PAGE - 7 THE ROOTS OF ANTI-SEMITISM - 1 ECONOMIC EXPLOITATION I dedicate this work to Dr. Israel Shahak, a Jewish holocaust survivor and Israeli citizen who showed the moral and intellectual courage to challenge the Jewish Supremacism that endangers both Jews and Gentiles.

David Duke You can purchase a handy little copy of David Duke's original PDF book here - Just 3.26 Mb 368 pages - plus illustrations. At $15 it's an essential buy !!

[Anti-Semitism] is an understandable reaction to Jewish defects – Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism (From his diaries, as quoted by Arthur Kornberg 296) When I became aware of the existence of Jewish Supremacism and its powerful influence in the United States government and the American media, I spoke openly about it. In a high school civics-class I remarked that Jewish bureaucrats who authored American Mideast policy had a potential conflict of interest. In an effort to quickly dismiss me, my teacher quickly pointed out that the President of the United States was a Gentile. I recounted to her what I thought was an impressive list of important government positions that were held by Zionist Jews who would likely put Israel’s interests over that of strategic American interests.

My teacher, frustrated in trying to rebut my points, dropped an intellectual atomic bomb. “That’s the kind of sentiment that led to the deaths of six million Jews,” she said. “You don’t want to give us the impression that you’re an anti-Semite, do you?” The usually restless and boisterous class became still, and I fell silent. I feared being accused of Anti-Semitism. What was Anti-Semitism? Had I become an anti-Semite for simply opposing elements of Jewish Supremacism? That very afternoon I went to the school library and found some books on Anti-Semitism. Jews wrote all of them, and from what I could discern, most of the writers were Zionists. I looked up Anti- Semitism in the four encyclopedias on the library shelves, and found that all of the articles on Anti-Semitism had Jewish authors. As illustrated by the popular Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia by Funk and Wagnall's, they are still authoring almost all the articles on anti-Semitism. The Encarta article on Anti-Semitism has a Jewish author, Nahum Norbert Glatzer, a revered scholar in the Jewish community and author of the very supremacist and ethnocentric Jewish History. Encarta also has a recommended reading list on Anti- Semitism. I reproduce it here.

Bein, Alex. The Jewish Question: Biography of a World Problem. Fairleigh Dickinson, 1990. History of Anti-Semitism world-wide. Belth, Nathan C. A Promise to Keep: A Narrative of the American Encounter with Anti-Semitism. Various publishers. Historical account of Anti-Semitism in America and Anti-Defamation League efforts to combat it; for general readers. Furet, François, ed. Unanswered Questions: Nazi Germany and the Genocide of the Jews. Schocken, 1989. Balanced collection of essays covering a variety of issues on the Nazis and Jews of Europe. (“balanced”? It is anything but balanced) Gerber, David A., ed. Anti-Semitism in American History. Illinois, 1986. Collection of essays focusing on hostility towards Jews in America. Katz, Jacob. From Prejudice to Destruction: Anti-Semitism, 1700-1933. Harvard, 1980, 1982. Recommended historical survey of Anti-Semitism in France, Austria, Germany, and Hungary. Lewis, Bernard. Semites and Anti-Semites: An Inquiry Into Conflict and Prejudice. Norton, 1987. Analysis of Anti-Semitism in the Islamic World. Poliakov, Leon. The History of Anti-Semitism. 3v. Vanguard, 1964-75. V.1, Christ to Court Jews; V.2, Mohammed to Marranos; V.3, Voltaire to Wagner; V.4, Suicidal Europe, 1870-1933; translated from the French. Reinharz, Jehuda, ed. Living With Anti-Semitism: Modern Jewish Responses. Brandeis Books/University Press of New England, 1987. Essays on varied reactions over 200 years, arranged geographically.297 The theme common to the article and all Jewish-authored books recommended by the encyclopedia is rather simple: Throughout history, Jews have been innocent victims of evil Gentiles. In hundreds of civil, national, and religious reactions against the Jews outlined by these books, there is never a hint that Jews could have done anything of a disreputable nature. They were always innocent little lambs led to the slaughter. Christians, Muslims, Zoroastrians, Pagans and other antagonists are all said to be motivated by religious or ethnic intolerance and hatred of Jews. The books also argue that innocent Jews are universally made into scapegoats for social and economic problems. Just so the reader understands that Encarta is not an exception, I also reproduce here the suggested reading list at the end of Grolier’s Encyclopedia’s article on Anti-Semitism.298 Erich Rosenthal wrote its article and presumably picked out the reading list. Bibliography: Almog, Shmuel, Anti-Semitism through the Ages (1988) Arendt, Hannah, The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951; repr. 1983) Curtis, Michael, ed., Anti-Semitism. (1986) Katz, Jacob, From Prejudice to Destruction (1980) in the Contemporary World (1985); Dinnerstein, Leonard, Anti-Semitism in America (1994; repr. 1995) Gager, J. G., The Origins of Anti-Semitism (1983) Gerber, D. A., ed., Anti-Semitism in American History Poliakov, Leon. The History of Anti-Semitism, 4 vols. Aren’t these suggested reading lists equivalent to recommending articles on the Arab-Israeli conflict written only by Palestinians or articles on anti-Communism written only by Communists?

