Other than a few minor formatting changes or "enhancements"
we have put this in - "as it was" - printed up by Mrs. Dilling.

What are these "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" which refuse to stay dead? What is a protocol" anyway? In diplomacy, says the dictionary, protocols are "a signed document containing a record of the points on which agreement has been reached by negotiating parties preliminary to a final treaty or compact".

The above Protocols of the Elders of Zion are a program for the enslavement of the world and the destruction of the Christian religion above all. Their circulation incites atom bomb-like fury on the part of the people who today claim that their religion is Pharisaism. This statement, for example, in the "Universal Jewish Encyclopedia" (1943), is typical:

"The Jewsh religion as it is today traces its descent, without a break, thru all the centuries, from the Pharisees.

"Their leading ideas and methods found expression in a literature of enormous extent, of which a very great deal is still in existence. The TALMUD is the largest and most important single member of that literature. . . and the study of it is essential for any real understanding of PHARISAISM". (See photostat in my "Plot Against Christianity" book). [The book she references here is awesome! It is a MUST READ by everyone professing to be followers of Christ. --BeWISE]

The basic doctrine is that only Pharisees are "MEN". Others rank as animals to be milked or beefed. Non-Pharisees, to quote are "the people who are like an ass - slaves who are considered the property of the master" (Kethuboth llla). They may be killed, their wages withheld, cheated, enslaved. 63 TALMUD books reek with these teachings. The protocols are mild by contrast.

It is true that the non-Pharisee - "animals" are called "GOYIM", and that Christ is taught - to be deserving of FIVE sadistic deaths - including Crucifixion. And this is the only, the supreme arbiter of religious "LAW" to the so-called Jew of today. Warnings abound that certain things must not be done if there is danger of "profaning the name" of the "Jewish" religion by making its real teachings known. Now we have the first complete English translation of the Tradition of the Pharisees, which is the BABYLONIAN TALMUD, declared complete in writing in Sura, Babylonia, in 500 AD. This is the Jewish-approved SONCINO translation, procurable thru Jewish bookstores for around $500. Christian clergy know no more about it than the parakeets chirping in my cage.

Every pagan abomination lambasted by the Old Testament is argued into approval and permission by the TALMUD, including burning children to Molech, murder, sodomy, incest, etc.


A most well-informed gentleman on my mailing list recently sent me "A Report Prepared by the Subcommittee to Investigate the Administration of the Internal Security Act . . . To "The COMMITTEE On The JUDICIARY, UNITED STATES SENATE". It is entitled:

"PROTOCOLS of the ELDERS of ZION - A Fabricated 'Historic' Document". It is dated August 6, 1964. It is signed by that all-out BELOVED of the PHARISEES, SEN. KENNETH KEATING and, strangely, Sen. Thomas J. Dodd. It was procured thru the gentleman's Congressman, and is a USA Govt. Printing Office job. Its "authorities" are strictly "kosher".

My friendly correspondent writes:

"You will find this a very sloppy snow job. The Jews have finally managed to get the Senate Committee to take the Protocols off their backs; they are still hoping to have the Crucifixtion of Christ removed from their backs by coming Ecumenical meetings! Perhap the PROTOCOLS are no longer of much importance since we now have the unexpurgated TALMUD to use. Nevertheless, as a taxpayer, it seems objectionable that tax-money was spent in issuing such a sloppy job of research on a subject about which there is such a vast literature.... One of their authorities cited, John S. said to have published his impartial study in 1948. I have a copy of his book, "AN APPRAISAL Of The PROTOCOLS Of ZION". . . It was published in 1942, not 1948 . . . He notes that no mention is made of the Appeal decision in the Berne Trial, etc.

"A Coward Dies a Thousand Deaths", said Shakespeare

Since 1905, when the PROTOCOLS became known and widely read, one conflicting denial, "killing" the Protocols" once and for all", has succeeded another. I am reminded of a song my mother used to sing, a jingle, rather, concocted on the subject of the explorer, Livingstone, being successively declared to be dead only to appear again. It went like this:

"O Livingston's died once again, Sir; The same he's done now every year..."


A one-page "INTRODUCTION" (signed by Keating and Dodd) is followed by a three page declaration entitled:


After jeering at the literary style of the Protocols, an Encyclopedia Britannica definition is cited:

"The Protocols are supposed to be a report of a series of 24 meetings held in Basle in 1897, at the time of the First Zionist Congress. There plans were said to have been worked out whereby Jews, . . . were to corrupt the entire Christian civilization, and on the ruins of Christendom erect a world state ruled over by Jews and Freemasons. Various devices are described which the Jews planned to use; among these the use of liquor to befuddle the leaders of European opinion, the corruption of European womanhood, the stirring up of economic distress, and plans to blow up the various capitals of Europe".

This is in line with Biblical prophecies about the ripening of the Red Satanic Pharisee forces at the end of this period, foreseen by Christ in His Olivet discourse (Matt. 24, Mark 13, etc; II Thes. 2) describing the "falling away" now in our churches, etc, as well as world Red dictatorship.

BUT, an article reprinted by the publication of Seton Hall's Institute of Judaeo-Christian Studies is, instead, quoted:

"The more one examines the 'Protocols', the more they show themselves to be absurd, contradictory, childish..."

