ADL, Elon Musk and Hate Speech

 The ADL, Elon Musk and Hate Speech

Elon and his “X” social media are being deprived of advertising revenue because he is permitting the advancement of knowledge by scholars demonized by the thought police.

A study by Michael Hoffman. Read it here

___________________

Powerful New Calls for Tucker Carlson to be Silenced

Powerful New Calls for Tucker Carlson to be Silenced

By Michael Hoffman ©2021

www.RevisionistHistory.org

UPDATED April 13, 2021 SEE BELOW

This writer is not the only one being hammered by the Anti-Defamation League of late.

ADL chairman Jonathan Greenblatt has called for the firing of talk show host Tucker Carlson, the ratings king at Fox News, after Mr. Carlson expressed on the air this week his concern that under the Democrats, illegal immigrants would “replace” Americans as future voters.

According to the ADL and the corporate media, any talk of “replacement” is indicative of a “white supremacist” trope.

The charge is ironic in that last January Carlson fulfilled the ADL agenda by defaming the late black academic Tony Martin, parroting ADL disinformation about Dr. Martin’s alleged “anti-Semitism.” Prof. Martin, an honorable and courageous man, was innocent of the charge. He was an enemy of hate made the object of it. It was fairly apparent that Tucker had done no research of his own into Tony Martin’s actual views, content to bear false witness by regurgitating the jaundiced characterizations of Martin’s implacable foes. 

However, fealty to ADL ideology on one point is immaterial if one of its acolytes dares to depart from their dogma on any other: the ADL defends the integrity of Israeli borders while lobbying for something approaching the contours of an open border policy in the U.S. 

Carlson failed to comprehend how zealously this dual standard is upheld. Now, like Prof. Martin, he too has a target on his back, although as a multi-millionaire who is buttressed by the wealth of the Murdoch family, his reputation will be far better defended than that of the black Wellesley professor whose thought crime was of the truth-hurts-variety—defending the accuracy of the Nation of Islam’s magisterial history book, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews (which documents the sensitive subject of the Judaic role in the transatlantic black slave trade). 

Moreover, Tucker’s approach toward immigrants is misbegotten. He’s not just bucking the Biden administration, the media and “woke” corporations, he’s tilting at windmills erected by “conservatives,” including their hero, Ronald Reagan. In November, 1986 President Reagan established the principle of mass amnesty for immigration law-breakers with his support for the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, which granted amnesty to millions of unauthorized border crossers recruited for purposes of stoop labor on the usury plantations of the monied elite. Cheap labor was the engine that drove the lax border policies of Reagan and George Bush pére et fils, while the motive for the Clinton, Obama and Biden administrations was (and remains) to obtain voters supportive of the Democrat party.

But the case of the Republicans is more perverse. The stoop labor exploiters sold them the rope with which to hang their electoral prospects. Now they’re crying crocodile tears. Tucker doesn’t factor this back story. He’s too often prone to shallow vituperation in place of far-reaching reflection and historical perspective. 

What Mr. Carlson has missed is the truth that what he’s lamenting has already come to pass. The Latino vote is a major factor in at least a dozen U.S. states and shutting the barn door after the horse is down the road solves nothing. Fox News enables Carlson’s anger. He’s a popular money maker, so why not? But anger is no substitute for deep thought. It’s a sign of weakness and desperation.

A wise pundit would sincerely offer compassion to the huddled masses on our southern border while undertaking serious reconnoitering of immigration realities: the immigrants are here. They will not be deported en masse. Their birth rate is higher than that of the contracepting feminists and playboys who comprise a substantial segment of the Fox News viewership. Even with no further illegal immigration, the Latino population will multiply significantly. Bring on to “Tucker Carlson Tonight” more conservative Latinos to discuss their border concerns. Provide a platform and offer support to the bilingual, conservative Christian priests and pastors involved in helping to defend the traditional family values of Mexican and Central American people from the toxic consumerism and sexual nihilism of America’s pop culture.

