Rabbi Goldstein: The bond that has kept the Jewish people together throughout the centuries has been the Torah, and the desire to live up to it as the highest degree. When we had a temple and a holy land that we were living in, that wasn’t so important, it was a spiritual thing. When we went into exile we did so not on a military basis but because the temple was destroyed; it was a spiritual concept. It took place in physical terms, obviously, but it was basically spiritual. The whole aspiration of the Jewish people this past two thousand years has been to understand the Torah better and thereby to become a better person.
The main thing is that the Jew looks for his children to become righteous and to understand the Torah laws; we don’t look for aspirations among the nations. Throughout history the Jews have been despised, but they were content as long as they were allowed to live in peace.
Anglo-Hebrew Publishing: The Jews have been persecuted, but who hasn’t? Have the Jews been persecuted more than anyone else?
RG: Yes, inasmuch as there have been many, many persecutions of other nations, but we have a sentence that G_d (4) has separated us. He commanded: you are supposed to be on a higher plane, to be an example. Now, if you choose to disregard this, then the nations of the world will remind you that you’re supposed to be different. Anti-Semitism has a different form from general persecution, but basically what we had was the hierarchy of Judaism, the greatest man was the man who knew the Torah best.
AHP: What is the meaning of a chosen people as the Jews are known?
RG: The Jews are known as the Chosen People. The question is what do we mean by the Chosen People? What are we Chosen for? The Aryan view that the Nazis had, that you are chosen as a superior, that you can’t join that race, is false. Our Chosen means that we are chosen in a spiritual light to lead the nations of the world, to set an example, but not in a racist form, because anyone can become a Jew, and part of this system.
The aspiration of the Jews was, and still is, to abide by the Torah, to live by the laws of the Torah, and to achieve as much as they can through that.
AHP: If being a Jew is such good news for mankind and anyone can become part of the system, in your words, why don’t Jews proselytise? (5)
RG: Jews don’t have a missionary attitude, but there are lots of converts; recruits are welcomed if sincere, but it’s not easy to become a Jew because it’s not easy to be one. Converts are given a hard time, but once they prove themselves, they are welcome. (6)
AHP: Coming back to the Chosen People dogma, don’t all religions preach this to some extent?
RG: No, not in the same sense. The Christians also say they are a chosen people, but they also say that they have sinned, and that their salvation will come through Divine Intervention. This is out of their hands, all they have to do is try to achieve the highest spiritual form that they can; when G_d decides to redeem them, He will redeem them.
The other religions preach that since we have sinned, we have lost that right. Now they are the salvation. They don’t really claim to be the chosen people, they claim to have taken over. The Christian religion was founded by Jews. What they say is that yes, the Jews are the chosen people, but that we’ve got a new way of going about it.
What went wrong is that there have always been renegades amongst the Jews, people who dropped out for whatever reason. There had always been assimilation, but once these people had dropped out, that was the end of it for them; Judaism carried on in its original form. It was with the Emancipation that things changed. The whole idea of the Jew as an equal citizen was entirely new to us; we were quite happy for the nations of the world to run their countries as they saw fit as long as they left us alone; the Jew never aspired to be an equal citizen.
But what happened with the Emancipation, when Napoleon gave everyone equal rights, was that the idea formed that we could now obtain status not through our religion, but through our mathematics, through our science, and to become part of the system.
AHP: It wasn’t just Jews who were emancipated. At that time, and for a long time afterwards, women did not have equal rights, blacks were slaves, even the ordinary goy in the street had to doff his cap to the lord of the manor.
RG: Yes, but the difference is that once the ordinary person achieved his or her equal rights, they had achieved the goal they were looking for; the Jewish goal was never equal rights. This was always a spiritual idea. What happened was that these reformists came along and decided that the Jews were not a Chosen People, they were a nation like any other nation. Our problem of anti-Semitism was not through Divine Intervention, our problem was that we needed nationalism. The reformists, who were mostly atheists, said that: if the Jews walk around dressed in traditional garb they’ll stick out and of course there’ll be anti-Semitism. So they started digging at our religion from that side. Others said we weren’t educated enough in secular learning, and that anti-Semitism could be overcome through education.
Then came Herzl. He was a totally assimilated Jew, he was totally ignorant of Judaism and was so assimilated that he converted to Christianity.
AHP: I always find this a great stumbling block. A Jew is someone who practices the Jewish religion. A Jew is also someone who has a Jewish mother, but in what sense is the latter really a Jew? By the same definition I would be a Christian, even though I’m a lifelong atheist. I find the concept of a Christian atheist absurd, and I find the concept of a secular Jew equally absurd. (7) What we’re really saying when we refer to Herzl as a Jew is that he was of Jewish origin.
RG: He was Halachically Jewish and would have been for the rest of his life, but he was totally ignorant of Judaism. Whether it was just this Dreyfus affair or something else, but he had the idea that he was going to solve the Jewish problem. So he called together a group of assimilationists – and non-Jews – and announced that he was going to solve the problem of anti-Semitism through nationalism. Which doesn’t work.
He was totally despised by all the Orthodox Jews because what he was preaching was totally alien to what we had been taught.
