Black “self-help,” not Islam, seems to be the common thread that ties them all together in the Jewish mind.

The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan helps set the stage when he poignantly remembers a moment with his uncle that occurred in 1945:

[A]ll my life I’d been longing for somebody who would love us enough to free us from the oppressive hand of our wicked oppressors. I looked for him; I searched for him, and the closest that I came to finding him was when my uncle showed me a picture of The Right Honorable Marcus Mosiah Garvey. When I asked my uncle who is that man, he said, “He came to unite our people,” and I wanted to go right away to meet him! But my uncle told me that Mr. Garvey had passed. And, as a 12-year-old, the tears were running down my face, because I had come so close to the man I was looking for, and he was gone.

Certainly, The Minister and probably also his uncle (the great Brother Samuel Muhammad, a long, long-time member of Boston’s Temple #11) were unaware of how the man who had come “to unite our people” had passed from this world in 1940 at the young age of just 52.

Marcus Garvey’s show trial consisted of a Jewish prosecutor, a Jewish judge, and an all-white, half-Jewish jury.

In 1922, Marcus Garvey was leading the largest Black self-help movement in the history of America. His Universal Negro Improvement Association had captured the imagination of Black people with his cry of “Up you Mighty People, you can accomplish what you will!” Nothing even remotely “Jewish” about that mantra, yet, curiously, Jews went into action to “accomplish what they will.” They began to falsely charge that Garvey was “anti-Semitic,” and Joel Spingarn, the Jewish board chairman of the NAACP, began the “Garvey Must Go” campaign to destroy the Black leader. This Jewish campaign of hate led to Garvey’s arrest on plainly falsified charges. His “trial” in New York was a legal mockery, prosecuted by a Jewish D.A. and argued before a jury of white men—half of whom were Jews. The trial judge was Julian Mack, the most prominent Jew in America, who served as the president of the Zionist Organization of America, the World Jewish Congress, and the American Jewish Congress; and he was a leader of the ADL’s parent cult B’nai B’rith! The verdict against Garvey was a foregone conclusion, with Mack imposing the maximum sentence. And so the man who “came to unite our people” was confined by this Jewish cabal to an Atlanta penitentiary and then deported to Jamaica. The arrogant racist Jewish prosecutor Maxwell Mattuck actually said that he “was more interested in Negroes than Marcus Garvey.” Garvey had a different take:

“When they wanted to get me they had a Jewish judge try me, and a Jewish prosecutor. I would have been freed but two Jews on the jury held out against me ten hours and succeeded in convicting me, whereupon the Jewish judge gave me the maximum penalty.”

Today the Black man and woman can continue to turn the pages of history back and back and back to find Jewish people in a constant state of war with Black progress. Garvey, at least, had some measure of freedom to leave us a powerful example of a Black self-help movement. A few years before, he might have been a sharecropper financially indebted to the local Jewish merchants, who syphoned or stole all the wealth from the Black laborers of the cotton South. A generation before, he might have been sold at slave auctions that were so crammed with Jewish buyers and sellers that slave sales had to be postponed on Jewish holidays. Back then, Jews did not call Black self-help advocates “anti-Semites”—they called them “runaways.” And many a self-emancipating “runaway” was recaptured and returned to enslavement by one of the thousands of reward-seeking Jewish peddlers trolling the highways and byways of America. Before that, Garvey might have found himself on the Jesus of Lubek, the ship of the notorious slave trader Sir John Hawkins, who we now know was commissioned by Jews, supplied with African human cargo by Jews, and guided across the Atlantic by Jewish pilots, his African captives sold to Jewish buyers in the Caribbean.

Jewish slave-owner Moses Levy uses newspaper to chase down self-emancipated Black man.

The sanctimonious cries of “anti-Semitism” mask this wretched reality, and its current viciousness and intensity are a measure of how desperately dependent Jews have always been on Blacks as laborers and as consumers. If Jews were to lose Blacks in these servant roles, the economic foundation of white supremacy would collapse overnight. If we think that Jews are riled up over a Chicago speech by The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan in 2018, or a photograph with Obama in 2005—they are—but there was anti-Black Jewish treachery long before Minister Farrakhan’s presence in our midst. What of the 1942 ADL-instigated attack on the Chicago mosque when Farrakhan was just 9 years young? What of Garvey’s persecution by Jewish leaders a decade before Farrakhan was even born? And what of the protracted period of decadent Jewish slave-trading and Jewish profiteering from the products of forced slave labor, and the more than a century’s history of economic exploitation of the Black consumer?

Garvey wrote, “A people without the knowledge of their past history, origin and culture is like a tree without roots.” And The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad said, “History is best qualified to reward our research.” Jesus was fearlessly on point when He—like Minister Farrakhan—targeted the “Synagogue of Satan” in Revelation 2:9 and 3:9, and then confronted Jews with their profoundly wicked history (John 8:44).

Today, Farrakhan is the embodiment of all those great men. He answers the cries of the countless victims of this centuries-long demonic Jewish rule, with his own sustained campaign of Black redemption and upliftment. The Showdown our great ancestors wanted to have against this longstanding but unseen enemy is now underway, and with Farrakhan victory is assured.

