Read this article in:



The modern "Protocols of Zion"

How the mass media now promotes the same lies that caused the death of more than 5 million Jews in WWII

Historical and Investigative Research
25 Aug 2005, by Francisco Gil-White


1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7


Genocides don’t just happen. The killers must think they kill in self defense. Which is to say that the victims of an extermination must first be perceived as a mortal danger. For this, a propaganda campaign will be necessary. The propaganda that got between 5 and 6 million Jews exterminated in WWII went by the name Protocols of The Learned Elders of Zion. This series documents that this propaganda is once again being energetically spread by the Western mass media, just as it was in the prelude to WWII.

The next Catastrophe looms...

Short Preface

How likely is a great anti-Jewish slaughter in the twenty-first century?

To answer this question is to make a forecast. Any kind of forecast requires the person making the prediction to evaluate patterns in the past in order to guess about the future. Thus, in order to get a feel for the likelihood of an anti-Jewish slaughter in the twenty-first century we examine the past to see whether such an event would be surprising, or else normal. As it turns out, it would be perfectly normal. For 2000 years in the Western world it has been more common than not for a century to contain at least one great anti-Jewish bloodletting. Unless otherwise specified, the items in the following list -- which is not complete, but which will suffice to make my point -- are culled from James Carroll's history of Western antisemitism, entitled Constantine's Sword:

1st century - Genocide of the Jews by the Romans (‘First Jewish War’)

2nd century - Genocide of the Jews by the Romans (‘Diaspora Revolt’ and ‘Second Jewish War’)

4th century - Following Emperor Constantine's Council of Nicaea (325), all sorts of imperial measures against the Jews, special taxes, prohibition on new synagogues, and prohibition of Christian-Jewish marriages.

Church father Ambrose encourages burning of synagogues so as to abolish Judaism.

5th century - Atacks against Jewish communities during Holy Week, including the burning of synagogues.
[00] A great massacre of Jews in Alexandria.

[There is a relative pause in anti-Jewish attacks, and relative tolerance toward Jews, due to the collapse of the political structure of the Roman Empire. Once the German aristocracies that conquered Europe converted to Catholicism, and the empire was reconstituted as the Germanic Holy Roman Empire of the Middle Ages, the attacks are renewed.]

11th century - Crusaders massacre Jewish communities in the Rhineland.

12th century - Crusaders massacre Jews in Europe; persecution in Spain.

13th century - Forced conversions of Jews all over Europe.

14th century - Black Plague is blamed on Jews. Perhaps three hundred Jewish communities are wiped out. Jews in the Rhineland are exterminated. Jews in Seville are massacred, followed by widespread pogroms in Iberia.

15th century - Spanish inquisition. Many Jews are killed. More than 150,000 are expelled from Spain.

16th century - Inquisition becomes pan-European phenomenon.

17th century - Inquisition continues.

19th century - In 1827 the Russian Tsar began a process of slow-genocide against the Eastern Jews, by forced conscription into the Russian army for Jewish boys, starting at the age of eight. Somewhat later the rate of conscription for some populations of Jews was raised to 5 times higher than what was applied to any other population, and matching the rate of groups selected for special punishment. The terms of service in the Russian army were 25 years.

19th century - Widespread pogroms against the Eastern Jews in the Russian Empire.

20th century - Widespread pogroms against the Eastern Jews in the Russian Empire, and then a genocide by the German Nazis all over Europe.

The twentieth century massacres, still fresh, were especially bloody. One often hears the slogan “Never Again,” meaning never again a Holocaust such as was carried out by the German Nazis. The slogan is invoked almost as a magical incantation, as if its recitation had the power to prevent the next antisemitic mass atrocity. It does not. If practically every century there have been great massacres of Jews in the Western world, then the least risky prediction that a historian can make for the twenty-first century is that there will be another -- without even looking at the evidence for current trends. The burden of proof is therefore on those who believe this cannot happen again: they will have to document why the world is now different.

This is a burden they cannot meet.

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the hostile propaganda that got hundreds of thousands of Jews persecuted and/or killed in Tsarist Russia, and then between 5 and 6 million Jews exterminated in WWII, is once again being energetically spread by the Western mass media, under a different guise. The result will be the same: a great massacre of Jews. This piece will document what the mass media does and how it prepares the ground for the next genocide, which is right around the corner. Unless this is quickly understood by the millions of people who will either kill, abet, or silently watch, the great Jewish Catastrophe of our times will soon overtake us.


1. Introduction: The "Protocols of Zion" in the broadest historical perspective.

George Santayana famously said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” What he meant was that problems have causes; if they are not examined, these causes cannot be recognized when they return, and we must suffer their consequences all over again. In the case of a disastrous, genocidal war, such as WWII, we are talking about problems that really ought to be avoided. Best to pay close attention to the causes, then.

So let us ask the question: What causes one people to exterminate another?