[And not just by the Orthodox. When American-Jewish financier Jacob Schiff met Herzl for the first time he said Zionism was “a sentimental theory” without a future. (8)
The distinguished Jewish journalist and historian Lucien Wolf (1857-1930) was also a staunch anti-Zionist. In the October 1904 issue of The Jewish Quarterly Review, Wolf published a lengthy article called The Zionist Peril in which he argued that European Jews were a religious community of white men not essentially different from the European Roman Catholics and Protestants. Nowadays an article with such a title would be more likely to appear in Spearhead.
Much later, at the time of the Balfour Declaration, Wolf, who was on the Board of Deputies of British Jews, took a vigorous stand against Zionist colonisation. At one meeting of the Board he spoke out against Zionism with equal vigour but was literally shouted down by the rest of its members. (9)
A few words are required here about the father of modern Zionism. Herzl – a great admirer of anti-Semites! – was inspired by the Dreyfus affair. This story is well known and has been thoroughly documented and cannot be discussed in detail here for want of space. In outline though, it is this. Herzl (1860-1904) was Paris correspondent for the Vienna newspaper Neue Freie Presse, and in this capacity he covered the trial of the French army officer Captain Alfred Dreyfus. Dreyfus, who was not it seems a particularly likable person, had been fitted up on a treason charge when a document sent to the German Embassy in Paris and containing military secrets (the famous bordereau) fell into the hands of the authorities. Dreyfus was tried in camera in 1894, convicted, sentenced to life imprisonment, and sent to Devil’s Island. It is not clear entirely (to the current writer) that this was because he was a Jew, but his ethnic origin was certainly an issue, and the case caused an international scandal. (10)
It was the trial of Dreyfus which inspired Herzl’s “nationalism”. In his book Der Judenstaat, he wrote “...Anti-Semitism increases day by day and hour by hour among the nations; indeed, it is bound to increase, because the causes of its growth continue to exist and cannot be removed.”
And: “Everything depends on our propelling force. And what is that force? The misery of the Jews.” (11)]
AHP: What about the Chovevei Zion who preceded Herzl?
RG: The Chovevei Zion were religious but misguided people. There were always individuals who wanted to live in the Holy Land, but not as a Zionist state. Usually they were people who were coming to the ends of their lives and who wanted to sit and pray and be near G_d. This had been going on on an individual basis throughout history, but there was never an aspiration to do this en masse.
There were in the Chovevei Zion those who dropped out because they realised it was wrong, but at the same time there were a few who had nationalistic aspirations, but nowhere near to the same extent as Herzl.
When Herzl called his first meeting it was accepted by many people that there was a Jewish problem. Having made the problem, (12) he set out to bring about the solution. The people who joined the Zionist Organisation at this time were people who were trying to make something for themselves, not necessarily money or fame, but satisfaction.
AHP: Was Zionism a nationalist movement in the same sense that it is today?
RG: It was nationalistic in the sense that it said the root cause of anti-Semitism was that we didn’t have a homeland. Zionism was political, but it wasn’t anywhere near as political as it is now. Herzl wanted to go to Uganda, and for this purpose Uganda would have sufficed. But, they had to play on the emotions of the Jewish people, and nobody had any sympathy for Uganda; it’s as alien to us as Pakistan or China. Zion is a thing we say in our prayers; there are various interpretations of what it is, but the word Zion preys on the Jewish conscience. We pray three times a day that G_d should send aback his rule over Zion, and that he should take us back and that he should build up the temple. So the word Zion means something to the Jewish people, and once they called themselves Zionists, it played on the Jewish conscience.
If Herzl had called his group the Jewish Assimilants, or the Jewish Atheists, he wouldn’t have got any sympathy at all. [But] once Jews heard the word Zionists they thought: okay, it’s true that 90% of what Herzl says is wrong, or maybe 95% of what he says is wrong, but there are certain elements that perhaps are right. And once you’ve got that connection, you can work on it, and that’s what the Zionists did.
AHP: Has the claim of a world Zionist conspiracy any foundation at all?
RG: The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion is a load of rubbish. The idea of a Zionist conspiracy is also wrong in that context. There is a Zionist conspiracy whose goal is to uproot the Jewish people and transform them from a religion into a nationalistic people with a country (Israel), with an army and all the other trappings of statehood. The Arabs call us the People of the Book; others call us the Chosen People, (13) which is the essence of what a Jew is.
AHP: I have to say that I’ve never ever believed in the Protocols; it’s trash, and I’ve gone out of my way over the years to denounce it. I’ve done quite a lot of research on the Protocols and I accept the standard historical line that they were written by or at the behest of the Tsarist secret police to whip up anti-Semitism. (14) Not everybody agrees though; David Pidcock of the Islamic Party of Britain thinks they were written by Herzl in order to incite hatred against the Jews which would give succour to the nascent Zionist movement and encourage Jews to colonise Palestine. (15)
RG: Now it is true that Zionism thrives on anti-Semitism, because without anti-Semitism there’s no reason to have a Zionistic or nationalistic cause. That has been so throughout the history of the Zionist movement; there have been many, many cases where Zionists have been instrumental in causing anti-Semitism, whether through their overt actions or behind the scenes with the German army, the Russian army or whatever. When the State was founded they stirred up hatred in Baghdad between the Jews and the Arabs. This is well documented. (16) At the time of the Second World War, Rabbi Dr Schonfeld here in London made some sort of arrangement with the Allies that they should save the Jews from the gas chambers, (17) allocate them here and there; if one country had too many Jews this could be sorted out after the war, in the meantime, let’s save them. The Zionist Organisation opposed that because they were fighting the White Paper. (18) This is also documented. Their attitude was: “Onlywith blood will we have our country. Every other nation is going to sacrifice its soldiers and everything else, and we’ve got to do our bit.”
