Chapter Three:
Holocaust Revisionism’s Enemies:
Organised Jewry – 2


Powerful as is Organised Jewry in Britain, in the United States it is a formidable animal indeed. However, because, unlike Britain, the United States has constitutional safeguards for freedom of speech, the legal persecution of Holocaust Revisionists (and anti-Semites) has been very muted. The most powerful arm of Organised Jewry in the United States is the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith. Usually referred to as simply the ADL, this was founded at Chicago in 1913. (1) [B’nai B’rith is an older, Jewish fraternal organisation].


The ADL And Its Influence


The ADL was founded at a time when there was genuine anti-Jewish prejudice and bigotry in the United States. A few years after its inception, the Protocols Of Zion reared its ugly head in the West, and was given enormous impetus both in America and throughout the world by the endorsement of the incredibly wealthy (and incredibly gullible) industrialist Henry Ford. (2) There can be no doubt that, in its early years at least, the ADL played a significant and honourable role in combating anti-Jewish slanders. But it doesn’t take many years for the oppressed to become oppressors in turn, (3) and the ADL has long become both a smear merchant in its own right and an errand boy for political Zionism.

As long ago as 1951, the former Times correspondent Douglas Reed wrote that “The Anti-Defamation League reported that in one recent year it transmitted 216 broadcasts a day, that it influenced 1900 daily newspapers with a circulation of 43,000,000...that it placed 330,000 books in public libraries, as well as 9,000,000 pamphlets ‘tailored to fit the audience’...” (4) A campaigning organisation which reaches into the minds of so many people on a day to day basis is influential indeed. If any critic of the ADL had any doubts about the way that influence is used, they were shattered in 1993.

In May of that year a former senior San Francisco police officer named Tom Gerrard was arrested in that city and charged with eight counts of theft of government documents, burglary, conspiracy and computer theft. Gerrard was a spy for the ADL, which was reported to have spied on no less that 950 political organisations and to hold files on 12,000 individuals.

Many organisations, political and non-political, hold files both on numerous individuals and other organisations for all manner of reasons, so the mere fact that the ADL does too is not necessarily sinister. However, the organisations in the ADL’s files included not only the Ku Klux Klan and the Institute for Historical Review, but Action for Animals, Peace Now and Greenpeace! (6) Exactly why an organisation whose raison d’être is – allegedly – to combat anti-Semitism, should spy on Greenpeace is not clear. The ADL has offices in thirty-three American cities, a staff of four hundred and an annual budget of over thirty million dollars. (7) Every cent of that is spent on spying on American citizens, smearing them, intimidating them, and lobbying to destroy their rights.

It should be borne in mind that although the exposure of Tom Gerrard is the first such exposure in the ADL’s history, Gerrard is almost certainly not the first person to have carried out this sort of programme for the ADL. One can only guess how many others there have been, and how much harm has been done to ordinary decent people who have been smeared as anti-Semites by these Machiavellian schemers and arch-liars. And by other arms of Organised Jewry throughout the world.

Among the Anti-Defamation League’s most prominent critics are two distinguished Jewish scholars. Alfred Lilienthal, a New York lawyer and America’s leading anti-Zionist Jew, devotes considerable space to the ADL in his 1978 book The Zionist Connection, while the academic Nathaniel Weyl takes the organisation to task in his formidable 1968 survey The Jew In American Politics.

Lilienthal refers to the ADL as a Jewish Gestapo (8) and says of American Zionist organisations generally: “I dislike the coercive methods of Zionists who, in this country, have not hesitated to use economic means to silence persons who have different views. I object to the attempts at character assassination of those who do not agree with them.” (9) He deals extensively with the smear tactics used by Organised Jewry generally against their enemies – real and imagined – and has particularly strong words for the men he refers to as the high priests of the cult of anti-anti-Semitism, the ADL staffers Arnold Forster and Benjamin Epstein. (10)