Seton Hall is run by a Jewish "convert", Osterreicher, who devotes this "Catholic" Institute to drooling over the beauties of Talmudism, that is Pharisaism, which Dumb Dove Christians mistakenly call "Judaism". - -- [Judaism was NEVER the religion of the Old Testament. It would more appropriately be called "YAHWEHISM" or "HEBREWISM" or "ABRAHAMISM", "Judaism" was and is "Pharisaism". --BeWISE]


The next "great" authority cited to prove the Protocols a lie and a forgery is John S. Curtiss who lists himself in "Who's Who's in America" as having been on the staff at Columbia Univ. as Instructor of history l934-6; Brooklyn College 1935-6; archivist of Franklin D. Roosevelt Library, Hyde Park, N.Y. ,l94l-2 and on his OSS, l942-5; Fellow of Russian Inst. 1946-8; Guggenheim Fellow 1954-5; author of books on Russia; now on faculty of Duke Univ. since l945.

But, more interesting than the above Russian and Kosher affiliations is the fact that CURTISS is a writer for the UNIVERSAL JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA on the Protocols (Vol.1(?) - copyrighted 1941 and 1948) under "Elders of Zion Protocols".

Curtiss shares the "Universal Jewish Encyclopedia" job on the Protocols with Theodore H. GASTER (pp. 46-60) and GASTER is a Big Shot Jew listed in "Who's Who in WORLD Jewry of 1955. There like Curtiss, he is listed as a Guggenheim Fellow. Our tax money made him a Fulbright Professor, Univ. of Rome, 1951-52. Since 1947 he has been with the Hebrew Union School of Ed., N.Y. and is contributing editor of the "Universal Jewish Encyclopedia".

Our Senate Committee calls upon another "impartial" judge of the PROTOCOLS which are "killed" with this:

"One need not be a specialist in historical research or have any extensive knowledge of matters Jewish to see through the fraudulent nature of the 'Protocols' after a cursory glance".

This is quoted from a work called: "Anti-Semitism, Historically and Critically Examined" by HUGO VALENTIN of Sweden.


This "impartial" authority is another Big Shot Jew listed as such in Who's Who in World Jewry (1955) as a writer of Jewish books, etc, and for 23 years Chairman of the SWEDISH ZIONIST ORGANIZATION. Herbert Willett (of my RED NETWORK) adds his "forgery" bit.

The little three-page harangue ends with a paragraph including this: "The subcommittee believes that the peddlers of the 'Protocols' are peddlers of un-American prejudice who spread hate and dissension among the American people... they, like the Communists would set religion against religion. Both would subvert the American system"


Would this Senate Committee also denounce the Jewish Pharisee religion consigning Christ to eternal Hell under "boiling semen" and all of His followers to eternal Hell under "boiling excrement"? Or reprimand the doctrine that all non-Pharisees rank as "the people who are like an ass - slaves who are considered the property of the master" (the Talmudist) (Kethuboth llla, etc)?? Or take a shot at the "great" Maimonides, Talmudic idol who taught that it is a crime to free ANY slave unless he be a "Jew"? How about a lecture on the teaching from one end of the TALMUD to the other that it is always sinless of a grown man if he rape a baby girl UNDER three years and one day old ? Yes, TRUE. Also illegal.


The overall spirit of both Talmud and Protocols is identical, namely that ANY means is justifiable to subdue "the people who are like an ass" - the GOYIM or non-humans. Naturally humans do not wish the animals to scamper about unfenced. They must be milked and beefed or their eggs taken, at the will of the MASTERS. Any resentment on the part of the non-Pharisee "animals" is always treated as "anti-Semitism", or "persecution of the JEWS". The Talmudic doctrine that it is sinless to cheat, lie, steal and murder if the subject be a goy is never disputed. Who are the peddlers of HATE? Why not a Senate report on this cause of world unrest? [BRAVO Elizabeth!! --BeWISE]

The PROTOCOLS are merely a series of plans by which the "animals" may be lured into cowbarns for milking. They lack the smut, the blasphemy of Scripture, the Christ-hating properties of the TALMUD. Our statesmen speak in synagogues, Yeshivas and other institutions erected for the promulgation of the TALMUD!


It was in 1905 that Serge Nilus, a Russian, translated the Protocols from the French and in 1906 a copy was registered in the British Museum. It is clear from the statement of Nilus who included these Protocols in his book, "The Great in the Small" that he considered them part of the Biblical Anti-Christ plan. He had received them in 1901. He wrote, in part:

"If it were possible to prove their authenticity" (received from a secret source, named)" and to discover the persons who head this world plot and hold the bloody threads in their hands, the 'mystery of iniquity' would be broken, but it must remain inviolate until its incarnation in the 'son of perdition'. For any observing, reflecting Christian, are there really too few proofs of the authenticity of the Protocols of Zion in the world round about and in the events for which his country and the universe are the theatre, which follow before ones eyes in a whirlwind of iniquity like an uninterrupted storm. . . ?" (p. 250).

