Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page
You remember, this current gold hunt began early last year, when Jewish leaders came up with the idea of expanding their claim for reparations from the 1930s and 1940s to include countries besides Germany. They already had bled Germany for $60 billion since 1948, most of which went to Israel. That averages out to about $60,000 for every Jewish family of four now in Israel. Getting that money from Germany was relatively easy, because the Allied governments had an occupation army in Germany that was ready to squeeze the Germans whenever the Jews gave the word. All they had to do to keep the Germans from complaining about these massive extortion payments was step up their whining about gas chambers and about the soap and lampshades supposedly manufactured from the corpses of gassed Jews. When they really wanted to shut up the doubters and the questioners, they would have Steven Spielberg crank out a new Hollywood dramatization of the so-called "Holocaust," which would have the effect of making anyone so "insensitive" as to think of denying the poor, persecuted Jews anything they demanded seem like a real heel to the public.
A few years ago they added a new twist to their racket by implying that it was not just the Germans who owed them reparations for having run Aunt Sarah and Uncle Abe through a crematorium at Auschwitz: everybody owed them for permitting the wicked Germans to "Holocaust" Sarah and Abe. The United States and the other Western countries who fought against Germany during the Second World War could have stopped the "Holocaust" if they really had wanted to, the Jews complained. The Allies could have bombed the rail lines leading to the German concentration camps, but they didn't, the Jews complained. The Allies could have taken in many Jewish refugees fleeing from Germany before the war, but they didn't: they turned the refugee ships back, and the Jews aboard them consequently perished in the "Holocaust," the Jews complained. "You could haff saved millions of us if you really had vanted to, but you didn't vant to. It vass your anti-Semitism which made you insensitive to our needs back in the 1930s and 1940s. So now you owe us."
After a good, long whine along this line intended to soften up and "sensitize" the Gentile world, and after a law prohibiting negative comments about identifiable ethnic groups was passed in Switzerland, the Jews became much more specific in their complaints. They claimed that many Jews who had stashed their money in secret, numbered Swiss bank accounts during the 1930s and early 1940s in anticipation of difficulties with the German authorities, subsequently died during the war, and their money still remained in the secret accounts. The Swiss had not done all they could to try to locate heirs of the depositors. They owed all of that money in dormant accounts to the Jews -- plus interest, of course. The head of the World Jewish Congress, Edgar Bronfman, who also belongs to the family who owns the world's biggest liquor company, Seagram, took charge of the effort to force the Swiss to pay up. Bronfman estimated that the amount owed to the Jews by the Swiss is $7 billion. Later the Jews expanded their claims to include insurance policies held by Jews who disappeared during the war and also gold used by the Germans to pay the Swiss for various commodities imported by Germany during the war. The Swiss should have known, claim the Jews, that some of that gold had come from confiscated Jewish assets. "Giff it back to us," the Jews now demand.
Of course, every large bank does have some dormant accounts, and in the case of Swiss banks, which always have taken pride in the confidentiality they offer to their customers, it is understandable that today Izzy and Rebecca may not have been able to get their hands on or even find the money that they believe Uncle Abe may have stashed in a secret account 60 years ago. The Swiss bankers pointed out that they always have treated their Jewish customers just like everyone else, and that any heirs who establish their claims in the normal manner would receive whatever was in Abe's account. The Jews feigned outrage at this response and accused the Swiss of being "insensitive" for failing to take into account the fact that there were no death certificates or other documents for many of the Jews who disappeared during the war. Of course, with the widespread destruction that occurred during the war, the same is true for non-Jews.
A few Swiss officials recognized these Jewish claims for the shameless extortion effort that they are and publicly denounced them as such. Most Swiss politicians and bankers, however, were more concerned with not jeopardizing their public image by having the Jews unleash their media weapon, and so they took a conciliatory approach to the Jews. They made a special search of their accounts and then took the unprecedented step of publishing the names of all their depositors whose accounts had been dormant since the Second World War, so that Jews could more easily file claims. It turned out that only a very tiny percentage of these dormant accounts belonged to Jews. Of course, this was largely ignored by the media. And of course the Jews continued to whine about how the Swiss had wronged them. They added to their list of grievances the fact that the Swiss had interned Jews who came across the Swiss border during the war in their effort to avoid being arrested by the Germans. The Swiss put them into work camps for the duration of the war. One might think that the Jews would be grateful to the Swiss for this, but if you thought that then you don't understand the Jewish mentality. Instead of being grateful to the Swiss for saving them from the Germans the Jews publicly lamented the fact that the Swiss made them work for their room and board. The media only occasionally mention that all able-bodied Swiss citizens were also forced to work during the war.