What happened was that the Zionist organisers were well connected, including Herzl, how they did this I don’t know. There is a letter that Herzl sent to one of the Archbishops in Jerusalem when he founded the movement, which said that “if you go along with our policy you will be able to convert all the Jews”. That was their mentality; they didn’t give a damn about the Jewish religion. But they had power, and they had connections.
In Britain, the Board of Deputies wants to be the spokesman for the whole of British Jewry; the controllers of the Zionist movement want to be the spokesmen for the whole of world Jewry. The way they succeeded was, if you take the Jews of Poland as an example, before the war, the Jews of Poland were very degraded, and later they were oppressed under communism. The Zionists come along and say, we’re going to save you from all this, you’ll have your own country, your own army to protect you. It’s very seductive for people who haven’t got enough knowledge or enough religious conviction to understand that this is wrong. Then came the Holocaust; the sympathies went towards the Zionist Organisation, although at the time there were rabbis in America and elsewhere who were trying to save as many Jews as they could, and they weren’t even given a hearing.
The generation that you’ve got today don’t even realise that; anyone my age was brought up to believe that the Arabs wanted to kill everyone, the Zionists managed to save the day, we were in danger, basically every Arab wants to kill Jews, and you’ve got to fight for your life. They’ve been indoctrinated. Many Jews don’t understand how any Jew can be anti-Zionist. Even if the Zionist state were not secular, even if it were run totally by religious Jews, doesn’t mean that it would be in anything but total contradiction to everything Judaism stands for. In Biblical times you had idol worshippers; just because they were idol worshippers doesn’t mean they were totally irreligious. They were a bit of both, they kept their religion and they worshipped idols at the same time. This is the same concept, they don’t realise.
Take these people at Woburn House, they’ve got no idea about Judaism. The Board of Deputies, I’d say 99% of them are irreligious, so therefore you can’t even sell them a religious or Jewish concept. It doesn’t work. In the Jewish religion in Britain, the main representative was always the United Synagogue. Spanish and Portuguese Jews came here in the Seventeenth Century, later, German Jews came, something had to be done to organise them, and so the United Synagogue was founded under one Chief Rabbi, and this Chief Rabbi had to see that the religion was kept.
That became very Anglicised, and later the Russian and Polish Jews came over, and they founded their own group. Reform was totally unaccepted; marriage, conversion etc. We can’t really deal with them. The whole idea of Reform Judaism is to water down the Jewish religion until we’re the same as everyone else. They’re trying to do exactly the same thing with us as has been done to the Christian religion.
Who represents us? Now you have this Hebron massacre, and there were terrible things written in the papers by the Zionist preachers. Our rabbi says we must demonstrate against it. But what do these people, the Zionists say? They say, no, you can’t do that, you have to hold meetings, make sure the synagogues are secure.
AHP: What exactly did the cabal at Woburn House say after the Hebron massacre?
RG: Obviously they condemned the massacre, but they didn’t condemn the reason behind it; they will not accept that this is part of Zionist indoctrination.
AHP: Which is basically that everyone wants to kill the Jews, so the Jews should make a preemptive strike?
RG: Not only that, but it’s come to the degree that you’ve got the fascist party there which says “We’ve got to get these Arabs out of the country.” Forget the fact that it’s their country. Forget the fact that you’re living on their farm, and you blame them for hating you because you’ve taken away their property.
AHP: You’ve got hatred on both sides though; there are these Islamic fanatics going around at the moment preaching kill the Jews on campuses up and down the country. (19)
RG: You’ve got hate on both sides, but their hate was caused for a reason. The hatred against the Jews in Nazi Germany was basically for no reason; the Nazis hated the Jews for no reason whatsoever. If they had taken the Jews as slaves instead of exterminating them, they’d probably have won the war and half the world. They weren’t interested in that, their main thing was the annihilation of the Jews. The Arabs don’t have any such policy; their position is that their land has been taken away, their country and their property, and they want to fight for it back. They want equal rights or full rights...Their war is a war with a purpose; any war costs bloodshed, and in any war the innocent get killed and usually the guilty get away. But their war is based on: “You’ve taken something that belongs to me, and I want it back.” And if a settler says you come near it and I’ll shoot you, and he does shoot them, this causes even more hatred.
The Board of Deputies don’t even look at the Arab side. They’ll condemn the Hebron massacre, but not the reason behind it, because as soon as they do that they have to accept that the Jewish problem is not to be solved by nationalism. There were a lot of people, even irreligious people, who felt our demonstration was right.
AHP: Who’s idea was it to hold the Baker Street demonstration?
RG: We asked our Chief Rabbi what we should do, and he said we must protest. The London protest was actually called by a series of rabbis including Rabbi Padwa and Rabbi Schlesinger.
[An example of Zionist indoctrination turned up at the rally. A young Reform Jew, who may have just been passing, was clearly horrified and got into an argument with the Rabbi, protesting that “These people would kill you. They want to kill Jews.” He couldn’t understand how any Jew could protest against Jews who have murdered non-Jews, as though people of all races, including many Jews, haven’t protested against apartheid, segregation, and countless human rights abuses, murders and massacres by governments and terrorists worldwide irrespective of the races of the perpetrators or of the victims. Rabbi Goldstein offered to meet him at a later date and discuss the issues with him more fully, pointing out that in “democratic” Europe there were pogroms every twenty or thirty years while in Arab lands there was a pogrom perhaps every two or three hundred years. He didn’t accept the invitation, and the Rabbi pointed out to me at the time the intensity of the indoctrination. Entire generations have now grown up like this.]
