Leo Frank and the Birth of the Anti-Defamation League of B'n

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Defends Pillsbury Doughboy[/large]

[large]Cease & Desist Letter[/large]
ADL ? An archive of disturbing illustration.[/justify]


[center]Part I. Cause[/center]


[justify]Because this picture reminds certain Jews of the Holocaust, they are demanding that we remove it. Suddenly anything that reminds Jews of the Holocaust, even things that have nothing to do with it, verboten? A high percentage of our staff is Jewish. After all rotten.com is part of the media conspiracy that Marlon Brando was kind enough to inform us about.[/justify]

[center]Part II. Conclusion[/center]


There is no problem, no action taken. Don?t be whiny.

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Deplores Ontario Unions Vote to Boycott Israel[/large]

Press Release Israel / Middle-East

ADL Deplores Ontario Union?s Vote to Boycott IsraelNew York, NY, May 30, 2006 ? The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today labeled as ?deplorable and offensive? a call by the Ontario branch of Canada?s largest labor unions for a full range of anti-Israel boycott activity.At its annual meeting on May 28, the Ontario chapter of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) unanimously passed a resolution to ?support the international campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions? against Israel. The vote almost directly coincided with the passage on May 29 of an anti-Israel boycott resolution by an academic union in Britain.

?Once again, a labor union has voted to take the deplorable and offensive step of attempting to isolate and vilify the State of Israel while taking a strongly one-sided view of the conflict,? said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. ?While full of propagandistic hyperbole, the union?s resolution makes no effort to reflect current realities on the ground in the region. There is no mention of Israel?s unilateral redeployment from Gaza and proposed action in the West Bank, nor is there any recognition of the challenges posed by the terrorist group Hamas? reign over the Palestinian Authority and its refusal to recognize Israel?s right to exist or to renounce terror.?

The CUPE resolution urged members to ?support the international campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions until Israel meets its obligations to recognize the Palestinian people?s inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law including the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194.? The resolution further called for solidarity with the Palestinians, the development of an ?education campaign about the apartheid nature of the Israeli state,? and for lobbying against Canadian support for Israel.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) represents 450,000 workers in health care, education, municipalities, libraries, universities, social services, public utilities, transportation, emergency services and airlines. The national union has not taken a position on Israeli-Palestinian relations.
The Anti-Defamation League, founded in 1913, is the world?s leading organization fighting anti-Semitism through programs and services that counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry.[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Didn't Do Anything Wrong and Promises Never to Do It Again[/large]

Source: The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, January 1994, page 6

Special Report:

[large]ADL Didn?t Do Anything Wrong and Promises Never to Do It Again![/large]

By Rachelle Marshall

The Anti-Defamation League, which last spring was found in possession of illegally obtained information on Arab Americans, members of the anti-apartheid movement, and other political and human rights activists, will not face criminal charges, the San Francisco district attorney?s office announced on Nov. 15. Roy Bullock, ADL?s longtime undercover agent, was also absolved of any crime. Bullock had supplied ADL with confidential police and motor vehicle records provided by retired San Francisco police officer Tom Gerard, who was indicted last May on charges of conspiracy and concealing government documents.

In return for having the charges dropped, ADL agreed to contribute up to $50,000 to a reward fund for hate crimes and to spend another $25,000 on a program to teach school children about the evils of violence and discrimination. All of the files seized by police from ADL and Bullock will be returned to them, except for the documents obtained from Gerard.

Although ADL officials Abraham Foxman and Melvin Salberg crowed that the district attorney?s decision ?confirms our consistent position that ADL has engaged in no misconduct of any kind,? the organization also agreed to a permanent civil injunction barring it from receiving classified information from any state or local employee who is prohibited from sharing it. In other words, ADL is perfectly innocent but had to promise never to do it again.

Outraged But Not Surprised

Members of organizations targeted by ADL?s spy operation were outraged but not surprised by the district attorney?s lack of backbone. In late October a coalition of nearly a hundred groups spied on by ADL held a press conference to denounce what they correctly predicted would be a lenient settlement. Members of the Coalition Against Surveillance said they had been told by anonymous sources that a ?sweetheart deal? was in the making and called it ?a great disservice to the thousands of victims of the ADL spy operation.?

Christine Totah, secretary of the Arab American Caucus of the California Democratic Party, said the settlement ?made a mockery of the justice system. You can bet that if it was an Arab-American organization that behaved this way, it would have been tried, prosecuted and hung.?

On Nov. 17, two days after the decision was announced, 20 members of the Coalition walked to ADL?s San Francisco office to ask for a conference with ADL officials. When they were not allowed to enter, the group asked if two of their members could talk with someone from the organization or make an appointment for a later date. ADL?s response was to call the police, who, when they arrived, went inside in an unsuccessful attempt to arrange a meeting between ADL and the Coalition.

Allan Solomonow, Middle East program director for the American Friends Service Committee and a member of the Coalition?s coordinating committee, called the settlement a result of the ?immense pressure? brought to bear on the district attorney. He pointed out that since last spring high-level ADL officers had met repeatedly with city officials in an effort to forestall an indictment. Letters and phone calls from ADL supporters in the community added to the pressure, as did a massive public relations campaign portraying ADL as a defender of human rights and the investigation as an attack on the entire Jewish community.

According to the San Francisco Examiner, ADL?s major tactic in negotiations with the district attorney was to emphasize the legal deficiencies of a possible case against ADL and Bullock. A battery of ADL lawyers was prepared to challenge the legality of the police searches of the organization?s offices and they questioned the prosecution?s ability to prove that ADL officials and Bullock had ?criminal knowledge? when they accepted information from Gerard. Another problem for the prosecution was ADL?s insistence that as an organization engaged in journalism it was protected by state laws guaranteeing press freedom. With an annual budget of $32 million, ADL could afford to drag out the case forever.

But in the end, political considerations were the deciding factor. ?District Attorney Arlo Smith didn?t think it was politically expedient to dump on the ADL,? a source in the D.A.?s office said after the settlement was announced. Smith has all but declared he will run for California attorney general in the next election against incumbent Republican Dan Lundren. Without the support of the Jewish community and its generous contributions to liberal Democratic candidates, Smith?s campaign would be dead in the water. Other local candidates would be affected as well, since they would be forced to choose sides if a case against ADL were to proceed, and much of their Jewish support would depend on the choice they made.

Don Bustany, president of the Los Angeles chapter of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, noted the irony in the district attorney?s decision: ?The ADL had been known for decades as a defender of rights for Jews and others, and now, when it?s caught violating the civil rights of literally thousands of Americans, it pulls political strings to escape responsibility. ?

Prosecution of ADL seemed almost certain last April, when a search of its offices in San Francisco and Los Angeles turned up files on more than 10,000 individuals and 500 groups, all but a small fraction of them involved in legitimate political activity. Organizations as diverse as Greenpeace, Women in Black, the American Civil Liberties Union, and public radio station KQED were included in the list along with several Arab-American groups. Because some of the files contained classified records obtained illegally by Gerard, San Francisco police accused ADL of ?misuse of confidential government information and the invasion of privacy of over 1,000 persons.? The police said ADL had also committed a possible felony by failing to report Etullock?s employment while paying him hundreds of thousands of dollars over nearly 30 years. Police inspector Ronald Roth accused ADL of being ?less than truthful with regard to the employment of Bullock and other matters.?

Since then ADL has succeeded in stalling efforts to examine the confiscated files. It achieved victory in early fall when Judge Lenard Louie, who had sealed the files, refused a request by the Coalition Against Surveillance to release them for scrutiny by the organizations that had come under ADL surveillance. Instead, Judge Louie ruled that he, the district attorney?s office and ADL would jointly determine which files could be made public?a procedure that gave ADL veto power over any decision. Solomonow estimates that all but ?about a box and a half? of the organization?s voluminous files on individuals and groups will be returned to ADL intact.

Despite its success in avoiding criminal charges, ADL still faces strong court challenges. Last April attorney Paul N. McCloskey, Jr. filed suit in San Francisco Superior Court on behalf of 19 Bay Area citizens named in ADL?s files, claiming that ADL and Bullock had violated their right to privacy. In mid-October, 12 Arab/American organizations filed suit in Federal District Court in Los Angeles charging police and sheriffs? departments in San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Francisco with negligence in allowing ADL to spy on organizations and individuals engaged in legitimate political activity and thus interfere with their constitutional rights to freedom of expression and assembly. The suit seeks to bar ADL and the law enforcement agencies from conducting future spy operations. Mark Van Der Hout, an attorney in the case, said the suit was brought because people ?have been spied upon, their mail looked through, their confidential police records given to ADL, their lives disrupted.?

