Opening A Case For The Reexamination
Of The History Of The Twenties And Thirties
No period of US history, or world history for that matter, is more misunderstood than the nineteen twenties and thirties. Some reevaluation is beginning to appear but much remains to be done.
In the following two essays I attempt a more accurate understanding of the squabble between the Jews and Henry Ford. You may be shocked, yes, shocked to find that Ford was not in the wrong nor was he an anti-Semitic demon. This is really interesting stuff.
July 22, 2014
Henry Ford And The Aaron Sapiro Case
Enter The Speculator Bernard Baruch
This chapter will attempt to get Bernard Baruch’s involvement in Sapiro’s career a littler clearer. Always circumspect in his two volume auto-biography one gains the impression from Baruch that he is only telling you so much as he wants you to know. That so much is always of a very positive character regarding himself. Although Baruch frequently finds or at least obtains no success in his public career it is always that he was right but the other fellow isn’t quite quick enough to get Baruch’s meaning. Thus when FDR fails to take Barney’s advice it is inexplicable to himself and as he imagines to Roosevelt’s later regret. However everyone consults him with gratitude.
For instance here is an interchange with Thomas Edison, then considered America’s greatest inventive genius:
For many years I carried on a heavy correspondence with men who were in a position to help the farmer. One of these was Thomas A. Edison, whose interest in agriculture must have been as surprising to some people as my own. One day I received a call from Edison’s secretary. Edison was on his way over to see me at my home, he told me. I had never met the “genius of Menlo Park” and could hardly fathom why he should be calling on me. When he arrived he told me that, having heard of my interest in the farm problem, he wanted my views on a plan for credit and marketing which he had drafted at the suggestion of his friend, Henry Ford. I undertook to comment on Edison’s plan, and he accepted my criticism graciously. I felt highly complimented when he wrote: “You are the first man who has had imagination enough to throw off the trammels of the money religion and analyze the proposed scheme like an engineer.”
That is the general tenor of the hundreds of encounters with very prominent men, the majority of whom are Baruch’s friends, over the 800 pages or so of his auto-biography. Edison, who had a reputation as an anti-Semite second only to Ford, seems strangely to have selected not only a Jew to read his plan but a principal in the Lubin-Sapiro Cooperative farming plan. He could have received nothing but a negative reading.
Bernard Baruch was born in 1876 in the former Confederate State of South Carolina. His father, though Jewish, had fought for the slave states and in the aftermath of Reconstruction had been a Klansman. This was a small marvel to the young Bernard before he left home for New York to become notorious as one of the bears of Wall Street. Bears are never thought well of on the Street so that Baruch’s reputation was always on the negative side.
While he never tells us how large his fortune was at any rate he was able to give up Wall Street during the Great War to enter public service, as he says, at the insistence of President Woodrow Wilson himself. That’s the way it was with Barney, all the great men came to him for advice unsolicited.
More than financially secure he was able to dispense considerable largesse, as he says. He entered Wilson’s war administration as the head of the War Industries Board- the WIB. Here he began the collectivization of American industry somewhat like the industrial codes of Roosevelt’s NIRA. Bernard’s reputation was as a speculator on Wall Street and a bear at that so when he was chief of the WIB and demanded all industrialists submit their financial data to him this would have an invaluable asset to him for his speculations. In fact he was accused of the very thing.
One shouldn’t be too surprised then that there was strenuous opposition to his request. None was more strident than that of the automakers of Detroit including the most famous industrialist of all, Henry Ford. As in 1935 when the Supreme Court defused the same type of situation in which Ford was embroiled so the end of WWI defused this one, but Ford had had his first encounter with Baruch and Jewish collectivist methods.
During the War farmers had benefited as much or more so than industry. These were a couple fat years as prices rose and demand exceeded supply. Farmers are not actually businessmen. Wartime orders both made and destroyed companies. The orders were so large that companies had to expand their capacity at great expense. Some like the small arms manufacturers did so at great expense only to fall on hard times when orders ceased in 1918, but the expenses went on causing them great distress much like the farmers.
On the other hand Dupont was heavily criticized when having received a huge order from France they explained to the French that they would have to build a new factory and would only do so if the French paid for it. Thus, when the orders stopped Dupont’s expense stopped and they made the transition to peacetime easily.
The farmers were in the position of the small arms manufacturers. They had bought lots of equipment as farming became more mechanized. When their sales collapsed and expenses went on they were in a desperate situation as banks had no choice but to foreclose. Not being businessmen the farmers were slow at financials.