Many Latino people have an inherent orientation toward their Christian heritage of five hundred years’ duration. Individuals, churches and institutions in North America should undertake the cultivation of that noble legacy through education, and other forms of cultural enrichment and provision. In some respects people from south of our border are more conservative than native-born Americans. This inherent conservatism should be protected and enhanced. For example, recent polls indicate that tyrannical Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom has lost the support of many Latinos in California.

Tucker’s aggrieved white guy stance, while cathartic, profits us nothing. The inchoate anger and resentment he’s stirring will inevitably be manipulated by forces far more sophisticated than he. January 6 at the Capitol was a textbook instance of the covert channeling of white rage that has paid huge dividends to a Cryptocracy which lives by violence and the maxim, “Divide-and-conquer.” Divide the Latino, black, Asian and white working classes in America and subjugate them. 

The pity of it is, we’ve left our Biblical knowledge back at the ranch.

1. “Where there is no vision the people perish.” (Proverbs 29:18)

2. “The love of money is the root of all evil.” (I Timothy 6:10)

3. The Money Power is the enemy of the working classes of every color.

When we proceed from these facts, our perception is cleansed of the diversions and tribal animosities which the Cryptocracy exploits to our destruction.

The sins of our white, nominally Christian fathers (Ronald Wilson Reagan and his cronies and successors), has led us to this impasse. Pretending it’s 1951 is no way of out of the crises we face in 2021.

Michael Hoffman’s latest book is Adolf Hitler: Enemy of the German People. He is the editor of Revisionist History® newsletter. His Truth Mission is reader-supported.

APRIL 13 UPDATE ON CARLSON

Has Tucker Carlson been reading our column? On April 12, on his Fox News show, in his opening monologue he quoted a 2010 Anti-Defamation League (ADL) statement warning against the replacement of Israelis by Palestinians. The ADL has called for Carlson’s firing because he warned last week against the replacement of Americans by illegal immigrants. The double standard is blatant and the exposé is a welcome development. 

On the same program, Mr. Carlson also mentioned at some length, President Ronald Reagan's catastrophic 1986 amnesty for millions of law breakers. The announcement of this suppressed fact is long overdue, though Tucker did not mention the cheap labor motivation behind the Simpson-Mazzoli Act (which he didn't specifically name). Nonetheless, it's a start. Let the deflation of Mr. Reagan's hagiography begin and along with it, lessons about the evils of Republicans exploiting stoop labor.

Now Carlson should make reparation by apologizing to Prof. Tony Martin's family and large circle of students and friends, for falsely defaming him as an "anti-Semite" and insinuating that he was a hater of Judaism. How about it, Tucker? Care to set the record straight? 

Michael Hoffman

_____________________

Independent History and Research  

Box 849 • Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83816

_____________________

Legacy media whining about investigations into their bigotry

The Karmic Consequences of Heresy-Hunting 

Oozing with aristocratic entitlement and indignation, the legacy media are whining about the insolence of writers and broadcasters who have the effrontery to investigate the skeletons in their closet

By Michael Hoffman

Former reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated Press

www.RevisionistHistory.org

On the front page of the August 25 edition of the New York Times, two reporters, Kenneth P. Vogel and Jeremy W. Peters, decry a new movement by Right wing researchers among Donald Trump’s base, aimed at sleuthing into the background and statements of journalists in the employ of the legacy media 

These investigations have been declared to be off-limits and “clearly not journalism.” So saith Washington Post’s Lord High Emeritus Executive Editor, Leonard Downie Jr. 

He alleges that an "organized, wide-scale political effort to intentionally humiliate journalists and others who work for media outlets” is something new. 

One wonders on what desert island he’s been sojourning. The censorship, doxing, boycotts and obstruction of revisionists, black nationalists and Conservative and Christian journalists don’t seem to register or even exist for media Brahmins of the upper crust.