Although sharply critical of the district attorney?s refusal to prosecute ADL, McCloskey believes it gave the civil suits a greater chance of success. ?The decision by the district attorney raises a serious question of whether you can expect equal justice for criminal defendants in America,? he said, ?but it enables us to proceed more rapidly with the discovery process.? McCloskey explained that before the decision, Bullock and ADL officials refused to produce documents requested by the plaintiffs or disclose any information, citing their Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate themselves. Since no criminal charges will be filed against them, they can no longer use this argument but presumably will be obliged to cooperate. On Feb. 9 McCloskey will meet with ADL lawyers to discuss a possible trial date.

Meanwhile ADL remains undaunted in its role as thought policeman and champion of Israel. A recent full-page ad published in the Northern California Jewish Bulletin asserted that ADL conducted its investigations of anti-Semitic and white supremacy groups ?in much the same way as news organizations like NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN or the Los Angeles Times.? After this bland declaration, the ad continued: ?We also seek to educate ourselves about what the critics of Israel say and write in order to present an informed and responsive defense of Israel.?

The ad did not explain what organizations such as Greenpeace or Women in Black have to do with anti-Semitism or white supremacy, or why ADL collects motor vehicle records and other confidential information about critics of Israel if its only aim is to respond to their arguments. Nor is it clear from the ad that CNN and NBC do not normally gather news by relying on undercover agents who adopt assumed names, rummage through garbage, and are paid from special bank accounts.

Recent actions by ADL provide a far more accurate view of the organization?s chief goal, which is not simply to counteract criticism of Israel but to promote that country?s interests regardless of other considerations. In early November ADL used its muscle to force Israel?s ambassador to the U.S., Itamar Rabinovich, to cancel a scheduled talk before the National Association of Arab Americans because the NAAA is party to one of the lawsuits against ADL. A Jewish Telegraphic Agency report published on Nov. 5 quoted an Israeli embassy official as saying that ADL Director Foxman ?did not ask, he demanded,? that Rabinovich not appear at the conference.

The ADL director followed up his success with the Israeli ambassador by calling on American Jewish leaders to refuse dialogue with any of the American-Arab organizations that are suing ADL, a move that could undermine the process of reconciliation recently begun between the two groups. Referring to the historic handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat, Foxman asserted, ?You can?t shake our hands and punch us in the stomach at the same time,? as if suing ADL means striking a blow at Israel.

Foxman?s other major move last November was to appeal to President Clinton to commute the sentence of Jonathan Pollard, who was convicted in 1987 of spying for Israel. As an intelligence analyst for the U.S. Navy, Pollard sold what The New York Times reported as ?suitcases full of military intelligence? to his Israeli handlers for $5O,000. It is instructive to see the head of an organization dedicated to the exposure of subversives and other un-American types championing a man who may have seriously jeopardized the security of the United States. On the other hand, what Pollard did he did for Israel, and to the Anti-Defamation League that?s all that matters.

Rachelle Marshall is a free-lance editor living in Stanford, CA. A member of the International Jewish Peace Union, she writes on the Mideast.

© Copyright 1995-1999, American Educational Trust. All Rights Reserved.[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Fact Sheet[/large]

Source: The Campaign for Radical Truth in History, http://www.hoffman-info.com
PO Box 849, Coeur d?Alene, Idaho 83816

[large]Fact Sheet on the ADL[/large]

The ADL is ??one of the ugliest, most powerful pressure groups in the U.S?Its primary commitment is to use any technique,
however dishonest and disgraceful, in order to defame and silence and destroy anybody who dares to criticize the Holy State
(?Israel?).?

?Noam Chomsky, Professor of Linguistics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Revisionist historian Michael A. Hoffman II (center) holds a copy of the ?Fact Sheet on the ADL? flier which he and two other activists
distributed as they picketed the appearance of Bruce Kort, ADL?s Seattle regional director at the Coeur d?Alene Resort, which can be seen
in the background, in Coeur d?Alene, Idaho

The Anti-Defamation League of B?nai B?rith (ADL) gave an award Nov. 18, 1998 to the city of Coeur d?Alene. City Fathers assume this is something to be proud of and have unthinkingly rolled out the red carpet for the ADL.

They think that an imprimatur from the ADL, a prominent Jewish group with a multi-million dollar budget and substantial media clout, is a kind of certification of our area?s goodness. But in point of fact, hosting the ADL and its regional Seattle director at the Coeur d?Alene Resort is a shameful blot on our region.

The ADL is a branch of the masonic B?nai B?rith (Sons of the Covenant), which was established Oct. 13, 1843.

Up until recently, for decades the chief ?fact-finder? (head spy) for the ADL was the late Irwin Suall. From 1957 through 1962, Mr. Suall was national secretary of the Socialist Party. (1)

The ADL keeps extensive espionage files on those who are critical of Israeli policies. Last year the ADL attempted to blackmail Benjamin Chavis, leader of the NAACP, with some of those files. (2)

The ADL spies on American dissidents on behalf of the Israeli government. Automobile license plate numbers of people attending a meeting of the Committee on the Middle East were recorded by ADL agent Roy Bullock, channeled through San Francisco police officer Tom Gerard, also an ADL operative, and furnished to the Israeli government. (3)

The ADL claims that it has the right to ?investigate? dissidents and ?probe into their private lives.? When asked in court, ?Does that mean anyone who participates in a political rally can be the subject of an in-depth investigation?? ADL attorney Stephen Bomse responded in the affirmative. (4).

In 1996 the ADL praised the prison sentence meted out to an American publisher in Germany: ?ADL today said it was gratified that a German court sentenced American?Gary Lauck to four years in prison for?disseminating anti-Semitic?hate material.? (5)

In January of 1998, ADL Director Abraham Foxman ordered Metropolitan Books to halt publication of ?A Nation on Trial: The Goldhagen Thesis and Historical Truth,? a book which exposed fraud perpetrated by anti-German bigot Daniel Goldhagen. (6)

Early in November of 1998, ADL Director Foxman was at it again, this time ordering the media to ban black leader Louis Farrakhan from the airwaves. Foxman?s demand can be summarized as, ?Keep Farrakhan off all the television networks!? (7)

In 1993 the ADL illegally obtained California police and government records in San Francisco on a wide array of dissident political groups and turned them over to the Israeli government. Due to its enormous influence, the ADL escaped criminal prosecution in return for paying $75,000 to groups that fight hate crimes. (8)

The ADL ?runs a nationwide surveillance operation on political groups with the assistance of other law enforcement officials?The ADL spied on political groups in the US and this information allegedly made its way to Israeli security authorities.? (9)

On Aug. 2, 1994 seventy-five Jewish-Americans accused the ADL of ?engaging in defamation? in the ADL?s attacks on Christian conservatives. (10)

The seventy-five stated that the ADL uses ?such discreditable techniques as insinuation and guilt by association? to compile its secret files on dissenters. (11).

On Aug. 9, 1994 Houston attorney Gary Polland compiled an analysis of an ADL attack on Christians. ?Among other things, the analysis demonstrates that ?(ADL Director) Foxman lied?? (12)

Syndicated columnist Mona Charen wrote: ??there is the crude, but undeniable fact that the ADL is in the anti-Semitism business?It is playing upon ancient fears?and it is doing so dishonestly, with quotes taken out of context and flagrantly false accusations.? (13)

In 1987 the B?nai B?rith of Canada was ordered to pay $400,000 for defaming a Winnipeg woman. (14)

On March 14, 1996 the B?nai B?rith called a press conference in Toronto urging the government to arrest revisionist publisher Ernst Zündel for printing revisionist pamphlets the Zionist group abhors. (15)

Jewish journalist Robert I. Friedman says the ADL is ?the largest private spy agency in America? working behind the scenes to stifle intellectual freedom.? [16]

According to the Associated Press, the ADL was instrumental in suppressing an advertisement on the Lycos Internet Website for the ?Jews for Jesus? organization. Lycos Inc. stated that it ?would not renew an advertisement from Jews for Jesus because of complaints from some in the Jewish community.?

Lycos said several Jewish people took offense when the ad popped up on their computer screens as they searched for Web sites containing the word ?Jewish.? Jeffrey Snider, Lycos? general counsel, told The Boston Globe that the ad?s contract, which expires in several days, was not renewed because ?controversial advertising is bad for business.?

According to the Associated Press, the ad ?was opposed by the Anti-Defamation League?s Boston office. Diane Kolb, ADL associate director, said she believes the ?Jews for Jesus? message is ?misleading and blasphemous.? [17]

When the U.S. government keeps a file on a citizen that individual can pursue a Freedom of Information inquiry to ascertain the contents and accuracy of the government dossier.