 


 

Atlantic Magazine Admits Jewish Role in Slave Trade

Atlantic Magazine’s Jeffrey Goldberg
Admits Farrakhan is Right on Jewish Role in Black Slavery

The Atlantic Magazine’s Jewish editor Jeffrey Goldberg has posted an article that details the Jewish role in Black slavery. He confirms that Minister Louis Farrakhan is correct in the assertion that Jews “frequently dominated” the slave trade. The article by John-Paul Pagano was posted on The Atlantic website and contains the following reference material:

“…. During slavery, Jews were slave masters, slave traders, merchants, peddlers, and state[s]men. In general, Jews were everything in the Old South except abolitionists…

Goldberg once Interviewed Min. for FOUR hours, leaving their meeting “fighting himself over how impressed he was.” Apparently, he was so impressed that he finally had to acknowledge that Minister Farrakhan was RIGHT about the Jewish role in Black oppression. See below:


The Atlantic article says this about
Jews and Black Slavery:

“Black and Jewish race relations within America were a microcosm of the greater Black-White race problem beginning in the Colonial Period. The initial Jewish contact with Blacks was an extension of the Dutch Slave Trade in which the Dutch tried desperately to eliminate “Jews and Jobbers” from the Slave Trade. Jewish history in America shows that Jews played an active role in the institution of slavery. Almost from the beginning there were Jewish slaveholders in New Amsterdam [New York]. Rhode Island history shows that Aaron Lopez and Jacob Rivera, refugees from the Spanish Inquisition, were well-known slave traders of colonial Newport. For the most part Jews in the North adopted the prevailing patterns of the people in the North. When slavery died out in the North so did Jewish participation in the institution.

“As a group, Jews did not adopt a position toward slavery in the manner which Quakers made their position clear. When the abolition movement surfaced the Jewish community remained aloof and took no concerted stand on the issue.

“The majority of Black and Jewish contacts in Colonial America was in the southern Colonies, especially South Carolina and Georgia….Jews, as a result, were quite prominent in this colony [South Carolina] as well as Georgia. This fact did not cause Jews to treat Blacks any better than other colonial Whites. As historians Bertram Korn and Jacob R. Marcus indicated, the Jewish treatment toward Blacks did not differ from their fellow white Gentiles.

“The presence of the southern Jews complemented the system of slavery; their mercantilistic interest made slavery a more effective labor system. While most Jews were not to be found on plantations, their activities made the plantation a self-sufficient unit. What was not produced on the plantation was delivered by Jewish merchants. The southern Jew had as much, if not more, to gain by maintaining the system of slavery as any other white segment within the South. During the Civil War Jews defended the system which insured them acceptance and success in the South. Neither the Civil War nor Reconstruction changed the southern Jews’ perception of Blacks as an animal to be used and exploited.

“The belief that Jews were superior to Blacks was not alien to Jewish circles. An article in a Jewish newspaper in 1863 illustrated that some Jews had a strong leaning in the direction of white supremacy:

‘We know not how to speak in the same breath of the Negro and the Israelite. The very names have startling opposite sounds—one representing all that is debased and inferior in the hopeless barbarity and heathenism of six thousand years; the other, the days when Jehovah conferred on our fathers the glorious equality which led the Eternal to converse with them and allow them to enjoy the communion of angels. Thus the abandoned fanatics insult the choice of God himself in endeavoring to reverse the inferiority which He stamped on the African to make him compeer even in bondage of His chosen people. There is no parallel between such races…The judicious in all the earth agree that to proclaim the African equal to the surrounding races would be a farce which would lead the civilized conservatives of the world to denounce this outrage.’

“The above blunt opinion reflected Jewish sentiment about Blacks after slavery ended.

“In the New South Jews were deeply ingrained in the southern system. Historian John S. Ezell stated:

‘Probably in no other region of the United States have Jews been so integrated with the general population or subject to less discrimination. Most came into the South after a period of assimilation in the North. They were welcomed because of their business connection which fitted in well with the philosophy of the New South as they quickly occupied an impartial position in the retail dry-good business.’

“Often in the New South, success of Jewish merchants depended upon winning Black trade. Jewish merchants appeared more courteous…than fellow white merchants. Blacks were often the victims of sales pressure when Jews refused to accept no-sale for an answer. …. ‘Jewing Down’…. The Jewish merchant received his desired price and the naïve Black went away with the over-priced goods.”

[end of excerpt from The Atlantic]

—From “Historical Impressions of Black-Jewish Relations prior to World War II,” in Strangers & Neighbors: Relations between Blacks & Jews in the United States, edited by Maurianne Adams and John Bracey (Amherst: Univ. of Mass. Press, 1999), pp. 34-36.


The statement above on the Jewish involvement in Black slavery and Black oppression was presented by Jeffrey Goldberg, editor of the Atlantic Magazine. The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan has presented precisely the SAME history and yet he is called “anti-Semitic.”