Follow the money: the legacy media will brook no competition that harms its lucrative monopoly on news. Therefore, we dissident journalists are supposed to know our place and be content with our lot as virtually invisible. The many attempts to humiliate, libel, obstruct and remove us from Google, YouTube, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter and Instagram are of no concern to the High and Mighty in the legacy press.

"It’s one thing for Spiro Agnew to call everyone in the press ‘nattering nabobs of negativism,’ Mr. Downie said, referring to Agnew's critique of how journalists covered President Nixon. “And another thing to investigate individuals in order to embarrass them publicly and jeopardize their employment.” 

This is precisely what several corporate newspaper chains, cable television news, websites, blogs and podcasts have been doing for years, including the NY Times — calling for the dismissal and loss of employment of alternative reporters who have been smeared as anti-Semitic, racist, sexist, homophobic, and so on.

A. G. Sulzberger, the publisher of The New York Times, said in a statement that exposure of shady biographical facts about Times reporters was a case of taking Trump's "campaign against a free press to a new level. They are seeking to harass and embarrass anyone affiliated with the leading news organizations that are asking tough questions and bringing uncomfortable truths to light,” Mr. Sulzberger declared. 

When such tactics are used against the “leading"news organizations they are immoral and wrong. However, when the Times, Washington Post and CNN smear, intimidate and prevent alternative journalists who work for smaller online operations from “asking tough questions and bringing uncomfortable truths to light,” then it’s not at all a matter for outrage. The news aristocrats have spoken. You may now kiss their designer shoes.

Mr. Sulzberger takes the moral high ground on behalf of his very profitable and powerful business behemoth: 

“The goal of this campaign is clearly to intimidate journalists from doing their job, which includes serving as a check on power and exposing wrongdoing when it occurs. The Times will not be intimidated or silenced.”

What about journalists who seek a check on your monopoly power and wrong-doing Mr. Sulzberger? What of your newspaper’s endeavor to jeopardize our employment?

Mr. Sulzberger’s heresy-hunting NY Times has shown zero interest in defending conservative reporters who are not members of the legacy media from calumny and blacklisting. 

Often the Times has been guilty of these odious tactics, which it now indignantly protests when its political rivals and business competitors employ them to deflate the reputation of the Times, and inform the public concerning the questionable character of some of its writers and editors.

In many cases Sulzberger’s newspaper has encouraged those attacks and covered up for thought police groups like Right Wing Watch and "Media Matters for America” that closely investigate and attack conservative journalists, and Sleeping Giants, which is sworn to threaten and shame any platform online that dares to host radical alternatives to politically correct dogma and revolutionary social change.

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is a prominent thought police group campaigning for the censorship of history books at Amazon, the silencing of black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, and of activists who are outside the established boundary of permissible opinions about Israeli settler-colonialism and the racist creed of the Babylonian Talmud. Over the years, the New York Times has been a dependable mouthpiece for the ADL and complicit in its libel and intimidation—yet the Times is horrified now that such tactics are being wielded against its own writers. Here we observe the grotesque hypocrisy of the entitled.

In June the heresy-hunters at Google’s YouTube removed several legitimate revisionist history videos, together with many white supremacist and hate speech videos. Having accepted without investigation Google’s deceitful description of all the videos it removed from YouTube as constituting "hate speech," the New York Times mechanically reported the entire ban in terms of taking down hate speech. Our video exposing Deborah Lipstadt’s hate speech toward historian David Irving was one of the films banned from YouTube. Consequently, our video which fulfilled a public service by advancing knowledge about the hate speech of an Establishment-revered Zionist celebrity (Lipstadt), was banned in the name of combating hate speech. The Times cooperated and was party to the masquerade. Revisionist researchers and activists are barely human in the eyes of the Times, and unworthy of the anguish and hand-wringing now being expended to defend their own hired hands from suppression and removal. This corrosive double standard undercuts Mr. Sulzberger’s protestations and reveals the corruption at the heart of his newspaper’s reporting.