But in the case of the secret files of the ADL which the group shares with U.S. Intelligence and the Israeli secret police (Mossad), the citizen has no recourse whatever.

If an anti-Communist, right wing group were to engage in such massive domestic spying our local press and politicians would thunder anathemas against this ?new McCarthyism.? But when a totalitarian Zionist organization engages in such tactics, the Establishment media act as their dutiful mouthpiece, and the Federal government gives them semi-official status as ?watchdogs over extremism.?

But what can these prevaricating ADL thought cops with their Stalinist tactics, offer America, other than the same kind of dictatorship that arose in Russia in 1917? Why do our government leaders and media executives seek the approbation and follow the dictates of so loathsome a group of snoops, censors, haters and tyrants?
Copyright©1999 by Michael A. Hoffman II


End Notes

[1] Lenni Brenner, ?The ADL,? American Educational Trust, 1996, p. 18.

[2] Village Voice, Nov. 11, 1997, pp. 48, 50, 53.

[3] The Independent (San Francisco, CA), Oct. 22, 1998, p. 11.

[4] Ibid.

[5] ADL Press Release, Aug. 22, 1996.

[6] NY Times, Jan. 10, 1998.

[7] ?ADL Attack on NBC,? Coeur d?Alene Press, Nov. 15, 1998.

[8] ?Privacy Suit Against ADL Allowed,? A.P. Nov. 17, 1998.

[9] SF Weekly, March 31, 1993.

[10] NY Times, Aug. 2, 1994.

[11] The New American, Sept. 19, 1994, p. 13.

[12] Ibid.

[13] The Wanderer (St. Paul, MN), Aug, 1994, p. 10.

[14] The Globe and Mail, Nov. 26, 1987.

[15] Toronto Star, March 15, 1996.

[16] Robert I. Friedman, ?The Jewish Thought Police,? Village Voice, July 27, 1993.

[17] Associated Press, Aug. 11, 1999[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Helped Cover for Nazi Supporter Prescott Bush


How Bush?s grandfather helped Hitler?s rise to power[/large]

Rumours of a link between the US first family and the Nazi war machine have circulated for decades. Now the Guardian can reveal how repercussions of events that culminated in action under the Trading with the Enemy Act are still being felt by today?s president

Ben Aris in Berlin and Duncan Campbell in Washington
The Guardian, Saturday 25 September 2004 23.59 BST



George Bush?s grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.

His business dealings, which continued until his company?s assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.

The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator?s action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

The debate over Prescott Bush?s behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the ?Bush/Nazi? connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis? plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler?s rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.

Remarkably, little of Bush?s dealings with Germany has received public scrutiny, partly because of the secret status of the documentation involving him. But now the multibillion dollar legal action for damages by two Holocaust survivors against the Bush family, and the imminent publication of three books on the subject are threatening to make Prescott Bush?s business history an uncomfortable issue for his grandson, George W, as he seeks re-election.

While there is no suggestion that Prescott Bush was sympathetic to the Nazi cause, the documents reveal that the firm he worked for, Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), acted as a US base for the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen, who helped finance Hitler in the 1930s before falling out with him at the end of the decade. The Guardian has seen evidence that shows Bush was the director of the New York-based Union Banking Corporation (UBC) that represented Thyssen?s US interests and he continued to work for the bank after America entered the war.

Tantalising

Bush was also on the board of at least one of the companies that formed part of a multinational network of front companies to allow Thyssen to move assets around the world.

Thyssen owned the largest steel and coal company in Germany and grew rich from Hitler?s efforts to re-arm between the two world wars. One of the pillars in Thyssen?s international corporate web, UBC, worked exclusively for, and was owned by, a Thyssen-controlled bank in the Netherlands. More tantalising are Bush?s links to the Consolidated Silesian Steel Company (CSSC), based in mineral rich Silesia on the German-Polish border. During the war, the company made use of Nazi slave labour from the concentration camps, including Auschwitz. The ownership of CSSC changed hands several times in the 1930s, but documents from the US National Archive declassified last year link Bush to CSSC, although it is not clear if he and UBC were still involved in the company when Thyssen?s American assets were seized in 1942.

Three sets of archives spell out Prescott Bush?s involvement. All three are readily available, thanks to the efficient US archive system and a helpful and dedicated staff at both the Library of Congress in Washington and the National Archives at the University of Maryland.

The first set of files, the Harriman papers in the Library of Congress, show that Prescott Bush was a director and shareholder of a number of companies involved with Thyssen.

The second set of papers, which are in the National Archives, are contained in vesting order number 248 which records the seizure of the company assets. What these files show is that on October 20 1942 the alien property custodian seized the assets of the UBC, of which Prescott Bush was a director. Having gone through the books of the bank, further seizures were made against two affiliates, the Holland-American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation. By November, the Silesian-American Company, another of Prescott Bush?s ventures, had also been seized.

The third set of documents, also at the National Archives, are contained in the files on IG Farben, who was prosecuted for war crimes.

A report issued by the Office of Alien Property Custodian in 1942 stated of the companies that ?since 1939, these (steel and mining) properties have been in possession of and have been operated by the German government and have undoubtedly been of considerable assistance to that country?s war effort?.

Prescott Bush, a 6ft 4in charmer with a rich singing voice, was the founder of the Bush political dynasty and was once considered a potential presidential candidate himself. Like his son, George, and grandson, George W, he went to Yale where he was, again like his descendants, a member of the secretive and influential Skull and Bones student society. He was an artillery captain in the first world war and married Dorothy Walker, the daughter of George Herbert Walker, in 1921.

In 1924, his father-in-law, a well-known St Louis investment banker, helped set him up in business in New York with Averill Harriman, the wealthy son of railroad magnate E H Harriman in New York, who had gone into banking.

One of the first jobs Walker gave Bush was to manage UBC. Bush was a founding member of the bank and the incorporation documents, which list him as one of seven directors, show he owned one share in UBC worth $125.

The bank was set up by Harriman and Bush?s father-in-law to provide a US bank for the Thyssens, Germany?s most powerful industrial family.

August Thyssen, the founder of the dynasty had been a major contributor to Germany?s first world war effort and in the 1920s, he and his sons Fritz and Heinrich established a network of overseas banks and companies so their assets and money could be whisked offshore if threatened again.

By the time Fritz Thyssen inherited the business empire in 1926, Germany?s economic recovery was faltering. After hearing Adolf Hitler speak, Thyssen became mesmerised by the young firebrand. He joined the Nazi party in December 1931 and admits backing Hitler in his autobiography, I Paid Hitler, when the National Socialists were still a radical fringe party. He stepped in several times to bail out the struggling party: in 1928 Thyssen had bought the Barlow Palace on Briennerstrasse, in Munich, which Hitler converted into the Brown House, the headquarters of the Nazi party. The money came from another Thyssen overseas institution, the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvarrt in Rotterdam.

By the late 1930s, Brown Brothers Harriman, which claimed to be the world?s largest private investment bank, and UBC had bought and shipped millions of dollars of gold, fuel, steel, coal and US treasury bonds to Germany, both feeding and financing Hitler?s build-up to war.

Between 1931 and 1933 UBC bought more than $8m worth of gold, of which $3m was shipped abroad. According to documents seen by the Guardian, after UBC was set up it transferred $2m to BBH accounts and between 1924 and 1940 the assets of UBC hovered around $3m, dropping to $1m only on a few occasions.

In 1941, Thyssen fled Germany after falling out with Hitler but he was captured in France and detained for the remainder of the war.

There was nothing illegal in doing business with the Thyssens throughout the 1930s and many of America?s best-known business names invested heavily in the German economic recovery. However, everything changed after Germany invaded Poland in 1939. Even then it could be argued that BBH was within its rights continuing business relations with the Thyssens until the end of 1941 as the US was still technically neutral until the attack on Pearl Harbor. The trouble started on July 30 1942 when the New York Herald-Tribune ran an article entitled ?Hitler?s Angel Has $3m in US Bank?. UBC?s huge gold purchases had raised suspicions that the bank was in fact a ?secret nest egg? hidden in New York for Thyssen and other Nazi bigwigs. The Alien Property Commission (APC) launched an investigation.

There is no dispute over the fact that the US government seized a string of assets controlled by BBH ? including UBC and SAC ? in the autumn of 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy act. What is in dispute is if Harriman, Walker and Bush did more than own these companies on paper.

Erwin May, a treasury attache and officer for the department of investigation in the APC, was assigned to look into UBC?s business. The first fact to emerge was that Roland Harriman, Prescott Bush and the other directors didn?t actually own their shares in UBC but merely held them on behalf of Bank voor Handel. Strangely, no one seemed to know who owned the Rotterdam-based bank, including UBC?s president.