I think the answer is simpler than the multitude of hand-wringing disquisitions on the WWII massacres have led us to believe. Yes, of course, many people follow orders without asking why, and so forth. But still, extermination is the most extreme of all possible human behaviors; people will not do it unless they think they are defending themselves.

So let us call that my hypothesis.

What my hypothesis predicts is that exterminations will be preceded by massive propaganda efforts meant to convince large segments of population A that population B represents a catastrophic and imminent danger to population A, and hence must be destroyed -- in self defense. Do we have evidence of such a massive propaganda effort prior to WWII?

We do.

Around the turn of the twentieth century, the Russian Tsar’s secret police, the Okhrana, produced a hoax that accused ‘the Jews’ of controlling all of the governments of Europe, and the United States, in addition to leading all the revolutionary movements, plus the capitalist enterprises. The document was called The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, and it pretended to be the minutes of a secret meeting conducted by a circle of super-powerful Jews who in secret controlled everything. These supposed Jewish elders absurdly represent themselves as evil in the document, and explained to each other how they were going to destroy ‘gentile [read: Christian] civilization.’ They’re just up to no good.

In producing this hoax, the Tsar’s people were trying to prevent the revolution that was brewing by distracting the oppressed Russian masses with the danger that this especially oppressed and destitute minority, ‘the Jews,’ supposedly posed for everybody. The revolution was not averted, but the hoax of The Protocols had for consequence in the Russian Empire a series of pogroms, which is to say episodes of vandalizing and sacking with the blessing of the authorities, including widespread massacres that cost tens of thousands of Jewish lives.[1a]

In 1921 Phillip Graves from the Times of London published a front-page demonstration that The Protocols was a cut-and-paste job from three works of fiction, but especially from Maurice Joly’s Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu, a political analysis of Napoleon III’s repressive regime that had absolutely nothing to do with Jews, one way or another. In order to show this, Graves put excerpts from Joly’s  Dialogue and from The Protocols side by side so that readers of the Times could see that they were practically identical.[2]

To no avail. The Protocols subsequently became a bestseller all over Europe and the United States, and the world, thanks to the sponsorship of wealthy antisemites such as Henry Ford and many others.[2a] The anti-Jewish hysteria continued to grow, and when Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany he made The Protocols required reading in German schools.[3] In this way, a large multitude of ordinary Westerners was made to believe that they were in mortal danger from ‘the Jews’: the so-called ‘Jewish Peril.’

This fearful hysteria prepared the ground for extermination.

Now, the various claims in The Protocols were completely contradictory and each of them alone quite implausible: Why would ‘the Jews’ simultaneously act as one to promote capitalism and to destroy it?; Given that they were historically the most oppressed population in the West, mostly dirt poor, and many of them still (in Russia) semi-slaves, how could they control the governments of Europe and the US?; Why would they allow themselves to live in such extreme disadvantage if they were supposedly so powerful? And once the killings started, another question was pertinent: Why weren’t ‘the Jews’ using their supposedly enormous power to counter the savagery of the Russian pogroms and of the Nazi Final Solution?

But the targets of this propaganda campaign -- ordinary gentiles -- for the most part did not stop to ask these questions because they were heirs to a tradition going back two-thousand years in which ‘the Jews’ had been demonized by Christian religious authorities as powerfully ‘evil,’ and moreover out to get ‘the Christians.’

Such accusations had produced many anti-Jewish massacres in the past. Analyzing the full list given at the top would keep us here too long, but the example of the fourteenth century is dramatic and instructive, because it bears a very close structural similarity to the Tsarist accusation: when 23 million europeans died in the Black Death of the fourteenth century, an imaginary Jewish conspiracy was blamed for it all, producing anti-Jewish slaughters in Europe and, in some places, exterminations.

These days we know that the Black Death was a plague epidemic originating probably in Central Asia which then spread to China, India, Egypt, all of Asia Minor, and reached Europe by 1346 or so. But the mediaeval Europeans didn’t know that. All they knew was that everybody was dying around them, and that they hated the Jews. So a rumor was circulated that all this dying originated in a Jewish scheme to poison the European drinking wells. As James Carroll explains in his history of Western antisemitism:

“. . .survivors in the cities [devastated by the plague] thought they knew the cause: a well-poisoning conspiracy of Jews. . . A masterly rumor identified a native of Toledo, one Jacob Pascal, whose name suggested Passover, as the initiator of the plot. A cabal (a word we have from ‘Kabbalah’) of Iberian Jews was the supplier of poison to Jewish agents elsewhere in Europe -- a first international conspiracy. Jews in Geneva, under torture, confessed that the rumor was true, which was all it took. As had been the case during the Crusades, the first major conflagration of anti-Jewish violence took place in the Rhineland, where Jews were slaughtered in large numbers. One chronicler reported that twelve thousand were put to death in Mainz -- an echo of [the Crusade of] 1096. . . .‘By the time the plague had passed,’ [historian] Barbara Tuchman observed, ‘few Jews were left in Germany or the Low Countries.’”[4]

The Jews also suffered as direct victims of the Black Death, of course, but the enraged Christians who thought they were defending themselves by exterminating the Jews did not stop to ask themselves why the Jews would poison themselves. Later, neither would Europeans in the twentieth century stop to examine the absurdities in The Protocols of Zion. The general similarities between the two cases are so striking that it is impossible not to see a causal chain at work: one accusation lays the ground for the next.

