Posts

The New Savagery of the Oldest Hatred

Same old, same old. But not it’s America, not Germany. And you won’t find it covered by the Democrat media complex.

The New Furies of the Oldest Hatred

Take a good look at who is speaking out against Jew-hate. And who is staying silent.

By: Peter Savodnik, Bari Weiss Substack, May 21, 2021:

The furies have been unleashed. They were everywhere you looked these past two weeks, though you won’t read about them much in the papers.

We saw them on Thursday, when pro-Palestinian protesters threw an explosive device into a crowd of Jews in New York’s Diamond District. We saw them on Wednesday, when two men were attacked outside a bagel shop in midtown Manhattan. We saw them on Tuesday, at a sushi restaurant in West Hollywood, when a group of men draped in keffiyehs asked the diners who was Jewish, and then pummeled them. And in a parking lot not far away, when two cars draped in Palestinian flags roared after an Orthodox man fleeing for his life. And in the story of the American soccer player Luca Lewis, cornered by a band of men in New York demanding to know if he was a Jew. Then there was the caravan careening through Jewish neighborhoods in North London carrying people screaming: “Fuck the Jews! Rape their daughters!” And the rabbi, outside London, who was hospitalized after being attacked by two teenagers. And the demonstrator in Vienna shouting, “Shove your Holocaust up your ass!” — the crowd of young people, mostly women, cheering. The synagogue in Skokie that was vandalized. The synagogue in Tucson that was vandalized. The synagogue in Salt Lake that was vandalized. The pro-Israel demonstrators in Montreal pelted with rocks. And the pro-Palestinian agitators in Edmonton driving around in search of Jews. The teeming crowds in Washington, D.C.BerlinBangladeshPhiladelphia and Boston and San Francisco and, of course, across the Arab world. The seemingly ubiquitous accusations of “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing.” The Turkish president, reaching all the way back to the Middle Ages, accusing Israelis of “sucking the blood” of non-Jewish children. Every hour on the hour, the celebrities posted their memes and the elected officials and the influencers — it’s hard to tell the difference — called Israel an “apartheid” regime. Apartheid regimes, like regimes guilty of genocide and ethnic cleansing, are meant to be overthrown. Violently, if need be. So bloodshed is warranted, yes?The silence-is-violence people — those who are quick to “call out” anyone deemed inadequately antiracist, experts at digging up any dusty book passage — have been remarkably quiet when it comes to Jews being dehumanized and hunted down.


Let us dispense with the fiction, once and for all, that hating the Jewish homeland, which contains the largest Jewish community on Earth, is different from hating Jews. It has been exceedingly difficult in our blinkered, hyper-secularized present, so removed from the primal animosities of not so long ago, to conceive of a world in which tens or hundreds of millions of people who have never visited Israel or never met a Jew want Jews dead. We’ve been blinded by the oceanic success of life under the Pax Americana. We think this is how people are. This is not how people are. This is a wondrous aberration. There were 2,000 years of ghettos, blood libels and pogroms, of dehumanization and second-class citizenship that culminated with the Shoah. For the past several decades — a sneeze in the span of Jewish history — we American Jews have been maundering through the happy, mournful echoes of the recent past. That recent past meant that we weren’t shocked to see this violence from the Europeans, who have never stopped hating Jews, but who had been forced, by the camps, to camouflage their Jew hate in their criticism of Israel, their obsession with it. But America? We were not steeped in the Old World hatreds. We were deeply flawed — who wasn’t? — but our flaws were always in conflict with our identity. One of the many problems with antisemitism, like Jim Crow, was that it made a mockery of our ideals, which made it impossible to hold onto the old bigotries forever. One had to reject Jew-hate and support the Jewish right to self-determination for the same reason one had to dismantle literacy laws that limited voting rights: It was central to the American weltanschauung. It was part of our animating ethic. The progress was glacial and uneven but inexorable. It was America becoming more American. We were supposed to have transcended the old blood-and-soil stupidities. But they can’t be transcended. That was a beautiful myth, a myth that was fundamental to our idea of ourselves. But we are losing ourselves.


How did this happen? It’s inane to try to superimpose a tidy, monocausal explanation on all of the above. But we know a few things for sure. America’s great institutions, and the security and stability and rhythm they once provided, have been co-opted, and this has had an unbelievably destabilizing impact on all aspects of American life. We have lost this edifice, which took decades to build and about ten minutes to tear down, because of our remarkably spineless “elite,” who seem to have no concept what role they are meant to play, or if they do, simply don’t have the cojones. Then there is the transformation of the American left. The left used to imagine itself having one job. That job was to protect the interests of the working class. In fact, until not long ago, the left could not imagine a politics outside the framework of a Herculean struggle pitting the working class against the managerial elite, otherwise known as the Republican Party. Literally every conversation started and ended with class. Class struggle, class warfare, the working class, the middle class. But in the last quarter of the 20th century, the old fight against economic inequality gave way to the pressures of the market and geopolitics. The Chinese gave up on violent, socialist totalitarianism and embraced a kind of retrofitted capitalism. Then came Thatcher, Reagan, the end of the Cold War, the collapse of Soviet communism, the Indians (who, in 1991, embarked on a Reagan-like unwinding of the old Five-Year Plans), the internet, globalization, Bill Clinton, and the narrowing of our ideological differences. In just a few decades, traditional left-wing politics seemed to have lost its reason for being. There was a void, and a need for a new organizing principle to try to make sense of the world. Into the void seeped the new, soft-boiled thinking about race and gender, which had been fomenting, mostly on campus, for the past two decades. Identity soon acquired a new status among liberals, who now called themselves progressives. It comported with our shifting demographics, and it gave the Democratic leadership, which could no longer talk about soaking the rich, something to talk about. Over the past two decades, this obsession with identity has intensified and spread. Progressives are now incapable of talking about anything important without mentioning human beings’ immutable traits.Any politics of identity was bad for the Jew. On the right, the identiarians said that the Jew lacked whiteness — it was a new version of the old Nazi claim about our impurity. On the left, the Jew was said to have too much. In 2021, we are well-aware of the white-nationalist inanities. We have memorized the horrific footage from Charlottesville. We remember every Jew murdered in Pittsburgh and in Poway.But their chants of “Jews Will Not Replace Us” are now being joined by the identitarians of the left, who wield vastly more capital and power, in government, in the media, in the universities, in Hollywood, and in Silicon Valley. (It’s curious that Rep. Rashida Tlaib has accused Israel of “forced population replacement.”) Together, they form a bleating chorus of grievances. Somehow their roster of The Hurt never includes the Jew.The betrayal of the Jew has been building. It started with an unexpected moral relativism (one recalls Howard Dean, on the presidential campaign trail in 2003, saying it was not America’s place to take sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict). Then there were the apologetic Jews, the Jews who felt, as so many Jews have felt across the centuries, that they must have done something wrong, the self-haters, the internalizers, who fashioned themselves into perfect fig leaves. This escalated into a low-simmering hostility (with Joseph Lieberman, the one-time vice-presidential nominee, slowly exiting his party), and the coolness of Barack Obama, and his insistence on an Iranian nuclear deal that seemed to excite American progressives more than any Israeli (or Saudi or Emirati) general. Then there were the activists. All of them seemed to have a — what’s the word? — problematic relationship with the Jewish community. It wasn’t just an incident or untoward comment. It seemed characterological. The Women’s March was helmed by a Louis Farrakhan acolyte who was not shunned, but put in the pages of Vogue and now stars in an ad for CadillacBlack Lives Matter was birthed by a fake Marxist who apparently enjoys when her book is compared to Mao’s, and whose original charter accused Israel of “genocide” and “apartheid.”The progressives will respond that there is nothing antisemitic about criticizing Israeli policy. They are right! All governments should be scrutinized. But criticism of Israeli policy is often just criticism of Israel’s existence. We know this because the criticized policies almost always involve Israel being able to defend itself against hostile neighbors (being able to exist); and because there is an obsession with Israel that distinguishes it from any other country or foreign-policy issue. Countless Muslims have suffered at the hands of the Chinese, Indians and Russians — to say nothing of the Assad regime having incinerated as many as 600,000 Syrians, the nearly 500,000 Palestinians confined to refugee camps in Lebanon, or the indentured servants, including many Palestinians, in the nearby Gulf. This is not whataboutism. It is perspective. Progressives will insist that we have progressed, as it were, beyond antisemitism. We don’t live in that world anymore. Don’t be paranoid! The violence in the streets doesn’t represent the movement! Note that the same people who insist that America hasn’t made one iota of progress on race — that we have so much work to do — also insist that we have resolved with the Jewish problem that goes back to Jesus. Sure. Elected Democrats, for a while, mostly held it together. They used to call the Jew hate what it was. Recall, for example, Senator Chuck Schumer, just two years ago, comparing Rep. Ilhan Omar’s remarks about Israel to Donald Trump’s comments about neo-Nazis. That was when Democrats embraced Israel’s right to defend itself, and condemned the loss of Palestinian life, but didn’t hesitate to note that it was Palestinians compounding Palestinian misery: a corrupt regime in Ramallah and an even more corrupt and violent and unimaginably inhumane regime in Gaza that was controlled by a terrorist organization backed by Iran.But over the past few years, progressives have slowly — and then not so slowly — abandoned those positions. They have succumbed, like so many on the right, to their partisan manias. Trump was “for” Israel; they had to be “against” it. They have stumbled into the bottomless rage of the identitarian left. They have embraced the new racial-gender taxonomy, which reimagines thousands of years of Jewish history into a wokified diorama. Today, the conflict can only be seen through this flattening prism, with Israel playing the role of the white, colonial settler and the Palestinian that of the settler’s dark-skinned, indigenous victim. All this cartoonishness has led progressives to erase the “lived experience,” as one is now trained to say, of the nearly one million Arab Jews who did not migrate to the Middle East but were expelled from their homes, in 1948, the year of Israeli independence, by Arab regimes. They have also ignored the pivotal role that was played, for two decades, by Egypt, which occupied Gaza, and by Jordan, which occupied the West Bank — a two-pronged occupation that presaged the broader Arab community’s attitude toward the Palestinians, whom they treated as fodder. The Palestinians, in the eyes of most other Arabs, were not a people but bodies they were happy to sacrifice to achieve what their armies could not in the Six-Day War of 1967 and the Yom Kippur War of 1973. That was the moral of the Arab military humiliation: Conventional armies could not defeat Israel, but maybe a protest movement pushing up against Israel’s borders — abetted by an adoring press corps, aid groups, repurposed Soviet propaganda and lots of E.U. cash — could. It was a brilliant segue.Now we are confronted with the spectacle of members of Congress droning on on the House floor about how the Israeli army is somehow guilty of systemic racism and superimposing complicated ideas concocted by a French philosopher they’ve never read onto a conflict they barely comprehend.They are an embarrassment and a disgrace and they are enabled by the cowards in their own party who are reluctant to criticize them for fear of being called racist or, God forbid, being primaried. That is not the worst that can be said. The worst that can be said is that, by squeezing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict into the Procrustean Bed of left-wing identitarianism, the new progressives have alienated the Jew, who, for the most part, remains attached to the Jewish State, from the American body politic. By transforming the Jewish State into a force for evil, they have forced the Jew to defend that attachment. They have created a space separating the Jew from America, and, in that space, they have legitimized violence against the Jew for defending the indefensible: “apartheid,” “colonialism,” “white supremacy,” “ethnic cleansing,” “genocide.”It is the Jewish youngs who are most vulnerable to the new idiocy. It is in their classrooms, on their screens. They find themselves in a sad lacuna. They have been steeped in Jewishness at home. But, on campus, on Zoom, on TikTok, on YouTube, on Instagram, they are pummeled by a ceaseless and acrimonious anti-Zionism.They respond predictably. Only 48 percent of American Jews under 30, in a recent Pew Research Study, feel close to the Jewish State (but 82 percent of Jews overall do). They prefer not to be affiliated with it. They say that Israel doesn’t represent them, that it doesn’t embody their version of Judaism, that it doesn’t align with their brand. They talk endlessly about Palestinian narratives and the need for the white settler to check his privilege, and they seem to forget that they are the most privileged Jews ever to walk the face of the Earth and that turning away from Israel is nothing more than exercising that privilege, flaunting their great fortune. One suspects their contemporaries raised in more antisemitic climates do not share their antipathy. The Jewish olds will reassure you that the sclerotic Democratic leadership — the 81-year-old Speaker of the House, the 70-year-old Senate Majority Leader and the 78-year-old president of the United States — are keeping the crazy in check. They are mistaken. This is not about who outmaneuvers whom in Congress, or the midterms, or the presidential primary. It is not about whipping votes or moving legislation. It is about the sea change that has engulfed us and that has exposed this most meaningless of distinctions without a difference: anti-Zionism and antisemitism.


The olds won’t be here forever. What will come next? For the 75% of Jews who vote Democrat, they will, presumably, continue to believe the right is unpalatable. That the G.O.P.’s lunatics are not tunneling their way into the party leadership, like they are on the left, but have already wrested control. Yes, the Abraham Accords are a great achievement, but what does policy matter when we can’t agree on who won an election? When members of Congress are comparing mask mandates to the Holocaust? Are there any other options?Right now, there is a single freshman congressman from the Bronx trying to hold back the tidal wave of insanity. Soon enough, Ritchie Torres’ colleagues will declare that anyone who is not adequately anti-Zionist is a white supremacist or else ok with white supremacy. Jews who refuse to disavow their Judaism and their Zionism will be discouraged from leadership positions or running for office. Their money will be welcome at closed-door meet n’ greets on Park Avenue or in the Palisades. Bagels, lox, a few Yiddishisms sprinkled into the conversation to make everyone feel tolerant, but please, no talk of that godawful abomination of a Nazi desert.Most of us will delude ourselves, Sarah Silverman-style.We’re good Jews. We’re not Israelis. I love Shabbat! I just don’t like Israel. We will wrap ourselves in our hypocrisy and self-loathing and fear. We will try to wish it away. We will post the right things, about defunding the police or hate having no home here or whatever. We will genuflect. We will pretend that we are not alone, like the Jewish State. That will be the only way to navigate our alienation. To lie and lie and lie to the world and, most importantly, to ourselves.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Rashida Tlaib was special guest for event hosted by Islamic terror spox who promotes Holocaust denial and Jew-hatred

New York Red Bulls goalkeeper Luca Lewis says jihadi mob in NYC said they’d KILL HIM IF HE WAS A JEW

‘I WOULD DO IT AGAIN’: Racist Muslim Who Brutally Beat, Bloodied NYC Jewish Man Shows No Remorse

Irish parliament to vote on motion to expel Israeli ambassador

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Son of a Slave

Some folks know me as a retired lawyer, having been very involved in my community.