AHP: The fallacious reasoning of the Anti-Semitic International is that because there are a number of Jewish banks, and because Jewish businesses dominate certain sectors of the economy – Marks & Spencer for example – the Jews control the economy. Because there are many rich Jews and powerful Jews, that all Jews are rich and powerful, and that it’s some sort of conspiracy. This is nonsense. The Zionists on the other hand are forever whining and wailing about how powerless they are, how everybody’s out to get the Jews, how we must have special laws to protect them. And most of the time they get their own way. The Zionists have enormous power, but rather than purely economic power or political power, it’s a mind-set.
RG: Definitely.
AHP: Their mentality is if you’re not with us 100% you’re against us, and therefore an anti-Semite. Unfortunately, they’ve managed not just to indoctrinate Jews with this nonsense but a substantial percentage of the general population, in particular social policy makers: politicians and the like. The other thing about the Zionists is that they are totally ruthless, and they will destroy anyone they regard as a threat, Gentile or Jew.
RG: The thing behind their wish to power is the power to rule over the Jewish people, they’ll use any means to do that.
AHP: And the goyim as well!
RG: No, they’re not interested in doing that, that is a mistake, what they are interested in is proving the point [that] the Jewish problem is a nationalistic problem, and what they do is right because we [ie they] are the representatives of the Jewish people. Anyone, whether they are Jew or Gentile, who claims otherwise, they will combat, because you’ve hit the nail bang on the head. They have no aspirations to run Britain.
[My experience refutes this, as do the experiences of countless others, particularly any sort of white “nationalists” (20) and Black and other Separatists. The Zionists are not motivated simply by a passionate “nationalism” of an “Israel-über-alles” nature, but by an intense hatred of the “nationalistic” aspirations of the goyim, particularly the Aryan goyim, whom they hold responsible for the historical persecution of their race. (21) In spite of travelling widely in his capacity as Neturei Karta spokesman and being much less insular than most of his community, the Rabbi has had little if any personal experience of this sort of hatred so doesn’t realise it exists].
RG: Ben Gurion once said that the whole idea of Zionism is that the entire Jewish people should be aliyah, in the Holy Land. You mentioned Marks & Spencer; there’s no reason why they should up and move, no reason why the Rothschilds should move. So the Zionists need anti-Semitism. Ben Gurion said if he had his way he would send people to terrorise the Jewish people.
AHP: He said that?
RG: He said that and it’s been done, this is well documented. In 1954 the Chief Rabbi of Baghdad asked the United Nations for protection against the Zionist terrorists. They bombed a couple of synagogues, blamed it on the Arabs, and caused a mass exodus of Jews from Iraq. (22) This policy has been going on throughout, and in the West. You’ve got Jews living comfortably in Britain, America and elsewhere; how do you get them to immigrate?
[Again, the Rabbi believes that the sole purpose of the Zionists’ hate campaign is to stimulate aliyah, and again, he hasn’t seen the whole picture].
AHP: The point is that the British National Party and their fellow travellers say this sort of thing too, they’ve been saying it for decades. Aren’t you afraid that this sort of revelation will give aid and comfort not just to anti-Zionists but to anti-Semites and anti-Semitic propagandists?
RG: They’re building on those particular facts, but how do you get people to move to Israel? With the Hebron massacre they didn’t want Jews to say: “We’re against this, we don’t want the Jewish people to have anything to do with it.” Instead they say: “We need security guards on the synagogues.” This sort of thing is destructive; if you go to a synagogue and there are security guards present, it puts people off. You’ve got these intercom systems on the Anglicised synagogues, not on our synagogues. (23)
The problem is that the British National Party openly say that, they also say they want the Jews out, (24) the blacks out, the Asians out. They take it out of context, if you know what I mean.
AHP: Are you saying that the claim anti-Semites like the BNP make about Zionist agents provocateurs daubing swastikas on synagogues has a factual basis? (25)
RG: Whether they have or haven’t is immaterial; they could do such a thing the same way they could and have blown up synagogues. And the same way they blew up a ship in Palestine that was full of Jewish refugees. The Zionists have no boundaries, and they have no morals. There was a book that came out a while ago by a former Mossad agent.
AHP: By Way Of Deception. (26) I wouldn’t take that entirely at face value.
RG: Take it as 30% true.
AHP: If I put this in print, the British National Party will love this, but the people at Woburn House will say this [pamphlet] is [the work of] a mad rabbi and an anti-Semite.
RG: I’ve been accused of being an anti-Semite [and] a self-hating Jew. The idea of the “conspiracy” is basically to achieve the Zionist goal of all Jews in aliyah. Our book Genocide In The Holyland, has also been condemned as anti-Semitic in certain universities.
AHP: A conspiracy is a secret, but there is nothing secret about either Zionist power or its real agenda.
[A conspiracy need not be a secret. Al’s mistake!]
RG: There is a secret; the secret is that the goal of Zionism is to destroy Judaism and to turn the Jewish people into a nation. Zionism claims to be the saviour of Judaism when it is just the opposite.