Even by the standards of the time, the Black Death accusations against the Jewish people were spectacularly absurd. Consider only that “About half of Norway’s population died when the Black Death (a plague epidemic) struck in 1349-50,”[5] so Norway suffered about as badly as England did.[6] And yet it should have been obvious to everybody that ‘the Jews’ had no opportunity to poison wells in Norway.

“Norwegians converted from paganism to Christianity in the course of nearly 100 years, largely as a result of coercive measures. In the year 1000, all non-Christians were banned from Norway in an effort to institutionalize Christianity as the national religion. Although the ban was presumably targeted at pagan adherents, it also put Norway out of bounds for Jews for over 800 years.”[7]

There were no Jews in Norway in 1349.

So this raises the question: Even if European Christians hated the Jews, still, how could they defy all logic to believe anything so ridiculous as the accusation that the Jewish people were responsible for the Black Death? Simple: ‘the Jews’ were supposed to be powerfully, and even supernaturally, ‘evil.’ After all, weren’t Christians hearing from their religious authorities every Sunday that ‘the Jews’ had killed God? If they were capable of that, then what wouldn’t -- and what couldn’t -- ‘the Jews’ do?

That first and most dramatic accusation (‘deicide,’ the killing of God), which appears in the canonical gospels, is false. Whether or not you believe that Jesus of Nazareth was God incarnate, the historical fact is that Jesus was executed by the Romans, something that even the gospels make clear. Of course, the gospels represent the Roman governor in Judea, Pontius Pilate, as reluctantly executing Jesus because he was threatened by ‘the Jews,’ who angrily demanded Jesus’ crucifixion. But there are several reasons why that particular claim is absurd.


Is this article useful? Help us do more with a donation .
Would you like to be notified of new articles? Sign up (it’s free) .


First of all, the Jewish people were one of the largest populations in the Roman Empire, and they were spread out all over the Mediterranean and beyond.[8] More than 99.99% of the Jewish population, therefore, simply could not be present at Jesus’ execution. The only people who could have been there were a small fraction of the Jerusalem Jews. So it is impossible that ‘the Jews’ -- as a people -- killed God even if we assume that Jesus was God incarnate and that the account in the gospels is reasonably historical.

But we cannot assume that the passion account in the gospels is reasonably historical. All the ancient documents we have making reference to Pontius Pilate, outside of the gospels, are consistent: Pontius Pilate was a monster who executed Jews for fun, and who delighted in provoking them.[9] He hardly needed to be threatened by an angry mob in order to execute a Jew who made trouble for Rome.

And Jesus made trouble for Rome.

“All the High Priests [of the Jerusalem Temple] whom we see in the gospel narratives,” as historian Fergus Millar explains, “were Roman appointees,” which means the Temple was at this time a center of Roman collaboration.[10] The Romans naturally needed to prop up the prestige of the Temple against the intellectual and physical attacks of Jewish revolutionaries, the better to wield the Temple’s authority for Rome’s benefit. Therefore, if Jesus was arrested for causing a commotion in the Temple, as the gospels assert, then Jesus was making trouble for Rome; Pilate, who enjoyed killing Jews anyway, cannot have been reluctant to execute Jesus.

Finally, consider that crucifixion was a sacrilege to the Jews, and a symbol of the oppression of the Romans against them, which was extreme. Why would a Jewish mob demand the crucifixion of a fellow Jew? Here, for context, is another passage from James Carroll’s history of Western antisemitism:

“In the year 4 BCE, which also happened to be the year of Jesus’ birth, Herod the Great died. His death left a temporary power vacuum, which caused violent outbreaks among forces loyal to various pretenders to succeed Herod as Rome’s client king and among the followers of messianic movements who sought to seize an opening against Rome. The Romans smashed every rebellion and, with those legions pouncing from Syria, restored direct imperial rule. As summed up by the scholars Richard Horsely and Neil Asher Silberman: ‘The Roman armies swept through many of the towns and villages of the country, raping, killing and destroying nearly everything in sight. In Galilee, all centers of rebellion were brutally suppressed; the rebel-held town of Sepphoris was burned to the ground, and all its surviving inhabitants were sold into slavery.’ Thousands of Jews were killed. Villages in Galilee were laid waste. In Jerusalem where rebels had briefly taken charge, the Romans showed the lengths to which they were prepared to go to maintain control by swiftly executing anyone even suspected of collusion with the rebellion -- Josephus puts the number at two thousand. The Roman means of execution, of course, was crucifixion, and Josephus makes the point that indeed the victims were crucified. This means that just outside the wall of the Jewish capital, crosses were erected -- not three lonely crosses on a hill, as in the tidy Christian imagination, but perhaps two thousand in close proximity. On each was hung a Jew, and each Jew was left to die over several days of suffocation, as muscles gave out so that the victim could no longer hold himself erect enough to catch a breath. And once squeezed free of life, the corpses were left on their crosses to be eaten by buzzards.”[11]

Believing that an angry Jewish mob in first-century Judea demanded of Pontius Pilate that Jesus be crucified is exactly like believing that an angry Jewish mob in the Third Reich demanded of Adolf Hitler that a controversial rabbi be sent to Auschwitz. This is not even remotely plausible, no matter what controversy had been sparked by the rabbi.