Other folks may know me for my conversions of unwanted heritage buildings into affordable rental housing for modest income working people, in various cities – which was actual “social justice” work, rather than the “virtue-signalling” with other people’s money which seems to so prevalent today..

A somewhat larger group of folks in Canada and the United States and elsewhere may know me as the author of four books concerning ideologies, political culture and values. They may also know me as founding president of Mantua Books, Canada’s sole conservative values publishing house.

With all the talk these days about “systemic racism” and the current ideologies of cultural and moral relativism, and the effect on our schools and universities of “critical race theory” and doctrines such as “privilege” and “intersectionality, and the increasing hostility to freedom of speech, I think that I have something to add to the current debate and protests, with their general hostility to western values.

My ancestors many years ago originated in the Middle East and then were exiled by the Romans, living for some years in southern Europe before being exiled again and ending up in Eastern Europe. In the Holocaust, my father’s parents and then 8-year old little sister were murdered in the gas chambers. My father was 19 years old in 1939 and like many other Jews of his age was made into a slave labourer working in the industrial zone of Auschwitz concentration camp. Unlike American slaves who were purchased and then cared for with enough food to protect the slave-owner’s investment, the Nazis did not feed their slaves but for a daily piece of bread and weak turnip soup. Eventually, if the slave got too weak to work, he or she would be sent to the gas chambers and would be replaced by some poor soul arriving to Auschwitz in cattle cars before the Nazis would decide which would die immediately and which seemed strong enough for slavery.

In the modern world, we have many different ways of looking at our identities.

White people are marching against racism towards Blacks and Blacks are forming alliances with Islamists who, strangely enough, were the group that sold blacks from Africa into slavery (and some in Africa still do, including the Islamist Toureg, so admired by Volkswagen that it named an SUV after them.)

Our fundamental freedoms and sense of personal responsibility are daily under attack. I think I have a good concept of my identity – hardworking Jewish Canadian lawyer and social justice real estate developer and intellectually and morally conservative author and publisher, proud father and grandfather, etc. But in these times, for me, one thing trumps all:

I am the son of a slave.

The Black slavery in America ended not long after Abraham Lincoln emancipated the slaves and America went through a Civil War over this emancipation that resulted in a huge death toll. That was way back in the mid-1800s. After that came Reconstruction, which had only partial success and more lately in the 20th century, the Civil Rights Movement. Today, American Blacks take their places in every field of endeavour and are found in “elite” universities, the best law schools, the best medical schools and senior levels of government. But we are told that white people are racists and we have white privilege. Allegations of privilege have become a way to slander those who, like me, study hard, work hard, take responsibility and try to make the world a better place.

In Canada, some blacks are descended from those who arrived in Canada through the “underground railway’. with a small number arriving here after the American revolution or after the War of 1812. Today, most of our Blacks are descended from black slaves in the Caribbean who moved to Canada and England in search of better economic opportunities. Accordingly, most of our Blacks immigrated to Canada willingly and therein lies a big difference with the Blacks in America. And yet copycat protests with Black Lives Matter are numerous.

In Canada, therefore, those concerned about social justice, should focus more on injustices done to our Indigenous People who were here first. The tragedy of the Residential Schools is one that has been tempered with reparations and apologies – but too many northern Indigenous peoples live in dire conditions and too many in large cities carry with them problems of addiction and self-worth.

Most Americans and Canadians know all of this, but the Black Lives Matter protests seem not so much about history as about current conditions in black poor neighbourhoods, in schools and prisons – and overall we see a culture in crisis. Some 73% of Black babies born in the U.S. are born to single mothers with no father to complete the family. George Floyd had fathered 5 children in Houston before he ran away for a “fresh start” in Minneapolis. Most black victims of crime are the victims other blacks. To me, the focus on police misconduct hides the real purpose of the protests and violent looting, which is to use the Black issues as a screen for the attempts to gain more power and so to destroy America as a constitutional republic and replace it with a communist or Islamist or globalist society.

The Left and the Islamists both share the tactic of trying to erase History. The Islamists say there was no Holocaust, no Jews were indigenous to Israel, and all facts prior to 1967 must be erased. The Left wants everything cancelled, taken down or renamed if it doesn’t meet its view of identity politics, taking offence, or safe spaces. As reported in Newsweek on June 20, 2020, the great-grandson of the most recent woman to appear on boxes and bottles of Aunt Jemima products is angry that the virtue-signalling company making the product, Quaker Oats, is rebranding the product because some black people say it reminds them of slavery although this brand was established well after the end of slavery.

The great-grandson, Larnell Evans Sr., says that his great grandmother became the brand’s representative and public relations person and toured the country for some 20 years, making pancakes at events. This great-grandson, a Marine Corps vet says: “This woman served all those people, and it was after slavery. She worked as Aunt Jemima. That was her job… How do you think I feel as a black man sitting here telling you about my family history they’re trying to erase?”

I know how he feels. Prior to 1967, when I was 16 and trying to find out the information that my Dad preferred not to talk about – the death camps, the slavery, the genocidal anti-Semitism, the murder of one million Jewish children by a supposedly western culture in Germany, I could not find any books or other publicly shared information. The main book about the war era then was Shirer’s Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, and that was mainly a military and diplomatic history. When I got to university, I discovered that a few years prior the first comprehensive book in English, Raul Hillberg’s The Destruction of European Jewry had been published. Soon books such as The War Against the Jews: 1933-1945 by Lucy S. Davidowicz and many others began to appear in time for my curiosity.

Survivors were not encouraged to talk about what had happened and otherwise good people in Canada and the United States perhaps felt too uncomfortable discussing the issues. My father did not talk about what happened to him, his family and friends until the late ‘80s after being hospitalized with depression. American Jews who lionized FDR did not want to hear about his role in denying Jews refuge in America and thus allowing them to be murdered.

And so I, the son of a slave, know how Mr. Evans feels when History is a casualty of politics and culture.

America, or Canada for that matter, are not evil nations. That is why many people around the world want to move here, and not so many want to leave. To me, what is going on is mostly about power, The Leftist-Islamist-Globalist alliance has taken power in school curricula, in the Universities, and now sense the opportunity to use the George Floyd tragedy as a way to take political power, if not on the national level, then on the state and local level. The concept of defunding police is not so much a serious policy but a scare tactic, a domestic terrorism. When criminals take over the streets, just as supposed “protesters” and their violent, looting, colleagues have done, the resulting chaos will be useful for the Left as it creates the perfect conditions for a revolution to implement economic, political and cultural Marxism.

It all seems quite clear to me, maybe because I am the son of a slave.

Slavery was abolished by Congress in January of 1865 and ratified in December of 1865. Thus abolition constitutes the 13th amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

It is clear to me that poor black people are being played by both Blacks and Whites in the Left, who use them, like Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and now BLM do, to empower themselves, their political organizations and their leftist and Islamist allies. The racist anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan is tolerated by those who should know better.

Even the big tech corporations pour money into a loosely run, inadequately vetted organization like BLM for the usual virtue signalling, that helps the signaller more than the folks on the ground, living in gang-run Black ghettos. Soon, if the Democrats win the next election we shall likely see more “autonomous zones” where there is no law, no freedom, and the police are banned.

Just like during the Holocaust, no one wants to talk about some really important matters – poor Blacks are mostly killed or injured by other poor and culturally challenged Blacks, not by Whites. There is a pandemic in black neighbourhoods; drugs, guns and gangs rule, and then the Democrats come around every four years pretending to be their friends and work for their benefit.

We have spoken above of the real cultural crisis among poor and even middle-class Blacks, which is a crisis of morality. In the age of cultural relativism, we are not allowed to discuss issues like this.

It is 155 years since the end of slavery in America. It is time to stop using slavery as an excuse for immorality and crime. It is time, after all the affirmative action, all the NGO sponsored programs, and after all the Black successes in overcoming historical racism to acknowledge that our culture is sympathetic to Blacks, in our entertainment, sports, music and affirmative action programs even if certain individuals are not. It is time for the universities and media to tell the truth about America and so help to strengthen positive values and moral cultures.

I know that a culture can be changed in one generation. I worry about how fast the Leftists, the Islamists and the Globalists and the extremist professors are succeeding in changing our culture of freedom and justice and personal responsibility- because we see historically that the first wave of those seeking totalitarianism and/or Communism are often killed by the more radical power-seekers that follow. I know that a culture based on Justice and Liberty, personal responsibility and morality, is best for all ethnicities and races, and that anyone with a history of slavery in his or her family should understand this better than anyone else. And I want to contribute to a respectful dialogue about the violence and left-wing flight from freedom.

Because I am the son of a slave.

©All rights reserved.

In the Hate of the Moment

While the State Department was trying to stop religious hostility, one congresswoman was down the street trying to fuel it. In an eerie backdrop to the Trump administration’s ministerial, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) seemed determined to highlight the threat that exists right here at home — radical Democrats.

Omar, who hasn’t exactly been a friend to Israel, took her contempt to a new level this week when she introduced a new level of anti-Semitism into her congressional agenda. If she learned anything from her February scandal, when she demeaned the Jewish people and drew the ire of her own party, Omar hasn’t shown it. Instead, she’s doubled down on her obvious disdain for Israel with a resolution that would support the anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

If you’re unfamiliar, the BDS movement that Omar is promoting is an effort reminiscent of what took place in Nazi Germany leading up to WWII. In 1933, the German government launched Juden boykott, a boycott of Jewish stores and shops designed to not only to hurt the Jewish community economically but to stigmatize and delegitimize the Jewish people. The BDS movement — whether stated or not — has the same effect only it is an international effort targeting the state of Israel.

The BDS movement is being done in the name of the Palestinians, attempting to force Israel to give up their land in the eastern portion of the country, Judea, and Samaria. The sad irony is that while targeting Israel, the movement is hurting many Arabs and Palestinians who are working side by side with Jewish residents in these communities. I’ve been to places like Ariel, which have thriving industrial parks that employ hundreds of Palestinians. The reality is, in those communities, Israel’s thriving economy is fostering a managed and sustainable peace that so many on the outside have promised through third-party intervention.

The criticism has been so overwhelming that CBS News invited the Minnesota congresswoman on its morning show to explain. “Would you like to make it clear that you’re not anti-Semitic?” Gayle King asked. “Oh, certainly not,” Omar said, smiling. “Yes.” “Would you like to make that clear?” King asked again. “Yes,” Omar repeated, a little more frustrated this time. “Oftentimes there are things that you might say, might not hold weight for you, but to someone else, right, the way that we hear and consume information is very different than how the next person might,” she explained.

Of course, to the Jewish people here and abroad, it’s more than what Omar has said (and that’s more than enough). It’s what she’s doing that speaks the loudest. Vice President Mike Pence, like most conservatives and reasonable Democrats, isn’t fooled. He knows this is part of a much deeper hatred, which, if it isn’t stopped now, has the potential to unleash a frightening new chapter in America. “Anti-Semitism is on the rise,” he warned at the ministerial. “In France and Germany, things have gotten so bad that Jewish religious leaders have warned their followers not to wear kippahs in public for fear that they could be violently attacked. And attacks on Jews, even on aged Holocaust survivors, are growing at an alarming rate.”

Then, in a direct nod at Omar, said, “Regrettably, the world’s oldest hatred has even found a voice in the halls of our United States Congress. So let me say it clearly: Anti-Semitism is not just wrong; it’s evil. And anti-Semitism must be confronted and denounced wherever and whenever it arises, and it must be universally condemned.” That’s a scary thought to most Americans, who assumed the U.S.’s new envoy to combat anti-Semitism wouldn’t be needed here at home.

But, as Noam Marans explained at a panel I joined at the ministerial, “Hate is an equal opportunity offender. It sometimes begins with Jews, but it never ends with Jews.” That’s why the U.S. Congress — and Democratic party in particular — needs to stand up and make it clear: this kind of dangerous prejudice won’t be tolerated. Irene Weiss, a Holocaust survivor, who spent eight months in Auschwitz sleeping next to the crematorium, understands all too well where this leads. “Day and night columns of young mothers with children, and elderly men and women, took their last steps as they passed by our barrack. We watched them enter the gate that led to the gas chamber.”

She thought no one could have possibly known such evil existed. “If they knew, surely they would stop it.” It turns out, world leaders knew about Auschwitz and the other extermination camps. “But the killing continued.” Seventy-years later, she said soberly, “Humanity’s vulnerability to the same forces of hate exists today.” And we cannot say we did not know.


Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.


RELATED ARTICLES:

Like Gold Tested in Fire

Remember Wen? Meet Planned Parenthood’s More Extreme Boss

EDITORS NOTE: This FRC column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

This Just In: Left Discovers Candace Owens Is A Nazi!

Candace Owens

Are Leftists evil, crazy, or both? This piece isn’t about jihad, but it does describe an instance of the same tactic that Leftists and Islamic supremacists use on foes of jihad terror and Sharia oppression: take a statement, twist its meaning, and use it to try to defame and destroy the speaker. My latest in FrontPage:

Leftists thought they had hit the jackpot last week in their never-ending quest to portray all dissenters from their totalitarian agenda as Nazis and/or tools of Vladimir Putin: video surfaced of black conservative activist Candace Owens of Turning Point USA appearing to say that the only problem with Adolf Hitler was that he carried his program outside of Germany. Their gleeful smearing of Owens raises the question yet again: are Leftists evil, crazy, or both?

Owens said this at a December event in London:

I actually don’t have any problems at all with the word ‘nationalism.’ I think that it gets, the definition gets poisoned by elitists that actually want globalism. Globalism is what I don’t want. So when you think about, whenever we say ‘nationalism,’ the first thing people think about, at least in America, is Hitler. You know, he was a national socialist, but if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, okay fine. The problem is that he wanted, he had dreams outside of Germany. He wanted to globalize. He wanted everybody to be German. Everybody to be speaking German. Everybody to look a different way. To me, that’s not nationalism. In thinking about how we could go bad down the line, I don’t really have an issue with nationalism. I really don’t. I think that it’s okay.