These two uglies have collaborated on a number of books, including The New Anti-Semitism and Danger On the Right. The current writer has read both these books cover to cover and has no serious disagreement with either Lilienthal or Weyl (see below) on this score. Of The New Anti-Semitism, (11) Lilienthal says that the book contains no index, probably purposely because “it would have quickly revealed an imposing roster of respectable people listed as ‘anti-Semites.’” Lilienthal says the ADL and the report’s authors equate the mildest criticism of Israel or Zionist activities with anti-Semitism, (12) and suggests, without a trace of humour, that the organisation should change its name to the Defamation League. (13)

Nathaniel Weyl, a Columbia University graduate and author of several books, is also scathing in his criticisms of the ADL: “The Anti-Defamation League supposedly exists to refute slanders against the Jewish people and promote tolerance amongst the non-Jewish majority. It is difficult to believe that the best way of bringing this about is for the national chairman of the ADL to slander some twenty per cent of the American people as associates of ‘kooks,’ ‘bigots’ and ‘yahoos.’” (14)

This is a reference to another Forster & Epstein publication, the aforementioned Danger On The Right. This book was put out as a professional smear job in 1964, at about the time Senator Barry Goldwater was running for President. (Goldwater is part-Jewish and had been attempting to woo the Jewish vote). The book attempts to smear all “Extreme Conservatives” as anti-Semites, Nazis or fellow travellers. (15)

This slander on the American people may have been published as long ago as 1964, but it is still very much alive today. As recently as 1992, the ADL commissioned a survey which “found” that 1 in 5 Americans “hold strong prejudicial attitudes against Jews”. (16) Anti-Semitism was said to be most prevalent among blacks and the elderly. One wonders how many black members the various Klans and American Nazi parties have. The “anti-Semitism” found by organisations such as the ADL is in stark contrast to the social status of Jews, not only in the United States but in Britain and elsewhere.

Weyl’s 1968 study (already cited) reports that, according to census data, 8.4% of Negro Americans go to college; 21.4% of whites; 44.1% of Chinese and Japanese Americans; and 80% of Jews! (17) Although genuine anti-Semites (and outright crazies) often make exaggerated claims about the alleged Jewish dominance of the economy, it is well documented that many Jews enjoy phenomenal success in business, ditto politics. To take an extreme example, at the time of writing, in Britain, the Home Secretary, the Foreign Secretary and the Lord Chief Justice are all Jewish. (18) As the former two are also MPs and are therefore elected it should be patently obvious that, however many “anti-Semites” there are in Britain, most people either don’t hate Jews enough not to vote for them or to boycott them in business. The plain truth is that most people simply couldn’t care less, but what does piss many people off is the incessant whining and wailing by organisations like the ADL throughout the United States, Britain and the world. Many people are literally sick to death of hearing about “anti-Semitism”, the Holocaust and six million exterminated Jews.

Finally, neither American law enforcement agencies nor genuine civil rights organisations have been particularly impressed with the ADL. An FBI memorandum on the organisation dated September 22, 1966, reports that “The Anti-Defamation League has vested interest in discovering and exposing anti-semitic organizations such as the Klan and other hate groups. While the League has recorded some accomplishments in this area, they do not have the facilities to examine and discover the complete facts with regard to organizations such as the Klan.” (19)

And in 1982, the United States Commission On Civil Rights issued a similar though more strongly worded attack on an ADL report. It accused the organisation of mixing epithets and “emotionally-laden labels” with the facts, and of including hearsay and other unverifiable material which “borders on jingoism” and which, if published by the USCCR, could “seriously undermine the agency’s reputation for fairness and objectivity”. (20)