AHP: I don’t find this entirely convincing, I accept what you say about their wanting to transform the Jewish religion, but there is another agenda here, and this is racial hatred, particularly of the Aryans, but also of the Arabs, and probably of the rest of mankind as well, including the Jews themselves, because Zionism is a fascist ideology, and ultimately all fascist ideologies are concerned only with perpetuating themselves, not with the people who live under them.
If I can take the case of Oswald Mosley. Mosley was not in any sense an anti-Semite; (27) people who claim he was, have been reading the wrong books. Neither was the fascist movement anti-Semitic, at least not in Britain and not in its birthplace, Italy, either. (28) True, there were cranky anti-Semitic fascist groups like the Imperial Fascist League, (29) but fascism itself was not inherently anti-Semitic.
As late as 1933, the President of the Oxford Jewish Union defended Mosley in a famous letter to the Jewish Chronicle.
[In the Jewish Chronicle, September 29, 1933, page 16, the President of the Oxford University Jewish Society, A. Herman wrote: “At the present time, our greatest supporters in our fight against the Imperial Fascists are the Mosley Fascists themselves.”
Later, this quote was republished by Arnold Leese to prove that Mosley himself was an agent of the Jews! Leese referred to Mosley’s ideology as kosher fascism. Mosley was equally unflattering about Leese. (30)]
AHP: In November 1933, Mosley published an article in the Blackshirt called Shall Jews Drag Britain to War? (31) Obviously the Second World War was in the wind for a long time, and Mosley charged in this article that a Jewish cinema chain owned by the Ostrer family together with other powerful Jewish – read Zionist – interests – were trying to embroil Britain in a war with Germany. From that point on, it seems to me that there was this mass attack on British fascism by Organised Jewry, and if the fascists weren’t anti-Semitic, they certainly became anti-Semitic before very long.
[It should be added here that the organised left were willing collaborators in this hate campaign and went out of their way to recruit racial Jews to fight the Mosley Fascists on the streets. All the reliable evidence indicates that for the best part of two years the Fascists were the underdogs. Eventually Mosley banned Jews entirely from his movement.]
RG: You mustn’t forget that in 1933 Hitler was propagating anti-Semitism; this was what fascism stood for.
AHP: This was Nazism rather than fascism. The point though is that if Organised Jewry had taken a different attitude towards Mosley they may have been able to use him as a benign influence on Hitler. Mosley was a great admirer of Hitler, and Hitler knew this. Mussolini was no admirer of Hitler, but Hitler obviously respected him because he modelled National Socialism on Italian Fascism. (32) Now, supposing instead of attacking Mosley, Organised Jewry had cultivated his friendship. When Hitler started passing Draconian anti-Jewish laws they could have sent a fascist delegation to Germany which might have argued something like this:
“Look Führer, you’re doing a great job, National Socialism’s a great ideology, you’ve got the country back to work, restored German pride, but we really do think you’re going a little bit over the top with the Jewish Question. We know a lot of communists were Jewish but most Jews are not communists, they’re not all pornographers and gangsters, a lot of them are doctors, professional people; some of this country’s best brains are Jewish. We really do think you should stop this persecution because you’re giving Germany a bad name.”
The point is that people listen to their friends. Hitler didn’t pay any attention to the hate campaign against him, which he regarded as Jewish-inspired, (33) but he might have paid attention to Mosley and other fascists. Certainly he listened to Mussolini. (34)
RG: Hitler was quite fanatical. He wrote in his own diary that his fanaticism regarding the Jews never left him. The whole thing was not rational; I don’t think he would have given a rational response. Ninety per cent of our people at the time were victims of Nazism; they’d been in Germany, they’d been in Poland, they’d been in camps, and they’d seen Nazism at its peak.
[We spoke also of the Holocaust and of Holocaust Revisionism. Naturally the Rabbi does not like the suggestion that the alleged genocide programme and the gas chambers were mere anti-Nazi propaganda, but he exhibited none of the righteous indignation, hysteria or mock outrage of Organised Jewry and their fellow travellers in the Socialist International, at Revisionist propaganda. He said simply that he knew countless Jews who had lost relatives in the Holocaust and that therefore the suggestion that it didn’t happen was not to be taken seriously. Of course, there is far more to Holocaust Revisionism than this, and such arguments as he put forward are open to serious objections, but I was concerned here primarily with the Jewish verdict on Zionism, not on Nazism, which speaks for itself.
The Orthodox Jewish version of the Holocuast is that not only were millions of Jews murdered by the Nazis but that countless Jews were sacrificed willingly by the Zionists, many of whom were enthusiastic collaborators. One of these alleged Nazi collaborators has frequently been named as Simon Wiesenthal, the so-called Nazi-hunter. I would not be so bold as to endorse these claims, especially as Wiesenthal has, on at least one occasion, sued one of his accusers successfully for libel, (35) but there is far too much reliable evidence of Nazi-Zionist collaboration for it all to be dismissed as black propaganda: anti-Semitic or otherwise.]
AHP: You claim that the Zionists sacrificed tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of Jews, in order to bring about the creation of their beloved Israel. Don’t you think that’s worse than denying the Holocaust?
RG: This is all part of the Holocaust. Denying the Holocaust is denying a fact; it’s a cover up, the same cover up, basically. Denying the Holocaust must have some sort of purpose; besides the Jews who went through it, every Jewish person you’ll meet has had some relative who died in it. What is the purpose of denying it except to say that Nazism really isn’t that bad?