Those who adopted Christianity in the first century not only accepted this accusation but believed, on top of it, that ‘the Jews’ had killed God: deicide. As much of the eastern Mediterranean began to convert to Christianity, the Jews lost the political support they had previously found among the pagans, and it became possible for the Romans to carry out an anti-Jewish extermination in the first and second centuries that can only be compared to the Nazi Final Solution, and which may have outdone it in relative terms.

James Carroll writes:

“. . .in the climactic war of 66-73 CE [the first ‘Jewish War’], . . .Jerusalem was laid waste and hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed (Josephus and Tacitus put the number of Jewish dead in this first war at around 600,000; in the second ‘Jewish War’ sixty years later, the tally for Jewish victims is put at 850,000). . . [T]he vast number of victims were killed without the mechanized methods that make modern warfare so lethal, which is why analogies between Rome and the worst of twentieth century dictators [i.e. Adolf Hitler] may not be misplaced here. …if the [Roman] legions had had machine guns, bombs, railroads, and gas at their disposal, who is to say that any Jew would have survived the second century?”[12]

That looks bad enough, but in fact Carroll neglects to mention the ‘Diaspora Revolt,’ a genocidal installment that took place between the two ‘Jewish Wars’: “Historians estimate that many hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed by the Romans and Greeks during the ‘Diaspora Revolt’ of 115-17 CE.”[13] The sum total is that the pattern of absurd accusations followed by anti-Jewish exterminations began early, some two thousand years ago. Each accusation has made the next one seem plausible.

A cultural inertia.

Now, since there have been anti-Jewish massacres in Europe for a long time, and since, in modern times, they have been preceded by absurd accusations of super-powerful Jewish conspiracies, one would expect modern, educated people to be ready to identify the next such absurd accusation. Worryingly, they are not.

Today the world is awash with the twin rumors that Israel supposedly controls the lone superpower’s hated foreign policy, and that ‘the Jews’ supposedly control the mainstream Western media. Few people seem to think that there is anything too alarming in such beliefs, despite their having the same basic structure as the Black Death accusation which led to anti-Jewish exterminations in the fourteenth century, and despite being practically identical to the Protocols of Zion accusations, which led to anti-Jewish exterminations in the twentieth century. The Jewish people certainly do not appear to think that they are on the eve of another catastrophe, just as they also didn’t want to believe the worst prior to the Nazi genocides in which 5 to 6 million European Jews were annihilated. But from the historical perspective the current climate should be alarming in the extreme.

In 2003, Mahathir Mohammed, the former prime minister of Malaysia, said the following:

“We [Muslims] are actually very strong. 1.3 billion people [the total Muslim population] cannot be simply wiped out. The Europeans killed six million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule this world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them.

. . .They invented and successfully promoted Socialism, Communism, human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong, so they may enjoy equal rights with others. With these they have now gained control of the most powerful countries and they, this tiny community, have become a world power. We cannot fight them through brawn alone. We must use our brains also.”[14]

The ‘evil’ Jews, says Mahathir, invented human rights and democracy because they thought they had a right to equality with others, and so that persecuting Jews would appear wrong. Are you following this argument? Mahathir blames the Jews for inventing human rights and democracy.

Mahathir is a fascist.

Mahathir obviously agrees that in the past the Jewish people have been persecuted and did not enjoy equal rights (a situation of which he approves). This means that, in his view, ‘the Jews’ were not controlling the world when “Europeans killed six million Jews out of 12 million.” But according to Mahathir matters are different today, for ‘the Jews,’ he says, “have now gained control of the most powerful countries and they, this tiny community, have become a world power.”

And ‘the Jews’ are going to use this secret world power to do…what? Why, to wipe out the Muslims, says Mahathir! But Muslims shouldn’t just stand still and wait for this to happen: “We are actually very strong. 1.3 billion people cannot be simply wiped out. . .”

The above are just two excerpts from a speech in which Mahathir hammered away at the same point in a million different ways: ‘The super-powerful Jews are out to get us, and we need to defend ourselves before it is too late.’ The speech opened the 10th Organization of the Islamic Conference Summit, attended by every Muslim head of state in the world.

Mahathir got a standing ovation.