It is suggested by some of the authors that inherent Jewish superiority in ability and morals causes Gentiles to be jealous and spiteful. Many books on Anti-Semitism even argue that Anti- Semitism is a manifestation of mental illness and that it is an inherent defect among Gentiles. In discussing the almost universal, oftrepeated anti-Jewish attitudes of the past 2,000 years, Glatzer, Rosenthal, and the other writers fail to recognize a few things. They never make the slightest suggestion that the Jewish people may have been at least in part responsible for the repeated negative reactions to them. One would also never suspect that Jews themselves held any intolerant attitudes toward Christians and other Gentiles. Without exception, in every conflict between Jews and Gentiles, the Gentiles and Christians are depicted as evil, while the Jews are depicted as paragons of goodness.299 300 301 302

Glatzner, Rosenthal, and the other Jewish partisans have a onesided point of view. None of their books mention that the negative Christian reaction to Judaism arose out of the Jewish anti-Gentile rhetoric of the Talmud and the persecution of early Christians by Jews such as Paul (Saul) until his conversion. Viciously anti-Gentile, Jewish teachings long predated the anti-Jewish Christian writers. None of these Jewish authors mention this important fact.

The more I read, the more I realized that the articles and books castigating Europeans as anti-Semites are racist in the most pejorative sense. To portray a race of people as inherently psychotic and murderous is just about the worst thing someone can say about a race. And yet, the mainstream Jewish media characterizes European Christians precisely that way. And, it must be said that the media also categorizes Palestinians and Arabs in the most unflattering ways. So this is how I am supposed to get to the truth about Anti-Semitism, I thought. Jewish chauvinists must explain it to me. If that is good logic, then we might as well learn about the Second World War only from the perspective of Nazis or the history of the Palestinian people only from followers of Menachem Begin. How could anyone discover the truth about the causes of the Gentile-Jewish conflict from reading only the Jewish side of it, or from only those Gentiles who endorse the Jewish view? Gentile writers cannot help but learn quickly that there are great advantages to adopting the Jewish point of view to get their books accepted by major publishers or reviewed in the thoroughly Jewish New York Times Book Review. The same is true if they want to be interviewed on programs such as the Jewish-produced Today Show. And, of course, they must promote philo-Semitism for their works to become “recommended reading” by the encyclopedias. Why, in all the mainstream media, are people not allowed to hear the reasonable view that Anti-Semitism has frequently been a reaction to Jewish Supremacism and misanthropy? Certainly, there have been intolerant outbreaks of Anti-Semitism in which innocent Jews have suffered or died. That being said, we must also acknowledge that Jews have had more than their share of anti-Gentile intolerance. However, we never hear about the Jewish excesses. To end the recurring cycles of Anti-Semitism, we must try to learn its real causes.

Is Anti-Semitism an irrational response that finds its genesis in the mental pathology of its adherents, or does it find its origin as an understandable reaction to Jewish behaviors? It is reasonable to think that Jewish supremacy and Anti-Semitism nourished each other over the generations, ultimately producing the modern horrors of the Second World War, the Holocaust and Zionist imperialism. The conflict may well reach a dehumanizing crescendo in the 21st century unless we learn the true roots of the conflict between Jew and Gentile. To understand what has motivated Gentile opposition to Jews as a group, it is important to be aware of Jewish patterns of behavior that Glatzner and other authorities on Anti-Semitism fail to acknowledge. So-called anti-Semites have alleged over the centuries that, as a group, Jews have disproportionately engaged in unethical and exploitative practices such as usury, the slave trade, prostitution, fraudulent business schemes and various other criminal enterprises. Many have alleged that Jews use unethical business practices and collusion to gain control over commerce. Anti-Semites have charged that many historic examples exist of Jews collaborating with the foreign enemies of their host nations. Charges of Jewish disloyalty have been voiced since the time of their sojourn in Egypt, and have continued to the present day. The case of convicted Israeli spy, Jonathan Pollard, is a recent example.