AHP: Can’t Nazism be opposed without mentioning the Holocaust?
Rabbi: The Holocaust is a good example of what Nazism leads to.
AHP: Anything that happened to the Jews in the Holocaust happened in the context of the Second World War. And this was a war Hitler didn’t want in the first place.
Rabbi: I think he definitely did want war because he wanted to conquer the whole world.
AHP: No. He wanted Poland, Lebensraum, but he never wanted war with England, and he made numerous peace offers. It was Churchill who wanted war. (36)
Rabbi: He didn’t just want Poland because even after he signed the peace treaty with Russia he broke his word and declared war. He also conquered France, Greece, Norway, Sweden [and other countries]. He even fought in Africa.
[Here the Rabbi has swallowed British rather than Zionist propaganda. The claim that Nazi Germany wanted to conquer the world, coming from the British – as mostly it did – is more than a little ironic since Britain had done precisely that! This was at a time when perhaps a third of the world’s surface was covered in red. The Nazis’ attitude to colonial people’s may have been no better than that of the British, but it was certainly no worse. In the aftermath of Kristallnacht, the Nazis retorted that “The alleged measures of violence in Germany, in which not a hair of a single Jewish head was touched, lasted a few hours.” Then, they went on to accuse the British of oppressing colonial peoples, especially in Palestine! (37)
Whether or not he wanted to conquer the world in a metaphorical sense, (38) the Führer had no designs on Britain. On July 19, 1940, Hitler appealed directly and in person to the British in a radio broadcast. “Mr. Churchill ought for once to believe me, when I prophesy that a great empire will be destroyed which it was never my intention to destroy or even to harm...In this hour I feel it my duty before my conscience to appeal once more to reason and common sense in Britain...I CAN SEE NO REASON WHY THIS WAR MUST GO ON!”
Within half an hour, the British replied “Let me tell you what we here in Britain think of this appeal of yours to what you are pleased to call our reason and common sense. Herr Führer and Reichskanzler, we hurl it right back at you, right in your evil smelling teeth...” (39)
This reply was made by the German-born, anti-Nazi propagandist Denis Sefton Delmer. Delmer let the cat out of the bag and made many other candid revelations in the second volume of his autobiography, (40) although this broadcast was probably heard by millions. Of course, one cannot take a single offer of peace by Hitler – or any war time leader – and use it to interpret him as a totally unwilling belligerent. But Hitler’s admiration for the British and for the British Empire is a matter of public record, or it was before the propagandists went to work. (41) One American Revisionist Historian wrote that “Hitler was a worse bootlicker of Britain than the Kaiser and the cornerstone of his foreign policy was to achieve a permanent understanding with Britain. Even after Dunkirk, where he deliberately permitted the British to escape, (42) he offered Britain a generous peace and told his generals that he would put the German Wehrmacht, air force and navy (43) at the service of Britain to preserve the British Empire.” (44)]
AHP: Was [Hitler’s] whole purpose anti-Jewish?
RG: Hitler himself said that his fanaticism towards the Jews never left him. If he’d tried to use them on a normal basis, he might have won the war. Is that not a typical example of what Nazism is?
AHP: In 1933, there was also the Jewish boycott of Germany.
RG: Which did a lot of harm.
AHP: Again, this is something which has been written out of history by the powers that be. When
it is mentioned it is described as a counter-boycott. (45) In reality it was a boycott mounted by Organised Jewry in the
United States, and its purpose was to destroy Germany. (46)
RG: It was a campaign of sanctions by Jewry but it brought out the hate even more; it was very counter-productive. The Jewish problem isn’t the same as the South African problem. Sanctions against South Africa have worked; the message did get through to a certain degree. But our problem is not the same, it is not a physical problem as such.
AHP: If you’d been the top Jew in America in 1933, what would you have done with regard to Hitler?
RG: Tried to appease him.
AHP: In view of what happened later, appeasement is considered a dirty word, at least with regard to Nazi Germany.
RG: What have Jews done throughout history? In Tsarist Russia, before Tsarist Russia, in Poland, in Germany, in France...all they’ve done is try to get hold of one of the ministers, somebody of influence, and to win him over, make representations to the government, representations to the Tsar...
AHP: That doesn’t sound like appeasement, that sounds like reason.
RG: That is appeasement, to cool them down, not to heat them up.
AHP: The other thing is that anti-Semites blame the Jews for World War Two. And everything else. They blame them for World War One as well, even though twelve thousand Jews died for Germany
in World War One, something even Hitler recognised. (47) When the Nazis imposed sanctions on the Jews, the
last people to suffer were those who had fought at the front. (48)
That considered, to what extent was Organised Jewry responsible, not for starting World War Two in isolation, but for edging the Allied governments on? Churchill – one of the most evil men who ever lived – did his best to prolong the war. Hitler only wanted the Jews out of Germany.
RG: Hitler wanted power. He wanted power over the whole world. I don’t think you can blame Churchill for fighting that sort of thing. Once there is a dictatorship in whatever form, with no rule and no reason, no sympathy for other people, it has to be stopped.
[Again, the Rabbi has swallowed whole the propaganda about Hitler and his blond-haired, blue-eyed beasts hellbent world domination.]
RG: I wasn’t around at the time so I can only judge from what I read, but we [Torah-true Jews] believe that it was Divine Intervention that stopped Hitler from completely taking over the world.