goyim left, right and centre as “anti-Semitic”, in 1997 it launched a campaign against Jewish intolerance! Following the death of Rabbi Hugo Gryn, a Reform Jew who was not exactly flavour of the month with the Ultra-Orthodox, there was a great schism in British Jewry, revolving principally around the issue of who should attend his funeral. Gryn died in 1996, but the schism deepened, and in the May 30, 1997 issue of the Jewish Chronicle, Chief Rabbi Sacks was quoted thus: “Such is the depth of the divisions that anyone who seeks to make peace between Jew and Jew is at risk of being attacked on all sides”. The title of the article in which this quote appeared (on page 6) is ADL campaigns against Jewish intolerance; the comment of the Chief Rabbi was thrown in to emphasise that this was a universal problem. On the other side of the Atlantic, the ADL’s new campaign was said to be the first one ever aimed at Jews. On the very same page another article reported on a renewed drive against “suspected Nazis” living in Canada; Sol Littman, who at the time of writing is still, apparently, head honcho of the Canadian Branch of the Wiesenthal Center, was behind this latest piece of mischief-making. [See pages 27-35 of the current work re Littman’s and the Wiesenthal Center’s activities].




The American-Israel Public Affairs Committee is the most influential organisation in the United States lobbying specifically on behalf of the State of Israel. Although, unlike the ADL, it does not concern itself with Holocaust Revisionism, it has been responsible for the propagation of black propaganda against “enemies” of Israel, real and imagined. In other words, anyone who has been so thoughtless as to claim that Palestinians have rights, or to protest against brave Israeli soldiers shooting Palestinian children. It has also been known to work in collusion with the ADL. (21) In 1992, AIPAC had 55,000 members, an annual budget of twelve million dollars, and a staff of over a hundred, including six whose job it was to work full time lobbying Congress and government officials.

As well as smearing Gentiles as anti-Semitic, Jewish opponents of Zionist tyranny and Imperialism are smeared as self-hating Jews. A lot of this is done covertly, so as with the dirty work of the ADL, one can only wonder how many “anti-Semites” are the inventions of professional Jewish propagandists.

Interestingly, AIPAC has a big file on the black politician Jesse Jackson. A former operative of an AIPAC secret smear unit told an American newspaper that the Jackson file is locked away because AIPAC employs around twenty Afro-Americans “in menial positions” (22) and “we had to be careful they didn’t know we were going after blacks.”


The Jewish Defense League

Said an Israeli general called Mike:
“It’s untrue that we Jews are war-like,
Though we often react
Just before we’re attacked
With what’s known as a pre-emptive strike!” (23)

There is, allegedly, a saying from Morocco which Jewish mothers tell their children: “If a goy hits you, bow your head and he will spare your life.” (24) Any honest person who has studied Jewish history will realise that the above limerick is a far more accurate reflection of what Jewish mothers tell their children than the Moroccan fantasy.

The ugliest face of Jewish “self-defence” in the United States is undoubtedly the Jewish Defense League. The JDL was founded by the Zionist fanatic Rabbi Meir Kahane, who was assassinated in New York in November 1990. In July 1984, the offices of the Institute for Historical Review were burnt to the ground; although no one was ever apprehended for this attack, the JDL was almost certainly responsible. (25) The Institute for Historical Review has been targeted on other occasions by the JDL, for example, the Jewish Revisionist and IHR member David Cole was violently assaulted by a JDL thug at a Revisionist meeting in January 1992. The IHR has published a special, twenty page, illustrated in-depth report on the activities of the JDL and “other Criminal Zionist Groups”, whose crimes include murder. (26) Members of the JDL have also been caught red-handed staging anti-Semitic incidents; on one occasion a certain Mordecai Levy posed as a mythical neo-Nazi named James Guttman to stage a public meeting. (27)


Simon Wiesenthal “Nazi Hunter”,
And His Center


Simon Wiesenthal is the most famous “Nazi Hunter” in the world. It is often the case though that reputations are made up out of the whole cloth by the media, or even by the people who own them. To be scrupulously fair to Wiesenthal, his reputation has been created largely by the media, but it remains to be seen how much if any of it he deserves.