It was time for me to dig into the roots of Anti-Semitism. Religious Intolerance or Economic Resentment? When I delved into the great body of popular Jewish authors on Anti-Semitism, two themes emerged. The first and most popular theme is that Anti-Semitism stems from the fact that Gentiles blame Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus. To quote the Encarta Encyclopedia, “Jews from the fourth century and perhaps even before then were viewed as the killers of Jesus Christ.” Another theme of Jewish and philo-Jewish writers is that Anti-Semitism arose from Gentile jealousy of Jewish economic and social success. Jewish writer Arthur Hertzberg shows how blaming Anti-Semitism on Christian intolerance has a strategic advantage:

To blame Christianity and only Christianity for most Anti- Semitism has certain advantages for Jews. Their sufferings through the centuries can be conceived as noble martyrdom; the attacks on Jews are not to be connected with their own distinctive beliefs, culture, and patterns of behavior, and in some cases their faults, but only with their faith. –Arthur Hertzberg 303 Thorough study of historical Jewish-Gentile interaction reveals that blaming the crucifixion of Christ on the Jews had only a minor role in ancient and modern Anti-Semitism. For instance, biblical passages asserting that Jews crucified Jesus Christ did not prevent Christians from trying to convert Jews and bring them into the Christian community. Obviously, the Christian Church did not see Jews as irredeemable because of the actions of their pharisaic ancestors. Early multiethnic Christians opposed Jews not on the basis of race or ethnicity, but primarily because of Jewish beliefs and practices. In regard to religion, Jews as a group were opposed primarily because of the intractable anti-Christian and anti-Gentile character of the Talmud and concomitant anti-Christian acts — illustrated by the mass persecution and murder of Christians by the emperor Nero’s Jewish mistress, Poppaea Sabina.304 305 In stark contrast to the ethnically more tolerant Christians, Jews based their opposition to Gentiles on race. While Christians repeatedly tried to convert Jews, Jews made no real attempt to convert Christians. Instead, they erected barriers to conversion, and the small number of Gentiles who did convert were designated, according to Jewish law, as bastards. Jewish priests were forbidden to marry Jews who were converts or even descendants of converts, a policy still in effect today. 306 In all of Jewish history in Western civilization there is not one Gentile convert who became a significant Jewish leader.

Christianity evolved from a precarious, fledgling faith into the state religion of Rome, and later Europe itself became synonymous with Christendom. Once secure in its own power, Christianity became more tolerant of other faiths — even if disapproving of them. Hostility toward Jews found its base in economic, social, ethnic, and political issues, and there is much evidence that these factors dominated anti- Jewish attitudes even during times of little religious turmoil. For instance, Anti-Semitism was not historically limited to Christians but found virulent expression before the Christian era and in many non- Christian lands. Religious antagonism often seemed to be a rationalization of economic and social hostility.

I sought out the works of the giants of European literature, philosophy and science on the Jewish issue. Sometimes I would spend hours in the library looking up “Jews” and “Judaism” in the indexes of the books of some of the greatest Western writers. I found that many had things to say that would be considered anti-Semitic today. It would be impossible to list them all, but a few of them include Milton, most of the Catholic Popes as well as major Protestant leaders, Shakespeare, Kant, Goethe, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Voltaire, Shaw, Emerson, Melville and Dickens. Even my favorite American author, Mark Twain, made some interesting comments about the Jews. Most of Twain’s remarks on the Jews in an 1899 Harper’s magazine article are extremely flattering to the Jewish people. But some parts of his essay are impermissible today. In the cotton States, after the war, the simple and ignorant negroes made the crops for the white planter on shares. The Jew came down in force, set up shop on the plantation, supplied all the negro's wants on credit, and at the end of the season was proprietor of the negro's share of the present crop and of part of his share of the next one. Before long, the whites detested the Jew, and it is doubtful if the negro loved him… The Jew is being legislated out of Russia. The reason is not concealed…. He was always ready to lend money on a crop, and sell vodka and other necessaries of life on credit while the crop was growing. When settlement day came he owned the crop; and next year or year after he owned the farm, like Joseph… In the dull and ignorant England of John's time everybody got into debt to the Jew. He gathered all lucrative enterprises into his hands; he was the king of commerce; he was ready to be helpful in all profitable ways…

Religious prejudices may account for one part of it, [anti-Semitic Prejudice] but not for the other nine. 307 To my amazement, Jewish histories, which are intended mainly for Jewish eyes, frankly record cases of Jewish economic exploitation from ancient times to the present. I found the Jewish historians far more enlightening on the issue than the Gentile writers. They had no prejudice against Jews; if anything, they had a clearly supremacist bias for their own people. Many of them practically gloated about their financial victories over the Goyim.