The Senate Committee report on the Protocols repeats the various "killings" the Protocols have had by the inventions of Jewry. These include:

1. That the Protocols were "forgeries" invented by the Russian czarist police:

"More than 60 years ago the czarist intelligence service concocted and peddled a confection called the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion'..." Again:

"It was clearly demonstrated...that large portions of the Protocols were plagiarized from a book written to discredit the government of Napoleon III. Moreover, the French volume, it has been shown, was once the property of the Russian political police; and there is other evidence to indicate that the 'protocols' originated with and were used by the Russian political police".

2. "At a recent trial in Bern, Switzerland, the court declared the 'Protocols' to be forgeries".


The only reason in the world that B'nai B'rith and its Jewish leaders move heaven and hell to suppress the circulation of the Protocols is that they outline the positive program (set forth in the TALMUD), although unknown to Christians) which any observer may see is going on today. Whether or not the Protocols represent the program decided upon at the first Zionist Congress in l897, or not, is unimportant.

AHAD HA-AM (Ginsberg)

A whole worshipful book devoted to exalting Asher Zvi Ginsberg, known as AHAD HA-AM ("one of the people"), was published in 1960 by the top Jewish Publication Society of America. This outfit is an adjunct of the world-powerful American Jewish Committee in which the banking and industrial Jewish powers of the world converge. Its "worldwide responsibility" to world Jewry is annually reported in their official American Jewish Year Books. From Algeria to China and New York they raise up and knock down opponents like bowling pins.

AHAD HA-AM's (Ginsberg's) role as a dynamic of worldwide Zionism, as a prophet, as a motivating force in the secret society which preceded the World Zionist Organization, is all set forth on bended knee, as it were, by the author, Leon Simon, of this book on "AHAD HA-AM". But, when the accusation was made that he constructed the Protocols, screams of rage rent the Jewish world. This Russian Jew later moved to England. But in Russia he had devoted himself so diligently to TALMUDIC study that "Rabbi Joseph Saul Nathanson of Lemberg, one of the greatest talmudists then living" treated him as an equal. Ginsberg was raised in the Hasidic, demon-invoking, cabalistic voodoo branch of Talmudism, called Hassidism. Until he was fifteen his father had provided him with a tutor in TALMUD. He would have found no trouble in systematizing its program for ruthless world power for the "humans".


Born in 1856, died in 1927, the cover of the book on AHAD HA-AM includes this: "Ahad Ha-Am, no less than Theodore Herzl, has exerted an influence on contemporary Jewish thought affecting the communal, the Zionist and the religious aspects of life. His spiritual nationalism is still echoed from pulpit and platform and expounded in books and journals. His ideas have become current intellectual coin, so that even their users are frequently unaware of their origin. Ahad Ha-Am lives on in Jewish thought..." etc.


The Senate statement above that "large portions of the Protocols were plagiarized from a book written to discredit the government of Napoleon III", refers to the old saw used to "kill" the Protocols, namely that the Protocols were copied frdm a book by Maurice Joly in l864. Joly was implying that Napoleon III was following the Talmudic program of the Protocols. A reading of Jewish hisories might raise the suspicion that he may have been correct.

Napoleon III had obtained the crown by chicanery after being elected to head a Republic.

His uncle, Napoleon Bonaparte, had drowned Europe in Christian blood. The approach of his armies was the signal for the burning of ghetto gates, wild enthusiasm on the part of Jewry, the election of Jewish mayors and other officials. The Pope was driven into exile, although he had been of "liberal" mind. He came back with the fall of Napoleon ridded of his former leanings toward Jewish "liberalism". Jewish encyclopedias hail Napoleon as Jewry's boy friend.

After the wave of Jewish power unloosed by the French revolution, in which Jewry played such a prominent role, and after the fall of Napoleon with his opening of the ghetto gate, in all ways, intelligent Christians all over Europe sensed the situation. It is not strange that opponents and critics arose, like the German Hedsche, in 1868, and Gougenot de Mousseaux, with his "Le Juif", in 1869. Nor is it strange that these informed men should have made statements about this Jewish program similar to those in the Talmudic Protocols.

Assassination ended the irrefutable writing of the well-known de Mousseaux, just as death threats and a bombing threatened to end the paper of the late crusader, Conde McGinley, from time to time.


Lucien Wolf, the British Barney Baruch of his day, "killed" off the Protocols by pompous discourses to the effect that the Protocols were merely quotes from the German by the name of Hermann Hedsche who, he said, had been fired for delinquency from the Prussian postal service; that he borrowed material from contemporary Russians and from Gougenot de Mousseaux, one who blamed "democratic" revolutions on the Jews. He bothered with no proofs. This "democratic" Jewish picture, however, is marred a bit by his own statement in the "London Pall Mall Gazette" of Nov. 24, 1895:

In 1895 "In spite of contrary affirmations, I maintain that Jews are first of all JEWS and afterwards English, and if this were otherwise I would be greatly distressed for Judaism. I do not intend to spend time on the absurdity that a sentiment of limited nationality should be imposed on a people above cosmopolitan human aspirations which have been taught to me by the words of the most sacred Sages of my race".

Yes, the foul-mouthed rabbis of the Talmud are called "SAGES". Their laws include the one which holds that if a Jew is trying to kill an "animal" or GOY, and in the process kills a "human", or Jew, he is innocent of murder. His aim purifies the murder of a "human". (See photostatic exhibits 90-2 in my "Plot Against Christianity".