Agriculture through the twenties was in desperate shape. Ford who had a soft spot for farmers from his youth on the farm took a great interest in the problem working out his own solutions apparently with the help of his great friend and fellow ‘anti-Semite’ Tom Edison.
According to Baruch he also became interested in the farm problem. From the quote about Edison it would appear that he had been for at least a decade or so. This raises the question of whether or how much he knew about David Lubin.
Then, in 1922- Bernard Baruch, My Own Story Vol. II, The Public Years, p. 159:
By 1922, a total and tragic collapse of the tobacco market had brought Kentucky to the “verge of anarchy,” in the words of Judge Robert Bingham, publisher of the Louisville Courier-Journal and the Louisville Times and later Ambassador the Court of St. James. At the suggestion of Arthur Krock, the editor-in-chief of the Louisville Times, Bingham asked me to join him in organizing the Kentucky tobacco growers, which I did.
The services of Aaron Sapiro, the foremost expert on the organization and management of cooperatives, were enlisted.
Who are you going to go to when you’ve got a tough problem? Why, Super Bernard Baruch of course. And Bernie, naturally, went to the top expert in the field his fellow Jew, Aaron Sapiro. But, had they known each other before, were they fellow conspirators? Baruch doesn’t say. Now, the reader unconsciously accepts Bernard’s opinion that Sapiro is THE foremost expert. That he was foremost implies that there were several other experts. So Sapiro is not alone in his field. According to Baruch, then, Sapiro was head and shoulders above all the others. Perhaps, but probably not, but what and how does Aaron know about cooperatives? After all, he began as a nickel and dime lawyer in San Francisco.
The Jewish cooperative movement of which Baruch and Sapiro were exemplars had begun back around the turn of the century under the leadership of the Jew David Lubin among Jewish orange growers around Sacramento, California. What was known as the Sapiro Plan was actually the Lubin plan.
Sapiro began as a shyster lawyer in San Francisco becoming known to Lubin who made him a cooperative ‘expert.’ Lubin who had grand international plans then departed for Europe where he managed to sell his plan to the king of Italy. Taken under the king’s wing, financed by him, Lubin set to work. A question is did Ford know about Lubin? As he mentioned that the Jews had an international plan, and Lubin was behind one, I’m guessing that he did. Unfortunately for Lubin and possibly for Sapiro he was cut down by influenza in 1919. After 1919 then Sapiro was on his own and appears to have begun drifting. His fortunes began declining so he was already on the skids when Baruch brought him into the Kentucky tobacco affair. By 1924 it may have been necessary for him to seek a million by suing Ford.
Ford had his newspaper, the International Dearborn Independent. During 1920-21 Ford had published 91 articles exposing Jewish machinations in the US. The articles were all true, that is, factually correct, but the Jews ever sensitive to criticism denounced Ford as an anti-Semite. Exposes had a long history and the debunking authors coming along on the heels of the muckrakers became prominent in the twenties so in that sense Ford was right in step with the times. Ford wasn’t doing anything that the Jews weren’t doing with the exception that he was doing it to the Jews.
Sapiro having come to his attention, in 1924 he began a series of 20 articles exposing what was the Lubin-Sapiro plan but Ford didn’t know of or at least didn’t mention David Lubin. Ford’s articles did couple Bernard Baruch’s name with Sapiro’s as well as those of fellow Jews Eugene Meyer and Albert Lasker.
In Volume II of his memoirs, The Public Years, Baruch discusses this involvement. 159-162:
It seemed to me that farmers could spare themselves many trials if, instead of trying to create an organization, they could acquire one already established, one with adequate facilities, experienced personnel, and a standing in the marketing field.
In other words, organized as businessmen, which they weren’t.
I approached J. Ogden Armour the meat packing tycoon, in the spring of 1923. I proposed that he sell his Armour grain company, one of the largest grain marketing houses in the country, to several farmer organizations. This idea was not without its implicit irony. Armour was then anathema to farmers, representing all that was evil in the creation and operation of the Chicago meat packing empires, which Upton Sinclair had execrated in his famous book, The Jungle.
So, the farmers have the leading Wall Street bear speculator getting a scourge of the farmers, Armour Packing Co., to sell that what appears to be a very profitable business. At what price?