USURY

Jews are a nation of usurers . . . outwitting the people amongst whom they find shelter. . . . They make the slogan 'let the buyer beware' their highest principle in dealing with us — Imanuel Kant308 The philosopher Immanual Kant was not the first Westerner to make the charge that the Jews are a nation of usurers, and that their economic practices were often exploitative. Since the Israelite sojourn in Egypt, non-Jewish politicians, theologians, and chroniclers have spoken of Jewish avarice and exploitative practices. Even Shakespeare immortalized the Jewish usurer in The Merchant of Venice through his character Shylock, who, in the absence of the money due him, demands the Christian’s “pound of flesh.” There are numerous examples of medieval governments receiving huge percentages of their revenues from the taxation received on the profits of Jewish usury. In the Diaspora (the Jewish people living outside of Palestine) there is a pattern of Jews being employed by Gentile kings and governments as tax farmers and revenue collectors, and of their being utilized as the administrators of foreign occupational governments. By their very nature, farming and ranching require periodic infusions of capital. Diseases, insect infestation, and natural disasters can place those who cultivate crops or animals at the mercy of those who have ready money to lend. This is especially true among those who draw little more than their essential sustenance from such pursuits, which was true for most people from ancient times to the modern era. Historically, such needs for capital were often provided by cooperatives and intervention by the civil authorities, but more often such needs went unanswered, resulting in times of severe suffering and want. In all business, capital is crucial to ameliorating the unforgiving cycles of prosperity and recession. Amid these economic uncertainties enters the Jewish moneylender, far more skilled and knowledgeable in the manipulation of currency and gold than his customers. There was little financial regulation of lending practices until fairly recent times, offering many opportunities for the unscrupulous. It should be made clear that the term usury means not simply a fair and moderate interest rate but an excessive one. Usury would be what one would call loansharking today — with exorbitant interest and compound interest rates.

usury n.

1. the lending or practice of lending money at an exorbitant interest.
2. an exorbitant amount or rate of interest, esp. in excess of the legal rate.
3. Obs. interest paid for the use of money.

loansharking n.

the practice of lending money at excessive rates of interest Random House Webster’s Unabridged Electronic Dictionary 1996

Jews themselves understood the exploitive nature of their usurious practice on the Gentiles. Maimonides, who is considered the greatest European Jewish teacher, wrote the following in his important Book of Civil Laws: It is permissible to borrow from a heathen or from an alien resident and to lend to him at interest. For it is written Thou shalt not lend upon interest to thy brother (Deut. 23:20)309 — to thy brother it is forbidden, but to the rest of the world it is permissible. Indeed, it is an affirmative commandment to lend money at interest to a heathen. For it is written Unto the heathen thou shalt lend upon interest (Deut. 23:21).310 ( The Code of Maimonides, Book 13, The Book of Civil Laws, ch. V:1, 93)311 Nesek ("biting," usury) and marbit ("increase," interest) are one and the same thing. . . . Why is it called nesek? because he who takes it bites his fellow, causes pain to him, and eats his flesh. ( The Code of Maimonides, Book 13, The Book of Civil Laws, ch. IV:1, 88-89)
The usury practiced by the Jews of the medieval world are outrageous by modern standards.

• In A History of the Jews in England, Cecil Roth finds Jews charging interest rates between 22 and 43 percent. 312 In northern France the interest rate was limited to 43 percent in 1206 as the authorities tried to reduce the prevailing rate of 65 percent plus compounding. 313
• In The Jews of Poland: A Social and Economic History of the Jewish Community in Poland from 1100 to 1800, writer Bernard Weinryb shows similar outlandish rates in Poland in the 14th and 15th centuries.314
• In the 1942 book The Jews in Spain: Their Political and Cultural Life During the Middle Ages, the Jewish author A. A. Neuman writes that in Castile the authorities allowed Jews to charge an interest rate of 33 1/3 percent. When farmers desperately needed to purchase seed during the great famine in Cuenca in 1326, the Jews refused to lend money unless they were allowed 40 percent.315
The most important political document from medieval England and perhaps in the history of Western civilization, the Magna Carta (revealing their common presence) declares that widows and orphans have first claim on estates over Jewish moneylenders.316