May wrote in his report of August 16 1941: ?Union Banking Corporation, incorporated August 4 1924, is wholly owned by the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart N.V of Rotterdam, the Netherlands. My investigation has produced no evidence as to the ownership of the Dutch bank. Mr Cornelis [sic] Lievense, president of UBC, claims no knowledge as to the ownership of the Bank voor Handel but believes it possible that Baron Heinrich Thyssen, brother of Fritz Thyssen, may own a substantial interest.?

May cleared the bank of holding a golden nest egg for the Nazi leaders but went on to describe a network of companies spreading out from UBC across Europe, America and Canada, and how money from voor Handel travelled to these companies through UBC.

By September May had traced the origins of the non-American board members and found that Dutchman HJ Kouwenhoven ? who met with Harriman in 1924 to set up UBC ? had several other jobs: in addition to being the managing director of voor Handel he was also the director of the August Thyssen bank in Berlin and a director of Fritz Thyssen?s Union Steel Works, the holding company that controlled Thyssen?s steel and coal mine empire in Germany.

Within a few weeks, Homer Jones, the chief of the APC investigation and research division sent a memo to the executive committee of APC recommending the US government vest UBC and its assets. Jones named the directors of the bank in the memo, including Prescott Bush?s name, and wrote: ?Said stock is held by the above named individuals, however, solely as nominees for the Bank voor Handel, Rotterdam, Holland, which is owned by one or more of the Thyssen family, nationals of Germany and Hungary. The 4,000 shares hereinbefore set out are therefore beneficially owned and help for the interests of enemy nationals, and are vestible by the APC,? according to the memo from the National Archives seen by the Guardian.

Red-handed

Jones recommended that the assets be liquidated for the benefit of the government, but instead UBC was maintained intact and eventually returned to the American shareholders after the war. Some claim that Bush sold his share in UBC after the war for $1.5m ? a huge amount of money at the time ? but there is no documentary evidence to support this claim. No further action was ever taken nor was the investigation continued, despite the fact UBC was caught red-handed operating a American shell company for the Thyssen family eight months after America had entered the war and that this was the bank that had partly financed Hitler?s rise to power.

The most tantalising part of the story remains shrouded in mystery: the connection, if any, between Prescott Bush, Thyssen, Consolidated Silesian Steel Company (CSSC) and Auschwitz.

Thyssen?s partner in United Steel Works, which had coal mines and steel plants across the region, was Friedrich Flick, another steel magnate who also owned part of IG Farben, the powerful German chemical company.

Flick?s plants in Poland made heavy use of slave labour from the concentration camps in Poland. According to a New York Times article published in March 18 1934 Flick owned two-thirds of CSSC while ?American interests? held the rest.

The US National Archive documents show that BBH?s involvement with CSSC was more than simply holding the shares in the mid-1930s. Bush?s friend and fellow ?bonesman? Knight Woolley, another partner at BBH, wrote to Averill Harriman in January 1933 warning of problems with CSSC after the Poles started their drive to nationalise the plant. ?The Consolidated Silesian Steel Company situation has become increasingly complicated, and I have accordingly brought in Sullivan and Cromwell, in order to be sure that our interests are protected,? wrote Knight. ?After studying the situation Foster Dulles is insisting that their man in Berlin get into the picture and obtain the information which the directors here should have. You will recall that Foster is a director and he is particularly anxious to be certain that there is no liability attaching to the American directors.?

But the ownership of the CSSC between 1939 when the Germans invaded Poland and 1942 when the US government vested UBC and SAC is not clear.

?SAC held coal mines and definitely owned CSSC between 1934 and 1935, but when SAC was vested there was no trace of CSSC. All concrete evidence of its ownership disappears after 1935 and there are only a few traces in 1938 and 1939,? says Eva Schweitzer, the journalist and author whose book, America and the Holocaust, is published next month.

Silesia was quickly made part of the German Reich after the invasion, but while Polish factories were seized by the Nazis, those belonging to the still neutral Americans (and some other nationals) were treated more carefully as Hitler was still hoping to persuade the US to at least sit out the war as a neutral country. Schweitzer says American interests were dealt with on a case-by-case basis. The Nazis bought some out, but not others.

The two Holocaust survivors suing the US government and the Bush family for a total of $40bn in compensation claim both materially benefited from Auschwitz slave labour during the second world war.

Kurt Julius Goldstein, 87, and Peter Gingold, 85, began a class action in America in 2001, but the case was thrown out by Judge Rosemary Collier on the grounds that the government cannot be held liable under the principle of ?state sovereignty?.

Jan Lissmann, one of the lawyers for the survivors, said: ?President Bush withdrew President Bill Clinton?s signature from the treaty [that founded the court] not only to protect Americans, but also to protect himself and his family.?

Lissmann argues that genocide-related cases are covered by international law, which does hold governments accountable for their actions. He claims the ruling was invalid as no hearing took place.

In their claims, Mr Goldstein and Mr Gingold, honorary chairman of the League of Anti-fascists, suggest the Americans were aware of what was happening at Auschwitz and should have bombed the camp.

The lawyers also filed a motion in The Hague asking for an opinion on whether state sovereignty is a valid reason for refusing to hear their case. A ruling is expected within a month.

The petition to The Hague states: ?From April 1944 on, the American Air Force could have destroyed the camp with air raids, as well as the railway bridges and railway lines from Hungary to Auschwitz. The murder of about 400,000 Hungarian Holocaust victims could have been prevented.?

The case is built around a January 22 1944 executive order signed by President Franklin Roosevelt calling on the government to take all measures to rescue the European Jews. The lawyers claim the order was ignored because of pressure brought by a group of big American companies, including BBH, where Prescott Bush was a director.

Lissmann said: ?If we have a positive ruling from the court it will cause [president] Bush huge problems and make him personally liable to pay compensation.?

The US government and the Bush family deny all the claims against them.

In addition to Eva Schweitzer?s book, two other books are about to be published that raise the subject of Prescott Bush?s business history. The author of the second book, to be published next year, John Loftus, is a former US attorney who prosecuted Nazi war criminals in the 70s. Now living in St Petersburg, Florida and earning his living as a security commentator for Fox News and ABC radio, Loftus is working on a novel which uses some of the material he has uncovered on Bush. Loftus stressed that what Prescott Bush was involved in was just what many other American and British businessmen were doing at the time.

?You can?t blame Bush for what his grandfather did any more than you can blame Jack Kennedy for what his father did ? bought Nazi stocks ? but what is important is the cover-up, how it could have gone on so successfully for half a century, and does that have implications for us today?? he said.

?This was the mechanism by which Hitler was funded to come to power, this was the mechanism by which the Third Reich?s defence industry was re-armed, this was the mechanism by which Nazi profits were repatriated back to the American owners, this was the mechanism by which investigations into the financial laundering of the Third Reich were blunted,? said Loftus, who is vice-chairman of the Holocaust Museum in St Petersburg.

?The Union Banking Corporation was a holding company for the Nazis, for Fritz Thyssen,? said Loftus. ?At various times, the Bush family has tried to spin it, saying they were owned by a Dutch bank and it wasn?t until the Nazis took over Holland that they realised that now the Nazis controlled the apparent company and that is why the Bush supporters claim when the war was over they got their money back. Both the American treasury investigations and the intelligence investigations in Europe completely bely that, it?s absolute horseshit. They always knew who the ultimate beneficiaries were.?

?There is no one left alive who could be prosecuted but they did get away with it,? said Loftus. ?As a former federal prosecutor, I would make a case for Prescott Bush, his father-in-law (George Walker) and Averill Harriman [to be prosecuted] for giving aid and comfort to the enemy. They remained on the boards of these companies knowing that they were of financial benefit to the nation of Germany.?

Loftus said Prescott Bush must have been aware of what was happening in Germany at the time. ?My take on him was that he was a not terribly successful in-law who did what Herbert Walker told him to. Walker and Harriman were the two evil geniuses, they didn?t care about the Nazis any more than they cared about their investments with the Bolsheviks.?

What is also at issue is how much money Bush made from his involvement. His supporters suggest that he had one token share. Loftus disputes this, citing sources in ?the banking and intelligence communities? and suggesting that the Bush family, through George Herbert Walker and Prescott, got $1.5m out of the involvement. There is, however, no paper trail to this sum.

The third person going into print on the subject is John Buchanan, 54, a Miami-based magazine journalist who started examining the files while working on a screenplay. Last year, Buchanan published his findings in the venerable but small-circulation New Hampshire Gazette under the headline ?Documents in National Archives Prove George Bush?s Grandfather Traded With the Nazis ? Even After Pearl Harbor?. He expands on this in his book to be published next month ? Fixing America: Breaking the Stranglehold of Corporate Rule, Big Media and the Religious Right.