It was indeed possible to see this as saying that the only problem with Hitler was that he didn’t confine his activities to Germany alone. And Owens’ Trump/Hitler resonance in speaking of Hitler wanting to “make Germany great” was more fodder for Leftists eager to find validation of their multiple smears of conservatives, and particularly of Trump supporters.

However, any sane person can see that Owens was discussing the taint that has been attached to the word “nationalism,” and not pausing to detail all of Hitler’s obvious crimes. That did not mean that she endorsed those crimes, as she made clear after the firestorm erupted: “He was a homicidal, psychotic maniac who was bent on world domination outside of the confines of Germany. You wouldn’t say he was a nationalist, because he wasn’t about putting Germans first. There were German Jews that he was putting into camps and murdering. He was a mass murderer.”

She also explained that she wasn’t likening Trump to Hitler: “Trump has no interest in conquering the world.” He is “employing a type of nationalism that is desperately needed in times like this, when you have people that are trying to globalize our economy, and we’re seeing that America has been hurt by it.” Responding to claims that she was saying Hitler would have been fine if he had just stayed in Germany, she said: “No, I’m saying Hitler wasn’t a nationalist.”

Anyone with an ounce of good will and common sense could have realized these things all along, but Leftists evidently have neither. Chelsea Clinton tweeted: “Ignorance about Hitler’s evil regime must always be confronted. That burden should not fall on Holocaust survivors. There was nothing, using @RealCandaceO own words, ‘great’ about the Third Reich before it began annexing & invading its neighbors.”

Fake moderate Muslim Qasim Rashid jumped on as well: “Oh my God. Candace Owens says she has ‘no problem’ w/Hitler’s nationalism as long as it had remained in Germany b/c ‘it’s important to retain your country’s identity.’ So Hitler using Nationalism to commit genocide of Jews was ‘just fine’ for Owens.”

The Washington Post pontificated: “Owens and Turning Point have been criticized for issues related to diversity. Some former members have called leaders of the group racist. With speeches like that from Owens, it’s not hard to see why.”

There are just two options here: one is that the Leftists who pounced on Owens (and there are many more) actually believe that conservatives are Nazis, in which case they are insane. Insanity is the inability to distinguish reality from fantasy, and if Chelsea Clinton, Qasim Rashid, the Washington Post and the rest really think that Owens’ initial statement revealed that she secretly admired Hitler, they have shown that they cannot make basic distinctions and perceive elementary realities.

On the other hand, if Leftists knew full well all along that Owens was not a Nazi, but saw her words as fodder to be exploited in order to try to defame and destroy her and all conservatives and Trump supporters, then they are evil.

The most likely answer is that they’re both crazy and evil.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column with images is republished with permission. The featured image is from Candace Owens’ Facebook page.

What the Nazis Borrowed from Marx

Polylogism is the replacement of reasoning and science by superstitions. It is the characteristic mentality of an age of chaos. Ludwig von Mises

The Nazis did not invent polylogism. They only developed their own brand.


Image credit: Flicker-Recuerdos de Pandora | CC BY 2.0

Until the middle of the 19th century no one ventured to dispute the fact that the logical structure of mind is unchangeable and common to all human beings. All human interrelations are based on this assumption of a uniform logical structure. We can speak to each other only because we can appeal to something common to all of us, namely, the logical structure of reason. Some men can think deeper and more refined thoughts than others. There are men who unfortunately cannot grasp a process of inference in long chains of deductive reasoning. But as far as a man is able to think and to follow a process of discursive thought, he always clings to the same ultimate principles of reasoning that are applied by all other men. There are people who cannot count further than three; but their counting, as far as it goes, does not differ from that of Gauss or Laplace. No historian or traveler has ever brought us any knowledge of people for whom a and non-a were identical, or who could not grasp the difference between affirmation and negation. Daily, it is true, people violate logical principles in reasoning. But whoever examines their inferences competently can uncover their errors.

Because everyone takes these facts to be unquestionable, men enter into discussions; they speak to each other; they write letters and books; they try to prove or to disprove. Social and intellectual cooperation between men would be impossible if this were not so. Our minds cannot even consistently imagine a world peopled by men of different logical structures or a logical structure different from our own.

Yet, in the course of the 19th century this undeniable fact has been contested. Marx and the Marxians, foremost among them the “proletarian philosopher” Dietzgen, taught that thought is determined by the thinker’s class position. What thinking produces is not truth but “ideologies.” This word means, in the context of Marxian philosophy, a disguise of the selfish interest of the social class to which the thinking individual is attached. It is therefore useless to discuss anything with people of another social class. Ideologies do not need to be refuted by discursive reasoning; they must be unmasked by denouncing the class position, the social background, of their authors. Thus Marxians do not discuss the merits of physical theories; they merely uncover the “bourgeois” origin of the physicists.

The Marxians have resorted to polylogism because they could not refute by logical methods the theories developed by “bourgeois” economics, or the inferences drawn from these theories demonstrating the impracticability of socialism. As they could not rationally demonstrate the soundness of their own ideas or the unsoundness of their adversaries’ ideas, they have denounced the accepted logical methods. The success of this Marxian stratagem was unprecedented. It has rendered proof against any reasonable criticism all the absurdities of Marxian would-be economics and would-be sociology. Only by the logical tricks of polylogism could etatism gain a hold on the modern mind.

Polylogism is so inherently nonsensical that it cannot be carried consistently to its ultimate logical consequences. No Marxian was bold enough to draw all the conclusions that his own epistemological viewpoint would require. The principle of polylogism would lead to the inference that Marxian teachings also are not objectively true but are only “ideological” statements. But the Marxians deny it. They claim for their own doctrines the character of absolute truth. Thus Dietzgen teaches that “the ideas of proletarian logic are not party ideas but the outcome of logic pure and simple.” The proletarian logic is not “ideology” but absolute logic. Present-day Marxians, who label their teachings the sociology of knowledge, give proof of the same inconsistency. One of their champions, Professor Mannheim, tries to demonstrate that there exists a group of men, the “unattached intellectuals,” who are equipped with the gift of grasping truth without falling prey to ideological errors. Of course, Professor Mannheim is convinced that he is the foremost of these “unattached intellectuals.” You simply cannot refute him. If you disagree with him, you only prove thereby that you yourself are not one of this elite of “unattached intellectuals” and that your utterances are ideological nonsense.

The German nationalists had to face precisely the same problem as the Marxians. They also could neither demonstrate the correctness of their own statements nor disprove the theories of economics and praxeology. Thus they took shelter under the roof of polylogism, prepared for them by the Marxians. Of course, they concocted their own brand of polylogism. The logical structure of mind, they say, is different with different nations and races. Every race or nation has its own logic and therefore its own economics, mathematics, physics, and so on. But, no less inconsistently than Professor Mannheim, Professor Tirala, his counterpart as champion of Aryan epistemology, declares that the only true, correct, and perennial logic and science are those of the Aryans. In the eyes of the Marxians Ricardo, Freud, Bergson, and Einstein are wrong because they are bourgeois; in the eyes of the Nazis they are wrong because they are Jews. One of the foremost goals of the Nazis is to free the Aryan soul from the pollution of the Western philosophies of Descartes, Hume, and John Stuart Mill. They are in search of arteigen German science, that is, of a science adequate to the racial character of the Germans.

We may reasonably assume as hypothesis that man’s mental abilities are the outcome of his bodily features. Of course, we cannot demonstrate the correctness of this hypothesis, but neither is it possible to demonstrate the correctness of the opposite view as expressed in the theological hypothesis. We are forced to recognize that we do not know how out of physiological processes thoughts result. We have some vague notions of the detrimental effects produced by traumatic or other damage inflicted on certain bodily organs; we know that such damage may restrict or completely destroy the mental abilities and functions of men. But that is all. It would be no less than insolent humbug to assert that the natural sciences provide us with any information concerning the alleged diversity of the logical structure of mind. Polylogism cannot be derived from physiology or anatomy or any other of the natural sciences.

Neither Marxian nor Nazi polylogism ever went further than to declare that the logical structure of mind is different with various classes or races. They never ventured to demonstrate precisely in what the logic of the proletarians differs from the logic of the bourgeois, or in what the logic of the Aryans differs from the logic of the Jews or the British. It is not enough to reject wholesale the Ricardian theory of comparative cost or the Einstein theory of relativity by unmasking the alleged racial background of their authors. What is wanted is first to develop a system of Aryan logic different from non-Aryan logic. Then it would be necessary to examine point by point these two contested theories and to show where in their reasoning inferences are made which—although correct from the viewpoint of non-Aryan logic—are invalid from the viewpoint of Aryan logic. And, finally, it should be explained what kind of conclusions the replacement of the non-Aryan inferences by the correct Aryan inferences must lead to. But all this never has been and never can be ventured by anybody. The garrulous champion of racism and Aryan polylogism, Professor Tirala, does not say a word about the difference between Aryan and non-Aryan logic. Polylogism, whether Marxian or Aryan, or whatever, has never entered into details.

Polylogism has a peculiar method of dealing with dissenting views. If its supporters fail to unmask the background of an opponent, they simply brand him a traitor. Both Marxians and Nazis know only two categories of adversaries. The aliens—whether members of a nonproletarian class or of a non-Aryan race—are wrong because they are aliens; the opponents of proletarian or Aryan origin are wrong because they are traitors. Thus they lightly dispose of the unpleasant fact that there is dissension among the members of what they call their own class or race.

The Nazis contrast German economics with Jewish and Anglo-Saxon economics. But what they call German economics differs not at all from some trends in foreign economics. It developed out of the teachings of the Genevese Sismondi and of the French and British socialists. Some of the older representatives of this alleged German economics merely imported foreign thought into Germany. Frederick List brought the ideas of Alexander Hamilton to Germany, Hildebrand and Brentano brought the ideas of early British socialism. Arteigen German economics is almost identical with contemporary trends in other countries, e.g., with American Institutionalism.

On the other hand, what the Nazis call Western economics and therefore artfremd is to a great extent an achievement of men to whom even the Nazis cannot deny the term German. Nazi economists wasted much time in searching the genealogical tree of Carl Menger for Jewish ancestors; they did not succeed. It is nonsensical to explain the conflict between economic theory, on the one hand, and Institutionalism and historical empiricism, on the other hand, as a racial or national conflict.

Polylogism is not a philosophy or an epistemological theory. It is an attitude of narrow-minded fanatics, who cannot imagine that anybody could be more reasonable or more clever than they themselves. Nor is polylogism scientific. It is rather the replacement of reasoning and science by superstitions. It is the characteristic mentality of an age of chaos.

This article was reprinted from the Mises Institute.

COLUMN BY

Ludwig von Mises

Ludwig von Mises

Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973) taught in Vienna and New York and served as a close adviser to the Foundation for Economic Education. He is considered the leading theorist of the Austrian School of the 20th century. 

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column with images is republished with permission.

Why the Holocaust Should Matter to You by Jeffrey Tucker

People tour the nation’s capital to be delighted by symbols of America’s greatness and history. They seek out monuments and museums that pay tribute to the nation state and its works. They want to think about the epic struggles of the past, and how mighty leaders confronted and vanquished enemies at home and abroad.

But what if there was a monument that took a different tack? Instead of celebrating power, it counseled against its abuses. Instead of celebrating the state and its works, it showed how these can become ruses to deceive and destroy. Instead of celebrating nationalist songs, symbols, and stories, it warned that these can be used as tools of division and oppression.

What if this museum was dedicated to memorializing one of history’s most ghastly experiments in imperial conquest, demographic expulsion, and eventual extermination, to help us understand it and never repeat it?

Such a museum does exist. It is the US Holocaust Museum. It is the Beltway’s most libertarian institution, a living rebuke to the worship of power as an end in itself.

I lived in Washington, DC, when the Holocaust Museum was being built, and I vaguely recall when it opened. I never went, though I had the opportunity; I remember having a feeling of dread about the prospect of visiting it. Many people must feel the same way. Surely we already know that mass murder by the state is evil and wrong. Do we really need to visit a museum on such a ghastly subject?

The answer is yes. This institution is a mighty tribute to human rights and human dignity. It provides an intellectual experience more moving and profound than any I can recall having. It takes politics and ideas out of the realm of theory and firmly plants them in real life, in our own history. It shows the consequences of bad ideas in the hands of evil men, and invites you to experience the step-by-step descent into hell in chronological stages.

The transformation the visitor feels is intellectual but also even physical: as you approach the halfway point you notice an increase in your heart rate and even a pit in your stomach.

Misconceptions

Let’s dispel a few myths that people who haven’t visited might have about the place.

  • The museum is not maudlin or manipulative. The narrative it takes you through is fact-based, focused on documentation (film and images), with a text that provides a careful chronology. One might even say it is a bit too dry, too merely factual. But the drama emerges from the contrast between the events and the calm narration.
  • It is not solely focused on the Jewish victims; indeed, all victims of the National Socialism are discussed, such as the Catholics in Poland. But the history of Jewish persecution is also given great depth and perspective. It is mind boggling to consider how a regime that used antisemitism to manipulate the public and gain power ended up dominating most of Europe and conducting an extermination campaign designed to wipe out an entire people.
  • The theme of the museum is not that the Holocaust was an inexplicable curse that mysteriously descended on one people at one time; rather the museum attempts to articulate and explain the actual reasons — the motives and ideology — behind the events, beginning with bad ideas that were only later realized in action when conditions made them possible.
  • The narrative does not attempt to convince the visitor that the Holocaust was plotted from the beginning of Nazi rule; in fact, you discover a very different story. The visitor sees how bad ideas (demographic central planning; scapegoating of minorities; the demonization of others) festered, leading to ever worsening results: boycotts of Jewish-owned business, racial pogroms, legal restrictions on property and religion, internments, ghettoization, concentration camps, killings, and finally a carefully constructed and industrialized machinery of mass death.
  • The museum does not isolate Germans as solely or uniformly guilty. Tribute is given to the German people, dissenters, and others who also fell victim to Hitler’s regime. As for moral culpability, it unequivocally belongs to the Nazis and their compliant supporters in Germany and throughout Europe. But the free world also bears responsibility for shutting its borders to refugees, trapping Jews in a prison state and, eventually, execution chamber.
  • The presentation is not rooted in sadness and despair; indeed, the museum tells of heroic efforts to save people from disaster and the resilience of the Jewish people in the face of annihilation. Even the existence of the museum is a tribute to hope because it conveys the conviction that we can learn from history and act in a way that never repeats this terrible past.