To quote a carefully documented French work: "Charles Choliac, a friend of Gougenot des Mousseaux had been invited to be his guest Oct. 3, 1876 at his home in Coulommiers, near Paris. About ten o'clock that evening des Mousseaux laughingly showed him a letter saying: "Do not eat, or drink anything until you have first tried it on your dog, because at a secret meeting held yesterday, you were condemned to death by the Jews. Nine hours later, after showing this letter, he died suddenly after taking Holy Communion as was his habit at 7 AM in the little chapel of the monastery of Coulommiers". (p. 65: "L' Empereur Nicholas II et les Juifs"; Chiron, Editeur, 40, Rue de Seine, Paris, 1924. LUCIEN WOLF is one of the "authorities" cited in the "Universal Jewish Encyclopedia" article written by the Senate Committee's "authority", John S. Curtiss, and Theodore Gaster.


The Senate Committee report also makes use of the big "kill" assertion that the Protocols were invented by the Russia police (to cause pogroms, etc.). That job was beautifully put over by worldwide dissemination of the testimony of Princess Radziwill and her friend Mrs. Hurlbut. The Protocols, said Radziwill, were invented to convince the son of the assassinated Alexander II that his father had been assassinated by Jews instead of by members of the upper, class.

The head of the Political Police, Gen. Orgewsky, she said, had sent agents to Paris to manufacture the false documents. They copied citations from Jewish philosophers and searched in the annals of the French revolution for themes and incendiary discourses to represent the Jewish people as a band of assassins. The very famous Ratchkowsky, the Princess said, was charged with this job. He was Chief of the Russian Secret Police at Paris and with him was Manassiewitch-Manouioff. Also there was Mathieu Golovinsky. "His mother had great properties in the region of d'Oufa where I owned an estate", she said. "Golovinsky came to see me and I received him as the son of his mother whom I knew, but I did not know he was attached to the secret police. One day he showed me and several of my friends the writing on which he was working with Ratchkowsky and Manouioff. He told us that this manuscript ought to demonstrate that there is a vast Jewish conspiracy against the peace of the world. The only means, according to him, of combatting this conspiracy, was the expulsion of all the Jews from Russia. All this made us laugh. But Golovinsky seemed very proud of his work."

"I examined the manuscript several times; and my friends which included an American lady did the same. The manuscript was in French, handwritten, but in different handwritings, on yellowish paper. I remember perfectly that on the first page there was an enormous spot of bluish ink. . ." There are more details.


Princess Radziwill emphasized that she was speaking of the years 1904 and 1905 while she was living on the Champs Elysees in Paris. Then the American friend mentioned by Radziwill gave an interview to the "American Hebrew" of New York which appeared in their issue of March 4, 1921. She backed up everything Radziwill had said, every detail, including, of course, the big spot of bluish ink on the manuscript. S he told how the agent of the secret police had come to the Radziwill home directly from the Bibliotheque Nationale (National Library) to the Champs Elysees Paris home of Radziwill, how she remembered the manuscript tied up with white ribbon on yellowish paper with a big inkspot and exclaimed about it being the work of Golovinsky her friend. There was no doubt that this document and the Protocols were one and the same, identical. So, at the beginning of 1921 the princess and Mrs. Hurlbut had backed up Lucien Wolf; established that the Protocols had been fabricated under the very eyes of the Princess and Mrs Hurlbut by three agents of the Russian Secret Police: Ratchkowsky, Manassiewitch-Manouiloff and Golovinsky, who had shown the manuscript around from hand to hand. This false manuscript had been concocted in 1904 and 1905 in Paris.

Shortly after the above was as printed, the Jewish Tribune April 22, 1921 came out with the news that Radziwill had made a public report on this in Brooklyn, from a "sense of duty".

The Jewish world was charmed. The Protocols had been KILLED flat.

T H E N . . .

Then came an article by M. Vladimir Bourtzew in his paper, "The Common Cause", in which he berated the Protocols but called attention to certain little errors in Radziwill's revelations. This was the April 14, 1921 issue. The "Jewish Tribune" of April 29 screamed with rage that such an article could be written without the consent of the Anti-Defamation Lg. of B'nai B'rith which had taken all measures to prevent the publication of the Protocols in America. This was dreadful! for Bourtzew had denounced the Protocols but mentioned the fact that Ratchkowsky in 1904-5 was NOT IN PARIS and couldn't have met with Radziwill and GoIovinsky because he had been recalled from Paris in advance of the Russian-Japanese war (which broke out Feb. 6, 1904).

Then it came out that Golovinsky had been recalled before 1900 from Paris. In London's "Plain English" journal for March 19 and April 2, 1921, were signed articles teliing how Radziwill had been shot at by Lord Salisbury, had then gone to Africa where she took advantage of the famous Cecil Rhodes (was his mistress) and forged a huge cheque in his name and was sentenced to prison for this.

She had been born in St. Petersburg around 1880 as countess Rzewuska and had left Berlin where she had been mixed up with Bismark, so she said. She was regarded with some distrust, suspected as being a secret political agent for Germany. Before the Boer war she had disappeared completely from the St. Petersburg horizon. Then it was learned she was in Africa with Cecil Rhodes (Note: who used to report to the Rothschilds in London yearly according to Jewish history).