It would take a book to describe all Wiesenthal’s dubious activities; Revisionist Historian Mark Weber has published a short but damning critique of Wiesenthal. (28) Wiesenthal’s critics include the American Bar Association and, surprisingly, Organised Jewry! (29) Here, the current writer proposes to focus on three of Wiesenthal’s offerings: a photograph of a “war criminal” in one of his books; and the reaction of the authorities in both Europe and Canada to the activities of his Center.


Simon Wiesenthal And The Remarkable
Story Of An “Atrocity” Photograph


Wiesenthal’s 1989 book Justice Not Vengeance contains a photograph of an alleged war criminal, a German officer who is, apparently, torturing two prisoners. The plate is captioned “We had this photograph printed on postcards which were sent to Chancellor Helmut Schmidt in 1979, demanding that the statute of limitations on Nazi crimes be revoked.”

Wiesenthal’s explanation of how this photograph came into his possession is unconvincing. “An American soldier had discovered this photgraph [sic] in one of the private quarters he’d been billeted in and brought it to my office.” (30)

However, Holocaust Revisionist Udo Walendy claims that “...the picture is an obvious fake. The guard’s uniform is all wrong. The side pockets beneath the belt are missing. The buttoned edge of the jacket does not run correctly from top to bottom. The pistol hangs on the wrong side. An unterscharfuhrer would not be allowed to wear officer’s pants with boots.

Secondly, the lighting is all wrong. The guard and the two hanging victims cast no shadows, while the prone victim does.” Walendy concludes by saying that when he visited the Dachau museum in January 1968, a life-size blow-up of the photograph revealed that no ropes were detectable. “Either the victims are floating in mid-air, or someone forgot to draw them in!” (31)

Royal Air Force Flying Review. (33) It was obviously taken many years earlier, probably in 1945, after the liberation of the camps. This photograph also appears in two other popular books on World War Two. One of these is the book Medical Block Buchenwald, which was written by a former inmate, Walter Poller. (I am referring here to the 1975 Corgi paperback edition of Poller’s book). According to his own account, Poller was arrested in 1938 and was released from Buchenwald on May 10, 1940, (34) which means that he did not witness, as an inmate, any of the terrible scenes that were found in Buchenwald and other camps at the end of the war. Although Poller’s is one of the more believable accounts to have been written by former concentration camp inmates, (35) the horror photographs in his book have little or no relation to the author’s brief sojourn in the camp. (36)

Returning to the Wiesenthal photograph, when one compares different versions of it one realises that it proves nothing, because they are so different that unless one were to obtain the original plate, one would not be able to make any definitive judgment on its authenticity. (37) One thing is for certain though, this photograph was most definitely not discovered by a serviceman who walked into Wiesenthal’s office and handed it to him.

Although the current writer has not been able (to date) to trace this “atrocity” photograph further back than 1954, there is no doubt in my mind that it was indeed taken in Buchenwald, but, as stated, after the war. In his 1976 study A PICTORIAL HISTORY OF THE SS 1923-1945, author Andrew Mollo admits candidly that many such photographs were indeed staged after the war. Photograph 316 is captioned “Former inmates dressed in SS uniforms were on hand to demonstrate the more grisly apparatus such as the gallows and crematoria” to the local inhabitants as part of their re-education. (38)

It should be stressed that there is nothing dishonest about this sort of “staging” (perhaps reconstruction is a better word), provided that there is no intent to deceive the public and that the reconstruction is duly credited. (39) Obviously this does not apply in the case of Simon Wiesenthal. The reader should bear this in mind also whenever he is shown alleged atrocity photographs, be they of the Second World War or of anything else. A photograph without an accredited caption is meaningless, however emotive.


The Wiesenthal Center And The
“War Criminals” Who Never Were


The Los Angeles based Wiesenthal Center is not actually run by the great man himself but pays him $75,000 a year for the privilege of using his name, (40) (nice work if you can get it). If Wiesenthal’s sleight of hand gives the reader cause for concern, some of the Wiesenthal Center’s activities have given Organised Jewry cause for concern, in both Europe and Israel. The reader should bear in mind here that Organised Jewry in Britain and throughout the world have never been slow to smear people as anti-Semitic, pro-Nazi, etc, so when their reaction to such allegations is lukewarm, there is clearly mischief with a capital M afoot.