This is clearly designed to whip up hysterical fear of the Jews, just as Adolf Hitler’s identical accusations also were, with disastrous results. And Mahathir’s effort is not an isolated one.

The old Tsarist hoax, The Protocols of Zion, is a bestseller in the Muslim world (and elsewhere) today. Consider only that state-owned Egyptian TV recently created a 40-part series entitled Horseman Without a Horse that has been viewed all over the world, and which is a dramatization of The Protocols of Zion.[15]

And yet educated people are by and large not rushing to point out that an imminent anti-Jewish massacre is being prepared by such high-profile—and widely agreed upon—accusations, which are not radically different from the constant refrain heard in the West: that Israel and ‘the Jewish lobby’ supposedly control US foreign policy, and that ‘the Jews’ supposedly control the Western mass media (and all the banks!).

About the climate in the West, consider only what US presidential candidate Ralph Nader said in 2004, during the presidential campaign:

“The days when the chief Israeli puppeteer comes to the United States and meets with the puppet in the White House and then proceeds to Capitol Hill, where he meets with hundreds of other puppets, should be replaced.”[16]

Nader is supposedly a leftist, but what he says is indistinguishable from what the ultra-right-wing neo-Nazi websites write.[17]

It seems, therefore, that we are well on our way to proving George Santayana correct, once again. If these baseless and hysterical beliefs are once again allowed to run amok without contest, we are headed for another catastrophe.

So I will contest them.

I have already traced elsewhere the history of US foreign policy towards the Jewish people from the 1930s to the present, in order to demonstrate that this policy has been consistently and radically anti-Jewish, and continues to be, becoming more anti-Jewish all the time, contrary to the common belief and to Mahathir’s and Nader’s mouth-foaming rantings.[18]

I have also documented that the so-called 'Jewish lobby' does not produce pro-Israeli policies -- in fact, what AIPAC (the most visible organ in the ‘Jewish lobby’) does is promote pro-PLO US policies.[19]

In this piece I will document that neither do ‘the Jews’ control the Western mass media, and that in fact the media goes out of its way to attack the Jewish people.

The argument

Before I do anything else, let me lay out two hypotheses concerning the type of interest that may be behind what gets said in the Western mass media, and specify what kind of evidence will support one hypothesis against another.

Hypothesis 1: A pro-Jewish interest controls the Western mass media.

Hypothesis 2: An anti-Jewish interest controls the Western mass media.

If the media lies in order to defend the Jews, and in order to paint the enemies of the Jews unfairly in a bad light, then the hypothesis of a pro-Jewish interest controlling the media will be supported.

By the same token, to find the media lying in order to attack the Jews, and in order to paint their enemies unfairly in a good light, will support the second hypothesis, namely, that an anti-Jewish interest controls the mass media.

I will not be the first to argue and document that the Western mass media has an anti-Jewish bias. But the example I will rely on to make my case will show that the mass media is not merely biased but consciously duplicitous, thereby providing the strongest possible demonstration that it is anti-Jewish.


Is this article useful? Help us do more with a donation .
Would you like to be notified of new articles? Sign up (it’s free) .


I will look closely at the activities of two people: Raymond McGovern and Vincent Cannistraro, both of them ‘former CIA officials.’ I will establish, in this order,

1)  that McGovern and Cannistraro are darlings of the Western mass media, which media puts them prominently on display;

2)  that any fool with twenty minutes of time can easily demonstrate that McGovern and Cannistraro are liars who, by the way, used to train terrorists for a living;

3)  that the Western mass media (naturally) knows this about McGovern and Cannistraro, but it does not share it with the public;

4)  that McGovern and Cannistraro, employing spectacular lies, go out of their way to attack Israel and defend Israel’s terrorist enemies in the mass media; and

5)  that McGovern’s and Cannistraro’s widely reproduced criticisms of the Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq are carefully designed to make ‘the Jews’ appear as supposedly in control of the US government for nefarious ends, producing a modern version of that old slander, The Protocols of Zion.

Continue to part 2:


Footnotes and Further Reading

[00] Cornwell, J. 2000. El papa de Hitler: La verdadera historia de Pio XII. Barcelona: Editorial Planeta. (p.40)

In English: Cornwell, J. 1999. Hitler's pope: The secret history of Pius XII. New York: Viking.

[0] To read about this, consult:

Nathans, Benjamin. 2002. Beyond the Pale: The Jewish encounter with late imperial Russia, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. (pp.26-38)

[1] This footnote contains discussion of two pogroms. The first took place inside the Russian Empire, where the word 'pogrom' originates, in the town of Kishinev [Kih-shee-nuh-yev], in 1903, and the events are related by historian Amos Elon. The second took place in British Mandate 'Palestine,' and the events are related by Kenneth Levin (who quotes at length the writings of eye-witness Lieutenant Colonel John Patterson).