Below is our note, which we e-mailed to the two NY Times employees who, in the August 25 online edition, told of the supposedly immoral and impudent move to investigate the background and statements of their distinguished fellow reporters at the legacy media’s most honored and acclaimed flagship, to which every decent American is expected to demonstrate fealty.

Dear Messers Vogel and Peters

You wrote, "In the case of the pro-Trump network, research into journalists is being deployed for the political benefit of the White House.”

I can’t abide Trump but I consider these exposures of privileged  members of the legacy media delightful, due to the fact that said media have acquiesced in massive censorship and denial of service on Facebook, YouTube, Google and in Amazon’s censorship of historians’ dissident books. In these instances involving alternative writers and journalists who compete with the NY Times and other legacy media, there has been little or no solidarity offered by your fellow reporters and editors. 

In many cases where the harassed and interdicted alternative journalists are Conservatives, there have been expressions from members of the legacy media of satisfaction at the heresy-hunting, doxing and removals.

Now, when the shoe is on the other foot, we’re supposed to believe the process of sleuthing into journalists' public and private foibles and failings is somehow an outrage against press freedom? 

Freedom of the press does not begin at the gate of the legacy media. The Times, the Post, CNN etc. were the ones who first let the genie out of the bottle. You ought to deal with the karmic consequences without whining. 

Better yet, work for the freedom of expression of your lumpen proletariat rivals online.

Michael Hoffman

_____________

Your donation keeps Michael working for Truth

Donate now!

_____________

Alice asks questions and the parrot replies...

Alice asks questions and the parrot replies,

"Slanders of the Talmud are as old as the Talmud”

A Study in Avoidance Tactics

By Michael Hoffman

In the screenshot above, Yair Rosenberg, writing in the Judaic Tablet magazine of Dec. 17 quotes an excerpt from Black poet Alice Walker’s “It is Our Frightful Duty to Study the Talmud," and then announces that the poem is a “slander,” as well as a “malevolent attack of anti-Semitic origin."

The egoism in his assault on her poetry shines forth like a blinding truck light. We are the deer frozen in the headlights of his ipse dixit.

Mr. Rosenberg doesn’t so much as begin to answer the earnest questions in her poem. He resorts instead, to a kind of pre-fabricated axiom: all-decent-people-know-this-is-nothing-but-recycled-anti-Semitic lies.

That is the bullshitter’s con. Stall and bluster. Insinuate bad motives to those who dare to pose hard questions that demand an answer. 

The Avoidance Tactics

Why these avoidance tactics?

Because the answer to every question Alice poses, is yes.

Yes, Mr. Rosenberg, the Babylonian Talmud does indeed decree that 1. Jesus is in hell boiling in excrement, 2. that the Blessed Virgin Mary was a whore, and that 3. “Even the best of the goyim should all be killed.” 

How is bullshitter Rosenberg going to evade these truths? He can try to steer us toward a redacted Talmud Bavli text, but that would put his credibility in peril, since uncensored English translations that prove the veracity of the contents of the Talmud, such as the esteemed and accurate Steinsaltz edition, are readily available. 

Mockery is a stratagem that the Talmudic mentality puts forth as a substitute for truth.  That’s one “answer” — mocking Alice Walker as a myopic blunderer so sloppy she is seduced by tiresome and hateful libels. How do we know they are libels? The media tells us so. If we doubt the media, then we are cast as demons inhabiting an anti-Semitic hell.

The other tried and true tactic is censorship and suppression, lest there be a reckoning, which would consist in the realization of the concealed truth that Orthodox Judaism’s holiest book (far-surpassing the written Torah in authority) — the Mishnah and Gemara, i.e. the Torah sheBeal peh, a.k.a. the Talmud of Babylon —  is most definitely a book of ferocious racism, savage hatred and scurrilous pornography.

But rather than face those inconvenient truths and deal with them forthrightly, Yair Rosenberg and a thousand hacks of greater and lesser hack-aptitude almost always parrot, by way of reply, something along the lines of: 

Slanders of the Talmud are as old as the Talmud.