The Deeper Roots of the Holocaust

For the last six months, I’ve been steeped in studying and writing about the American experience with eugenics, the “policy science” of creating a master race. The more I’ve read, the more alarmed I’ve become that it was ever a thing, but it was all the rage in the Progressive Era. Eugenics was not a fringe movement; it was at the core of ruling-class politics, education, and culture. It was responsible for many of the early experiments in labor regulation. It was the driving force behind marriage licenses, minimum wages, restrictions on opportunities for women, and immigration quotas and controls.

The more I’ve looked into the subject, the more I’m convinced that it is not possible fully to understand the birth of the 20th century Leviathan without an awareness of eugenics. Eugenics was the original sin of the modern state that knows no limits to its power.

Once a regime decides that it must control human reproduction — to mold the population according to a central plan and divide human beings into those fit to thrive and those deserving extinction — you have the beginning of the end of freedom and civilization. The prophets of eugenics loathed the Jews, but also any peoples that they deemed dangerous to those they considered worthy of propagation. And the means they chose to realize their plans was top-down force.

So far in my reading on the subject, I’ve studied the origin of eugenics until the late 1920s, mostly in the US and the UK. And so, touring the Holocaust Museum was a revelation. It finally dawned on me: what happened in Germany was the extension and intensification of the same core ideas that were preached in the classrooms at Yale, Harvard, and Princeton decades earlier.

Eugenics didn’t go away. It just took on a more violent and vicious form in different political hands. Without meaningful checks on state power, people with eugenic ambitions can find themselves lording over a terror state. It was never realized in the United States, but it happened elsewhere. The stuffy academic conferences of the 1910s, the mutton-chopped faces of the respected professorial class, mutated in one generation to become the camps and commandants of the Nazi killing machine. The distance between eugenics and genocide, from Boston to Buchenwald, is not so great.

There are moments in the tour when this connection is made explicit, as when it is explained how, prior to the Nazis, the United States had set the record for forced sterilizations; how Hitler cited the US case for state planning of human reproduction; how the Nazis were obsessed with racial classification and used American texts on genetics and race as a starting point.

And think of this: when Progressive Era elites began to speak this way, to segment the population according to quality, and to urge policies to prevent “mongrelization,” there was no “slippery slope” to which opponents could point. This whole approach to managing the social order was unprecedented, and so a historical trajectory was pure conjecture. They could not say “Remember! Remember where this leads!”

Now we have exactly that history, and a moral obligation to point to it and learn from it.

What Can We Learn?

My primary takeaway from knitting this history together and observing its horrifying outcome is this: that any ideology, movement, or demagogue that dismisses universal human rights, that disparages the dignity of any person based on group characteristics, that attempts to segment the population into the fit and unfit, or in any way seeks to use the power of the state to put down some in order to uplift others, is courting outcomes that are dangerous to the whole of humanity. It might not happen immediately, but, over time, such rhetoric can lay the foundations for the machinery of death.

And there is also another, perhaps more important lesson: bad ideas have a social and political momentum all their own, regardless of anyone’s initial intentions. If you are not aware of that, you can be led down, step by step, to a very earthly hell.

At the same time, the reverse is also true: good ideas have a momentum that can lead to the flourishing of peace, prosperity, and universal human dignity. It is up to all of us. We must choose wisely, and never forget.

Jeffrey A. TuckerJeffrey A. Tucker

Jeffrey Tucker is Director of Digital Development at FEE and CLO of the startup Liberty.me. Author of five books, and many thousands of articles, he speaks at FEE summer seminars and other events. His latest book is Bit by Bit: How P2P Is Freeing the World.  Follow on Twitter and Like on Facebook. Email.

Give the Nazis What They Want: Call Them National Socialists by B.K. Marcus

If you called Donald Trump a Nazi, he’d probably take offense, even though his nationalism is socialistic. If you called Bernie Sanders a Nazi, you’d be dismissed out of hand, though his socialism is avowedly nationalistic. But did you know that Adolf Hitler himself took offense when the word was applied to him and his political party?

“He would have considered himself a National Socialist,” writes word nerd Mark Forsyth in The Etymologicon.

Sure, but as Steve Horwitz reminds us in “Why the Candidates Keep Giving Us Reasons to Use the ‘F’ Word” (Freeman, winter 2015), “Nazi is short for National Socialist German Workers Party [Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei].” So why would even Hitler be offended by the epithet?

Because “Nazi is, and always has been, an insult,” according to Forsyth.

Hitler’s “opponents realised that you could shorten Nationalsozialistische toNazi. Why would they do this? Because Nazi was already an (utterly unrelated) term of abuse. It had been for years.”

The standard butt of German jokes at the beginning of the twentieth century were stupid Bavarian peasants. And just as Irish jokes always involve a man called Paddy, so Bavarian jokes always involved a peasant called Nazi. That’s because Nazi was a shortening of the very common Bavarian name Ignatius. This meant that Hitler’s opponents had an open goal. He had a party filled with Bavarian hicks and the name of that party could be shortened to the standard joke name for hicks.

Something similar has been happening in the Middle East, with opponents of the self-described Islamic State deciding that the group should be called instead Daesh.

Sarah Skwire explains:

ISIS does not want to be called Daesh. The group considers the acronym insulting and dismissive. An increasing number of its opponents do not want it to be called the “Islamic State.” They fear that this shorthand reifies the terrorist group’s claims to be a legitimate government. (“The Islamic State by Any Other Name,” December 8, 2015)

Totalitarians and terrorists shouldn’t get to bully us into using the terminology they prefer, especially when their preferred terms smuggle semantic baggage past our defenses, but neither should we reflexively refuse to apply accurately descriptive names just because it’s what the bad guys say they want.

Whether you consider “Islamic State” to be an appropriate moniker hinges on how you feel about both the nature of Islam and the nature of the state.

But how appropriate was Hitler’s preferred appellation? No one denies that nationalism was central to his ideology, but whether or not he deserved to call himself a socialist depends on how you feel about individual liberty, private property, central planning, and state ownership of industry. It also depends on how much you want the word socialism to carry a connotation of internationalism and social liberalism.

Horwitz writes, “The Nazis were undoubtedly socialist … as even a quick glance at their 1920 platform will tell you.” And those of us who associate private property with public welfare will tend to agree. But ours was not the dominant perspective in the countries that received National Socialism’s exiles.

As Forsyth tells it,

Refugees started turning up elsewhere complaining about the Nazis, and non-Germans of course assumed that this was the official name of the party.… To this day, most of us happily go about believing that the Nazis called themselves Nazis, when, in fact, they would probably have beaten you up for saying the word.

I suspect, however, that the confusion Forsyth describes was less innocent than his story implies. Those who fled east to get out of Germany would have found themselves under the authority of self-described socialists of the Soviet variety. Those who fled west landed among social democrats who, whether or not they were comfortable with the term “democratic socialism,” certainly didn’t want to give weight to the growing association between socialism and totalitarianism.

In the United States, the S-word was never as popular with the general public as it was in Europe, but many in the American intelligentsia did and still do seek to defang socialism in the popular imagination. The more we use the old Bavarian insult as if it were the National Socialists’ name for themselves, the more we cooperate with that agenda.

But you don’t have to oppose socialism to call the German fascists by their party’s proper name. You need only prefer historical accuracy and semantic precision to linguistic confusion — or politically motivated obfuscation.

B.K. MarcusB.K. Marcus

B.K. Marcus is editor of the Freeman.

Different Players Same History

Almost everyone knows that history repeats itself, much like a merry go round. The merry go round goes in a circle, you see a particular horse, it disappears as the merry go round revolves, but at the precise regular interval the same figure reappears again.  In a sense, history is no different (but with one exception) that in the circle of history that repeats itself, unlike the merry go round the characters do change.

For example, seventy four years ago during December of 1941 the world was under extreme threat from both the Nazis and the nation of Japan.  Leading up to the fateful year, Neville Chamberlain, the appeasing Prime Minister of Great Britain endangered that great empire by pandering to the Nazis.  Chamberlain’s continued weak posture resulted in Hitler feeling free to rain down bombs throughout the United Kingdom capital of London.

The good news is the Chamberlain’s woeful ways were not the cornerstone on the long term outcome of Great Britain during World War Two.  Even though V1 rockets destroyed hundreds of square miles of the fabled city, they did not wipe out the resolve of the people to overcome the enemy.  The good news was that the Chamberlain persuasion wasn’t the final word on how Great Britain and the West would encounter and defeat the enemies of freedom.

The good news was that the Chamberlain persuasion was not the final word on how Great Britain and the allies would engage the enemies of freedom.  There was a man named Sir Winston Churchill, the English statesman who was born in 1874 and destined for a magnanimous rendezvous with destiny.  For years, during the unfruitful regime of Chamberlain, Winston Churchill was either ignored or shouted down by the progressive leaning members of Parliament who refused to believe Churchill’s call to stand up to the Third Reich was the way to go.

Of course, history would prove that all of the kissing of Hitler’s backside that Neville Chamberlain could muster would only embolden Hitler’s horrors against the British Empire.  But alas, insanity gave way to Godly wisdom and Churchill would hear from Heaven and join forces with Franklin D. Roosevelt, the American president who strategized with Churchill and great generals like Patton, Eisenhower and Sherman.  Those divine connections led to the eventual victories over both Germany and Japan.  Mr. Roosevelt was also a great comforter to the American people during the war.  His radio broadcast fireside chats and prayers for America and victory became legendary.

But the bottom line is, those who sought to wreak havoc throughout the world were ultimately defeated.  The resolve to face down and defeat evil was almost always there, despite the horrendous mistakes of Chamberlain and even the earlier hesitation president Roosevelt to enter America into the fray of World War Two.  But ultimately, history was made and “Happy Days” were here again, which set the stage for what became the greatest increase in the standard of living and freedom for mankind in the history of the world up to that time.

Today history is being repeated, via the mission of oppression of the Obama administration.  His fierce loyalty to those seeking to destroy America is exhibited in the refusal to allow a full throttle American assault against the Muslim terrorists who have vowed to destroy us.  This turn of events displays an even more egregious than the boot licking policies of Britain’s Chamberlain which preceded victory under Churchill and Roosevelt.

Obama’s feckless leadership and shallow policies of appeasements have weakened the United States and strengthened the resolve of those who have vowed to kill, steal from and destroy those who differ from Islam and sharia law.

Despite the current low ebb of American governance, I am firmly convinced that the pages of history shall soon turn and reveal a dramatic and positive change in the state of affairs regarding war with those on the march against the Christian inspired land of liberty, called the United States of America.  Just as Churchill and Roosevelt set the tone for victory against the enemies of freedom during their time, so will our next president be inspired to properly lead this republic not only toward victory, but to greatness as the sweet land of liberty so envisioned by the founding fathers.

History does repeat itself, but it is ultimately up to us which history will be repeated and becomes the direction our nation takes in the future.  As former president George W. Bush stated “we are the deciders.”  Will we repeat or continue the decline and misery of the Carter and Obama years, or do we repeat the history of greatness and power like America experienced during the years of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan?

I can promise you that without repentance to almighty God who shed his grace upon our blessed republic for our foolish choices including certain ones voted to the presidency, we will continue to repeat the failures of our present era. Thus America will remain on her slippery slope to oblivion.  The current decline and worse are the goals of the progressive democrats, rinos and sharia law trolls.

But if your desire is to witness the rebirth of America, she must first be reborn spiritually.  The founding fathers recognized the importance of and our need for our heavenly Father’s grace and sought His wisdom and guidance regularly.  “The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity…I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God”:  John Adams, Second President.

If God was good enough for the founding fathers, he is more than good enough for “We the People” today.  Let us together seek his wisdom, so that the history repeated in our time is good for us, our children and our children’s children.

God Bless you and Merry Christmas.

The Pink Swastika: Hijacking the Holocaust

The greatest sacrilege to the millions of innocent infant and aged Nazi victims, would be allow these dead to be exploited as political fodder to re-arm the same ideologues who ushered in Germany’s “final solution.”

Are The Victimizers Co-Opting the Holocaust?

Under the banner of The Pink Triangle (a Nazi symbol for incarcerated homosexuals), a mass media campaign by the major broadcasters, press, educators and now by the legal system, has been awarding Nazi victim status to homosexuals. Claiming to have been victimized by the Nazis just like the Jews, and Jehovah’s Witnesses and other groups murdered by the Nazis, pink triangles have swept the land, embossed on fancy stationary, upscale check books, flags, posters, stickers, shirts, pins, and on classroom doors as a “safe space” for “Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered and Questioning Youth,” and the like. After losing nearly all of my Jewish family in the gas chambers during World War II, and being old enough to remember that war, I was deeply disconcerted when Holocaust museums world-wide advertised new exhibits alleging the Nazi mass murder of homosexuals.

One of the complaints of museum curators has been the dearth of evidence with which to document museum assertions of a Nazi animus toward homosexuals. Now, here come the authors of The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams, charging that there is a reason why evidence of a fatal form of Nazi “homophobia” has been uniformly lacking.

For Lively and Abrams instead document the homosexual movement as the agents that ensconced National Socialism (the Nazi party) and Adolf Hitler, thus triggering a holocaust which engulfed all of Europe.

Hitler’s Silence on Homosexuality in Mein Kampf

Writing of those days in The Mass Psychology of Fascism, radical German sexologist and Hitler contemporary, Wilhelm Reich, warned that Nazi leadership was both ideologically and actually homosexual. Almost as an aside, Reich noted Nazi leaders such as “Bluher, Roehm…. Rosenberg” represented Hitler’s fascism, which was, Reich said, “a male state organized on a homosexual basis.” 2

But, the confirmation of a Nazi homosexual bias are found in the formal writings of Adolf Hitler himself, in the bible of the Nazi movement, Mein Kampf [My Struggle].