AHP: Hitler said that the Big Lie of the
Jews was that they were a race when they claimed to be a religion. (49) You have told me that the concept of the Jewish race is invalid. Granted that there were the Twelve Tribes of Israel, but apart from that, did the concept of the Jewish race originate with Herzl?
RG: Noah had three sons; Jews are all descendants of Shem, but there were lots of converts. Initially if you didn’t practice Judaism you were not a Jew, but having been born to a Jewish mother, such a person who would want to practice Judaism would not have to convert as would a Gentile.
AHP: I was told that there is no such thing as half-Jewish.
RG: There is no such thing as half-Jewish in a Halachic sense.
AHP: Something another rabbi told me was that you believe the Holocaust was justified in that it can be seen as a punishment from on high.
RG: It was proclaimed by many rabbis at the time that the idea of Jewry being nationalistic or socialistic is contrary to Jewish beliefs, and therefore, when Jews go against their beliefs, they are punished through Divine Intervention. And in this particular instance, Divine Intervention appeared through the National Socialists. This is not to say that we believe it was justified, but we believe that everything that takes place does so through Divine Intervention.
AHP: You don’t accept collective guilt?
RG: We do accept collective guilt; when there is a punishment on the Jews it’s not necessarily the guilty who are punished, it’s the innocent and the guilty. But again, we look on this as Divine Intervention; why it is that one person was destined to live and another to die, is something we try to understand. What we do know is that if we try to slip away from our religion we will be punished. The Holocaust was basically some sort of warning or punishment, whatever it is. We cannot understand it, we can’t try to understand it.
AHP: The other thing about the Holocaust is that the Zionists have really exploited it.
RG: That’s right. The Zionists benefited from the Holocaust because their whole aim was a national homeland and they realised that after the war they had more chance of getting the sympathy of world governments. For this reason they refused to help save Jews. They could have done, they had funds, in Switzerland for example. There was the case of Rabbi Weissmandel who negotiated indirectly with Eichmann: money for lives. The Zionist Organisation wouldn’t put up the money, they were interested in the Holy Land, nothing else.
AHP: And they’re still battering the nations over the head with it. There’s the attack on nationalism. You say that they don’t want to rule over the goyim, but if you look at what’s going on in this country now, and has been for some time, you’ve got this Home Affairs Committee on Racial Attacks. Virtually all the race relations legislation in this country has been passed at the insistence of, or at the very least with
the enthusiastic endorsement of, and often framed by, Zionist Jewry. (50)
It’s reached the stage now that on certain aspects of race you can’t open your mouth. Anyone who says that we shouldn’t allow uncontrolled immigration into Britain is denounced as a racist, a fascist and a Nazi. The Home Affairs Committee which at this moment is investigating racial attacks – quote unquote – is dominated by Zionist Jews. Even worse, Gerry Gable and his chums from Searchlight were called to give evidence. As Gable is a many times proven liar and as sloppy a researcher as you could wish to find, that
speaks volumes for the integrity of this committee’s eventual findings. (51)
Add to this, all the time Zionist Jewry is calling for, and getting, more and more repressive so-called anti-race hate legislation. It’s little wonder that the extreme right interpret this as a conspiracy against the white race. What is behind this campaign of unconditional hatred, this Zionist-inspired war against Western civilisation?
RG: I don’t think there is a Zionist war against Anglo-Saxons or against Gentiles generally; the Zionist war is against Jews. It’s a case of who they can manipulate to achieve their goal, which is the total destruction of the Jewish people as a religious people.
[A point the Rabbi obviously fails to appreciate is that it is the Aryan goyim who are being destroyed,
far more so than the Jews, (52) but that is hardly surprising since he is the father of ten children! I read somewhere
that many Orthodox Jews in Stamford Hill did not speak English; I assumed this was because they were older people, emigrés, who, because they live in an extremely insular community, had not
taken the trouble to learn. When on one occasion I mentioned this to the Rabbi he told me that he did not teach his own children any more English than was
required by law, and that this was a common practice among the Ultra-Orthodox, to keep the flame burning as it were. A while ago the not-so-Orthodox launched an organisation called Jewish Continuity. Its arrival was
announced with great fanfare by the Jewish Chronicle. It doesn’t take much imagination to figure out what would be the reaction to an indigenous organisation which dared to call
itself Aryan Continuity, or perhaps White Survival. Aside from the de rigueur sneering of the far left, there would be howls of rage from Organised Jewry. Indeed, it was this sort of unconditional hatred which led to the anti-Semitism of the National Front.]
RG: They will use any means possible because they have been indoctrinated, that’s the main thing: if you want to help your fellow Jews you’ve got to fight for Zionism;
if anyone condemns Zionism, be they Jew or Gentile, you condemn them. (53) Their whole purpose is not the manipulation of other nations, it’s control of the Jews. To do that they have to show they’re doing something. The way they show to the world that they represent the Jews is by constant political activity.
AHP: I find this argument less than convincing; you’re saying that what motivates them is not hatred of the goyim but of the Jews?
RG: What motivates them is not hatred of the goyim, but use of the goyim or any other means at their disposal. I wouldn’t say that the idea behind it is a conspiracy against the nations.
To take one example, Rabbi Dovid Smith has been the victim of several Zionist attacks. At the time of the great American aliyah he was in Morocco; he condemned it to his people. They wanted to kill him then, and he had to run for his life. In Lithuania they came into his synagogue at the time of prayer and beat him with chains, and all because he was claiming, as we do, that the Zionists don’t represent Jews.