In The Social Life of the Jews of Northern France in the XII-XIV Centuries as Reflected in the Rabbinical Literature of the Period, Louis Rabinowitz notes how the Jewish usurers themselves saw their occupation as far more profitable than farming or artisanry.317 Many Jewish historians have documented the tremendous wealth accumulated by the Jews through usury. Rabinowitz points out, for example, that the taxes on Jewish usury alone amounted to more than the rest of the ordinary royal revenues in France in 1221. King Louis IX, who vigorously denounced the Talmud, had more concern over the Jewish economic predatory behavior. In 1254 he barred Jews from moneylending and said they should live by trade and manual labor. As an illustration of the far-reaching impact of Jewish usury, Achille Luchaire shows that in medieval Europe even many churches and monasteries were closed because of debts owed to the Jewish moneylenders.318 Jacob R. Marcus, one of the world’s leading Jewish historians, in his Encyclopaedia Britannica article “Jews,” states, “the floating wealth of the country was soaked up by the Jews, who were periodically made to disgorge into the exchequer.” 319 Gentile opposition to Jewish predatory economic activity, far from always being pathologic and hateful against Jews, was more often rational and compassionate. Today loansharking is viewed as a pernicious activity that deserves criminal prosecution. It has been also shown that in communities that limited such activity, Anti-Semitism was also mitigated. Davidson quotes two patricians in 16th century Venice as saying that moneylending is the way that the Jews “consume and devour the people of this, our city.” 320 The Venetian authorities eventually codified precise regulations of Jewish economic activity, including a maximum interest rate of 5 percent on loans.321 Brian Pullen quotes a rabbi of the times who, after elucidating the causes of Anti-Semitism elsewhere, noted: Usury makes them unpopular with all the orders of the city; engaging in crafts with the lesser people; the possession of property with nobles and great men. These are the reasons why the Jews do not dwell in many places. But these circumstances do not arise in Venice, where the rate of interest is only 5 percent, and the banks are established for the benefit of the poor and not for the profit of the bankers. 322 Arthur Kornberg, in Theodor Herzl: From Assimilation to Zionism, quotes extensively from the founder of modern Zionism, Theodore Herzl — including fascinating parts of his diary. Herzl writes that Anti-Semitism arising from Jewish financial domination was completely understandable and insisted that “one could not expect a ma jority to ‘let themselves be subjugated’ by formerly scorned outsiders whom they had just released from the ghetto.”323 In another section he quotes Herzl as saying that Jews had been educated to be “leeches” that possessed “frightful financial power” and were a “moneyworshipping people incapable of understanding that a man can act out of other motives than money.” 324Herzl commented, “I find the anti-Semites fully within their rights.”325 Modern Jewish writers on Anti-Semitism never acknowledge the possibility that Gentiles have a basic right to defend themselves from “frightful” Jewish financial power and that anti-Semites could be “fully within their rights.” If a Gentile described Jewish financial predators as “leeches,” — even when such is acknowledged by one of the leading lights of Zionism — he would certainly be called an anti- Semite.

Is it any wonder that a thoughtful Christian such as Saint Thomas Aquinas, who was considered a great exponent of love and charity, would also speak out against the Jewish practice of usury? The Jews should not be allowed to keep what they have obtained from others by usury; it were best that they were compelled to work so that they could earn their living instead of doing nothing but becoming avaricious." — THOMAS AQUINAS, Saint. 13th century scholastic philosopher.326 As I read more Jewish histories, I learned that usury was just one of many predatory financial practices in the commercial sector that provoked opposition in the Christian community. Jewish Commercial Activities Usury was the greatest source of Jewish power and certainly the wellspring of the Jewish banking families that dominated Europe for hundreds of years, but Jews also found profit in many other activities, both credible and contemptible. While Jewish religious teaching forbade usury to fellow Jews as a pernicious practice, it encouraged Jews to engage in usury against the Gentiles. The same principle extended to every economic competition between Jew and Gentile. Financial acumen combined with powerful group cohesion and economic strategy provided powerful weapons in the battle for commercial dominance in Europe and later in America. The fact that Jews practiced a dual set of ethics — an altruistic one for themselves and a predatory one for Gentiles — contributed to their economic domination even in the more ordinary business endeavors.

Many of the most egregious practices were condemned by a (Jewish) Frankfort synod of 1603 in order to prevent hillul hashem (disgrace of the Jewish religion). “Those who deceive Gentiles profane the name of the Lord among the Gentiles.”327 That statement has been much quoted by those who dismiss anti- Gentile financial measures as representative of a bygone era. However, a subsequent rabbinic responsa clarified the issue as a result of a dispute between two Jews who contested the spoils of the deception of a Gentile. It held that exploitation and deceit against Gentiles is permissible as long hillul hashem does not occur; that is, if the act does not damage the Jews as a group. Jacob Katz says, “Ethical norms applied only to one's own kind.”328 Just as it was morally wrong to practice usury on fellow Jews and morally commendable to be usurious with Gentiles, it is decreed morally ethical for Jews to engage in profitable unethical acts toward Gentiles as long as they can do so without harming the Jewish community. The following passage from the vital Code of Maimonides clearly shows the dual economic morality in business dealings. It should not be forgotten that Jews consider Maimonides their greatest philosopher during the enlightenment. A heathen cannot prefer charges of overreaching because it is said " one his brother" (Lev. 25:14).329 However, if a heathen has defrauded an Israelite he must return the overcharge according to our laws (in order that the rights of) a heathen should not exceed (those of) an Israelite. ( The Code of Maimonides, Book 12, The Book of Acquisition)330 Jewish teaching commanded Jews to aid their brothers and not to compete with one another in attempts to exploit Gentiles. Jacob Katz traces a large body of Jewish literature forbidding competition between Jews. They were barred from interfering with monopolies controlled by other Jews and from underbidding fellow Jews. They were always to cooperate with other Jews in the face of Gentile competition so as “not to lose the money of Israel.”331