Here the reader meets up with page after page of Hitler’s outspoken hatred of Jews, Marxists, Negroes, Chinese, Arabs, women, and all Eastern Europeans along with his overwhelming worship of power and disdain for Judeo-Christian morality alongside his strategy for world domination.

In his introduction to Mein Kampf, 4 Konrad Heiden reconfirms Hitler’s hatred for Christianity, as he viewed the “belief in human equality” to be a Jewish plot, made popular due to “Christian churches”.

Hitler here outlines who he and Germany should hate. He hid nothing. Jews and the like were subhuman, they were “parasites” “vampires,” “liars” “cowards,” “traitors,” among other adjectives.

However, search the Nazi manifesto for any animosity, contempt, much less disgust of homosexuals. To do so is to search in vain. In point of fact, as Reich knew personally, Hitler eulogized and venerated the archetypal super macho Aryan male, for whom women were seen to serve the role of breeders for the race of supermen.

The Furher’s contempt for women is made vivid by the abnormal way in which he used his niece and the few other women close to him, including Eva Braun.

Contemporary Homosexual Nazi Fashion

nazi with man tied upHitler outlined in Mein Kampf who would live and who would die: He stated who would be slave and who would be master. The Pink Swastika opens his fascist bible to the prototypical Nazi macho homosexual male best expressed today in the widely popular “Tom of Finland” fantasy drawings sold in all homosexual book stores, magazines, as well as in general advertisements for “gay” films and phone sex.

Common are the blond, square jawed, youngish muscle men wearing Luftwaffe caps, skin tight black pants, high black polished boots. This ‘macho male’ sports a black leather strap going from the shoulder diagonally across a hairless, bare, Aryan chest, a whip swishing alongside the hero’s slender hips.  He will often dominate a dark haired male who cowers near or under his Nazi style boots.  All in imitation of the Nazi uniform, careful to avoid the actual uniform and thus to reveal even to the most naïve, how fascistic, sadistic is the glorification of macho male homosexuality.

nazi boot on naked manThe authors recall the 1920s post WW I Weimar Republic, the near starvation and wild currency fluctuations in Germany against the backdrop of the sex and drug “Cabaret” scene of Europe and Gay Berlin. They point to Berlin’s world famous coterie of Bohemian artists, sadosexual transvestites, lesbians and homosexual nightclubs and baths, as well as the rampant control of Berlin by pornographers, organized crime and drug dealers. In this milieu, reports Elson in Time-Life Books, Prelude to War, thousands of young female prostitutes walked Berlin’s city streets half nude, dressed as “dominatrixes” and school girls, while transvestites and “powered and rouged young men” everywhere sold their wares to financiers and military men alike. 5

Magnus Hirshfeld

Magnus Hirshfeld

The infamous German Jewish homosexual sex “scientist” Magnus Hirshfeld reported that roughly 20,000 boys and youths6 were prostituted to Germany’s flourishing “gay” population. The British, qua-American homosexual icon, Christopher Isherwood blissfully said of Berlin’s 1920’s boy brothels, “Berlin is for boys…The German Boy….the Blond”). 7

In the midst of such pansexual revelry it could be argued that were Hitler a shy, retiring sort of bookworm, he might not notice the dominating homosexual sensibility and the erotic mix of sexes. However, Lively and Abrams conclude that as a young aspiring Viennese artist, Hitler would be especially familiar with the artistic homosexual fraternity for Vienna was the hub of Bohemian culture.

Hitler claims to have been destitute, and in the midst of the Cabaret era, he was reduced to living in a men’s hostel for down-and outers. Both male and female prostitution were rife, the younger the better. Such a poor young artist would have met many “different” and adventurous people whose celebrity. like today, was gilded by an intimacy with homosexuality. The authors present a reasonable body of evidence to the jury of public opinion, including the possibility that Hitler earned extra cash as a youthful Viennese prostitute, serving a male clientele.

Rohm Had A “Taste For Young Boys.”

In a fascinating read of 204 well documented pages, the authors of The Pink Swastika track down the facts behind the homosexual movement’s current claims for Nazi-victim status. Divided into seven parts, the story opens as the new Nazi party is founded in the smoky din of the Bratwurstglockl, “a tavern frequented by homosexual roughnecks and bully-boys….a gay bar,” favored by Hitler’s closest comrade, Captain Ernst Roehm.

Almost every biography of Hitler reports that Roehm was a flagrant homosexual and the only man Hitler called by the familiar “du.”

Hitler’s beloved Storm Trooper Chief and founder of the Brown Shirts, the authors note, had a “taste for young boys.” Almost as close to Hitler as Roehm was Rudolph Hess, known for his dress-up attire as “‘Black Bertha’” in the gay bars of pre- war Berlin”. 8

In fact, Mein Kampf was dedicated to Hess while Hitler was in prison. The Pink Swastika reports that Hitler was given power by a homosexual gang. It was this gang of Brown Shirts, under homosexual Roehm, says Dr. Carroll Quigley, President Bill Clinton’s college teacher and mentor, that subverted Germany’s free elections by brutal and underhanded strategies.

Quigley: The Reichstag Burned by Homosexuals?

According to liberal historian and Clinton’s college mentor, Caroll Quigley in Tragedy and Hope (1966) Hitler’s intimate friend, Captain Roehm and his trusted homosexual cadre of Storm Troopers staged the famed burning of the Reichstag. Along with other bully-boy tactics, this would frighten people into supporting the Nazi party and Hitler.  For our purposes here it is useful to see what Quigley says about homosexual Nazi Storm Troopers:

Accordingly….a plot was worked out to burn the Reichstag building and blame the Communists. Most of the plotters were homosexuals and were able to persuade a degenerate moron from Holland named Van der Lubbe to go with them. After the building was set on fire, Van der Lubbe was left wandering about in it and was arrested. 9

This is especially interesting. There are many myths surrounding “The Night of the Long Knives” or the “blood purge” when supposedly only homosexuals such as Rohm were murdered by Hitler. Quigley offers another interesting insight, saying that “Most of the plotters were homosexual”.

Burning the Records of Nazi Sex Criminals

nazi book burning

May 10, 1933 Institute book burning.

He adds that many of those who knew the truth were murdered in March and April while “Most of the Nazis who were in on the plot were murdered by Goring during the “blood purge” of June 30, 1934” (emphasis added). 10

Also it was under Roehm and his Storm Troopers that the records and books of “the Sex Research Institute,” were burned. The authors reveal that Dr. Magnus Hirschfeld, the homosexual director of the Institute, maintained detailed records of his many court-referred sex offenders, including important Nazi rapists, and homosexual child offenders, pederasts. Naturedly such incriminating documents would have to be burned.

Quigley confirmed that Roehm and other key Nazis who knew too much about Hitler’s criminal activities were killed for allegedly plotting against Hitler.

Lively and Abrams track the role of Roehm in 1933 11 recruiting and training a total of roughly 2.5 to 4.5 million Storm Troopers (SA) and Gestapo (SS) compared to about 100,000 men in the regular German army. Once the SA was disbanded after the June 1934 blood purge, most of these experienced SA homosexual leaders moved into other power positions in the German military.

Pederasts Running The Hitler Youth?

The authors raise many questions in The Pink Swastika. If he feared homosexual influence on boys, why did Hitler chose known homosexuals to serve as key youth leaders? Karl Fischer, a homosexual teacher, began the Wandervogel (a German version of the boy Scouts), which became “The Hitler Youth” in 1933, under a well known pederast, Hans Blueher, who wrote of man-boy “love.” Gerhard Rossbach, homosexual Nazi leader of the Freikorps gave over leadership of the Schill Youth to Edmund Heines, a convicted Nazi pederast, and murder, all under the watchful eye of Adolf Hitler.

The Pink Swastika reports that while Hitler and his Gestapo chief, Heinrich Himmler methodologically annihilated all German and European Jews via mass deportations to death camps, beyond political homophobic rhetoric after the Rohm murders, and a demand that men produce children for the Aryan race, Hitler refused to attack “homosexuals.”

Goering Dressed “In Drag And Wore Camp Make-Up”

Adolf Brand

Adolf Brand

Adolf Brand, a pederast-child pornographer was one of many prominent “butch” advocate homosexuals who continued to live, write and entertain in Germany, untouched by the Nazis.

Other homosexual and bisexual leaders cited by these and other authors included Bladur von Schirach, Hitler Youth Leader; Hans Frank, Hitler’s Minister of Justice; Wilhelm Bruckner, Hitler’s adjutant; Walther Funk, Hitler’s Minister of Economics; friend and advisor Hermann Goering, Hitler’s second in command (who dressed “in drag and wore camp make-up”).

Also, Hans Kahnert founded Germany’s largest “Gay rights organization (Society for Human Rights) which counted “SA Chief Ernst Roehm among its members,” (below left, sitting) Edmund Heines, a pederast sadist (below left standing next to his alleged lover Roehm), Dr. Karl Gunther Heimsoth, a homosexual Nazi who coined the term “homophile,” and Julius Streicher, an infamous pornographer and pederast who was very close to Hitler.

Bladur von Schirach (left)

Bladur von Schirach (left), Hitler Youth Leader.

The question of homosexuality versus anti-Semitism come together most profoundly in a man named Emil Maurice, Hitler’s close Jewish personal secretary and chauffeur. One of the Roehm purge assassins, apparently Maurice, lived as a member of the SS, until the war’s end. Lively and Abrams cite Maurice as homosexual. Mollo, in his history of the SS, identifies Maurice as Jewish in an infamous photograph below:

hitler with homosexual friends

Hitler and four of his first SS men (a fifth has been erased). L to R: Schaubk, Schreck, Hitler, Maurer and Schneider.  The fifth man was Emil Maurice who was thrown out of the SS in 1935 when found to be a Jew, but later allowed to retain his appointment and privileges, and wear [sic] SS uniform. 12

hitler maurice

Hitler with Emil Maurice, his chauffeur.

It is absolutely inconceivable that Maurice was not known as Jewish. Beyond his appearance, his family and the very high probability of his circumcision, it is reasonable now to consider whether Hitler had a sexual relationship with his handsome young chauffeur (a not uncommon arrangement as identified in reports of the time).

So, How To Explain Maurice

Maurice is the man erased in the SS photograph, his two shoes still quite visible in the picture.  These other photos reveal Maurice to be a rather Semitic looking young man, always close behind Hitler. Now that Lothar Machtan, a reputable German historian, confirmed Hitler’s homosexuality, it is highly likely that Maurice was indeed one of Hitler’s lovers. At any rate, whatever Hitler’s relationship with Maurice, who remained a member of the SS during the war, suggests that the homosexual lust easily overpowered anti-Semitic hate. As politically uncomfortable as it has become to face the role of macho homosexual men in establishing Nazism, Dr. Nathaniel S. Lehrman, former clinical director of Kingsboro Psychiatric Center in Brooklyn, N.Y., wrote:

“Adolf Hitler’s homosexuality has been demonstrated beyond question by German historian Lothar Machtan’s massively researched new book, The Hidden Hitler….But the crucial role within the Nazi movement of the most vicious and lawless types of homosexuality, which Machtan also shows, is even more important than Hitler’s personal preference.

In 1933, six months after Hitler took power, the distinguished Jewish author Ludwig Lewisohn described what Machtan confirms, that “the entire [Nazi] movement is in fact and by certain aspects of its avowed ideology drenched through and through with homoerotic feeling and practice.” And those homosexual currents inextricably were connected with vicious German militarism long before the Nazis.” 13

hitler with followersThe intimacy of Maurice and Hitler is important in terms of what it tells us about the power of the homosexual drive. The captions read:

[Picture #1] “Hitler in prison with Maurice, Kriebel, Hess and Dr. Fredrich.” [Picture #2] “Common room of Nazi prisoners at Landsberg. Behind Hitler, Emil Maurice, early companion and chauffeur.” 14

Most histories of World War II (see especially Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich) report Hitler’s ties to the “notorious” homosexual, Ernst Rohm and other males within his coterie. The Pink Swastika notes, if anything, that sex laws under Hitler’s Reich Minister of the Interior Henrich Himmler were largely tolerant toward the “2 million” Germans Himmler said were registered in homosexual organizations in 1933, for “only repeat offenders can be incarcerated.”

Homosexual Artists and Actors Were Also Safe

But, “repeat offenders” meant a fourth public sex offense, or someone who had already served six months in jail for repeated offenses. In 1940, Himmler reiterated that only “multiple offenders” (largely engaged in sex in a public forum) might be jailed.

However, wrote Himmler, “artists and actors” might escape any penalty, despite how often they were found in compromising situations.15

During the Hitler era, of roughly 70 million Germans16, “less than 1%” “hardly one hundredth of all the country’s inhabitants” were Jewish, said Hitler.17 Morris Ernst, in his book on Kinsey, discussed Hirschfeld’s findings:

Germany….with a population of 62,000,000, there were nearly a million and a half men and women [said Hirschfeld]  “whose constitutional predisposition is largely or completely homosexual” Just how big a proportion of his estimated million and a half German homosexuals found their way into Nazi uniforms is not known, of course.  But a good many of them were attracted by the Nazi principles and the society of their fellows in a bond which excluded all women (p. 169-170).

Historical records suggest Germany had perhaps 700,000 Jews 18 versus 2-3 million “registered” homosexuals, according to Himmler. Whether there were 1 and a half million (Hirschfeld) or 2to 3 million (Himmler), at most 10,000 German homosexuals were sent to work camps, 6,000 died and 4,000 were released. The 6,000 homosexual deaths are a minimum of Germans who would have been “fems,” despised by the homosexual powered elite as well as collections of homosexuals who were also Jewish, Italian, Asian, Black, Communist, Marxist and the like.

Out of 2-3 Million Homosexuals, 6,000 “Fems” or Reds Killed

This still leaves estimates of 20,000 male prostitutes unaccounted for with the under 1% of homosexuals largely interned in “work camps,” not, the authors note, the “death” camps for Jews and other outcasts. Lively and Abrams point to the nearly 100% extermination effort by the Nazis toward all captured Jews of all nationalities, gassed or interned in death camps. The especial concern of Hitler that all good Germans reproduce in order to create an Aryan nation must not be forgotten.