I suggested a plan which he readily endorsed. Under its terms a farmer organization would purchase the Armour Grain Company. Its duration would be entrusted temporarily to a board comprising the present management, representatives of the farmers, and representatives of the public. When the farmers’ indebtedness to Armour was liquidated, direction would be left entirely to the farmers.
Not clear exactly what Baruch is smoking here. I can see about twenty things that could go very wrong here. First we have sharpers vs. rubes. Very bad start. Then we have ‘entrusted temporarily’. Two bad words there, trust and temporary. And skipping over to the end, direction by farmers. Farmers are farmers busy farming. They aren’t going to direct any of this. They are going to have to trust permanently after having given up their independence. My daddy always said you can’t trust anybody and I found that to be true. I couldn’t even trust daddy.
The farmers weren’t going for any of it and between Baruch and Armour I don’t blame them. Now, we’re getting a little closer to the bone after this carefully worded preface:
Many people who admired the doctrines of competition, more in theory than in practice, professed to see in the cooperative marketing movement a violation of the anti-trust laws at the very least; and, at worst, a dangerous form of collectivism.
Yes, it was a dangerous form of collectivism. The farmers wouldn’t be any better off and they would be bound by the collective of which Baruch and his group would be the beneficiaries. There were other cooperative plans so farmers seeing their plan as a number of violations wasn’t necessarily opposition to cooperatives.
One of the loudest voices in the hostile pack was Henry Ford’s who used his mouthpiece, the Dearborn Independent to unleash a particularly violent an bigoted attack on cooperative marketing, labeling it the handiwork of Jews and Communists, and naming Aaron Sapiro and me as among the alien influences responsible for this un-American idea.
I don’t see how being opposed to an unsound plan makes one evil as Baruch says here. I don’t know how you can be bigoted against the concept of cooperative marketing while I don’t believe Ford was actually opposed to farm coops. I may be wandering but I’m not sure farm coops and Baruch’s use of cooperative marketing are the same thing.
To my knowledge the Sapiro articles from the Independent haven’t been published in book form so I haven’t read them but I am unwilling to accept Baruch’s self-serving characterization of them. After all, what we have here is an us vs. them situation. One can’t expect fair play from Baruch and the rest.
Following the above Baruch gives a long paragraph of character assassination of Ford. Then, as if to vilify Ford further he gives us this diatribe, p. 162:
Beginning with the issue of May 22, 1920, and leading with a front-page editorial captioned “The International Jew: The World’s Foremost Problem” the Independent had carried on one of the most violent and sustained anti-Semitic attacks ever seen in this country. Its pages were filled with it for ninety-one consecutive issues. It was an operation as fantastic in its planning as in its execution. E.G. Liebold, a Ford executive, had established a detective agency in New York City to investigated the private lives of Jews and providing fodder for the Independent campaign. Many of the agency’s men had numbers like 121X. It was this bureau that bought a translation of the spurious “Protocols Of The Learned Elders Of Zion,” a notorious and classic anti-Semitic document, which provided the Independent with material for a year and a half.
One day the Independent appeared with a headline and story proclaiming me as the “pro-consul of Judah in America’ and a Jew of Super-Power,” the head and front of a dictatorial conspiracy.
I ignored these assaults, but Sapiro was irate.
The detective agency would have been part of Ford’s Service Department. I can’t fathom why Baruch was irate because the Xs were spying on the private lives of Jews. While I find that, if true, offensive however the fact is that the American Jewish Committee and the ADL keep files on 3,000,000 of what they presume are American anti-Semites of which there is a file on me. Believe me it can be quite an invasion of privacy.
Currently some of my essays are displayed on the ADL site as examples of anti-Semitism which I consider defamation. No one thought to ask me. So, Bernard is being somewhat disingenuous here.
As far as his being a pro-consul, whatever is meant by that, I believe he probably was an officer of the international Jewish government. As far as being a Jew of Super-Power, any reading of his auto-biography would indicate he obviously thought of himself as that.
So here in these quotes from four carefully written pages of Baruch’s we have a principal participants view of what the thought was happening and how he was involved in it. He carefully selects what information to release but it isn’t that difficult to read between the lines.
Tracking down Eugene Meyer and Albert Lasker’s involvement looks to be more difficult however the more one looks into this issue the more Henry Ford is exonerated.