The Swiss are a bit naive when it comes to dealing with Jews, and so they have continued to try to appease them, even as the Jewish demands have escalated. The Swiss bankers and politicians got together recently, estimated the most the Jewish assets they might be holding could amount to is in the neighborhood of $150 million, multiplied that figure by four, and then offered to pay the Jews $600 million to settle all of their claims.
Now, if you understand the Jewish mentality, then you don't have to be told how Bronfman and the other Jewish leaders responded to this offer. The Jews simply escalated their demands again. They feigned shock and outrage that the Swiss offered them only $600 million. Liquor czar and World Jewish Congress boss Edgar Bronfman scoffed at the $600 million offer and said that the Swiss owe his people billions of dollars, not millions. Israeli spokesman Yoram Dori called the Swiss offer "offensive" and said: "If we were not dealing with such a tragic story, this would be laughable." Bronfman's colleague in the World Jewish Congress, Israel Singer, claimed to be "pained" by the Swiss offer and said that the offer had been made in a "shabby" manner. Rabbi Marvin Hier of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles said of the Swiss offer: "We consider it a lack of seriousness on their part." He added that the offer "will be unanimously refused." New York Jewish lawyer Edward Fagan, who is representing more than 30,000 Jews claiming to be heirs to dormant accounts, called the Swiss offer "insulting" and said, "My 31,000 clients will not stand for this. . . . A billion dollars is not enough."
Behind all of this pretended outrage and these claims of feeling insulted by the Swiss offer of $600 million is a lot of very cold-blooded calculation by the Jews. They simply believe that by using their media power and their virtually total control of the Clinton administration, the U.S. Congress, and several state legislatures they can squeeze substantially more than $600 million out of the Swiss. The Jews' number-one step'n'fetchit in the Congress is New York Republican Senator Alphonse D'Amato, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. He is running for re-election in November and is counting heavily on Jewish support. After the Jews let their displeasure with the latest Swiss offer be known, D'Amato threatened to use the Senate Banking Committee for reprisals against Swiss banks operating in the United States. He said: "If they continue to proceed in this manner, whereby they are ducking their responsibilities, we have no other course in the Congress of the United States than to go forward."
New Jersey state Assemblyman Joel Weingarten has introduced legislation to bar New Jersey from investing state funds in Swiss banks, and similar measures are moving forward in New York City and in the New York state legislature. In California, the Chinese State Treasurer, Matt Fong, also is eager to prove his loyalty to the Jews.
So confident are the Jews that ultimately they can pressure the Swiss into yielding to their demands that World Jewish Congress boss Edgar Bronfman already is talking publicly about other countries on the Jews' hit list. "It's not just the Swiss banks," he said in a published telephone interview with the New York Jewish newspaper Forward. "We still have problems with the Poles, with the French, the Dutch, the Belgians, the other neutrals." It's pretty clear that after the Jews have sucked the Swiss dry they will be looking for blood from a long line of other countries they believe haven't done enough for them recently.
A new line of attack which the Jews are using is that the European countries which claimed neutrality during the Second World War and refused to join the Jewish-American-Soviet crusade against Germany weren't really neutral: they provided aid to the Germans, and so now they owe reparations to the Jews. Switzerland also had business dealings with the Allies, but this is ignored. A Jewish official in the Clinton administration, Stuart Eizenstat, has been especially active in pushing the idea that the neutral countries were guilty of not doing enough for the Jews. He has prepared a report for the U.S. State Department in which he strongly criticizes Sweden, Spain, and other neutral countries. Eizenstat concludes: "It is clear that these countries were committing unneutral acts, even by the standards of the times."
The arrogance of Eizenstat's complaint is really breathtaking, considering the fact that under Jewish pressure the Roosevelt administration, in 1939, 1940, and 1941, at a time when the United States was officially "neutral," was committing unneutral acts against Germany which dwarfed into insignificance anything the Swedes and the Spaniards might have been doing to help Germany. Not only was the Roosevelt government supplying first Britain, and later the Soviet Union, with vast supplies of war materiel, but Roosevelt was trying everything he could to provoke the Germans into some action that would give him an excuse to enter the war on the Jewish side. In September 1941, three months before the official entry of the United States into the war, he went so far as to order the U.S. Navy to shoot on sight at any German naval vessel encountered in the Atlantic.