Aryan Germans were expected to breed and it is well known that German breeding farms were established for that purpose. Non-German homosexuals appear to have been of no interest to the Nazis, for there is no record of any attempts to hunt, arrest or harm foreign homosexuals, for any reason.

The evidence strongly suggests these selected German homosexuals were killed for political reasons, versus 566,000 of roughly 700,000 German Jews (85%), 23.5% of all gypsies, 10% of Poles, 12% of Ukrainians, 13.5% of Belorussians.19. The German military plot to kill Hitler resulted in the murder of the few men responsible, as well as 7,000 of their family members. The authors raise some interesting questions, such as where is the record of retaliation for those who hid, hired, nursed and fed persecuted homosexuals? The author’s discussions of the “butch” versus “fems” battle raging between German homosexuals and the effect of this internal war on alleged “book burning: and the like, answer many critical questions.

Elie Weisel:  Homosexual Guards Trafficked in Jewish Boys

In the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Shirer said Hitler welcomed “Murderers, pimps homosexual perverts, drug addicts or just plain rowdies.”20 In fact, even Shirer sidestepped the brazenly homosexual nature of Nazi party pioneers–a critical body of knowledge for any society contending for a civil existence. The authors cite several million “Butch” type Roehm homosexual Nazis who worked as guards and directors of women’s and men’s death camps and work camps. Elie Weisel, the world famous Holocaust survivor, reported witnessing homosexual guards and administrators who “kept” and raped young Jewish boys at will, “there was a considerable traffic in children among homosexuals here, I learned later.”21

Lively and Abrams report that basic mathematics refute the idea that homosexuals were killed for being homosexual. For were homosexuals treated like Jews, 2-3 million out of 2-3 million German homosexuals should have lost their businesses, their jobs, their property, their possessions and most should have lost their lives.

Homosexuals would have been forced to wear pink triangles on their clothing in the streets, they would have had their passports stamped with an “H,” barred from travel, work, shopping, public appearances without their armbands, and we would have thousands of pictures of pink triangle graffiti saying “kill the faggots,” and the like.

Where Did 2 Million German Homosexuals Go?

If German homosexuals were not Nazis, these 2-3 million men would have been homeless, walled into ghettos, worked as a mass labor pool, then gassed and their abuse recorded in graphic detail, as were millions of Jews. And, if Germany’s several million “gays” were not Nazi victims, they were Nazi soldiers, collaborators or murderers.

Interviewing SS General Jurgen Stroop and a German policeman, Moczarski, Kazimiers22 reports on the continued presence of homosexuals in the Nazi hierarchy.

A policeman well acquainted “with Germany’s homosexual element [spoke up and said they] kept files on all known and potential pederasts. He remarked that very few homosexuals in the NSDAP were as “indelicately” treated as was Roehm…”So maybe a few of the fags in the party did get knocked off.

There were plenty of others who made out just fine. They remained active party members…..got promotions…..[and were] protected by the top NSDAP brass.”

The Storm Troopers and the Gestapo were schooled in what the authors call the “Hellenistic” Greek ideal of man-youth-pedagogy. Concerned about the man-boy aspect of homosexuality, The Pink Swastika connects-the-dots for readers from the homosexual power structure in Germany to the current social debate in the United States. The naked, copulatory San Francisco “gay rights” parades, the violent homosexual burning of buildings when Governor Pete Wilson originally refused gay minority rights, the bullying attacks on Cardinal O’Conner and former HHS Secretary Louis Sullivan and scores of others, note the authors, are a replay of the homoerotic Nazis.

Our own research on Heterosexual v. Homosexual Partner Solicitation Language (The Advocate v. The Washingtonian), as noted earlier, regularly finds men and boys pictured in naked Fascist chic, strutting the black Luftwaffe cap, boots, whips and black leather–Fascist sadism.. While Lively and Abrams cite at least 160 ex-gay organizations nationwide which identify sex abuse, neglect and authoritarian trauma as triggering homosexual conduct, on the evidence, a post-World War II Fascist model is afoot in American schools under the protective cover of “AIDS Prevention” and “gay youth” protection, controlled largely by adult homosexual activists.

Parallel with these subversive activities is the effort to divorce children from their parents, by painting the fatal and lonely life of homosexuality with a patina of heroism and martyrdom, via mass media, institutional education and law (the privilege of marriage being a recent assault) undermining America’s survival as the international standard-barer of a Judeo-Christian moral order.

German School Children: Taught to Ignore Old Fashioned Parents

Lively and Abrams are concerned, and I would conceded properly so, that idealistic “gay youth” groups are being formed and staffed in classrooms nationwide by recruiters too similar to those who formed the original “Hitler youth,” The Pink Swastika authors draw our attention to the need to forcefully reverse the flood of “gay rights” legislation or face a massive increase in children dedicated to the exploitive and heartbreaking “gay life” with all that implies for the child and society.

The Pink Swastika finds that serious “Judeo-Christians” are the likely targets of this resurgent homosexual movement. In 1934, all German school children were receiving textual, verbal and cinematic classroom indoctrination into Fascism. The libraries purged anti-Nazi books and teachers, just as our libraries are purging anti- homosexuality books and teachers. And, like our current status, by 1936, sexuality advocate, Wilheim Reich warned that the wide availability and juvenile use of pornography was creating heterophobic German children–boys and girls who feared and distrusted the opposite sex.23

The homosexual fight for Nazi victim status comes directly on the heels of our exposé of forty years of corrupt and cynical manipulation of the fraudulent “10%” of homosexuality data established by Dr. Alfred Kinsey and Co. (Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, Reisman and Eichel). Recently, Newsweek challenged the fraudulent Kinsey data, asking, “How Many Gays Are There?” while the Wall Street Journal faced up to “Homosexuals and the 10% Fallacy.”

Using Kinsey’s 10% Fraud to Seduce School Children

Recent admissions by Dr. John Bancroft, the new Kinsey Institute Director24 of Kinsey’s reliance and use of a homosexual pederast[s] to obtain Kinsey’s child sex data raises the specter that a homosexual/pederast biased male research base has become the foundation of current sexual attitudes, education, conduct, law and public policy. As no other sex researcher has ever reported his or her laboratory experiments on children to determine their sexual capacity, Kinsey remains the citation for all such scientific claims.

abusing child pamphletTo that end, H.R. 2749, “The Child Protection and Ethics in Education Act of 1995” was introduced by Congressman Steve Stockman, December 1995, to begin to investigate that possibility. The price we now are paying for decades of Kinsey’s claims of infant and child sexuality and his 10% homosexuality data, can never be calculated.

At left is an advertisement in The Washington Post, circa 1997, designed to frighten and intimidate parents into accepting the notion that homosexuality is genetic, and may include their son. In the book, Coming Out of the Classroom (1991), “out” lesbian Virginia Uribe, the originator of “Project 10,” describes the way in which the homosexual movement used Kinsey’s fraudulent homosexual “data” to enter the classroom.

“PROJECT 10, named after Kinsey’s (1948) estimate that 10% of the population is exclusively homosexual, originally envisioned as an in-school counseling program…. has become a district-wide and nation-wide forum for the articulation of the needs of lesbian, gay, and bisexual teenagers.”25

Some closeted percentage of the lesbians and homosexual male counselors and teachers entering these classroom counseling programs are also child molesters.   Homosexual “volunteers” in schools and at the “Gay and Lesbian and Bisexual and Transgendered” youth clubs to “aid” children need to be seen in concert with old fashioned wariness about “bachelors,” in general and homosexual bachelors in particular. As we have seen, sexual predators use the classroom to gain access to a vulnerable pool of child victims. Sexually victimizing children is more smoothly accomplished if the “academic” subject matter is not math or science but sex– when sexual ideas, issues, acts, pictures, seem to be a natural part of the educator’s mission.

Gay & Lesbian “Youth” School Clubs a “Hitler Youth” Spin Off

gay lesbian youthWriting in Gay and Lesbian Youth (1989) Herdt explained why homosexual youth recruitment increased:

“We had not foreseen that….gay youth would also have to contend with the new horrors of AIDS [that]…teenage gays and lesbians would shun older gays as role models or even as friends26…[To meet this challenge, said Herdt] only now has gay culture begun to institutionalize “socialization” techniques for the transmission of its cultural knowledge to a younger generation27… [as] local “gay” movements provide their own infrastructural support for the coming out process in teens.28 (Emphasis added)

Douglas Feldman, a medical anthropologist claimed, “these kids are our [the gay community’s] future and we must invest in them.”29 Yet, he adds that gay and lesbian 0organizations discourage having “gay” boys tested for HIV.30 Why? “Teenagers tend to be very susceptible to sexually transmitted diseases,”31 observed Feldman. In any event, Feldman says these boys “have about a one in four chance of developing AIDS in 32 approximately 5 years.”

Adult sex with “consenting” minors is still statutory rape. Yet, the March 1992 Advocate magazine cover story blames boy victims, not their adult male victimizers, for the disease, saying; “Teen Sex: They’re Doing it—And AIDS Is Killing Them By the Thousands.”33

Now the homosexual press regularly reports that scores of “closet” lesbians and homosexuals are in place to resurrect homosexuality, reshaping the nation’s ideals of child, marriage, justice, research, law, health, sexuality, crime and public policy from the old bi/homosexual sensibility. And establishing homosexual enclaves in private, public and even some parochial schools everywhere based on the idea that children are born homosexual, bisexual, transsexual and so on and on.

If it is true that institutional Judaism capitulated to homosexual pressure in Holocaust museums worldwide, awarding Nazi victim status to the macho male ideology which launched the Holocaust,34 what does growing homosexual power mean to their memory, and to the way homosexual power will exert itself in the future?

Historical research on Nazi homosexual power should be pouring out from our institutions of higher learning. That universities are captured by “politically correct” homosexual/feminism only proves how dangerous fraud in science has been and continues to be for our nation.

The Pink Swastika should be studied in all our schools, primary to university, for woe unto our nation should we ignore the warning of James Madison in 1832: “A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or perhaps both.”35

END NOTES

1  Circa February, 1998.

2   Wilhelm Reich (1970), The Mass Psychology of Fascism. Penguin: New York, pp. 123, 127.

3   The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. (1992) Houghton Mifflin.

4   The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia. (1991), Columbia University Press.

5   Robert Elson (1976), Prelude to War. Time-Life Books, New York, pp. 70-83.

6 Havelock Ellis (1934), Psychology of Sex, Ray Long & Richard R. Smith, Inc., New York, p. 221-222, Ellis cites Magnus Hirschfeld’s research on boy prostitution.

7   Christopher Isherwood (1953), Christopher And His Kind, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, New York, pp. 4-5.

8   The Washington Blade, August 11, 1985, p. 47 (a homosexual press).

9   Carroll Quigley (1966) Tragedy and Hope, Macmillan Company, New York, p. 437.

10   Ibid.

11 Pictures taken under fair use from the U.S. National Archives

12  Andrew Mollo, A Pictorial History of the SS, 1923-1945. Stein and Day, New York, p. 19.

13 Nathaniel S. Lehrman The Hidden Hitler, “Insight on the News,” Feb 25, 2002, Website: http://www.thirdreich.net/Was_Hitler_Gay.html. http://www.defendthefamily.com/pfrc/archives.php?id=7968553.

14   John Toland (1976) Adolf Hitler, New York.  Ballantine books, p.131.

15 See: Eldon R. James, Ed., “The Statutory Criminal Law of Germany,” Washington, The Library of Congress, 1947, pp. 114-115, and Timothy Kearley “Charles Szladits’ Guide to Foreign Legal Materials: German,” published by the Baker School of Foreign and Comparative Law, Columbia University, 1990.

16  Morris Ernst, American Sexual Behavior and the Kinsey Report, The Greystone Press, NY, NY, 1948.

17 Mein Kampf translated by Ralph Manheim, Boston: Sentry Edition: Houghton Mifflin, 1962. Also see Ingo Muller, Hitler’s Justice: Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass: The Courts of the Third Reich, 1991, where Muller writes “Accounts of the power and invluence wielded by Jews in the Weimar Republic have usually been grossly misleading. In actual fact the percentage of Jews in the population of Germany declined steadily from the late nineteenth century onward, shrinking from 1.2 percent in 1871 to 0.76 percent in 1930….0.16 percent of all government employees. p. 59.

18   The People’s Chronology, Henry Holt and Company, Inc. 1992.

19 Katz, Steven. (1989). “Genocide in the 20th Century”: Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Vol 4, No 2. Great Britain: Pergamnom Press, pp. 127-148.

20   William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of The Third Reich, New York,

21   Elie Wisel (1982) Night, New York, Bantam Books, p. 46.

22   Moczarski, Kazimiers (1977). Conversations With An Executioner.  New Jersey: Prentice Hall. pp. 38-

23   Reich, supra, pp. 123, 127.

24   The Washington Post, December 8, 1995, p. B1, and December 28, 1995 Letter to the Editor.

25 Karen Harbeck, Ed., COMING OUT OF THE CLASSROOM CLOSET: GAY AND LESBIAN STUDENTS, TEACHERS AND CURRICULA,

Harrington Park Press, New York, 1991, at 11. At a Beaverton Oregon conference Uribe said, “When you want to start something with gay and lesbian groups, just do it without asking. Its easier to say “I’m sorry” than “May I.” April 23, 1992.

26 Herdt, GAY AND LESBIAN YOUTH, Harrington Park Press, New York, 1989, at 3.

27  Id, at 4.

28  Id., at 29.

29  Id., Feldman in Herdt at 192.

30  Id., at 188.

31  Id., at 189.

32  Id., at 188.

33  The Advocate, “Teen Sex: They’re Doing it—And AIDS Is Killing Them By the Thousands,” March 24, 1992.

34   John Toland (1976) Adolf Hitler, New York.  Ballantine books, p.131.

35 Letter from James Madison to W.T. Barry (August 4, 1832), reprinted in The Complete Madison, S. Padower, ed. 1953, p. 337.

VIDEO: New Film to Expose Muslim Persecution of Christians

The ethnic and religious purging of Christians today is exactly like Hitler’s ethnic cleansing of Jews in WWII,” [film director Peter] Spencer said. “True Christians are today obligated to rescue the perishing from the blades of [the Islamic State].”