In the article, Buchanan, who has worked mainly in the trade and music press with a spell as a muckraking reporter in Miami, claimed that ?the essential facts have appeared on the internet and in relatively obscure books but were dismissed by the media and Bush family as undocumented diatribes?.

Buchanan suffers from hypermania, a form of manic depression, and when he found himself rebuffed in his initial efforts to interest the media, he responded with a series of threats against the journalists and media outlets that had spurned him. The threats, contained in e-mails, suggested that he would expose the journalists as ?traitors to the truth?.

Unsurprisingly, he soon had difficulty getting his calls returned. Most seriously, he faced aggravated stalking charges in Miami, in connection with a man with whom he had fallen out over the best way to publicise his findings. The charges were dropped last month.

Biography

Buchanan said he regretted his behaviour had damaged his credibility but his main aim was to secure publicity for the story. Both Loftus and Schweitzer say Buchanan has come up with previously undisclosed documentation.

The Bush family have largely responded with no comment to any reference to Prescott Bush. Brown Brothers Harriman also declined to comment.

The Bush family recently approved a flattering biography of Prescott Bush entitled Duty, Honour, Country by Mickey Herskowitz. The publishers, Rutledge Hill Press, promised the book would ?deal honestly with Prescott Bush?s alleged business relationships with Nazi industrialists and other accusations?.

In fact, the allegations are dealt with in less than two pages. The book refers to the Herald-Tribune story by saying that ?a person of less established ethics would have panicked ? Bush and his partners at Brown Brothers Harriman informed the government regulators that the account, opened in the late 1930s, was ?an unpaid courtesy for a client? ? Prescott Bush acted quickly and openly on behalf of the firm, served well by a reputation that had never been compromised. He made available all records and all documents. Viewed six decades later in the era of serial corporate scandals and shattered careers, he received what can be viewed as the ultimate clean bill.?

The Prescott Bush story has been condemned by both conservatives and some liberals as having nothing to do with the current president. It has also been suggested that Prescott Bush had little to do with Averill Harriman and that the two men opposed each other politically.

However, documents from the Harriman papers include a flattering wartime profile of Harriman in the New York Journal American and next to it in the files is a letter to the financial editor of that paper from Prescott Bush congratulating the paper for running the profile. He added that Harriman?s ?performance and his whole attitude has been a source of inspiration and pride to his partners and his friends?.

The Anti-Defamation League in the US is supportive of Prescott Bush and the Bush family. In a statement last year they said that ?rumours about the alleged Nazi ?ties? of the late Prescott Bush ? have circulated widely through the internet in recent years. These charges are untenable and politically motivated ? Prescott Bush was neither a Nazi nor a Nazi sympathiser.?

However, one of the country?s oldest Jewish publications, the Jewish Advocate, has aired the controversy in detail.

More than 60 years after Prescott Bush came briefly under scrutiny at the time of a faraway war, his grandson is facing a different kind of scrutiny but one underpinned by the same perception that, for some people, war can be a profitable business.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL in 1933 and Berlusconi Now[/large]


The ADL in 1933 & Berlusconi now

by Lenni Brenner
9/19/2003
BrennerL21@aol.com

[If anyone asked informed Americans to name one Zionist organization, they
would most likely cite the Anti-Defamation League. Its ads, and letters by
Abe Foxman, its National Director, appear routinely in the New York Times
and other publications.

It wasn't Zionist in the '30s. It was then just a desk in the office of the
B'nai B'rith, (Sons of the Covenant), a fraternal order established in the
19th century by immigrants from Germany. The order represented the American
Jewish upper class, which didn't come over to Zionism until its acceptance
by Washington in 1948, after the Holocaust.

Today, the ADL is the public face of B'nai B'rith, but in the '30s, the
order spoke for the ADL. Now the ADL pretends to be the shock troops in the
fight against anti-Semitism, but readers of this 1933 editorial statement
will see why it never dares to mention what it did against Hitler, and the
surge of American Jew-hatred, in the wake of Hitler's 1933 triumph.

The document takes on special relevance now, as the ADL scandalizes the Jews
of the world as it prepares to give an award to Italian Prime Minister
Silvio Berlusconi, who has just announced that "Mussolini never killed
anyone, Mussolini sent people away on vacation, in internment," when, in
reality, he helped Hitler murder thousands of Italian Jews.

The text below can be found in 51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with the
Nazis, Edited by Lenni Brenner and published by Barricade Books.]

"B'nai B'rith and the German-Jewish Tragedy," B'nai B'rith Magazine,
May 1933.

Criticism is heard: B'nai B'rith did not join the public protests against
the German-Jewish tragedy! The power of B'nai B'rith was not exploited
sufficiently in the public press! What an opportunity B'nai B'rith had to
keep its fame on the front pages in this crisis!

Such things have been said.

The members of this organization have cause to be proud of their affiliation
with a Jewish body that obscured its own prestige in order to serve its
German brethren the better. Not the glory of B'nai B'rith but the safety of
German Jews was paramount at the moment and quietly B'nai B'rith moved to
the defense of these brethren through the strong hand of the State
Department.

What was the position of American Jewry in the tragic hour? It was as if a
robber had entered one's house and seized one's child and held it for a
shield... "You shoot at me and you kill your child!"

What does a man do in such a pass? Shoot? He puts aside his pistol. He
considers other means of meeting the crisis.

With the Hitler government threatening reprisals against Jews, should B'nai
B'rith have rushed forward with loud protests? In the eyes of the unthinking
this might have enhanced the prestige of B¹nai B¹rith... "How courageous is
B'nai B'rith!" they might have said.

B'nai B'rith puts aside the opportunity for valor (5,000 miles from the
scene of danger!) and with what power is in its hand and in co-operation
with other Jewish agencies, set in motion the diplomatic efforts that are
already historic. Aye, B'nai B'rith might have thrown itself alone into the
breach so that it could be said of it, "Singlehanded this organization
battles for the rights of Jewry." But B'nai B'rith greatly desires unity in
Israel and it marched with other organizations and still so marches.

If there has not been complete unity in Israel in this crisis, it is no
fault of B'nai B'rith.

Weeks before the German-Jewish tragedy became the pain of all Jewry, B'nai
B'rith, conscious of forebodings, took steps, met with the leaders of other
organizations, considered what was best to do, having always in mind that
nothing ought to be done that would endanger rather than mitigate the
unhappy situation of the German Jews.

This policy directs and will continue to direct every move of B'nai B'rith
acting in co-operation with the American Jewish Committee. We have no
quarrel with other organizations that went their own way to make public
protest. We believe, however, that time will show that the policy of B'nai
B'rith is founded on better wisdom. We regret that in the momentous hour
American Jewry is not united.

Even those who were at first hot for public protest have come to see that
discretion is the better part of valor in an hour when lives are in the
balance. They have announced that "In deference to the wishes of the State
Department" they "refrain from making (further) comment on the tragic
situation of the Jews in Germany."

For B'nai B'rith there was, besides, a poignant special cause to restrain it
from action that might seem rash in the moment. It has fraternal ties with
many Jews in Germany where the finest of Jewry is included in the membership
of B'nai B'rith. Hostile public words or actions by B'nai B'rith in America
might have reflected dangerously on the B'nai B'rith of Germany of whom it
might have been said by their enemies, "They have instigated their fellow
members in America against us."

The conscience of B'nai B'rith could never have acquitted itself had any
ill-considered action by the Order in America caused injury to our brethren
in Germany.

And what of the future? It may be answered that B'nai B'rith in co-operation
with the American Jewish Committee is alert; that things are being carefully
done; that perfect unity of speech and action exists between the B'nai
B'rith and the American Jewish Committee.

If the Jews desire the unity of all Israel in America in the presence of
this tragedy they can have it by demanding it of the organizations that
represent them. As for B'nai B'rith, it feels that its action in this crisis
will make a worthy chapter of its history.[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Infiltrates the Fbi and Subverts Its Agenda[/large]

Source: ADL Website | June 6, 2002

[large]ADL Press Release[/large]

Law Enforcement From Across The U.S. Participate In Joint ADL-FBI
Conference On Terrorism

New York, NY ? More than 500 representatives of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies were briefed on extremist and terrorist threats during a daylong conference co-sponsored by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The May 31 program, held at the FBI Academy in Quantico, VA, was an outgrowth of ADL?s longtime involvement in providing information and training to law enforcement on threats posed by extremists. The conference, ?Extremist and Terrorist Threats: Protecting America After 9/11? included presentations from ADL, FBI and other nationally recognized experts on extremist groups, investigative techniques, counterterrorism strategies, domestic security and threat assessment.