The Jewish Team Strategy

It is difficult to overstate how Jewish economic solidarity and, when they deem them necessary, economic boycott or hostility can injure commercial enterprise. In my chapter on media control, I discussed the well-coordinated Jewish takeover of the Gentile-owned Times-Herald in Washington, D.C., which was accomplished by quietly having Jewish advertisers and agencies leave the Herald and drive it into insolvency and then returning their revenue after the newspaper was safely in Jewish hands. Such is indicative of the many ways that group strategy can have tremendous economic impact on almost any business enterprise.

Take, for example, the impact that government has on almost any major corporation in America. Key bureaucrats can influence government contracts, environmental compliance, civil rights, tax liability, and regulations on items such as food and drugs. If a Jewish government administrator has hostility toward a particular corporation — or a vested interest in it — obviously he can have a tremendous impact on its financial health. If a Jew has an important corporate purchasing authority, he can choose to buy a product from either a Gentile firm or one owned by fellow Jews. His decision will have a profound effect, for good or ill, on the two entities. The Gentile in this instance has been conditioned to think that everyone must be judged on his or her merits and that it would be immoral to be biased for his own race. Furthermore, he learns that his primary mission is the good of the company or government agency he serves. The Jew, on the other hand, has been conditioned from early life to think in terms of the good of his group and of Gentile perfidy from Pharaoh to Hitler. Is it any wonder that the Jewish manager is likely to choose the Jewish firm to fill the contract or the Jewish applicant to fill the important executive vacancy? Such actions might seem altruistic, but they are also self-serving, for just as he knows he will assist a fellow Jew when he can, he knows that somewhere along the line he will be assisted in the same way.

A classic example of ruthless Jewish team business strategy was revealed in a 2001 study by Avner Halperin of MIT's Faculty of Business Administration. The Israeli daily Ha’aretz had a story about Halperin’s study called, “Why American CEOs of Israeli Firms Fail.” 332 It stated, “Lots of startups hired Americans as top executives in order to facilitate entry into the United States market.” The gist of the article is that dozens of Israeli firms lured American executives to their firms as executive officers so as to get a jump start in American markets. Not surprisingly for anyone who understands Jewish team ethics and strategy, all the Gentile hires were fired after they had served their purpose. The Jewish Mr. Halperin blames the firings on cultural clashes between Jews and Gentiles, but the fact remains that in his study of over 90 firms with 25% of them having hired a Gentile CEO, that, “The result: every one of the companies wound up firing their American CEO.”333 While ever increasing numbers of American firms such as Disney are taken over by team-aligned Jews (while Gentiles are told it would be wrong to discriminate against Jews or any other minority), Jewish firms work relentlessly purge any potential Gentile interlopers.

Historically there are many examples of this “team effort” utilized for economic and political advantage. Roth discusses the appointment of a Marrano Jew, Diego Arias Davilia, as state treasurer in 15th century Spain.334 The terms “Marrano” and “New Christian” are used to denote Jews who falsely converted to Christianity, while practicing Judaism covertly.335 Roth points out that through Davilia’s influence many other “New Christians” rose to high positions. He also shows that the Marranos also controlled all New World imports and exports as well as their distribution in Spain. If Roth is right and the Jews, as a closed syndicate, controlled all the trade during that period, would not that cause hostility from Gentile merchants? All over Europe the Jews used their common languages and organizations to gain a competitive advantage over Christians and Muslims in the Mediterranean region. In his book The Jews of the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish Republic, Stanford Shaw shows how Jews had a system of bills of exchange honored only by other Jewish traders and bankers, giving them a competitive edge.336 A case study in Opatow, Poland, during the 17th and 18th centuries by Gershon Hundert called The Jews in a Polish Private Town: The Case of Opatow in the Eighteenth Century337 illustrates how the Jews came to dominate commercial life. There were constant complaints that the Jews refused to join the craft guilds; that they controlled the trade and prices of raw materials; that they imported finished goods into the town, undercutting the local Christian artisans; that they did not buy from Christians; that there were complaints . . . that Jews had pushed Christians entirely out of commerce, with the result that Christian merchants were forced to move elsewhere.338 Hundert writes that "Jewish domination of the town's commerce . . . was almost complete."339 He also notes that Jews came to dominate all phases of the alcoholic beverage business, including its manufacturing, distribution and retail. Some Jewish writers even implied that Jewish union leaders in America were more inclined to be conciliatory to management if their union membership was mostly Gentile rather than Jewish.340 If that is true, then one could presume that Jewish firms would be likely to get more favorable labor agreements than Gentile firms. One can easily see the powerful advantage such firms would have over their Gentile competitors. There are many ways that group cohesiveness and loyalty can corrupt and ultimately pervert supposedly free markets.