Brave and bold words, and all too rare in America these days, where naming the evil is all but illegal. The ‘Orange Resistance Movement’ seem like a strong and creative response to Muslim persecution of Christians in the Middle East and Africa. Judging from the endorsements on Mr. Spencer’s site, the message seems to be catching on among Christians and Jews. Let’s hope so.

“Filmmaker’s ‘Chilling’ Warning About the Islamic State and His Message to ‘True Christians’ About Why They Must Fight Back,” by Billy Hallowell, The Blaze, September 17, 2015:

The writer and director of a feature film about a group of young people who fought to save the innocent during the Holocaust has unveiled a new movement aimed at raising awareness about the dire religious persecution of Christians in the Middle East.

Peter Spencer, director of “Return to the Hiding Place” — the sequel to Billy Graham’s “The Hiding Place” — exclusively told The Blaze about his new Orange Resistance effort to rescue Christians being harmed by the Islamic State, and the “chilling similarities” that he sees between what’s happening now and the horrors that unfolded during the Holocaust.

“The ethnic and religious purging of Christians today is exactly like Hitler’s ethnic cleansing of Jews in WWII,” Spencer said. “True Christians are today obligated to rescue the perishing from the blades of [the Islamic State].”

The Orange Resistance movement is named for the both the color of the jumpsuits worn by victims of Islamic State extremists and for the Netherlands’ historic association with orange; the setting of the ”Return to the Hiding Place,” which is based, in part, on Dutch Christian Corrie ten Boom’s heroic acts to save Jews in the Netherlands.

Spencer said that the campaign will employ a number of tactics to get the word out about the plight of Middle Eastern Christians.

“We are working with denominations across the country to schedule screenings of our film followed by a panel discussing the terrifying parallels between Nazi Germany’s extermination of the Jews and the current hate-onslaught of [the Islamic State] and their mission to liquidate Christians, starting in the Middle East,” he said. “Groups won’t even need to sell tickets to the event.”

“Return to the Hiding Place,” which is based on a true story, tells of ten Boom’s refuge for Jews, as well as an “army of untrained teenagers” who helped rescue the most vulnerable from the horrors of the Holocaust.

“We know viewers, often intimidated and discouraged by today’s frightening news will see this film and be mobilized, encouraged that there is hope,” Spencer told The Blaze. “Resistance is not futile … even one person can make a revolutionary difference.”

Spencer will also be selling Orange Resist shirts and bracelets in an effort to raise money to help organizations that are actively working to rescue Christians from the region, while also featuring these organizations in special video posts that will be distributed via social media.

The goal, Spencer said, is to cause “America to become aware and involved in politically vocalizing the need to intervene on behalf of Christians and Jews worldwide experiencing a second holocaust.”

“The only hope for coping is by taking action. The only way we can cope is if solutions are at hand,” he said. “These solutions will not present themselves — we have to stand and fight, get behind the cause, and put our resources into saving lives today.”

Spencer invited people to learn more about Orange Resistance here, and to purchase copies of “Return to the Hiding Place” here.

Watch the trailer for ‘Return To The Hiding Place’ here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Russian Foreign Ministry: Coalition only simulating anti-terrorist efforts

New York Muslim: “I’m ready to die for the Caliphate, prison is nothing”

Jihadists of Tomorrow

european nazisAnti-Semitism is growing among German Muslim students. Following Koranic teachings, the early childhood brainwashing, and school books rife with politically biased indoctrination, these students openly declared that they will kill Jews, specifically threatening Max Moses Bonifer, student spokesman for the school system in Offenbach, Germany, a city of more than 16,000 Muslims. Teenage students in Landsberg, near Leipzig, were reported to be using Nazi slogans, and greeting “Heil Hitler,” with some sporting Hitlerian moustaches. Yet, despite the increase in anti-Semitism, Muslim and other immigrant students were exempted from partaking in the concentration camp visits required with the Holocaust educational programs.

”Severe intolerance and hatred does not happen overnight,” explains Dr. Tawfik Hamid, himself under threat from his co-religionists for teaching a peaceful understanding of Islam. “The indoctrination process, incremental and subtle, occurs in three stages – hatred, suppression of conscience, and desensitization to or acceptance of violence.”  It is completed when the formerly young and innocent are capable of violence without remorse, no different than the Muslims who attacked synagogues in Germany after Israel’s “Operation Protective Edge” against Hamas, or the Nazis who participated in the Kristallnacht pogrom of November 10, 1938.

The hate and intolerance of the Koran is reinforced during prayers five times daily.  Beginning in early childhood, toddlers are taught to behead dolls, and young men delight in the worst animal cruelty that Australians have ever witnessed being done to their exported cattle.  Films from Gaza show Palestinians “kneecapping” the cattle, stabbing their eyes, and hacking their throats open on the streets.  Severe animal suffering precedes the slaughter of animals for the celebration of Eid Al-adha or Feast of Sacrifice (it also generates an extraordinary cash windfall for some of Pakistan’s most dangerous militant groups).

These Muslim German students, along with their agitating professors, should be learning about the Holocaust through newsreels, books, and visits to the concentration camps.  The excuse that their culture had nothing to do with this period of history is both untrue and irrelevant; history shows that Arabs were in lockstep with the Nazis. Islam, like Nazism, is an ideology that teaches superiority and subordination, consigning slaves, women, Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians and others to different levels of humiliation and wretchedness.  It is their theological imperative that Jews (and Christians) be subservient to Muslims; the success of infidels is an insult to Allah.  Therefore, the chants and false accusations of “settlements,” “apartheid,” “colonizers,” “occupation,” are diversions and key words needed to trigger hatred and violence against Jews and Christians worldwide, as they have throughout their history.

Mohammed’s wrath began with the Jews, who remained faithful to the Torah and rejected the Koran – with its more than 100 verses advocating the use of violence to spread Islam, and 123 verses about killing and fighting. .It continued when Muslims encountered the formidable Christian opposition in Eastern and Western Europe. Massacres were conducted when Christians primarily (but Jews, as well) earned “too much” wealth and power in Granada (1066), and when Christian communities in Middle Eastern countries identified with Crusaders.  Muslims killed the Mongols, who had earlier destroyed their caliphate, together with their Christian and Jewish collaborators.  Envy was a consequence of their teachings, causing Muslims to rage and slaughter when they noted the superior economic status of Christians in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Therefore, in 164 verses, the Koran encourages jihad and looting from their victims, so that they may own what belongs to their perceived enemy.  True to character, Muslims are unable to tolerate Israel’s superiority, the achievements of a mere 67 years of statehood.  It is not about settlements or deeds but a deep-seated envy, exemplified by the Khomeinist International Union of Resistance conference held in Beirut (May, 2015).  Resentful Muslim scholars came together to formally accuse Israel of all Islamic nations’ failures.  The attendees admitted that they wished to “counter the arrogant world,” a reminder of their shame for not achieving the greatness of the West, the greatness they’d been promised in their Scriptures.

In a warped attempt to reverse their feelings of inadequacy, Muslims destroyed the World Trade Center in New York, as well as antiquities, artifacts and shrines worldwide. To overcome their deficiency, they produced an extensive, extravagant museum exhibit that lays claim to “1001 Inventions, the Enduring Legacy of Muslim Civilisation,” many of which (perhaps all) may be traced to the ingenuity and industry of their conquered and forcibly-converted victims.

Islamists called Israel “arrogant” for being first responders to people who suffer from natural disasters (earthquakes, tsunamis, fires, famine) and for providing medical care to the victims of Islamic unrest (including surgery for Mahmoud Abbas’s wife and medical treatment for a Hamas leader’s sister).  They sent no humanitarian aid to the infidel victims, but accused Israel of harvesting organs of the dead in Haiti when, in fact, families showed their gratitude for their care by naming their newborns “Israel.”

These desert people, whose Sharia law, ironically, is named for “the way of water,” have just witnessed Israel’s new capability of recycling water, producing enough to make their land flourish with food, and having more than enough potable water for themselves and a generous supply for wasteful Palestinians, (more than required by the Oslo Accord. California is already using Israeli water technology to combat its worst drought in history.  Muslims are seething with resentment, yet the achievements that earn praise in the Islamic world are terrorist attacks.  They cannot stand to be upstaged, but hope only to be the “best” when everyone else is gone.

In a June, 1938 letter, the Syrian Alawites told the French prime minister that the new Zionists “brought prosperity over Palestine without damage to anyone or taking anything by force,” and American historian Walter Laqueur noted, “No one doubted that the Arabs had benefited from Jewish immigration.” (The Arab population almost doubled between 1917 and 1940, wages increased, and the standard of living rose higher than anywhere else in the Middle East.)  Still, Israel’s contributions made some Arab leaders in the Palestinian area become increasingly hostile to the Jewish community. Many affiliated with the rising Nazi movement, incited and instigated mob attacks against the Jews in 1920, ’21, ’29, and 1936-1939.

The connection between Islam and Nazism is undeniable. Palestinian Arab leader Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, an admirer of Adolph Hitler, recruited a Bosnian-Muslim Waffen SS unit, the notorious “Hanjar troopers,” that slaughtered 90% of Bosnia’s Jews and burned countless Serbian churches and villages.  SS chief Heinrich Himmler favored the recruits and established a special Mullah Military school in Dresden.

Anti-Semitism among these German-Muslim students has become critical and life-threatening, and continues as they fail to integrate into their host society.  German Chancellor Angela Merkel said, “It is absolutely necessary to counteract religious and political indoctrination among Muslim youth.”  These words should have been spoken and acted upon yesterday, because the Muslim children of today have been groomed to become the jihadists of tomorrow.    

An Auschwitz Anniversary

There was some serious irony when U.S. Secretary of Treasury Jack Lew gathered together with French President Francois Hollande and a Russian delegation led by Sergei Ivanov, Putin’s chief of staff, along with leaders from Germany and Austria to participate in the January 27 ceremony commemorating the liberation of Auschwitz in 1945 by Russian troops.

I suspect that an entire generation or two born after that year, 70 years ago, may have little or no knowledge of what Auschwitz was. It was a Nazi death camp located in Oswiecim, Poland. Its full name was Auschwitz-Birkenau and it is estimated that one million people, mostly Jews, were killed there.

I say “irony” because Auschwitz-Birkenau was part of a system of six Nazi death camps that included Belzac, Chelmo, Majdanek, Sobibor and Treblinka. Each camp was filled with the victims of a widespread anti-Semitism that had existed in Europe for two thousand years, so it was not difficult for the Germans to turn a blind eye or the French and others to provide assistance in rounding up their Jews.

Jews - Nazi starThe camps engaged in large scale murder to fulfil Adolf Hitler’s intention to exterminate every Jew in Europe. In 1933 there had been nine million living in 21 nations that would be occupied during World War II. By 1945, two out of every three European Jews had been killed.

In addition to the Jews, an estimated five million others deemed enemies of the state for political or other reasons such as being Communists, trade unionists, gypsies or homosexuals also died in the camps.

What is rarely acknowledged is that the Europeans of that era were largely educated, had a rich culture of music, literature, and drama, and many were church-goers. In short, you would not have been able to tell them apart from the Europeans of today.

The Nazis wrote the book on the use of terrorism to facilitate their barbaric, murderous theology of death. The Muslims that have moved to Europe have adapted it to their own ends, seeking like the Nazis to become globally dominant. They don’t have death camps—yet—but the widespread and constant slaughter in which they are engaged has a similar feel to it.

In the 1930s those European Jews had few places to which to flee. They were not even that welcome in America where anti-Semitism was widespread. Those that could did emigrate and, again there is irony because several of the German physicists that came to the U.S. were instrumental in the creation of the atomic bomb that ended World War II while others played roles in the Nazi’s defeat during the war. One such emigrant, Albert Einstein, was the first to suggest the creation of the weapon to Franklin Roosevelt.

In response to European anti-Semitism, a movement called Zionism had begun before World War II with the intention of reestablishing Israel as a Jewish state where Jews could be safe. The movement was founded by Theodor Herzl in 1896. Here again there is irony because the movement was dominated by secular Jews who were not motivated by Jewish history or the Torah. What they wanted was to be free of the oppressive antipathy of the nations in which they lived. What they were seeking was emancipation.

By the time World War II occurred they were a force to be recognized in Israel, known at the time as the Palestinian Mandate and run by the British who, as often as not, shared the anti-Semitism that had given life to the Zionist movement. It would take the Holocaust to accelerate the movement of Europe’s surviving Jews to Israel which in 1948 declared its sovereignty and was immediately attacked by the Muslim nations surrounding it.

Fast forward to our times and the Jews of Israel as well as those around the world know one truth. If Iran is permitted to reach a point where it can create its own nuclear weapons and put them on their missiles, Israel will only be minutes away from an extermination that the Iranian leadership and the other Muslim nations of the Middle East have openly called for since Israel came into being and the Islamic Revolution took control of Iran in 1979.

This time, however, the same nuclear weapons that would destroy Israel would also be turned on the United States because the shouts of “Death to America. Death to Israel” are a part of the daily lives of the Iranians, as well as others in the region.

What makes these days so dangerous is that the United States of America is engaged in negotiations with an Iran that has never made a secret of their intention to be a nuclear-armed nation. What makes these days so dangerous is that the President of the United States has barely hidden his own anti-Semitism and animus toward Israel.

One can only pray that seventy years hence some other writer will not be commenting on the second great annihilation of the Jews, literally within the lifetime of people who were alive during the first one. I am one of those people and Auschwitz is not some place that existed a long time ago. It was yesterday.

© Alan Caruba, 2015

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Auschwitz death camp survivor Jadwiga Bogucka (maiden name Regulska), 89, registered with camp number 86356, holds a picture of herself from 1944 in Warsaw January 12, 2015. Reuters.

Watch “Night Will Fall” about Nazi Atrocities During the Holocaust

Children who Survived  Auschwitz  Source AP

Jewish Children liberated at Auschwitz, February 1945. Source : Archives of the US National Holocaust Memorial.

On January 27, 1945 forward units of the 100th Rifle Division of the 1st Ukrainian Front entered the Auschwitz Birkenau death camp precinct liberating several thousand remaining survivors. More than 1.1 million were murdered there by the Nazi SS, 1 million of them Jews. Among the first groups they encountered in the remaining barracks were children, twins, victims of the ‘angel of death, Dr. Josef Mengele’s sadistic medical experiments. The Russian troopers in their white camouflage coats hugged and gave them chocolate. These Jewish children hadn’t felt any humane treatment during their enforced incarceration in Auschwitz.