?Now more than ever, law enforcement must have the resources and know-how to prevent future acts of terrorism,? said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. ?In order to assess threats against the United States, law enforcement must have credible information about domestic and foreign extremists whose rhetoric promotes violence. Through our network of regional offices and our experts in the field, ADL is uniquely suited to aid in the war against terrorism. This conference was an opportunity for law enforcement and extremism watchdogs to compare notes and forge alliances.?

The conference brought together representatives of federal, state and local law enforcement from every region of the U.S., and included participants in the FBI National Academy, ADL regional directors, area counsels and investigative researchers.

The program featured opening remarks from Mr. Foxman and Dr. Kathleen L. McChesney, the FBI?s Executive Assistant Director for Law Enforcement Services. The plenary session, ?Right and Left, Domestic and Foreign: An Overview of Extremist and Terrorist Movements and Groups,? featured presentations from Dr. Bruce Hoffman, Director of the Washington office of The Rand Corporation; Greg Comcowich, Intelligence Research Specialist in the FBI?s Counterterrorism Division; and Mark Pitcavage, ADL Director of Fact Finding.

James T. Caruso, the FBI?s Deputy Executive Assistant Director for Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence, delivered the keynote address.

Five concurrent workshops focused on Threat Assessment on the State and Local Level; Strategies for Police-Community Cooperation to Combat Extremism and Terrorism; The Changing Role of Law Enforcement: Policy, People and Technology; Inside the Minds of Terrorists and Extremists; and New Partnerships: Law Enforcement, the Military and Non-Governmental Organizations. Among the presenters were police chiefs from Arlington, VA, Irvine, CA, and Spokane, WA; and officials from the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command; the U.S. Army War College, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, and ADL and FBI professionals.

David Friedman, Director of ADL?s Washington, D.C. Regional Office, and Louis Quijas, Assistant Director for the FBI?s Office of Law Enforcement Coordination, delivered closing remarks.

EDITORS NOTE: Additional information on extremist groups and ideologies, and the League?s partnerships with law enforcement agencies across the country, is available at ADL?s online Law Enforcement Agency Resource Network, at www.adl.org/LEARN.

The Anti-Defamation League, founded in 1913, is the world?s leading organization fighting anti-Semitism through programs and services that counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry.[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Info Helped HUAC in 1947 Witch Hunts[/large]

Date: Fri Sep 18 00:27:37 1998

ADL Info Helped HUAC In 1947 "Witch-Hunts"

REPORTS THAT the Anti-Defamation League (ADL)
furnished information on individuals and organizations to
government agencies is not new. At press time, the MELB
learned that in 1947, Congressional hearings revealed
that the self-styled "civil rights" organization had been
furnishing information to the U.S. Civil Service
Commission on persons either alleged to be "communist,"
or linked, even indirectly, to some one who was. This
information, was in turn, used by the House Un-American
Activities Committee (HUAC) and the FBI.

The investigation was conducted by a House
Subcommittee on the Expenditures of the Executive
Department on October 3,6 and 7, 1947. Its purpose was
"to make inquiry as to the authority of the Civil Service
Commission to expend federal funds to compile an
'investigators' leads file containing facts, rumor, and
gossip bearing upon the views, opinions, and acts of
individuals who were neither federal employees nor
applicants for positions coming under the jurisdiction of
the Civil Service Commission. Also to learn for what
purpose the 'file' was to be used."

What the Subcommittee learned, clearly to its
disgust as a reading of the hearings make clear, was that
the Anti- Defamation League was major source of
information which Subcommittee Chair Clare Hoffman
declared to be "all hearsay."

As an example, Hoffman held up a card, referring to
the National Lawyers Guild, February 20-22, 1937,* which
stated that it came "from the subversive files in the
office of Attorneys Mintzer & Levy, 39 Broadway, room
3305, and the files were made up in cooperation with the
American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League"
(P. 17).

According to the Commission President Harry B.
Mitchell, the files contained "the names of persons
connected with some person who may be disloyal,
subversive in some way. And we have the names of a great
many who registered as Communists, who filed a petition,
a nominating petition as a member of the Communist Party"
(P. 10). It also apparently, included the names of some
Senators and Congressmen (sic).

"You must remember," Mitchell later acknowledged,
"that there is no evidence against the names on the
list." "No," responded Hoffman, "but it furnishes a most
admirable smear list." (P. 17)

Subcommittee member, Fred Busbey of Illinois, asked
Commissioner Arthur Flemming how he could "reconcile your
statement before this committee [regarding its
activities] with the order put out by the Civil Service
Commission on November 3, 1943, prohibiting your
investigators from even asking questions about various
Communist-front organizations - whether the man read the
Daily Worker, or whether he was a member of the
Washington Bookshop, or the American League for Peace and
Democracy, or other organizations of that type?"

Flemming replied that "the Commission became
convinced that the technique being used by some of the
investigators, instead of helping us achieve our
objectives, was deliberately playing into the hands of
the persons against whom the investigations were being
conducted. That type of information could be more
effectively developed in other ways without playing into
[their] hands."(P. 21)

Busbey, noting the "numerous cards" in the
Commission's files that came from the ADL, asked Flemming
to explain the relationship that existed between anyone
on his staff and the ADL, and another organization, the
Friends of Democracy, whose name was linked to it on the
cards.

Mr. Busbey: Do you have any knowledge as to who in
your organization contacts the Anti-Defamation League and
checks their files, and how often they go to their
offices and check their files for leads for your files?

Mr. Flemming: I do not know, and I do not have such
information.

Busbey, obviously frustrated when this line of
questioning produced no results, urged the committee to
"subpena before it the executive head of the
Anti-Defamation League, and that they have Mintzer &
Levy,I subpoenaed, to ascertain what they had to do with
getting that kind of information into this file" (P. 36)
The "advisability" of doing so was immediately questioned
by Subcommittee assistant, Porter Hardy, the chair agreed
and it went no further.

The Commissioner was adamant in his refusal to let
the Subcommittee review the files, despite acknowledging
that investigators from other committees, such as HUAC,
and the FBI had been given access. In a letter to
Hoffman, dated December 19, 1947, Commission President
Mitchell reported that of the 487,033 cards (on
individuals) in its New York City office, "6,000 or 7,000
cards" compiled, to some degree, "n cooperation with the
Anti-Defamation League." (P.63)

It should be noted that 1947 was the year in which
ten Hollywood writers, producers and directors, who came
to be known as the "Hollywood Ten,"were called before
HUAC and asked whether or not they were "now or had ever
been" members of the Communist Party. All refused to
answer, claiming that their First Amendment rights
protected them from such an inquiry. They were judged to
be in contempt of Congress and sentenced to a year in
federal prison. The House Un-American Activities
Committee, at the time, with whom the ADL made common
bond, was largely made up of Southern racist "Dixicrats"
and ultra-right wing Northern Republicans.

*This was during the infancy of the first HUAC, which
came to be known by the name of its notorious right-wing
chair, Martin Dies, as the Dies Committee.[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Issues Hate Crimes Cards to Police[/large]

Source: The Los Angeles Times, [small]http://www.latimes.com[/small], October 17th 2000

[large]Now Here?s a Chance to Raise the Hate Crimes Card[/large]

By PATT MORRISON

Coming soon to a police cruiser near you: the hate crimes card.

The Anti-Defamation League has drafted a nifty laminated card?bigger than the Miranda model, but just the right size to slip into a field notebook or clip to the visor of a patrol car?to help officers handle hate crimes.

Several hundred were given to the badge-and-uniform set at a hate crime conference in Sacramento recently, and by month?s end, cards will be in the mail to law enforcement in all 50 states.

The card was field-tested in California by the Los Angeles school police and the San Diego County Sheriff?s Department, which had something to say about everything from the card size to the typeface.

It bears 11 strategies (?Allow victim to use own words. Use interpreter, if necessary.?) and seven factors to watch, like telltale signs of a hate crime, and whether the crime took place on an ethnic or political red-letter day?like Cinco de Mayo, or Hitler?s birthday.[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Jews Withdraw Fearing Exposure

No Place for Hate Withdraws from Hamilton
Town Meeting Warrant[/large]

By NOELLE DINANT ? News staff

HAMILTON ? The No Place for Hate campaign withdrew its request for a townwide endorsement last night, fearing it might spark dissension in town.

Local debate on the statewide program, which promotes tolerance and anti-violence, has drawn national media attention and two visits by a white supremacist group in the past month.

The program, which was opposed by selectmen who didn?t want to endorse an ideology, was slated for a vote at the annual Town Meeting on May 6.

No Place for Hate members, however, presented a petition to the Board of Selectmen requesting the endorsement vote be removed from the Town Meeting warrant.