Banks and Stock Exchanges

The first family of banking over the last two centuries has been the Rothschilds. From them came the most powerful banking houses of Europe. The founder of the House of Rothschild, Mayer Amschel Rothschild, was born in 1743 in Frankfurt am Main, Germany. Amschel studied first to be a rabbi and then decided to go into moneylending and finance instead. He ultimately became the financial agent of the British government during the Napoleonic Wars and launched the greatest banking houses in Europe, with his sons going to the continent’s major capitals and establishing banks there. I read a very flattering book on the Rothschilds that related the story of Mayer Amschel’s most famous financial coup. During the great battle between Napoleon and Wellington at Waterloo, the London stock market suffered as traders worried about the possibility of Napoleon’s victory. Amschel saw the important battle as an unparalleled business opportunity. Knowing that if Napoleon won, the stock market would crash, and that if France lost, the market would soar, Amschel set up a system whereby he would learn the outcome of the war before anyone else got the news. Using carrier pigeons over land and a series of boats with signal lanterns at intervals of a mile or so across the English Channel, he learned before anyone else that Napoleon had lost at Waterloo. He then had his confederates put out the false information that Napoleon had won. This lie led to a devastating crash of the London stock exchange. Valuable stocks sold for pennies on the dollar. Amschel and his Jewish associates, knowing that Britain had actually won, bought up the stocks for a pittance. Overnight, as the London market learned of the British victory, these stocks became worth a huge fortune. The book presented the Rothschild’s fraud as clever and admirable. One must pause to think about the fortunes lost — fortunes that had been acquired by years of toil and genius — of businesses literally stolen from their creators, of lives broken. Did the author think that this huge fortune simply materialized out of the air? Did the author care that money comes not only from those who create and lead companies, but also from the hard work of thousands of laborers? Such a theft affects salaries, working conditions, employment and many other factors. Many hundreds of thousands ultimately had to pay the high cost of Rothschild’s swindle. Mayer Amschel used the enormous wealth he acquired through his Waterloo scheme (among others) to establish his five sons, Am schel, Salomon, Nathan, Karl, and James, in their own banking houses across Europe. As discussed in my chapter on the Russian Revolution, the Rothschilds have readily used their massive wealth to influence nations on behalf of Jewish interests, as when they ripened Russia for revolution by canceling loans in protest over the Czar’s May Laws.341 Rothschild’s ill-gotten wealth also effectively bought his family the first Jewish seat in the British Parliament and even membership in the British aristocracy. By combining the power of their own family’s huge banks and other Jewish-owned banks, they could literally bring a nation’s economy to its knees. By dominating international banking, they could set their own financial terms to cash-hungry nations and amass even greater riches.

Because of the competitive advantages of Rothschild’s international contacts, Jews dominated private banking throughout Europe. For instance, there was almost a complete absence of Gentile banking firms in Prussia in the late 19th century. In 1923 Berlin there were 150 Jewish banks and only 11 non-Jewish banks.342 343 In the stock market, schemes similar to Rothschild’s Waterloo ploy have been used for generations, finally resulting in the center of world trading, Wall Street, becoming dominated by Jewish stock and investment- banker operations. In the book Our Crowd and a relatively recent one, the New Crowd: The Changing Jewish Guard on Wall Street, Jewish writers Judith Ehrlich and Barry Rehfeld fawningly relate the overwhelming Jewish takeover of the nexus of the American economy.344 345 Ivan Boesky and Michael Milken, who stole close to two billion dollars between them, are glowing praised for their brilliance and market savvy. When I was in high school, my father had some modest stock investments. His broker was a politically conservative Jew, R. Newmann of the firm of Kohlmeyer & Company. I got a job working for Newmann, “plotting curves” — the term for charting stocks and commodities. At the time of my employment, I had little understanding on the Jewish issue. I liked Newmann, and he always seemed to have a pertinent statement handy in response to the latest outrages of liberalism. Newmann had made a fortune in the market, and while I worked for him I discovered the real secret of making money in the market and the reason Jews have come to dominate the brokerage industry. Newmann was constantly on the phone with his fellow Jews in New York, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. Each member of his circle knew other Jews as well as a few Gentiles in business, government, and media and at the critical junctures of the market. In his conversations Newmann often spoke using words that I could not understand: they were Yiddish. Occasionally, after the telephone conversation, he would quickly write out an order for a major stock or commodity purchase and have me run it to the clerk for submission. I remember frequent transactions that netted him tens of thousands of dollars. I asked him what his secret was, and he told me that he had no secret. “Information,” he said, “that’s how you make real money in the market. You have to get the information before the crowd gets it. Once it is in the newspapers it’s too late.”