The fact that Ratchkowsky was not in Paris in 1904 or 1905; the news that the Protocols were already inthe hands of Nilus in 1901 and he translated them into Russian that same year, and issued them as a brochure in 1902, sadly compromised the testimony of Radziwill concerning the Protocols being fabricated in Paris while she lived on the Champs Elysees during 1904-5. Then the famous Msg. JOUIN came out with the printed statement that the Paris registry bore no trace of any Princess Radziwill living on the Champs Elysees in 1904-5. In recent years one still had to be registered with the authorities in Paris, whether as a resident or mere visitor, as tourists know.

IN 1905 AND 1917

Nilus bewailed the fact that the Protocols as a program of Jewish power aroused little interest before the revolution engineered by Jewry in 1905. After the Red Revolution of 1917 they aroused interest all over Europe and the USA.


It is curious that our great Senate Committee has to use the old saw about the Protocols having "originated with the Russian political police", Radzwill's mythical pals, where they all were not. Radziwill's interview at the Hotel Astor in New York, carried around the world by the Jewish press, had fallen with a momentary thud only to be revived ever since by one or another of the hirelings of the Jewish press. And that "spot of blue ink" was always a clincher in the various manufactures. M. du Chalya was puffed and quoted as backing Radziwill's tale and so for some 50 years the denials have gone on. But always a conflict of facts.

Pages of data concerning the colossal ramifications of power wielded by Achad Ha-Am (Ginsberg), his activities in Palestine and world Jewry as far reaching as the powers of the well known Jacob Schiff - appear in the work of A. Netchvolodow. "L' Empereur Nicolas II et Les Juifs - Essay on the Russian Revolution and its connection with the contemporary worldwide activity of Jewry" (to translate the last of the title). His part in the first Zionist Congress at Basle where presumably the Protocols were proposed as a world Jewish program, the rapturous eulogies of the Jewish encyclopedias, even this last 1960 Jewish Publication Society of America volume, "ACHAD HA-AM", would make his authorship reasonable.

But actually no authorship is necessary for a program that sets forth exactly what is happening, much of which is foretold in Scripture in the rise of the seventh Red world government, now in action in the Jewish creation, the United Nations, and the fact that the Temple has at last been rebuilt in Jerusalem ready for the Anti-Christ Pharisee (since 1968).


It is dizzy work to read the conflicting tales concerning the origin of the Protocols in Jewish publications. Now, we taxpayers pay for another rehash by the Senate Committee. Now that the Soncino English translation of the TALMUD, endorsed by highest Pharisee authorities, is available at last to read, for the first time, anyone may see that the TALMUD is far filthier, more criminal and anti-Christ than the relatively pale Protocols ever were. Why deny an outline for accomplishing exactly what the whole TALMUD teaches? Why print the Talmud? Bold, indeed!


When Henry Ford printed the articles known as the "International Jew", the Talmudists went into hysteria. If you are interested in the gloatings on how Ford was brought to his knees presumably, and made to publicly apologize, one interesting source is Volume I of "LOUIS MARSHALL - Champion of Liberty - Selected Papers and Addresses", put out by the Jewish Publication Society of America in 1957.

LOUIS MARSHALL was one of Jacob Schiff's cohorts in founding the AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE of world financial and industrial Jewish powers. A book could be written on the powers wielded by him and his sons and their communistic Marshall Foundation. In the "House Committee. on Un-American Activities Dies Report: Communist Front Organizations", there are no less than 27 listings.

Back in 1938 and 1939 when I did considerable speaking in Detroit, I used to be entertained at the executives table at the Ford plant.

Harry Bennett, personnel director for Henry Ford (who afterwards was cowed and wrote a pro-Jewish screed) showed me the picture of the Jews in a huge picture, he had in his office of the Ford Riot they stirred. A truck load of typewriters and used tables was sent me for my office by the Red Squad, at Ford direction. Bennett described how the Jews had driven Ford off the road in his car in an effort to kill him and how his wife had plead with him to cease his Jewish exposures and live for her sake. For this reason he retracted.


Gloatingly, on p. 376 of Vol.1 of the Marshall book, is the statement extracted from Henry Ford. It is preceded by Marshall's communication with Sam Untermyer, etc. Ford's apology includes his plea that he had been too busy to know what was being printed in his Dearborn Independent and had delegated such duties to men he trusted but that he had no idea that the general nature" of the data on the Protocols had been so repulsive to Jewry. "Had I...I would have forbidden their circulation without a moment's notice, because I am fully aware of the virtues of the Jewish people as a whole. . . . " (and more praises).

Ford's statement goes on to state that: "I deem it my duty to make amends for the wrong done the asking their retracting the offensive charges laid at their door by these publications. . ." The publications are to be "withdrawn from circulation" and "that henceforth the Dearborn Independent will be conducted under such auspices that articles reflecting on the Jews will never again appear in its columns. Finally, let me add that this statement is made on my own initiative and wholly in the interest of right and justice.

This "retraction" was dated June 30, 1927.