?It (the endorsement vote) could become a forum for outsiders ? or a debate about the role of government, which is a valuable debate but not what the program is about,? Jerry Schwartz, a member of the group, said. ?None of us wants to see citizens not feel welcome.?

The group intends to ?take a step back? to re-examine its makeup and mission, Schwartz said.

The group, which has about 20 members in Hamilton and Wenham, will meet for the next six months to draft its goals, then will report back to the selectmen in both towns, he said.

?It (the campaign) took a direction that a lot of people were a little uncomfortable with,? said Peggy Stedman, a former Hamilton selectman, who is assisting the group. ?Hopefully, we?re going to move ahead in a stronger direction.?

State Sen. Bruce Tarr, R-Gloucester, who is also helping the group, served as a facilitator of sorts last night.

?The idea is, we all have the same laudable goal,? he said, referring to promoting tolerance. ?We intend to address that in the most inclusive way possible. This is a serious enough issue that it involves that amount of time (six months of planning) and that amount of commitment.?

Established in 1999 by the Anti-Defamation League and the Massachusetts Municipal Association, No Place for Hate is a statewide program designed ?to promote respect for the individual and group differences, while speaking out against hate and intolerance,? according to literature.

The program, which provides educational materials and forum ideas to participating communities, has been adopted by more than 50 cities and towns.

Hamilton eighth-grader Hannah Hoy got involved with the program as part of a school project.

She, in turn, asked for support from a violence prevention task force that is part of the Hamilton-Wenham Health Advisory Council.

Hoy, members of the task force and other citizens then brought the ADL No Place for Hate program to town leaders. To be designated as a No Place for Hate community, the town must endorse the program.

Hamilton?s leaders balked, saying it?s not the role of government to endorse private ideologies or initiatives.

The debate drew the attention of ?The Today Show,? which interviewed Hoy and her father. It also attracted a white supremacist group, which dropped leaflets and held signs in town.

Selectmen Chairman John Serafini Jr. reiterated his position last night, asking if the local group will remain affiliated with the ADL.

The final composition of the group hasn?t been determined, but it may be a coalition of a number of public and private groups, such as police, schools and the ADL, Tarr said.

?It is not a committee solely advancing the ADL mission,? he said.

Hoy could not be reached for comment last night.[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL National Director Abraham Foxman Pushed UC Santa Barbara to Investigate Professor


BREAKING NEWS: Abraham Foxman pushed UC-Santa Barbara to investigate professor[/large]

Anti-Defamation League?s national director personally pressured UCSB representatives to act against faculty member

Please Distribute Widely

Contact: cdaf.ucsb@gmail.com.

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. ? Anti-Defamation League National Director Abraham Foxman held a confidential meeting in early March with University of California officials on campus to pressure them to investigate charges of ?anti-Semitism? against sociology professor William I. Robinson.

The meeting included Dean of Students Michael Young, a second dean, and at least seven faculty members.

Some of the meeting participants told Robinson that Foxman, who was in Santa Barbara to meet with local funders, requested the meeting at UCSB for the sole purpose of demanding that university officials investigate Robinson for introducing materials critical of Israeli state policies in a course on globalization in January.

The materials included a photo essay that Robinson forwarded to students from the Internet and that had been circulating in the public realm. The photos compared images of Israeli abuse against Palestinians during the recent military invasion of Gaza with Nazi abuses during the holocaust. Two students took offense at the images and withdrew from the course, prompting the Anti-Defamation League to pressure the university to investigate Robinson for ?anti-Semitism.?

Robinson said participants at the meeting with Foxman were unaware beforehand of the ADL?s intentions. He said the attendees assumed the meeting had been convened to discuss university efforts to hire a chair for a Jewish studies program. ?But when the meeting started, Foxman made clear that the only agenda point was his demand that I be investigated,? Robinson said.

Robinson said such intimidation against critics of Israel is standard ADL policy, but Foxman?s personal intervention at UCSB constitutes a marked escalation of pressure tactics that sets a dangerous precedent for the future of academic freedom here and at other universities.

Foxman, 69, has been director of the Washington, D.C.-based ADL since 1987 and has worked with the organization since 1965. He is an international lobbyist who has met frequently with national and world leaders, including all U.S. presidents since Richard Nixon.

Members of the ADL?s Santa Barbara/Tri-Counties Office ? which serves Santa Barbara, Ventura and San Luis Obispo counties ? accompanied Foxman to the meeting on campus.

It?s unclear what effect Foxman?s pressure had on university officials. However, the Academic Senate has opened a formal investigation of the charges against Robinson.

The decision to investigate the professor spurred an angry backlash on campus. Students formed a Committee to Defend Academic Freedom and have created an online blog to coordinate efforts to cease the investigation against Robinson.

For detailed information about the Robinson case, visit the committee?s blog at [small]www.sb4af.wordpress.com[/small].

For media inquiries, email cdaf.ucsb@gmail.com.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, April 28th, 2009 at 6:31 pm.[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Offers Damage Control For War Criminals[/large]

New York Times, 5/21/04
To the Editor:?The Gaza Quagmire? (editorial, May 20) oversteps when it accuses Israel of carrying out a deliberate plan ?to unilaterally destroy the Palestinian territory.?

Israel?s operation in Gaza is trying to deal with an increasingly serious situation: the proliferation of tunnels through which Palestinian terrorists are smuggling weapons into the Gaza Strip to be used in attacks against Israeli soldiers and civilians. These tunnels are deliberately situated in high-density population areas.

The last few days in Gaza have witnessed tragic deaths on both sides. Israel has apologized for the deaths of demonstrators in Rafah, is investigating this tragic incident, and has repeated its commitment not to harm civilians.

KENNETH JACOBSON
Associate National Director
Anti-Defamation League
New York, May 20, 2004[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Promotes Radical Homosexual Agenda[/large]

Source: The Massachusetts News | June 2001 (Images added)

?Jewish? Group Touts Homosexuality in Hingham Schools The religious organization ADL is active in schools across the state with its message about homosexuality. It labels anyone who disagrees as a ?hater.?


A religious group is working in Hingham schools and across the state with selectmen, police, legislators and others to promote an outdated, discredited view about the gay gene. Anyone who disagrees with their antiquated theories is called a ?hater.?

It is reminiscent of the Lexington schools working with the Unitarian Church last year. Hundreds of parents protested at that time and that superintendent was fired this year without explanation, a few months after the protests.

The religious organization that is operating in Hingham is a ?Jewish? organization known as the Anti-Defamation League.

It has a program called, ?No Place for Hate.? The only problem with their program is in deciding who is going to define the word ?hate.? It?s a wonderful concept. But almost no one thinks beyond the catchy title.

On their website under ?No Place for Hate,? they list ?sexual orientation? as one of the protected classes for whom they are working.

Many Jews disagree with this group of liberals. But any person who dares to dissent with their belief in the ?gay gene,? quickly becomes a ?hater.?

How can this religious group be working in our schools? Are other religious organizations also invited?
Failure to support this is now ?hate.?

Rabbi Daniel Lapin of Toward Tradition says that the head of the ADL, Abe Foxman, is the Jews? ?Own Worst Enemy.? He told UPI that Foxman?s ?tireless efforts? to convince American Jews that they are beset by ?a phantom of anti-Semitism,? when their own experience suggests otherwise, ?have helped to confirm many in the belief that being a Jew has to do mainly withbeing oppressed and hated.?

He points out that the ADL ?gets paid [by contributors] according to how much anti-Semitism it finds.? It?s also obvious that if ADL can add homosexuals to the list of people they ?protect,? they can get even more money flowing in for Mr. Foxman.

The Jewish columnist for the New York Times, William Safire, called for Foxman?s resignation after it was disclosed that he had lobbied Bill Clinton for the pardon of Marc Rich who donated lavishly to the group.

Although everyone agrees with Foxman that we must end anti-Semitism, most are not convinced ? if they stop to think about it ? that homosexuality is in the same category and should be bundled with anti-Semitism.

A story in the Hingham Journal about the ADL program had the headline, ?Teenagers take message of tolerance to community.? The story talked about ?advocating harmony and goodwill.? No one could or will argue with that message.

The ADL?s Foxman thrives on ?hate.?

A student and a teacher spoke to 350 school administrators, guidance counselors and district attorneys at a meeting of the state?s Attorney General. They talked ?about Hingham?s ADL program? according to the Journal. The teacher told the paper, ?Caitlin [Marshall] was the only student in the whole place.? He added, ?This was a big step for Hingham, because the town was referred to as a model community.?

The paper said that Caitlin stresses the importance of extending the ?ADL philosophy? beyond the school and into the community.