Slanders of the Talmud are as old as the Talmud.

Slanders of the Talmud are as old as the Talmud.

That’s the moronic doggerel that confronts Walker’s poetry of truth, for which the truth-teller is smeared, boycotted and ostracized.

Argument? Debate? Open inquiry? The Talmudic mentality does not permit those rights of a free society when they threaten the myth of benevolence they have woven around their sacred text, upon which rests an increasingly tottering house of cards. 

The grandees at the ADL, the SPLC, the Tablet and the other self-appointed arbiters of what is permissible for us to say and ask in America, don’t stoop to answer Alice Walker’s reasonable questions. 

They want us to believe that it is simply the case that she is a foolish bigot for having issued her queries in the first place: now say no more or your reputation will be permanently traduced. 

That’s the parrots’ answer to Alice.

Michael Hoffman is a former reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated Press, a former media consultant for the New York Times, and the author of the textbook Judaism Discovered (1102 pages), as well as Judaism’s Strange Gods: Revised and Expanded.  In lieu of offering a rebuttal to his exhaustive scholarship, both books were banned from the Amazon Kindle on August 13, 2018.

____________

ALERT: Move to ban Hoffman's books on Judaism

Tech is being pressured to ban Michael Hoffman’s books critical of Judaism

The Tech Tyrants are considering banning Judaism’s Strange Gods: Revised and Expanded (382 pages; published in 2011) and sold by Amazon ever since.  Along with the much larger study, Judaism Discovered, it has had an international impact circulating on the Kindle. 

Beginning August 13 we learned of behind the scenes pressure on Amazon to ban two of our other history books, which Amazon has sold for many years without incident, both in digital Kindle format and as hard copy books. Theses books are:

Judaism Discovered (sold by Amazon since 2008)

The Great Holocaust Trial: The Landmark Battle for the Right to Doubt the West’s Most Sacred Relic (sold by Amazon since 2010)

These books maintain a high standard of scholarly excellence, had an average of four stars (out a possible five stars) favorable reviews, and are free of hatred and bigotry. They do however present a radical challenge to consensus history. Suddenly we are being told that "Amazon KDP" has discovered that the books have been in violation of Amazon’s “content guidelines” all these years. 

Asking for documentation of the charge results in no response. It is enough that the accusation has been tendered. The accused are guilty until proved innocent, although how proof of innocence is presented is anyone’s guess because there is no formal appeals process.

There is a nationwide purge underway that amounts to a new McCarthyism, blacklisting and suppressing politically incorrect speakers and history books under the rubric of “hate speech” accusations, initiated in part by two Zionist thought police organizations, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). 

In addition to our books being hate-free, we note that there are hundreds of hate-filled Zionist and rabbinic books brimming with ferocious bigotry for Palestinians, Germans and goyim in general, which are sold by Amazon. These hate-filled volumes to do not offend the ADL and SPLC, America's most powerful censors and arbiters of which books deserve circulation and which require censorship, therefore bigoted Zionist and rabbinic books are immune to removal and suppression.

We have requested an appeal on the ban on our books.

Copies of Judaism’s Strange Gods: Revised and Expanded as well as Judaism Discovered are available here:

https://truthfulhistory.blogspot.com/2016/02/judaica-books-and-resources.html

The Great Holocaust Trial: The Landmark Battle for the Right to Doubt the West’s Most Sacred Relic is available here:

https://revisionisthistorystore.blogspot.com/2010/03/michael-hoffmans-online-revisionist.html

______________________

ACLU abandons its historic commitment to Free Speech

A leaked internal document reveals that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has abandoned its historic commitment to Freedom of Speech

The Wall Street Journal, June 21, 2018, p. A17

"The American Civil Liberties Union has explicitly endorsed the view that free speech can harm ‘marginalized' groups by undermining their civil rights. 'Speech that denigrates such groups can inflict serious harms and is intended to and often will impede progress toward equality,' the ACLU declares in new guidelines governing case selection and Conflicts Between Competing Values or Priorities.