How the Ford money and Foundation fell under the control of the Jews and their collectivist agencies is another story. FORD never changed his mind.


In l939, Harry Bennett told me he would like to have me meet Wm. Dudley Pelley whose occultism I had criticized. I had never met him. He said: "He will be coming in here any day to get money and GET IT. He is a swell guy. All that stuff is just a gag with him!"

Rev. Gerald WINROD was doing an eye-opening job in his paper which had some 100,000 subscribers, I understand. He told me that Ford gave him $20,000 when he ran for office in Kansas at that time, on an anti-Pharisee platform.

I was working on the "OCTOPUS", which my husband,who afterwards regretted it, had me put out under a pen name. Ford gave me $5,000 in April or May of 1939 so that I could add to my office staff which that year cost $12,000.

One of our lawyers, during the infamous "sedition trial" to prosecute anti-Communists as Nazi "fascists", stated that none of the defendants had ever been as anti-Pharisee as Henry Ford had been. A public blast was issued from the Ford staff stating that FORD had never had any dealings with the so-called "seditionists". So, a separate trial aimed to dislodge the offending lawyer, Mr. Laughlin, I was put on the witness stand and testified what is written above. This was at the suggestion of Dr. Winrod who said one or the other of us should spill the truth. THERE WAS SILENCE - NO DENIAL from the Ford organization or Henry himself.


One may shrug off the Protocols as "forgeries" (of what?), but one cannot deny that the one supreme authority, the "LAW" of Talmudic Judaism is the Babylonian Talmud. Such top books put out by the Jewish Publication Society of America, adjunct of the World High Comman, the American Jewish Committee, as "The Messiah Idea in Jewish History", etc repeat the theme of the duty of WORLD power by the Talmudists whose religion is the Tradition of the Pharisees in written form. - -

"The New York World" of Feb. 17, 1921 published an interview with Mr. FORD, in the course of which he was asked: "Is your belief that the Jews are endeavoring to control the world based in any degree on the so-called PROTOCOLS... said to have been formulated by the Elders of Zion? You know, of course, that these have been denounced as forgeries or inventions. Do you believe they are genuine? He replied: "The only statement I care to make about the PROTOCOLS is that they fit in with what is going on. They are sixteen years old and have fitted the world situation up to this time. They fit it now."


Mr. FORD had been convinced of the Jewish responsibility for World War I by two Jews on his Peace Ship (See Ford Peace Party in my "RED NETWORK", and the activities of Rosika Schwimmer and Louis Lochner). This was covered in an interview in the "Jewish World", Jan. 5, 1922. He determined to make the truth known to his fellow Americans when he returned to this country, he said.


I spoke over the Moody Bible Institute radio a number of times, at special meetings and in the Moody church. The Moody radio teacher of the Bible for many years was Mrs. Iris I. McCord who was a close and most beloved friend to her death. She told me of the incessant pressure being put on the head of the Moody Bible Institute, Dr. Gray, to disavow his belief that the Protocols are Jewry's plan in action. But in vain, although some of the incidents were most threatening. Dr. Gray steadfastly refused to change his position. The Moody Monthly for Sept. 1927 carried an article by him on the"apology", forced from Henry FORD by the then chief of the High Command American Jewish Committee, Louis MARSHALL. Dr. Gray wrote:

"This confession in our opinion is another link in the chain of prophecy. As we read it we were impressed that the great millionaire went further than the circumstances of the case required him to go. To put it another way, we do not believe the editor of the "Independent", Mr. Ford's paper, was either as foolish or as wicked as the confession of its proprietor would make him appear. We believe he had good grounds for publishing some of the things about the Jews which he did publish, and that whether Mr. Ford was aware of it or not he, Mr. Ford, might have found corroborative evidence thereof had he looked for it. Indeed, the pressure brought to bear upon Mr. Ford to make his confession was in itself such corroborative evidence. The pressure came from the Jews - all over the world, and in the face of it Mr. Ford was panic-stricken. He is one of the richest men in the world, and of course conscious of the power that money brings with it; but he was made to feel that the Jews'have more money and hence more power than he, and that in such a cause their money and their power can be quickly mobilized against an opponent, and with crushing consequences.


I knew Dr. Gray. At that time (l932-4) he understood the anti-Christ subversion role of the so-called Jew as I did not. Like the Christian ministry as a whole, however, he knew nothing of the Tradition of the Pharisees' Babylonian Talmud, its written form,, which is the sole guide and authority of so-called Judaism today and since 70 A.D. Then the fall of the Jerusalem Temple, the disappearance of the Sadducees and departure of Scripture-believers...into Christianity, left the Pharisees in sole control of distorting and reversing Scripture, as Christ stated in such fiery terms (Matt. 23; John 8:37-44, etc, etc). I also knew the late Dr. Arno C. Gaebelein.


Dr. Gaebelein regarded the Protocols, like Dr. Gray, with respect. The brilliant Dr. Gaebelein was a guest in my home, presented me with his books, and we were entertained by him in New York. He also knew no more about the TALMUD than other clergy - which is nil. With the best intentions in ihe world, it would be interesting to find out how the two devout Christians came to publish, or at least to sign as co-editors, certain notes in the Schofield Bible. I might guess that they took the word of some "nice, sympathetic" Rabbi for the statements in the note to Matthew 3:7 and to Matthew 2:4. They were two of eight consulting editors.