"On April 19 an outrage occurred in the small Bessarabian town of Kishinev, which, in less than 48 hours, left 45 local Jews lying dead, and nearly 600 wounded; 1,500 shops and homes were pillaged or destroyed. The church bells were ringing on Easter Sunday, when a wild mob, undoubtedly acting on a given signal, rushed through the narrow streets killing Jews and setting fire to their homes and stores. In the past few decades Kishiniev's Christian population of some 60,000 had lived peacefully alongside 50,000 Jewish artisans and small shopkeepers. The only newspaper in the town was a sensational anti-Semitic journal, the Bessarabitz, subsidized by the czarist Ministry of the Interior from a special slush fund. In recent months the Bessarabitz had waged a vicious campaign against the Jews of Kishinev, accusing them of ritual murder of Christian babies and of sponsoring, at the same time, both socialist revolution and the capitalist exploitation of Christians.

The police made no attempt to interfere in the widespread killing, looting, and arson. For almost twenty-four hours, while the army was ordered by the provincial governor to remain in its barracks, the mob ran amok. Nails were driven into victim's skulls, eyes gouged out, and babies thrown from higher stories of buildings to the pavement. Men were castrated, women were raped. The local bishop drove in his carriage through the crowd, blessing it as he passed. Only on the evening of the second day did the police appear on the scene to disperse the mob. By then the devastation had been accomplished. It was generally believed that Konstantin Pobedenostsev, the Czar's close adviser and head of the Holy Synod, had inspired the outrage in order to divert popular sentiments from the social revolutionists.

Pobedenostsev's own solution of the Jewish problem was known to be three-pronged: a third would convert, a third would emigrate, and a third would die. It was widely reported that Wenzel von Plehve, the czarist Minister of the Interior, had instructed the provincial governor of Kishinev not to be overzealous in his protection of the Jews. At Kishinev the government was testing a new technique to drown the revolutionary fervor in Jewish blood. News of the pogrom was suppressed in the Russian newspapers, which merely stated that there had been a sudden outbreak provoked by the Jews."

SOURCE: Elon, A. 1975. Herzl. New York: Holt, Reinhart, and Winston. (pp.373-374)

JERUSALEM: The following account of the 1920 anti-Jewish racist riots in Jerusalem is from Kenneth Levin:

"The British, in the [WWI] postwar years, were attempting to maintain their Middle East territories with very limited forces and were indeed concerned with minimizing local unrest. But, of course, this does not account for [British] Mandate [in 'Palestine'] officers working as agents provocateurs and stirring up anti-Jewish violence or for British authorities failing to quell Arab riots when they were fully able to do so. Nor does it explain the [British] Military Administration's preventing local Jewish units -- elements of the Jewish Battalions -- from coming to the defense of the Jews of Jerusalem. [The Jewish leader Vladimir Zeev] Jabotinsky, who tried to organize defense, was arrested by the British and sentenced to fifteen years' imprisonment. He was soon released by only in the context of an amnesty extended also to the rioters. The British chose to construe the Jewish units' attempts to defend the Jews of Jerusalem as an intolerable breach of military discipline and disbanded the units.

Liuetenant Colonel John Patterson, a non-Jewish British officer who had commanded the Zion Mule Corps in Gallipolli [a Jewish force that fought with distinction on the British side during WWI], was subsequently appointed commander of the 38th Jewish Battalion and led the battalion in the [WWI] Palestine campaign [during which the British wrested control of 'Palestine' from the Ottoman Turks]. Patterson wrote extensively of the anti-Jewish depredations to which his [Jewish] troops, and the Jewish population of Palestine, were subjected by the British military’s forces in Palestine under Allenby (the Egyptian Expeditionary Force) and later by the Military Administration. These depredations emanated both from the command structure and, in the wake of evident command tolerance, from the rank and file. With regard to Arab attacks on the Jews in April, 1920, in Jerusalem, Patterson, referring to the assault as 'the Jerusalem pogrom,' noted the Military Administration's encouragement of the violence, its failure to intervene to stop it, its blocking of intervention by Jewish troops, its attempts to use the Arab assault as an excuse to curb Zionist programs, and its scapegoating of Jabotinsky.

Patterson wrote, for example, of the events of April, 1920, 'A veritable 'pogrom,' such as we have hitherto only associated with Tsarist [Czarist] Russia, took place in the Holy City of Jerusalem in April, 1920, and as this was the climax to the maladministration of the Military Authorities, I consider that the facts of the case should be made public...

'The Balfour Declaration [which gave Britain the responsibility of establishing a Jewish homeland in British Mandate 'Palestine']...was never allowed [by the Military Administration] to be officially published within the borders of Palestine; the Hebrew language was proscribed; there was open discrimination against the Jews; the Jewish Regiment was at all times kept in the background and treated as a pariah. This official attitude was interpreted by the hooligan element and interested schemers in the only possible way, viz., that the military authorities in Palestine were against the Jews and Zionism, and the conviction began to grow [within Arab circles] that any act calculated to deal a death blow to Zionist aspirations would not be unwelcome by those in authority...