“...The speech-case guidelines reflect a demotion of free speech in the ACLU’s hierarchy of values. Their vague references to the 'serious harm' to ‘marginalized' people occasioned by speech can easily include the presumed psychological effects of racist or otherwise hateful speech, which is constitutionally protected but contrary to ACLU values. Faced with perceived conflicts between freedom of speech and 'progress toward equality,' the ACLU is likely to choose equality. If the Supreme Court adopted the ACLU’s balancing test, it would greatly expand government power to restrict speech...

"The ACLU leadership had apparently hoped to keep its new guidelines secret, even from ACLU members. They’re contained in an internal document deceptively marked, in all caps, “confidential attorney client work product.” I’m told it was distributed to select ACLU officials and board members, who were instructed not to share it...”

— Wendy Kaminer

Read more at WSJ.com

___________

Henry Herskovitz’s Ordeal of Censorship

The following report was written by Henry Herskovitz, a retired engineer who has been picketing a synagogue in Ann Arbor, Michigan with a small circle of supporters for several years: 

Remember the days of poking fun at Pravda, the Russian government-owned press? We asked: how could anyone rely on the truthfulness of reports that were filtered by agenda-driven government agents? Aren’t we Americans lucky to live in a land where our news isn’t filtered, where we - unlike our Russian counterparts - enjoy a “free” press?

Remember the days of poking fun at Pravda, the Russian government-owned press? We asked: how could anyone rely on the truthfulness of reports that were filtered by agenda-driven government agents? Aren't we Americans lucky to live in a land where our news isn't filtered, where we - unlike our Russian counterparts - enjoy a "free" press?

We have witnessed how Jewish Power persuaded at least a half dozen billboard companies to refuse our attempts to run billboards with the simple message: America First Not Israel (latest example here). 

Careful readers will remember how an Ann Arbor Jew convinced publisher Patricia Garcia to refuse our ad request in the Ann Arbor Observer last year. 

Pressing on, WfP initiated contact with the local MLive Media Group, publisher of a resurrected Ann Arbor News, to run a display ad with the text:

America First Not Israel

Paid for by Deir Yassin Remembered

Saturday Protests 9:30-10:45 AM at 2000 Washtenaw Ave

Ann Arbor

All Welcome (vigilannarbor@hotmail.com for more info)

After MLive received the desired text, and after we received the print ad specs and discount page, marketing executive Hannah Gellis then inquired: "Thanks, Henry. After looking at the discount sheet, how many ads are you interested in running? "

We responded "We are looking at placing six ads, two per month if the marketing program allows. Sunday editions Eighth-page ads (6 @ $240/ad = $1440). We would then be looking at two ads in December, two in January and two in February."

She then asked for "Name of advertiser's business/group funding these ads (I see on the billboard creative that it states 'paid for by Deir Yassin Remembered,' but please confirm) Advertiser's billing address"

We confirmed Deir Yassin Remembered and provided MLive Media Group with my local address for billing purposes. 

Five hours later, however, Hannah dropped the ax:

Henry,

MLive has sole discretion to reject any ad, and after review, we will not be accepting this ad placement.

I'm sorry I could not assist you in your marketing needs. Please let me know if you need anything else.

Best wishes,

Hannah Gellis |MLive Media Group

Marketing Executive

We asked MLive how and by whom this decision was made? "Were there reasons given for the ad's rejection? Could Mlive suggest another wording that would pass muster?"

Hannah's terse response: "We won't be answering these questions. It's in MLive's discretion to reject ads, and we do from time to time. Thank you for your inquiry..."

Seems like this is Deja Vu all over again, and we report these events not because we're complaining, but to document evidence of Jewish Power and its corrosive impact on speech.