The notes to Matt. 3:7 include this: "The Pharisees were strictly a sect...and took an obligation to remain true to the principles of Pharisaism. They were correct, moral, zealous and self-denying, but self-righteous (Luke 8:9), and destitute of the sense of sin and need".


If Drs. Gray and Gaebelein had ever read the sub-sewer filth and criminality of the Tradition of the Pharisees in its written form, the Babylonian Talmud, NOTHING could have made those sincere Christians put their name to a statement like that. Furthermore, if the above were true, then Christ was guilty of criminal libel!

The note to Matthew 2:4 is as nauseous. After defining the scribes as those who made copies of the Scriptures, is this: "To this legitimate work the scribes added a record of rabbinical decisions on questions of ritual" (Note: actually on questions of the supremacy of Oral law over Scriptural law, called Halachoth, singular, Halachah -ED) "the new code resulting from those decisions (MISHNA); the Hebrew sacred legends (GEMARA) forming with the MISHNA the TALMUD".

To call the thousands of pages of endless drivel, criminal filth on sub-sewer themes, which comprise the argumentation called GEMARA, "Hebrew sacred legends" is too nauseous to describe. If you will look-thru even 100 of the nearly 300 photostats in my "Plot Against Christianity", divided into Mishna and Gemara, not to speak of thousands of pages not reproduced from the Talmud, you would understand why I wrote "AWFUL" beside the footnotes described, in my copy of the Schofield Bible. If you need a mild stomach cleansing you might pick up a copy of the "Kitzur", or abbreviated, "Schuchan Aruch", or "Code of Jewish Law", originally compiled by the Talmudic specialist Joseph Caro, in 1565. It became, to quote the Universal Jewish Encylopedia, "the standard authoritative source for Judaism".

Chapters 4 and 5 of the condensation of Caro from the Talmud, are devoted to the subject of how to behahave in a privy, a product of "the reprobate mind", as Paul called it.


Telling big lies for the fun of it is called HAGADA. Talmudic passages describing God's big feet, his throwing an egg that covers 40 countries and playing with the fish part of each day - that is Hagada. A compilation of the manuscripts usually copied from teacher to pupil, on eye-gouging, grave robbing, blood-throwing voodoo-practices connected with the inter-related Cabal (spelled several ways) illuminats many things. This Cabalistic voodoo comprising the necromancy, witchcraft, etc, practices of paganism, forbidden by the Bible, is usually kept secret with teacher allowing pupil to copy directions directly.

"RITUAL MAGIC" by E.M. Butler-Schrode, Professor of German in, the University of Cambridge, compiled a sickening array of these manuscripts found in museums (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1949). Her lighthearted approach to this subject as an "intellectual" topic does not alter the formidable impact of the material. That communistic proponent of free love, BERTRAND RUSSELL, calls it, according to the paper cover of the book: "Delightful reading and highly informative". It is the latter.


Under "Blood Accusation", the 1905 "Jewish Encylopedia" devoted more than seven pages to the trials held from one end of Europe to the other. Some 122 are itemized and dated. To quote: "Of the alarmingly large numbers of ritual trials only a few of the more important and instructive can here be mentioned". The descriptions start with "the case of Little St. Hugh of Lincoln... mentioned by Chaucer", a 13th century case. Thirty-nine in the 19th century are covered. Of course, like the Protocols, in every country and century, the charges were false".


Picture your own reaction after studying endless data on this subject, mostly from Jewish sources, to read the following Schofield Bible footnote which the innocent fundamental Christian ministers let go out under their sponsorship!

The note to Matthew 2:4 continues:

After stating that the Mishna and Gemara together form the Talmud (which is correct) comes this: "commentaries on the O.T. (Midrashim); reasonings upon these (HAGADAH); and finally, mystical interpretations which found in Scripture meanings other than the grammatical, lexical, and obvious ones (the KABBALA); not unlike the allegorical method of Origen, or the modern Protestant 'spiritualizing interpretation'".


How can one comment? It is too much. The backbone of the Cabala is centered upon sex, sex, sex. As in the paganism denounced by the Bible, procreation is worshipped as creation and worshipped by acts to match. And, in Cabalistic works Bible verses are dragged in to give "prestige" as in the Talmud, both reversing the actual teachings of the verses. As Christ told the Pharisees they were "hypocrites!" and: "Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your Tradition!"

Have you ever heard a Christian minister explain what Christ was talking about in Matthew 15 and Mark 7 when the Pharisees razzed Him about handwashing and He countered with their shyster way of dedicating their goods, theoretically, to the Temple so they could tell their parents they could expect no support from them as all they had belonged to "God"?

The whole Talmud book of YADAYIM (hands) is based on the Pharisee handwashing in connection with their demonology. The demons invoked stick around until ushered off with water, they presumably live in. The Pharisees denounced Christ for not practicing this rite.

TASHLIK is a ceremony, says the Jewish Ency. (1905), for the afternoon of Jewish New Year's Day: "it is customary to congregate near a running stream", and the ZOHAR is said to refer to it. Bread is thrown in for the demons and "The Cabalistic practice of shaking the ends of one's garments at the ceremony. . . The Orthodox Jews of New York perform the ceremony in large numbers from the Brooklyn and Manhattan bridges".