The students have addressed many other groups, including a convention of police officers in New Hampshire and a meeting of over 300 people in their own town and a group of more than 30 students met with their state legislator, Rep. Garrett Bradley.

Everyone will agree that political/religious proselytizing should not be permitted in our public schools. Why is this an exception?[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Pushes Legislation That May Threaten Talk Show Hosts and Free Speech[/large]

Talk Show Hosts May Be Accomplices Under Hate Bill

June 26, 3:49 PM
LA Nonpartisan Examiner
Robert Stark

The Hate Crimes Prevention Act which has passed the House of Representatives by an overwhelming margin is now facing hearings in the Senate. There are already similar hate crime laws in place, however, this bill imposes much stronger federal enforcement, which is a clear violation of the Tenth Amendment. It grants greater power to federal prosecutors to prosecute hate crime laws by prosecuting those who have been found innocent by local or state courts. The current bill will extend special privileges to gays and transgender individuals that are currently only granted to ethnic and religious minorities. The most dangerous part of the Bill which is a direct assault against the First Amendment is that it allows for the prosecution as accomplices in a hate crime for talk show pundits that the person who commits the alleged crime claims to influence their actions.

Here is the essential text:

Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce [radio, TV, internet] any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. (HR 1966, SEC 3, Sec. 881a)

Reverend Ted Pike of the National Prayer Network says that ?this means that if any pastor, talk show host or guest, or anyone communicating on radio or the internet is repeatedly ?hostile? to the practice of homosexuality and ?intends? to cause ?substantial emotional distress? in homosexuals, leading to repentance, he is guilty. The speaker doesn?t even have to succeed in causing such conviction for sin, even though he will be especially guilty if he does. In either case, the federal government is empowered under this bill to invade any state to prosecute the ?bully? of the airwaves.?

This Bill is the first major step to stripping away our rights to freedom of speech in the 1st amendment. Recently the Plains State ADL Director denounced the 1st Amendment by saying that ?freedom of speech does not extend to racist groups, nor give their supporters the right to threaten and intimidate others or commit acts of violence.?In many western nations, an individual can be prosecuted by the government for certain speech.

Though we still have the First Amendment we are headed in that direction of Europe and Canada where people can be prosecuted for thought crimes. Organizations such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and Anti-Defamation League have aggressively promoted hate crime legislation. These organizations have endorsed Europe and Canada?s policies on prosecuting what they deem as hate speech. The ADL openly advocates for their model anti-hate law. In 1988 the ADL gave out an award to law student Joseph Ribikoff for writing a proposed hate crime bill that would criminalize hate speech against gays and minorities.

In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, ADL Washington counsel Michael Lieberman spoke in support of the Hate Crimes Bill. ?We have no illusions about this legislation,? Lieberman testified. ?We know that bigotry, racism, homophobia, and anti-Semitism cannot be legislated out of existence. A new federal law that finally addresses all victims of hate crimes will not eliminate them.?
Copyright © 2009 Clarity Digital Group LLC d/b/a Examiner.com. All Rights reserved.[/justify]

[Dejuificator II]

[justify][large]ADL Releases Software to Block Internet Hate Web Sites[/large]

Source: The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, January/February 1999, pages 33, 96

ADL Releases Software to Block?Internet Hate? Web Sites

By Shawn L. Twing

The Anti-Defamation League of B?nai B?rith, a Washington, DC-based organization that monitors and combats anti-Semitism worldwide, recently released ?HateFilter? software that blocks Web sites and other areas of the Internet with content it deems offensive.

Installed on a personal computer, ?HateFilter? restricts access to a constantly updated list of Web sites the ADL considers hate-related. When an Internet user attempts to access these sites, he or she instead is directed to an ADL page that reads: ?Hate Zone. Access Restricted. To Find Out More, Click the ADL Logo [below].?

When the ADL logo is clicked, visitors are directed to a special section of the ADL?s Web site with information on nine different categories of hate, including: Internet hate, anti-Semitism, Racism, Holocaust Denial, Neo-Nazi Skinheads, the Ku Klux Klan, the Identity Church Movement, the Nation of Islam, and Homophobia. [Anyone interested in viewing this section may find it directly at [small]http://www.adl.org[/small] hate-patrol/1.html]

Each category subsection has a definition of the subject, a brief history of the topic, and an explanation of why the ADL considers the material to be offensive. Many of the subsections also are cross-linked with other information available within the ADL?s Web site, as well as recommendations for ADL-printed publications on the subject at hand.

?HateFilter? is a component of another Internet blocking software package called Cyber Patrol, which allows users to voluntarily restrict access to Web sites, chat rooms, and news groups that contain pornography and other material that is not suited for children. Rather than using keywords that appear in the text or code of Web sites to restrict access?a method that has been criticized repeatedly for its inability to differentiate between sex in pornographic sites and sex in sexual education, for example?the ADL?s ?HateFilter? software uses a list of Web site addresses, created and modified daily by humans, to deny access to material it considers offensive.

For its part, the ADL contends that ?HateFilter? was developed to protect children. ?Many parents are concerned that the Internet gives easy access to bigotry and prejudice. ADL HateFilter is designed to empower parents who want to restrict their children?s access to hate sites,? the ADL Web site reads (emphasis in the original).

?Hate sites,? according to the ADL, ?are those sites on the Internet operated by individuals or groups that, in ADL?s judgement, promote hatred or hostility toward groups?Jews and others?on the basis of their religion, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation or other immutable characteristics? (emphasis in the original).

On the surface, the ADL?s ?HateFilter? software seems relatively harmless. No one is trying to force it into public libraries?yet. It is installed voluntarily on an individual personal computer, and can be disabled or uninstalled without serious complications.

The problems with ?HateFilter? and what it represents, however, are numerous, as are legitimate concerns about the organization that created and constantly updates the list of ?hate sites?: the Anti-Defamation League.

?HateFilter? sits atop a long, slippery slope covered with free speech issues, and the ADL has a terrible track record for protecting, or even considering, the free speech of others. The ADL also has a history of serious rights abuse, including spying on more than 12,500 American citizens?primarily pro-Palestinian and anti-apartheid activists?and compiling blacklists of individuals holding these and similar views (see story on facing page).

As recently as Nov. 16, 1998, a California State appeals court ruled that ?Pro-Palestinian and anti-apartheid activists are entitled to learn whether [the ADL] illegally disclosed confidential information about them,? the Associated Press reported. That ruling came six years after San Francisco police seized ADL files that included drivers licenses and Social Security numbers, collected and compiled illegally by the ADL, which ?used them to get people blacklisted among ADL supporters,? according to AP. The ADL responded to the charges by saying, ?it was merely tracking hate groups and terrorists? (emphasis added).

Although the ADL Web site, and an ADL spokesperson, emphasized that Web sites blocked by ?HateFilter? are not political?a statement confirmed by this writer, who was able to access dozens of Middle East-related Web sites without a problem?the stage has been set to include political Web sites in the future.

Near the end of the ADL Web site?s section explaining anti-Semitism, under the heading ?In the half-century since World War II, public anti-Semitism has become much less frequent in the Western world,? the ADL offers the following caveat: ?There are exceptions, of course: disagreement over policy toward the State of Israel has created opportunities in which the expression ?Zionist? support for Israel as the Jewish homeland is often used as an anti-Semitic code word for ?Jew? in mainstream debate.?

Does that mean that, in the future, the ADL?s ?HateFilter? may restrict access to Web sites that contain information opposing Zionism, which is, by definition, a political movement? More importantly, what about the numerous Jewish and non-Jewish individuals and organizations that are not Zionist, oppose Zionism, or both? Despite what the ADL may believe and propagate, the overwhelming majority of people and organizations who oppose Zionism disagree with it on political grounds?particularly its role in Palestinian oppression?with no quarrel or ill feelings whatsoever toward the Jewish people, many of whom also oppose Zionism for the very same reasons.

Finally, it is interesting to note that ?HateFilter? does not restrict access to two very serious forms of hate: anti-Muslim and anti-Arab incitement and propaganda. With ?HateFilter? installed and operating correctly, the author was able to access a wide variety of extremist Web sites advocating, among other things, forcible expulsion of all Palestinians from the occupied territories, and the destruction of the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa mosques in Jerusalem, and using ethnic and religious slurs not fit to print against both groups. These Web sites certainly ?promote hatred or hostility toward groups?Jews and others?on the basis of their religion, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation or other immutable characteristics,? which is the ADL definition of a hate group. Yet these sites are not included in the ADL?s ?HateFilter? criteria. These omissions speak volumes about the kinds of hate the ADL is not willing to condemn.


Shawn L. Twing is Web site developer for the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. He can be reached by e-mail at stwing@washington-report.org[/justify]