Earlier in January 1945 the SS blew up the remaining crematoria. An earlier one was destroyed in the lone heroic resistance effort by Jews inside the camp in October 1944 with dynamite secured by Jewish women inmates.  The SS guards assembled more than 60,000 camp inmates  in January 1945 who  sent on a forced death march from which only 12,000 survived.  One of the survivors of that death march was the Nobel Laureate Eli Wiesel who as a youth of 16 was eventually liberated by the US Army at Buchenwald in April 1945. Another Nobel Prize winner and Holocaust survivor was Italian Jewish resistance fighter, chemist and author Primo Levi who received his Nobel award for Literature, posthumously in 2002. Levi fell to his death in his family home in Turin in 1987, some say depressed by the atrocities  he had witnessed. Wiesel’s biographic works about his experience at Auschwitz the forced march and liberation were memorialized in his trilogy Night, Dawn and Day. Levi’s Survival in Auschwitz: if this is a Man was testimony to the Nazi dehumanization and perseverance to survive and return home.

Israelis at Auschwitz-Birkenau Source AP

Israelis at Auschwitz-Birkenau. Source:  AP.

Another 5 million Jews didn’t survive.  They were murdered in unspeakable ways in the einstazgruppen slaughter in Russia, death camps in Germany and occupied Europe.  Their fate in the Final Solution was ratified by the SS at the Wansee Conference in Berlin on January 20, 1942. The objective of the SS Conference was to make Europe judenrein. Among the Six Million European Jews murdered were 1.5 million children. The Jewish children those Russian troops encountered at Auschwitz on January 27, 1945 were among the lucky survivors.

Palestinian leads 2015 UN International Holocaust Memorial at Auschwitz Birkenau

Tuesday, January 27, 2015 is the 10th annual UN International Holocaust Memorial Day. Ynet.com  drew attention that this year’s  annual commemoration with be headed by a Palestinian UN official.  Maher Nasser will host the event,  Palestinian to host UN International Holocaust Remembrance Day to be held at the site of the death camps at Auschwitz- Birkenau in Poland.  Nasser was  born in Albrieh, a village near Ramallah. The 25 year UN bureaucrat   held posts in Gaza and  Jerusalem. eHeh HH He  now holds a management position in the UN Department of Public Information.  Ironic  in that the Haj Amin al Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, fled to Berlin from Baghdad  following the Farhud, the Nazi-Arab massacre of Jews  in 1941.  The  was welcomed as  Hitler’s house guest during WWII. He  promoted  the genocide of Six Million European Jewish men, women and Children and sponsoring the recruitment of Muslim Waffen SS units in the Balkans.

UN Secretary General Ban-ki Moon will attend.   Israel’s President Reuven Rivlin will lead an Israeli delegation.  Rivlin will speak about the rise of Global Anti-Semitism and the threat of Islamic Jihadism. More than 100 Holocaust and Russian veterans will also attend the ceremonies at Auschwitz. In the Israeli delegation will be former Israeli Foreign Minister Sylvan Shalom  in 2005 proposed the UN commemoration of the Holocaust  to “honor of the six million Jews, 1 million Gypsies, 250,000 disabled people, and 9,000 homosexual men murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators.”

The Auschwitz-Birkenau UN commemoration of the Holocaust may not be televised. However, on the eve of International Holocaust Memorial Day, January 26th,  at 9:00 PM EST, HBO  will show a documentary on  Nazi atrocities, Night Will Fall.   It is based  on archival footage taken by British military photographers and cinematographers following the liberation of Nazi concentration camp, Bergen –Belsen in April 1945.  Famed Hollywood film director Alfred Hitchcock was briefly involved with the original British documentary in 1945.

Marlow Stern in his Daily Beast review of Night Will FallInside Alfred Hitchcock’s Lost Holocaust Documentary,” noted how the original project and Hitchock’s involvement came about:

Back in 1945, Sidney Bernstein, the chief of the Psychological Warfare Film Section of the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force, was commissioned to create the definitive documentary chronicling the liberation of the Nazi concentration camps. Bernstein’s aim was, in his words, to “prove one day that this had actually happened” and have it serve as “a lesson to all mankind as well as to the Germans.”

He eventually roped in his good pal, Alfred Hitchcock, to serve as the film’s supervising director. But the horrifying and heartbreaking footage of numerous concentration camps, shot by British, American, and Russian World War II soldiers as they were being liberated, became tangled up in a complicated web of politics and artistic rows. A magnificent new HBO documentary pulls back the veil on the making of German Concentration Camps: Factual Survey.

The eye-opening film-on-a-film, Night Will Fall, will premiere January 26 on HBO. It is narrated by Helena Bonham Carter, produced by Stephen Frears and Brett Ratner, and directed by Andre Singer, who serves as president of The Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain.  Singer executive producer  of  the documentaries The Act of Killing and Werner Herzog’s Into the Abyss. It was done in concert with London’s Imperial War Museum, and took 18 months of poring over thousands of feet of film to trace the making of the unmade epic.

[…]

The British soldiers found tens of thousands of emaciated prisoners inside the camp, many of whom were on the brink of death by starvation. The camera lingers on piles of naked, skeletal corpses stacked several bodies high, as well as line after line of dead children. A total of 30,000 corpses were witnessed by Allied troops, according to the film. Singer managed to track down several British soldiers who were there, and some break down in tears recalling the horrors.

“It’s very difficult to describe,” recalls survivor Anita Lasker-Wallfisch, who was 19 when Bergen-Belsen was liberated. “You’ve spent years preparing yourself to die, and you’re still here. Every British soldier looked like a God to us.”

night will fall poster 2Alissa Simon in her August 2014 Variety  review of Night Will fall, reported that,  “rather than wait, the impatient American government commissioned [Hollywood director]  Billy Wilder to use their footage [from German Concentration Camps Factual Survey] . Singer includes an excerpt of Wilder’s short film, Death Mills, intended for German and Austrian audiences, and clips from an interview with Wilder.”

Dorothy Rabinowitz in her Wall Street Journal review of Night Will Fall: Nazi Crimes on Film  explains why the original footage of the British film languished in the vaults of the Imperial War Museum (IWM) after excerpts were shown in the Nuremberg Trial of Nazi leaders:

Still, despite the stellar talents and authority of its creators, the film would be stored, rather than seen. Though its footage would provide some of the most damning testimony presented at the Nuremberg war crimes [trials].  It would be housed, from 1952 on, in the archives of the Imperial War Museum. Then four years ago the IWM undertook the enormous task of restoring and digitizing the documentary, along with the long-missing sixth reel. “Night Will Fall,” a new documentary about the historic film, leaves no question as to the reason it was withheld. Its commentators note that the British government then, whose policy was to bar any flow of European Jews to Palestine, was not eager to present a film that would create a great deal of sympathy for these survivors, as such a film surely would.

These graphic revelations of the Nazi final solution atrocities against millions of Jews and others should be a warning of the primary objective of the Global Jihad movement:  the annihilation of Jews, Christians and minority religions sought by Muslim extremists, following the way of Allah.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

ISIS is beheading children, and Obama drops two bombs

During my morning run, I pondered last night’s address by President Obama regarding the current situation in Iraq. What immediately struck me was that Obama spent more time talking about what he did not want to do than really defining what needed to be done.

Everyone is talking about an F/A-18 aircraft striking an ISIS artillery piece — hardly a strategic objective. This does back up what Obama so narrowly defined last night as his intent – address the threat to Americans in Irbil and Baghdad. I am pleased that we took the action to provide humanitarian relief.

The president was very careful in his words, and they were mostly political – not practical. But Obama was more adamant in declaring what he is not going to do — meaning the enemy has been provided a gap to exploit.

However, why was Barack Hussein Obama in such a rush to provide U.S. military resources in Libya supporting Islamist forces? We were told it was a humanitarian crisis, but it seems now hardly so. And please, don’t tell me it was just NATO — America is NATO. And now Americans know Libya as the place where an ambassador and three other Americans were killed in a terrorist attack, our embassy has been evacuated, and as we reported here, the same Islamists we supported have established a caliphate in eastern Libya.

Last night, President Obama had the chance to define a clear and present evil in our time. ISIS represents the Nazis of this century. There is no clearer portrayal of 7th century barbarism than this movement which we have allowed to gain strength, momentum and victory. Its blitz across Syria and Iraq can easily be compared to that of the 20th century blitzkrieg of Hitler. And the savagery being inflicted is beyond belief — consider the marking of Christian homes — history does repeat itself.

President Obama hid behind the excuse of Iraqi government reconciliation — destroying ISIS is not linked to the success or failure of Iraq’s governance. The destruction of ISIS is a global imperative — and someone has to lead. President Obama referred last night to opening discussions with other partners, the UN (who backs Hamas), and I suppose he will chat with a local Kiwanis Club and the Boy Scouts. Last night was a moment where Barack Hussein Obama could have shown Churchill-like leadership — instead he took the cautious path of Neville Chamberlain. And again, why was he so anxious in Libya and not now?

There is a quote, sometimes attributed to Sir Edmund Burke: “all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” In the grander scheme, bombing some artillery pieces is doing nothing. If I were Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi listening to Obama last night — and trust me he was – he isn’t threatened. Evil has knocked on Barack Obama’s door on his watch. You can’t just turn up the volume on the TV inside and attempt to ignore it. Frankly, it’s like Obama turned on the sprinkler system to try and scare it away.

Would you like more detail on the evil we face? How about the fact that ISIS is actually beheading children.

In the interview with CNN’s Jonathan Mann, Chaldean-American businessman Mark Arabo said that the “world hasn’t seen an evil like this for generations.” “There is a park in Mosul, where [ISIS] they actually beheaded children and put their heads on a stick and have them in the park,” he explained. “More children are getting beheaded, mothers are getting raped and killed, and fathers are being hung.”

Last night Obama could have made the case for that evil – but he did not. We hear that compassion means allowing illegals to invade America. We condemn Israel for defending itself against a declared Islamic terrorist organization that exists to destroy it — and will dig tunnels under Israeli kindergartens to do it. In ISIS we have the embodiment of evil and we have a tongued-tied President Obama who just will not say it is so.

ISIS is not something that just appeared over night. This monstrosity has festered over almost a year — and the Obama administration has watched. I’ve been on the battlefields of the 21st Century. The enemy only understands one language: the language of strength. Unfortunately that was not spoken last night by President Barack Hussein Obama.

All you needed to say last night, Mr. President, was this:

“I must apologize for allowing this evil to be born and grow. I ran as a president who wanted to end wars. I now realize my campaign promises and personal desires are not of any consideration, because the enemy also has a vote.

The Islamic State represents the most reprehensible evil the world has seen since that of Nazi Germany — and the world did nothing then. I shall not allow this on my watch. America will lead and we shall destroy this 7th century barbarism. Tonight, I am committing American military power to kill ISIS, wherever it is. If America sees the black flag we shall kill those who raise it.

First however, we will rescue the Yazidi and Christians trapped in the Sinjar mountains — and we shall kill any ISIS forces impeding that objective. Then in concert with our Kurdish allies, we will begin a committed offensive operation to ensure that Islamic totalitarianism and jihadism is defeated. God bless liberty and freedom. God bless America….and God curse ISIS.”

Sadly, that was not said, and the situation is even more confused than ever.

RELATED ARTICLE: Horror – Anglican Vicar of Baghdad: “Child I Baptized Cut in Half by ISIS”

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on AllenBWest.com.

Common Core Assignment: Think Like a Nazi and Explain Why Jews Are Evil

[youtube]http://youtu.be/xD-Fm8P8Ig8[/youtube]

An essay assigned to 10th graders, at Albany High School, is at the center of controversy after students were asked to ‘think like a Nazi’. Students were assigned a persuasive writing essay where the teacher asked them to “pretend I’m a member of the government in Nazi Germany”, the handout obtained by CBS Channel 6 said.

The assignment went on to say “convince me you are loyal to the Nazis by writing an essay to convince me Jews are evil and the source of our problems.” Albany’ Superintendent, Dr. Marguerite Vanden Wyngaard, called the assignment “ill-conceived and inappropriate.” “How could you ask a student to justify prejudice leading to genocide,” said Dr. Vanden Wyngaard. “It is an illogical thing for a student to have to do. It doesn’t make any sense.” The teacher, whose name is not being released by the district, will not be teaching while a decision is being made on what consequences there will be, said Dr. Vanden Wyngaard. “It can go anywhere from a letter of council, a letter reprimand, all the way through to termination there is a broad spectrum,” said Dr. Vanden Wyngaard on the possible sanctions against the teacher. “I will not make that decision within the 24 hours because the spectrum is too big.”

The assignment didn’t make sense to the head of the Holocaust Survivors and Friends Education Center, in Albany, officials said Friday. They were disappointed but looked at the incident as an opportunity to educate both students and teachers going forward. “I was totally shocked when I learned this morning that anyone would have such an unbalanced lesson and grade students teaching racist anti semitic views,” said Shelly Shapiro, Director, Holocaust Survivors and Friends Education Center.

This story first broke back in April when The Times Union reported, via Poor Richard’s News:

Think like a Nazi, the assignment required students. Argue why Jews are evil.

Students in some Albany High School English classes were asked this week as part of a persuasive writing assignment to make an abhorrent argument: “You must argue that Jews are evil, and use solid rationale from government propaganda to convince me of your loyalty to the Third Reich!”

Students were asked to watch and read Nazi propaganda, then pretend their teacher was a Nazi government official who needed to be convinced of their loyalty. In five paragraphs, they were required to prove that Jews were the source of Germany’s problems.

The exercise was intended to challenge students to formulate a persuasive argument and was given to three classes, Albany Superintendent Marguerite Vanden Wyngaard said. She said the assignment should have been worded differently.

“I would apologize to our families,” she said. “I don’t believe there was malice or intent to cause any insensitivities to our families of Jewish faith.”

One-third of the students refused to complete the assignment, she said.

Vanden Wyngaard said the exercise reflects the type of writing expected of students under the new Common Core curriculum, the tough new academic standards that require more sophisticated writing. Such assignments attempt to connect English with history and social studies.