[End quote from Mr. Herskovitz]

In America freedom of speech is increasingly captive to the whims of the online monopolies of Silicon Valley (Paypal, Google, Facebook and so forth), and outfits such as the World Jewish Congress, which earlier this year persuaded Amazon to ban dozens of World War revisionist history book. One would think that this suppression of books would be newsworthy, and consequently of interest to the media as well as a topic eliciting outrage among “civil libertarians." Fat chance. American intellectual life is horrifically warped by fear of the you-know-whos.

_________________

Banned Books Week: No sympathy for books banned by Amazon

Banned Books Week official has no sympathy for revisionist books banned by Amazon

By Michael Hoffman • RevisionistHistory.org

In the wake of our article on “Books Banned by Banned Books Week”—concerning “Holocaust denial” volumes policed out of the banned category—we received an e-mail from James LaRue, director of the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, which administers Banned Books Week. This organization appears to mainly promote the freedom to read proscribed books that don’t threaten the canon of Leftist ideology. Conservatives who are critical of publications that undermine traditional values are usually the villains in this rigged morality theatre. In the case at hand, revisionist authors who cast doubt on aspects of the Establishment’s hallowed historical dogmas, have virtually no presence in Banned Books Week. The American Library Association (ALA) and the American Booksellers Association are engaged in a cynical ruse, posing as champions of all banned books while almost exclusively promoting as banned those volumes which do not challenge the Leftist, or in this instance, the Zionist agenda.

In responding to this writer’s column, Mr. LaRue wrote, “Banned Books Week reports on challenges - attempts to remove or restrict access - to books held by publicly funded libraries and schools. Amazon, not publicly funded, not a library, falls completely outside of the scope of our work. Private businesses can carry, or not carry, any merchandise they choose to.”

If we understand Mr. LaRue correctly, he and the ALA have zero interest in banned books when they are suppressed by book stores as part of a commercial enterprise. LaRue’s insouciance with regard to the many dozens of revisionist books banned last February by Amazon.com at the behest of the World Jewish Congress, belies the public pose of the American Library Association and its “Freedom to Read Foundation” (FTRF), as expressed in 1970 by Judith Krug, in her articulation of its founding mandate: “To promote and protect freedom of speech and press...and...the public right to hear what is spoken and read what is written...”

Whether or not libraries and schools are the focus, for the “Office for Intellectual Freedom” and the “Freedom to Read Foundation” to be indifferent to the fate of any other banned book in any other setting other than libraries and schools, would probably be news to the majority of the public who are the intended audience for Banned Books Week, which in its 2017 advertising, depicted a clenched fist and the slogan, “Stand for the Banned.” Other catchphrases employed officially include, “Our Right to Read," "Stand for Intellectual Freedom,” and “Words Have Power: Read a Banned Book.” There are no “fine print” disclaimers accompanying these mantras, which are printed on bags, cups and bumperstickers sold by the ALA — stating that these noble sentiments apply only to books forbidden by public libraries and schools. 

The “Stand for the Banned” message is without qualification and is apt to beguile donors and supporters who have no inkling of how circumscribed and shuttered it actually is. They have no idea, for example, that the director of the ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom engages in what might be characterized as unseemly gloating over the commercial suppression of demonized books.  In his e-mail, James LaRue wrote, “...you do not have the right to demand public or commercial platforms for them (your opinions). There is harsh competition in the marketplace of ideas. There are winners, and speaking of obsessive, willfully ignorant anti-Semitism, there are losers.”

(Note well his words about willful ignorance. We will return to them shortly).

An official of the American Library Association who oversees Banned Books Week offers no lament for the banned books that are “losers” in “the marketplace of ideas.” Once again we are in the realm of the surreal. How does such an attitude advance the ALA’s goals of “Intellectual Freedom” and its apothegm, “Stand for the Banned”? When it comes to the suppression of World War II revisionist histories the American Library Association is firmly seated. Rather than hewing to liberty in all instances and across all categories, the ALA is taking the side of those who would marginalize books branded with the pejorative “anti-Semitism” stigma, which in some cases is little more than a witch-hunting canard intended to smear heretical works authored by learned non-conformists who are seeking to compete for the attention of readers in the “marketplace of ideas.” 