He felt safe bragging to a quiet high-school student,
and I listened and learned a lot.

“Let’s take the government,” he said. “Imagine you knew someone in the Federal Reserve who had inside information that Arthur Burns planned to raise interest rates. After all, someone has to know these things before the world knows. How could you do in the bond market or, for that matter, a dozen other markets that are extremely interest rate sensitive? Or how about if you knew a friend in the Department of Defense, and he knew if Lockheed or McDonnell-Douglas would get the new fighter-plane contract, do you think you could make a fortune? Face it, someone must know ahead of time. Or how about if your friends knew where the next military base would be opened? Think you could do pretty well in real estate? Or say you knew someone at the Justice Department who lets you know that they will drop their antitrust litigation against IBM. When that news comes out, what happens to the stock? Would you buy IBM stock? And it’s not just government information that can make you a king’s ransom. For instance, if you had friends at IBM and knew before anyone else that IBM was going to give a contract for a hundred thousand computer cases to a small company, what do you think might happen to that penny stock? There’s a million ways,” he would tell me, “how information means money.” I asked Newmann if insider trading was illegal, and he told me, “They might as well make breathing illegal.” He said it was technically illegal but that it was almost impossible to prove — and that it was not really even looked into except in the most blatant cases — usually involving huge amounts of money. Years later, such manipulation of enormous sums of money led to the biggest stock-market scandal in history. In 1986 Dennis Levine, Ivan Boesky, Martin Siegel, and Michael Milken were charged with insider trading of stocks and bonds worth billions of dollars. Boesky admitted his guilt and was fined $100 million, and millions more were eventually paid by Milken, who after all the fines and litigation and some jail time, still came out a very rich man. In 1987 Milken made $550 million for his activities the year before — more than all but the top 41 of the Fortune 500 companies earned that year. Levine, Boesky, Siegel, and Milken were guilty of the greatest financial fraud perpetrated since the Rothschild’s theft of the English stock exchange. It should also be noted that with their Jewish lawyers, and facing Jewish judges, they served light sentences in minimum security federal jails for their enormous crimes.

It is instructive to note how the Jewish power structure reacted to the Boesky affair. Some top Jewish leaders, including Laurence Tisch (who later became top man at CBS), Felix Rohatyn (now U.S. ambassador to France), and David Gordis, executive vice-president of the American Jewish Committee, came together to do damage control. The Palm Beach Jewish World quoted Rabbi Gordis as saying that because of the arrests, Jews would be seen as “exploiters of the economy and profiteers.”346 If my friend Mr. Newmann was right and inside information equals “money” in a modern market economy, what does that mean for the most cohesive and organized group in the world? Many Jewish young people are as knowledgeable in finance from an early age as many Gentile kids are familiar with the star players of the Super Bowl or World Series. Ivan Boesky is exceptional only in the magnitude of his theft. Insider information of one sort or another is incredible power in the hands of people who know how to make use of it. Around the corner, or around the world, it is the greatest weapon in an economic war. The spoils of that war are not only the luxuries that money can buy, but also the enormous political and media power it purchases. The fact that tiny Jewish minorities often rise to economic dominance in Gentile nations of both the Mideast and Europe certainly played an important role in the repeated rise of anti-Semitism. Even when businessmen act perfectly legally, a cohesive and powerful team effort will consistently amass collective power over a scattered and individualistic mass. Such is the elemental nature of business. When the team strategy is combined with inside information garnered by Jewish penetration into upper-level administrative roles in Government and businesses, the accumulation of incredible power is inevitable. I was soon to learn, however, that the secrets of Jewish financial success were far more than simply intelligence and team effort. I came to learn about an unexpected Jewish dominance in some of the most unsavory criminal enterprises that have ever afflicted mankind. It was time for me to investigate how the darkest sides of the Jewish character influenced the rise of anti-Semitism.