AHP: The point I’m trying to make is that although you do not recognise [Gerry Gable] as a Jew or as a spokesman for the Jews, the BNP and their fellow travellers don’t see things this way. If you read Gable’s magazine, it’s “Oy vay, oy vay, oy vay! Stop the Nazis!” It’s pure racial hatred. They see this Jew attacking them, inciting violence against them, hounding them out of their jobs, and they identify Gable because, in their eyes, he’s a Jew. He’s like something out of Der Stürmer, as is that character from the Board of Deputies, Mike Whine.
The point is, that, having identified the Jewish demagogue, they can’t get at him, so who do they go for? The local rabbi, or the local synagogue. And Gable knows this, there’s no doubt about that.
Gable presents himself as representing the Jewish cause. (54) What is your opinion of that?
RG: Gerry Gable does not represent Jews, just because he is of Jewish origin.
AHP: You say that the Zionists will only be satisfied when they have destroyed the Jewish religion utterly?
RG: That is their ultimate aim, that is the raison d’être of Zionism, to transform the Jewish people from a religious people into a nationalistic people.
AHP: Although I don’t dispute what you say about the Zionists’ war against Judaism, the Israeli government does subsidise Hebrew schools and Jewish education; also, the religious parties are strong in Israel. This tends to indicate that they do not want to destroy Judaism, rather to mould it to suit their purposes.
RG: It is true that the Israeli government has financed Hebrew and Jewish culture, but this is to engulf everyone, to try to get the entire Jewish people behind them. Everything has its price. The religious parties are very strong in Israel, those that receive money, but they’re taking the bribery, and they’re paying the price. The whole concept of Zionism is contrary to the whole concept of Judaism.
AHP: It’s not just the fact that they’ve indoctrinated Jews but that they’ve succeeded in indoctrinating most of the rest of mankind as well, certainly in the West. The line we’re constantly fed is that the Jew is always persecuted, always the scapegoat, never in the wrong, and the world has nothing better to do that incite hatred and violence against Jews, to persecute, pogrom and murder them, and that in the struggle against eternal anti-Semitism anything goes. The logical outcome of this is that whatever they do is justified, be it ever so vile. If they slay a few, a few dozen, or even a few hundred, goyim here and there, then this is a justifiable, indeed necessary preemptive strike to avert another Holocaust. And of course it goes further than that; we’ve seen with Zionist agents provocateurs and their fellow travellers in this country that where there is no anti-Semitism they’ll go out of their way to ferment it; in particular they’ll interpret anything they don’t like as anti-Semitism or potential anti-Semitism, even if it doesn’t relate to Jews. Then they’ll attack it. This was the mentality which as you said led to the Hebron massacre, even though that was the work of a lone madman.
RG: They want to portray this fellow as a madman, I don’t think he was. He went mad, but he knew where to go mad, and how; he didn’t jump from the rooftop; for him this was the Salvation, the answer, killing people, this was the result of Zionist indoctrination.
AHP: The quote about a million Arab lives not being worth a Jewish fingernail appears to have been genuine.
RG: Yes, definitely, it was a Zionist rabbi; they
didn’t print his name anyway, I wish they had. (55)
AHP: This statement was widely condemned. Sacks condemned it in
both the Jewish Chronicle and the Times. (56)
RG: Yes, without condemning Zionism itself.
AHP: Is it true as another rabbi told me that Lord Jakobowits was put
out to grass because of his stain on humanity quote? (57)
RG: I don’t know. He was retired; I know he was condemned by Zionist organisations for some of his statements, the same as anyone who goes up against Zionism is condemned by Zionist organisations.
AHP: What was the reaction to your protest from Organised Zionist Jewry? You mentioned something about calls to the radio station, I believe.
RG: There were a lot of people in the street who supported it, but there was a lot of hostility to the protest too, phone calls to the radio station.
AHP: From Zionist fanatics?
RG: Either from Zionist fanatics, or from people who have no idea what this entire thing is about.
AHP: That’s the way they’ve silenced all opposition, especially in the United States.
RG: There is a lot of opposition. There are a lot of anti-Zionist Jews in the United States.
AHP: But we don’t hear about them.
RG: There are many more anti-Zionist Jews there than there are here.
AHP: It’s only recently they’ve been kicked into line over the Palestinian question. For many years there has been very strong censorship over this issue.
RG: There has been a great deal of censorship, but it’s been of Jewish views rather than of non-Jewish views.
[Again, the Rabbi has not seen the full picture. For a comprehensive view of the way all dissenters are silenced – and smeared as anti-Semitic – the reader is referred to the following publications: The Zionist Connection, by American-Jewish lawyer Alfred M. Lilienthal; They Dare To Speak Out, by US Congressman Paul Findley; Publish It Not...The Middle East Cover-Up, by Michael Adams and Christopher Mayhew; Israel And The New World Order, by Andrew J. Hurley; and Uncomfortable Questions For Comfortable Jews, an amazing book by the Zionist fanatic, the late Rabbi Meir Kahane.]
AHP: Have you ever been attacked here in England?
RG: I’ve been at meetings where I’ve been threatened, subtlety, but I’ve never actually been physically attacked.
To Conclusion
Back To Baron Pamphlets Index
To Notes And References
Back To Introduction
Back To Cover And Credits
Back To Site Index