We would have thought that an organization bearing the lofty title, “Office for Intellectual Freedom,” and whose slogan is “Words Have Power: Read a Banned Book,” would respond by stating that while Amazon’s ban on World War II revisionist books was outside the immediate purview of the ALA’s Banned Books Week, they unequivocally regret and protest Amazon’s censorship, while recognizing that commercial operations may do as they please in this regard. 

James LaRue

Commerce has not yet trumped ethics in America — or has it, as far as the nation’s teachers and librarians are concerned? LaRue’s snide satisfaction with Amazon’s suppression of authors too far out even for Banned Books Week, reflects the ALA’s Leftist predilection for masquerading as freedom-lovers the better to render invisible politically incorrect writers whose freedom to be read has been abridged not so much by the free market, as monopoly forces within that market. Given the opportunity to compete freely by enjoying wide access to the nation’s readers, and revisionist books would become best-sellers. This can’t be allowed and Mr. LaRue tells us why: “...the lack of commercial interest in ‘contrarian’ or ‘revisionist’ histories of the Holocaust reflects their flat out falsity, their lack of scholarly rigor, and the transparent bigotry that guides them.”

There you have it. With regard to banned books judged by the Director of the Office for Intellectual Freedom to be false, lacking in “scholarly rigor” and suffused with “transparent bigotry,” it is neither reprehensible nor an occasion for protest when earth’s largest bookstore forbids their sale. Somehow this dictum of the Inquisition (that “error” has no rights), looks a tad contradictory and at cross-purposes with the official freedom philosophy sold to the public by Banned Books Week and its virtue-signaling sponsors.  

In light of Mr. LaRue’s remark about “willful ignorance,” we contacted him concerning which revisionist books he had read that caused him to assess them so caustically. Surely he was not “willfully ignorant” of their contents? We asked him: “With regard to your assessment of the whole corpus of WWII revisionist historiography in terms of ‘...their flat out falsity, their lack of scholarly rigor, and the transparent bigotry...’ have you ever actually read a book by one of the leading writers in the genre, such as Arthur R. Butz, Carlo Mattogno, Robert Faurisson or Germar Rudolf? If so, which one(s)? If not, I include a link to a pdf. file containing the complete text of Mr. Rudolf’s banned book, should you wish to undertake the obligation of perusing what you have so severely reproved: http://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/15-loth.pdf.”

Mr. LaRue did not scruple to reply.

(LaRue would allow us to publish his remarks only if we printed them in full, and we do so herein: “First, I have never spoken with the author of this article. I don't know who the ‘we’ is he refers to - unless it was the woman who last week demanded of one of my staff to know my ‘ethnic background,’ complained about a picture of a dreadlocked black man on the American library Association website, then made childish and incoherent remarks about Jews on Twitter. If she is aligned with your cause, she is not a credible investigator or representative. Second, as we make clear on our website and in press releases, Banned Books Week reports on challenges - attempts to remove or restrict access - to books held by publicly funded libraries and schools. Amazon, not publicly funded, not a library, falls completely outside of the scope of our work. Private businesses can carry, or not carry, any merchandise they choose to. To describe this as some kind of conspiracy on the part of the Left is...novel. Third, the lack of commercial interest in  ‘contrarian’ or ‘revisionist’ histories of the Holocaust reflects their flat out falsity, their lack of scholarly rigor, and the transparent bigotry that guides them. But the idea of conspiracies may be more comforting to you. Fourth, you have the right to your opinions. But you do not have the right to demand public or commercial platforms for them. There is harsh competition in the marketplace of ideas. There are winners, and speaking of obsessive, willfully ignorant anti-Semitism, there are losers.” James LaRue ALA / FTRF, October 7, 2017).

Historian Michael Hoffman’s most recent book is The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome.

______________