In the 1980s, the Wiesenthal Center made allegations against residents of a number of countries, including the United Kingdom and Sweden. The Swedish allegations concerned twelve former Balts who were named in a letter handed by the Center to the Swedish Embassy in Washington on November 18, 1986. (41)


The Swedish Allegations


On November 20, 1986, the Swedish Government appointed a high powered three man commission to investigate these allegations, and the following February the commission reported its findings and a recommendation that the Wiesenthal Center’s report be ignored.

Very briefly, the Wiesenthal Center’s letter concerned allegations made in a 43 page document. The relevant section of the report of the Swedish Commission concludes that the allegations of the Wiesenthal Center concerned eight men who were dead; (42) of the remaining four, one was over 90, the youngest was seventy and the other two were nearly eighty.

The allegations were said to have been based on four publications, three of which were produced by the Soviet Union. (43) The fourth was a publication of the Yad Vashem Archive in Israel. According to the Swedish Commission: “The Swedish embassy official who questioned the ’Yad Vashem’ archive representative in Israel found that the facts mentioned in the Wiesenthal allegations were inconsistent with the truth.” (44)


The British Allegations


The allegations against British citizens came from the same source. Initially there were seventeen names on the list, but later another thirty-four were added. (45) One of the first seventeen, Mr Antanas Gecas, a 71 year old Lithuanian, was named under Parliamentary privilege by the Zionist Labour MP Greville Janner.

According to the Latvian analysis, media coverage of this report was largely irresponsible and “demonstrate that the people on the list have already undergone trial and conviction by the media, before any judicial tribunal of any description has as much as examined any of the evidence against them.” What exactly was the evidence against them?

The Latvian analysis names three propaganda booklets which were published in the 1960s by the so-called Latvian Council for Cultural Relations with Countrymen Abroad, a KGB front organisation based in the Latvian capital Riga. The booklets were published in Latvian and English, and the titles are given here as People without a Conscience, Political Refugees Unmasked and Who are the Daugavas Vanagi? (46)

These three booklets were mailed to prominent persons, the media and other institutions in the West in the 1960s as part of a KGB black propaganda campaign against anti-Communist emigres. In 1986, copies that had been sent to the Yad Vashem archive came into the possession of the Jerusalem branch of the Simon Wiesenthal Institute. To its credit, Yad Vashem disclaimed the allegations. (47) To their credit, so, for the most part, did Organised Jewry. Eric Moonman, a senior member of the Anglo-Jewish Establishment and a notorious Zionist had this to say: “It is not within the wishes of the Jewish community in this country to see an indiscriminate campaign of allegations made against people unless there is adequate evidence.” (48) What more need be said?

The current writer has seen copies of two of the above books; (49) their grotesquely obvious propaganda content should alert any half-intelligent reader immediately. Thus we are told that the Daugavas Vanagi is a “fascist set-up”, and that “some today believe in the ‘Red Menace’ and so on and on, and thereby hinder the World Peace Movement.” (50) And that an organisation called the Assembly of Captive European Nations-Latvian Delegation (ACEN) formed by “nazi collaborationists” has a truly sinister goal: “Their aim is to cast rude slander on their countries who decided to go Socialist." (51) And so on, ad nauseam.