'Moreover, this malign influence was sometimes strengthened by very plain speaking. The Military Governor of an important town was actually heard to the presence of British and French Officers and of Arab waiters, that in case of anti-Jewish riots in his city, he would remove the garrison and take up his position at a window, where he could watch, and laugh at, what went on!

'This amazing declaration was reported to the Acting Chief Administrator, and the Acting Chief Political Officer, but no action was taken against the Governor. Only one interpretation can be placed on such leniency.'

Patterson, as quoted in Chapter 5, wrote elsewhere of the Arab attacks, 'There can be no doubt that it was assumed in some quarters that when trouble, which had been deliberately encouraged, arose, the Home Government, embarrassed by a thousand difficulties at its doors, would agree with the wire-pullers in Palestine, and say to the Jewish people that the carrying out of the Balfour Declaration, owing to the hostility displayed by the Arabs, was outside the range of practical politics.'"

SOURCE: Levin, K. 2005. The Oslo syndrome: Delusions of a people under siege. Hanover, NH: Smith and Kraus. (pp.203-204)

To learn more about the dramatic British support for anti-Jewish terrorist violence in British Mandate 'Palestine', visit:

"HOW DID THE 'PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT' EMERGE?: The British sponsored it. Then the German Nazis, and the US"; Historical and Investigative Research; 13 June 2006; by Francisco Gil-White.

[1a] “The Protocols of Zion”; Emperor’s Clothes; 26 November 2002; by Jared Israel.

[2] “The Protocols of Zion - An Exposure: Transcript of Philip Graves' articles published in the London Times, August 16 to 18, 1921”; Emperor’s Clothes; Posted 21 November 2002.

The above is an easy to read transcript of the London Times article. If you would like to look at the pdfs of the original, then visit:

[2a] “Henry Ford, who was so impressed by the efficient way meat packers slaughtered and dismantled animals in Chicago, made his own unique contribution to the slaughter of people in Europe. Not only did he develop the assembly-line method that Germans used to kill Jews, but he launched a vicious anti-Semitic campaign that helped make the Holocaust happen.

In the early 1920s Ford’s weekly newspaper, the Dearborn Independent, published a series of articles based on the text of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an anti-Semitic tract that had been circulating in Europe. Ford published a book-length compilation of the articles entitled The International Jew, which was translated into most of the European languages and was widely disseminated by anti-Semites, chief among them the German publisher Theodor Fritsch, an early supporter of Hitler. Thanks to a well-financed publicity campaign and the prestige of the Ford name, The International Jew was hugely successful both domestically and internationally.

The International Jew found its most receptive audience in Germany where it was known as The Eternal Jew. Ford was enormously popular in Germany. When his autobiography went on sale there, it immediately became the country’s number one bestseller. In the early 1920s The Eternal Jew quickly became the bible of the German anti-Semitism, with Fritsch’s publishing house printing six editions between 1920 and 1922.

After Ford’s book came to the attention of Hitler in Munich, he used a shortened version of it in the Nazi propaganda war against the Jews of Germany. In 1923 a Chicago Tribune correspondent in Germany reported that Hitler’s organization in Munich was ‘sending out Mr. Ford’s books by the carload.’ Baldur von Schirach, the leader of the Hitler Youth movement and the son of an aristocratic German father and American mother, said at the postwar Nuremberg war crimes trial that he became a convinced anti-Semite at age seventeen after reading The Eternal Jew. ‘You have no idea what a great influence this book had on the thinking of German youth. The younger generation looked with envy to symbols of success and prosperity like Henry Ford, and if he said the Jews were to blame, why naturally we believed him.’

Hitler regarded Ford as a comrade-in-arms and kept a life-sized portrait of him on the wall next to his desk in his office in Munich. In 1923 when Hitler heard that Ford might run for President of the United States, he told an American reporter, ‘I wish that I could send some of my shock troops to Chicago and other big American cities to help in the elections. We look to Heinrich Ford as the leader of the growing Fascist movement in America. We have just had his anti-Jewish articles translated and published. The book is being circulated in millions throughout Germany.’ Hitler praised Ford in Mein Kampf, the only American to be singled out. In 1931, when a Detriot News reporter asked Hitler what Ford’s portrait on the wall meant to him, Hitler said, ‘I regard Henry Ford as my inspiration.’”

SOURCE: “Animals, Slavery, and the Holocaust”; Logos; Spring 2005; vol. 4, iss. 2.; by Charles Patterson

[3] Cohn, N. 1981. Warrant for genocide: The myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy and the Protocols of the elders of Zion. Chico, CA: Scholar's Press.

[4] Carroll, J. 2001. Constantine's Sword: The Church and the Jews. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (p.339)

[5] Diamond, J. M. 2005. Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed. New York: Viking. (p.267)

[6] “The population in England in 1400 was perhaps half what it had been 100 years earlier; in that country alone, the Black Death certainly caused the depopulation or total disappearance of about 1,000 villages.”

SOURCE: "Black Death." Encyclopædia Britannica from Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
[Accessed August 7, 2005].