Unfortunately, the historical facts of the behavior of all the parties involved in the Second World War are not presented to the American public by the mass media, but just the facts the Jews want the public to know about. The average citizen listens to the complaints of the Jews about the unneutral behavior of Switzerland, Sweden, and Spain and believes that there may be some justification to the Jewish demands for reparations. It never occurs to the average couch potato to ask, "Hey, what about reparations for all of the other peoples who were looted during the war? Why are the Jews the only ones entitled to reparations? And if the Jews are entitled to reparations for losses that occurred 60 years ago, why shouldn't the Palestinians be entitled to reparations for what the Jews stole from them much more recently?"
No, unfortunately, it doesn't occur to the average American to ask such questions. He just accepts at face value whatever he reads in his newspaper or sees on his television screen. And as long as his newspaper and his television screen are controlled by the Jews, he's not likely to see anything which would cause him to question the current Jewish demands for gold from the rest of the world.
You might wonder how anyone could possibly be as arrogant as the Jews are in their quest for reparations. I think that the best explanation for that is to be found in the Jews' view of themselves and their relationship to the non-Jewish peoples of the world. This view is best expressed in documents the Jews themselves have written: documents such as their Talmud and their Old Testament. I understand, of course, that most Jews today are entirely secular and do not regard such documents with any special reverence or awe. Nevertheless, they provide wonderful insight into the Jewish mentality.
More than 3,000 years ago, when the immigrant Jew Joseph managed to become the most powerful bureaucrat in the Egyptian government by claiming to be able to interpret dreams for the superstitious pharaoh, according to the Old Testament book of Genesis, he acquired a monopoly control over the Egyptian grain market and doled out grain to the hungry Egyptian people or withheld it, according to his policy -- although he invoked the name of the pharaoh in exercising his policy. He then invited his fellow Jews to come into Egypt and to "eat the fat of the land." Not surprisingly, this policy caused resentment toward the Jews by the Egyptians, and eventually the Egyptians, under a new pharaoh, threw the Jews out.
Now, it's not really important whether or not this account in Genesis is historically accurate. What's important is the Jews' attitude toward this account, and their attitude is that it was right and proper for them to exploit the Egyptians, and that the Egyptians were persecuting them in expelling them. It was the Jews' right to exploit the Egyptians, because whatever the Egyptians had really belonged to the Jews as God's Chosen People.
One sees this attitude of "what's yours is really mine, because I am a member of the Chosen People" expressed over and over again in the Old Testament. In the book of Isaiah it is perhaps most explicit. Isaiah presents to his fellow Jews a vision of the future in which the Gentiles of the world will deliver all of their wealth to the Jews and will become the servants of the Jews. And anyone who refuses to pay reparations to the Jews will be punished severely: "The nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish." This is spelled out in detail in the sixtieth and sixty-first chapters of Isaiah.
Observant Jews focus their consciousness of their Jewishness on this assumed obligation of the Gentile world to turn its wealth over to them. They have a custom of attaching a little box to one of their doorposts, with a piece of parchment, called a mezuzah, in the little box. The parchment is inscribed in Hebrew characters with 22 lines from the Old Testament which epitomize to them what it means to be a Jew: that is, with the 22 lines they regard as the most important in all of their religious writings. These 22 lines are from the fifth book of Moses, also known as Deuteronomy. They stress the importance of Jews adhering to the contract they have with their tribal god. The interesting thing is that immediately following these 22 lines in Deuteronomy is spelled out what their god will give to them as his obligation under the contract. And what is promised to the Jews is essentially all the wealth of the world: specifically, all the wealth now in the hands of non-Jews. "Thy god shall . . . give thee great and goodly cities, which thou buildedst not, and houses full of all good things, which thou filledst not, and wells digged which thou diggedst not, and vineyards and olive trees which thou plantedst not. . . . Every place whereon the soles of your feet shall tread shall be yours." Remember, religious Jews regard this promise, this contract, as the core of their religion.
As you know, it is not my custom to bring religion into these broadcasts. I certainly don't want to start any religious arguments among my readers. But I do think that a consideration of the nature of Jewish religious belief, as expressed in their religious writings, can shed some useful light on their attitudes today. Whether they are religious Jews or non-religious Jews they all seem to have the attitude that they have some god-given right to exploit the rest of us. If there are Jews who dissent from this policy of collecting reparations from the rest of the world, I would like to hear them speak up. So far they seem to be rather unanimous in their support of the notion that the Swiss owe them billions of dollars -- and the Swedes and the Spaniards and, in fact, all the rest of us.
Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page