On page 109 of “POLITICAL REFUGEES” UNMASKED! appears a document which implicates a Mr Paul Reinhards in “war crimes”. He was one of the Latvian emigres named by the Wiesenthal Center. In April 1987, Mr Reinhards – since deceased – was described by the Jewish-controlled race-hate magazine Searchlight as “a prominent member of the exile Latvian community in London”; a photograph of the Latvian centre in London (72 Queensborough Terrace) appeared in the same article captioned “London headquarters of Latvian collaborators in exile.” (52)

Although an attempt was made to keep the Wiesenthal Center inspired witch hunt going, the allegations in Britain appear to have fizzled out around the end of 1987, although the hate lives on. In July 1995, an 84 year old Surrey man, Szymon Serafimowicz (now deceased), was charged with four murders, those of unknown Jews in Russia in 1941 and 1942, ie two in each year. These were said to be specimen charges. (53) For the record, this witch hunt is in stark contrast to international Zionism’s attitude to Jewish war crimes. The following month, a report in the Jewish Chronicle claimed that no action was to be taken over the murder of 49 Egyptian prisoners on Sinai in 1956 – after an admission by a retired Israeli army officer. Prime Minister Rabin rejected a call for an inquiry into the atrocities because “There were aberrations on both sides...There is no purpose in raising events of the past...Raising the issue embarrasses the Arab side as well.”(54) Talk about chutzpah.


The Canadian Allegations


While the Wiesenthal Center allegations were investigated thoroughly in both Sweden and the UK, in Canada they resulted in an investigation which was comprehensive beyond all meaning of the word. As in Sweden, the Canadian Government set up an official high powered commission of inquiry, this one under a judge, which resulted in a two part report published December 30, 1986. (55) The full title of this report is Commission of Inquiry on War Criminals Report, Part 1: Public, Honourable Jules Deschênes, Commissioner, Ottawa, Canada, and it runs to a staggering 966 pages. (56)

One of the special advisers to the Canadian Commission was Raul Hilberg, the author of one of the standard (Exterminationist) works on the Final Solution. The report includes 822 opinions on individual cases; (57) it is clear from even a superficial reading of the report that most of the cases investigated resulted from allegations which came either directly or indirectly from Jewish individuals or organisations. The most prominent name among those individuals is that of Sol Littman, Canadian representative of the Simon Wiesenthal Center.

It was Littman who was responsible (in Canada) for raising allegations about Dr Mengele, the legendary “Angel of Death”; these date to December 1984. (58) The Deschênes Report devotes an entire chapter to THE MENGELE AFFAIR. Dr Josef Mengele was born March 16, 1911 and joined the SA aged 22. In 1938 he joined the SS and in 1943 he was promoted to captain and assigned to Auschwitz. As might be expected, there are numerous versions of what happened to him – as well as to other important Nazis – who disappeared after the war. One of Littman’s allegations had it that Mengele had applied for a visa to emigrate to Canada from Buenos Aires in 1962. It was even suggested that he may have been living in Canada. The truth is that at the end of the war, Mengele escaped to South America where he spent the rest of his life. (59)

Mengele was said to have used up to 8 aliases including that of George Menk. Menk – a real but different person – came to Canada in 1958 when he was 44 years old. Another alias was said to be that of Joseph (Josef) Menke who had been a major in the SS. Regarding all the above, the Commission concluded that “There is no documentary evidence whatsoever of an attempt by Dr. Joseph Mengele to seek admission to Canada from Buenos Aires in 1962.” and “much to its regret, the Commission must say that it takes a dim view of the attitude of Mr. Littman.” (60)

Some of the allegations levelled at Canadian citizens on account of this witch hunt would have been amusing if this business were not so outrageous; one woman was investigated because she was alleged by “a private citizen” to have claimed that she loved Hitler! (61)

Cases 179 & 180 involved the denunciation as war criminals of a couple bearing a German name, living in a secluded place under the protection of two black dogs and offering old European furniture for sale. While Case No 18 was that of an unnamed individual accused by Wiesenthal himself. He was said to have been a member of the Galician Division of the Waffen-SS. Wiesenthal was able to provide no meaningful evidence. Case closed.

The following “estimates” of the alleged number of “war criminals” living in Canada is extracted from The Deschênes Report; (62) for a country with a population of less than thirty million people, (63) it is truly amazing that anyone would take it seriously.

Go To Next Page
Back To Book And Book Extracts Index
Back To Site Index