[7] “Jews in Norway”; From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

[8] Historian Robert Wolfe puts the Jews at 10% of the Mediterranean population. William Horbury says 8-9%, and that’s the lowest estimate I have seen. Some say higher than 10%.

Wolfe, R. 2003. The origins of the messianic ideal. New York: J-Rep. (p.59)

Horbury, W. 1991. "The Jewish dimension," in Early Christianity: Origins and evolution to AD 600. In honor of WHC Frend. Edited by I. Hazlett. London: SPCK. (p.40)

The Acts of the Apostles (2:5-11) mentions that Jerusalem was full of “Jews from every nation” who went there on pilgrimage. Here is the full list found in that text:

. . .Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea, and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphyla, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes [converts], Cretans and Arabs. . .

The first century Alexandrian Jewish philosopher Philo wrote in his Legatio ad Gaium (281-283) that

“. . .the Holy City [Jerusalem]. . .is the capital not of the single country of Judea but of most other countries also, because of the colonies which it has sent out from time to time to the neighboring lands of Egypt, Phoenicia, and Syria. . ., to the distant countries of Pamphylia, Cilicia, most of Asia as far as Bithynia and the remote corners of Pontus, and in the same way to Europe, to Thessaly, Boetia, Macedonia, Aetolia, Attica, Argos, Corinth, and most of the best parts of the Peloponnese. It is not only the continents that are full of Jewish colonies. So are the best known of the islands, Euboea, Cyprus, and Crete. I say nothing about the regions beyond the Euphrates. With the exception of a small district, all of them, Babylon and those of the other satrapies which have fertile land around them, have Jewish settlers. . .in Europe, Asia, and Libya, in continents and islands, in coastal and inland regions. . .”

[9] Here’s just one example from a long list of deliberate provocations by Pilate meant to give him an excuse to harass and kill Jews. He built an aqueduct in Jerusalem and appropriated money from the Temple to finance it, despite the fact that the Temple funds - even from the point of view of Roman law - were sacrosanct. When an angry crowd gathered to protest this, Pilate was ready for them, and had “ordered soldiers to dress in plainclothes, conceal their weapons, and mingle with the people.” When the crowd didn’t disperse he gave the order, and the mingled soldiers attacked. “Several people were killed, and others were trampled to death in the stampede that followed.”

SOURCE: Pagels, E. 1995. The Origin of Satan. New York: Random House. (pp.30-31)

[10] Millar, F. 1993. The Roman Near East: 31 BC -AD 337. London: Harvard University Press. (p.45)

[11] Carroll, J. 2001. Constantine's Sword: The Church and the Jews. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (p.83)

[12] Carroll, J. 2001. Constantine's Sword: The Church and the Jews. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. (p.90)

[13] Wolfe, R. 2003. The origins of the messianic ideal. New York: J-Rep. (pp.58-59)

[14] Dr Mahathir opens 10th OIC Summit: Update from The Star News Desk”; The Star Online; Thursday October 16, 2003.


“What do the EU, George Bush and Malaysian PM Mahathir have in Common? (Could it be they're all pushing the politics of antisemitism?)”; Empeor’s Clothes; 26 November 2003; By Jared Israel.

[15] “The Protocols of Zion”; Emperor’s Clothes; 26 November 2002; by Jared Israel.

[16] Mr. Nader's Baiting,  The Washington Post, August 15, 2004 Sunday,  Final Edition, Editorial; B06, 448 words

[17] For example, the Washington Post article above compared the quote from Nader to this, from the neo-Nazi National Alliance:

“Bush also repeated the catch-phrase . . . ‘committed to the security of Israel as a Jewish state,’ which is repeated almost word-for-word again and again by Israel's sycophants and Capitol Hill puppets.”

[18] “Is the US an Ally of Israel?”; Investigative and Historical Research; by Francisco Gil-White.

[19] "WHAT IS AIPAC FOR?: Does the so-called 'Jewish Lobby' produce pro-Israeli US foreign policy, or the opposite?"; Historical and Investigative Research; 5 May 2005; by Francisco Gil-White

Notify me of new HIR pieces!

HIR mailing list


 Part 1 - Introduction: The "Protocols of Zion" in the broadest historical perspective.

 Part 2 -  The mainstream Western media loves Raymond McGovern and Vincent Cannistraro, former CIA agents and anti-Israeli propagandists.

  Part 3 -  Should you believe ‘former CIA officials’ such as Raymond McGovern and Vincent Cannistraro?

   Part 4 -  How the mass media covers for Vincent Cannistraro, terrorist, and creator of the Nicaraguan Contras.

   Part 5 -  McGovern and Cannistraro both attack Israel - with lies.

   Part 6 -  Why doesn’t the US government expose McGovern and Cannistraro?

   Part 7 -  Why do people say that ‘the Jews’ control the media? They don’t.






































































































































































































































































































Notify me of new HIR pieces!

HIR mailing list