Gershom Scholem is listed in the big-shot's 1955 "Who's Who in World Jewry" as an Israel educator and "Prof. of Kabbala, Hebrew U., Jerusalem since 1933" (born Berlin, 1897). His book, "Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism" (1946, Schocken Pub., Jerusalem and N.Y.) should be studied by theological students enlightening them on the persistence of ancient paganism under the whited sepulchre of "Judaism".

Excerpts from the Zohar were put out by him in 1949, under the same auspices.

The book is entitled: "ZOHAR - The Book Of Splendor." Its first words in the Introduction are:

"The book of ZOHAR, the most important literary work of the Kabbalah, lies before us in some measure inaccesible and silent, as befits a work of secret wisdom..." The duty of cohabitation is the constant theme. Concerning a man away from home: "it is his duty, once back home, to give his wife pleasure...There is a twofold reason for this duty of cohabitataion. First, this pleasure is a religious one, giving joy also to the DIVINE PRESENCE...and for this reason 'thou shalt visit thy habitation and not sin', in gladly carrying out the religious duty to have conjugal intercourse before the Presence" (p. 35). That is only a starter.

If the dear misguided Schofield clergy really wanted to know what the "spiritualizing" interpretation of Scripture is in the Cabala, they should have studied the book of ZOHAR.

Scholem tells how from 1500 to 1800 the Zohar was "a source of doctrine and revelation equal in authority to the Bible and Talmud" (p.7). Then it became less known to "the broad masses" until the 18th century: "the Jewish Enlightenment again brought it into prominence, seeking to make it an active force in its own struggle...supplementing the Bible and Talmud on a new level of religious consciousness". The ZOHAR is termed "the mystical-theosophical interpretation of Scripture" (p. 20) which simply means converting the Old Testament into a glorification of voodoo paganism and sex-worship. And it calls one of the Talmudic rabbis, Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai, "the holy lamp". It should be read after a sound night's sleep and, like the Talmud, on an empty stomach.

God, in the Zohar, as thruout the Talmud, is the "EnSof" or nature essence, without any attribute and can neither know nor be known. Which, of course disposes of the Bible, His WORD.


It is not irrelevant to here state that the Report on the Protocols by the "Subcommittee to Investigate the Administrafion of the Internal Security Act and Other Internal Security Laws To the COMMITTEE ON THE JUIDICIARY - United States Senate -August 1964 - (whatta-mouthful!) states:

"Director of Research, BENJAMIN-MANDEL"

This Jewish gentleman issued a thoroughly kosher report.

Number 9 of the charges concerning the Protocols states: "At a recent trial in Bern, Switzerland, the court declared the 'PROTOCOLS' to be forgeries".


Yes, ever since 1935 when two men were brought to trial in Berne, Switzerland, B'nai B'rith and its henchmen have been peddling the lie that by court decree the Protocols had been declared "forgeries". That has lasted for 29 years now. And the Senate report finds it is still useful.


But, what are the facts?

"We rejoice to learn that on May 14, 1935, the Cantonal Court of Berne, Switzerland, openly denounced the so-called 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' as forgeries, obvious plagiarism, immoral, and manifestly prepared for the purpose of inciting popular passion against the Jews". Thus said the "New York Evening Post", May 14, 1935.


This has been repeated endlessly ever since.

BUT when the Swiss Court of Appeals on Nov. 1, 1937 not only acquitted the principal defendant, Sylvio Schnell, and assessed the entire cost of the trial, 30,000 francs, against the state and reversed the verdict, Jewry kept SILENCE! The decision cited the fact that the Marxist-Judge Meyer had heard not one witness for the defense; had kept no Court record of the proceedings; and detailed other irregularities of the trial.

The defendants had been arrested on complaint of the Federation of Jewish Communities of Switzerland on the charge that they had violated Article 14 of the Swiss law against distributing obscene literature, at a public meeting - the Protocols. The Appeals Court ruled that the "experts" for the Jews, C. A. Loosi and Prof. A. Baumgarten, appointed by Judge Meyer, not only were biased on the Jewish question, but, moreover, the authenticity of the Protocols had no bearing on the case since they are of a political nature and do not belong in the category of obscene literature.

The Appeals Court also denounced "the prejudice and gross irregularities" which had been committed in the trial. Not a single one of the 40 witnesses for the defense had been permitted to testify, while all sixteen of the witnesses for the Jewish Community which brought the suit had been heard. . ."

"The proceedings were accordingly carried on solely upon the testimony of the Jewish plaintiffs. And further, although Swiss law demands that in the case of every law suit, shorthand minutes of the proceedings be taken by an official of the court, the Judge did not adhere to this condition, but permitted the Jewish plaintiffs to appoint two private stenographers to keep the register of the official proceedings during the hearing of their own witnesses. As, therefore, no legal record of the proceedings was kept, it follows that the whole procedure, and the verdict itself, are both null and void".

One is tempted to say the same for the pompous "Report of the Senate Committee (Benny Mandel's) concerning the Protocols". [END]