May 25, 2014
Willkie, Wendell: One World, 1943, Readers League Of America
Woeste, Victoria Saker: Henry Ford’s War On Jews, 2012, UStanford Press
Today we are spending millions on a Voice of America, that it is fondly hoped, will persuade Russia to “understand” America. Why not a drive to make Americans understand America? A crusade that will raise patriotism above “liberalism’s” sneers, lifting all eyes to the shining arch of democratic achievement, and away from mean search for flaws at the base? We are a great people, and out of the glory of the republic’s morning, what may not be expected of the noon? If we are given a recovery of pride, courage, and faith, what height can dismay our climbing feet?
–George Creel- Rebel At Large
1947. George Putnam’s Sons
The period from 1913 when Woodrow Wilson became president to 1953 when the honorable Harry Truman passed the reins of government to Dwight Eisenhower must be studied as one unit. Dominating the period was the lust for a League of Nations in Wilson’s terminology at the beginning of the period, the United Nations as conceived by Franklin Roosevelt at the end.
The issue was placed in terms of Internationalism vs. Isolationism by the Wilsonians, a surrender of sovereignty by the opposition. As one can see the Wilsonians gave a pejorative to their opponents. Demonology. The Wilsonians characterized themselves as people of inherent almost godlike virtue, their opposition as devils. No compromise was possible for the Wilsonians, it was all or nothing. They believed that they could legislate peace.
They refused to see that there never had been peace at any time in the world, the history of mankind was a history of war or, as Edward Gibbon put it, a record of crimes and follies. While the Wilsonians concentrated on the European national war they failed to see that warfare was brewing in other quarters that would cancel out any agreements between Europeans. They were warned of it, told in no uncertain terms by men like Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard. Stoddard wrote three books identifying three trends that have played out as he indicated. The first book was The Rising Tide Of Color Against White Supremacy that indicated the revolt of the colored world against White hegemony. No surprise there. The second was The New World Of Islam that accurately predicted the current Moslem assault on Western Civilization and the third was The Revolt Against Civilization: The Menace Of The Underman that warned against the assault on civilization by those marginalized by the intelligence required to function in the modern technological and scientific world.
After 70 years or so of the United Nations warfare is as or more endemic over the whole planet as it was in Roosevelt’s time. Furthermore the most trigger happy of the whole lot is Roosevelt’s own disciple Barack Obama, the first Negro US president. His administration’s record to this time is war piled on war.
More importantly for Roosevelt’s time was that Wilson’s Versailles Peace Treaty led directly to WWII, League of Nations or no. Before the ink was even out of the pen pundits were predicting a world war two within twenty years and so it came to be. There was no peace, there will be no peace. And for this fantasy Roosevelt stripped his countrymen of their freedoms just as his successor is doing.
It is necessary to recapitulate the entire period.
Immigration And Immigrants
US history since the twentieth century began has been written from the point of view of the immigrant. Therefore immigrants are portrayed as good and the native reaction as evil. A couple immigrant nationalities stand out and chief of these is the Jewish people. The Jews are master propagandists while at the same time being an overwhelming influence on American historical writing. The country’s historical opinion has been formed by Jews.
In Russia and Central Europe Jews always rejected the authority of the host country seeking instead an autonomous position relative to the host. They nearly succeeded in this goal in Poland while the Russians stoutly resited their goal. Thus Jews and Russians fought an asymmetrical war for over a hundred years in which the Jews were the victor in the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. Until the accession of Stalin after Lenin’s death the Jews were supreme.
When the Jews emigrated to the US they naturally sought an autonomous relationship hoping to establish Yiddish as an official language on a par with English. While they failed in the latter goal, although efforts continue, with the inauguration of Woodrow Wilson in 1913 they flooded into DC as an essential part of the administration. They were influential if not autonomous or wholly equal.
Their activities in Russia, now the Soviet Union, as a symbol of victory the name was changed to erase the Russians, alarmed the world. A world wide reaction occurred because the Jews were then in a position using both asymmetrical and possibly conventional warfare to conquer the world. Theirs was an international operation or conspiracy even though they naturally denied it.
One of the most active exposers of Jewish designs of the period was the American, Henry Ford. Ford owned the first national newspaper, the Dearborn Independent. He ran a series of exposes over a two year period which he collected into four small volumes called The International Jew. This was a statement of fact not fancy or prejudice. Taken, one imagines, by surprise the leading Jewish organizations couldn’t formulate a powerful response. Of course they were in full damage control mode throughout the West.
Then in 1924 Ford began a twenty part expose of the activities of an agriculturist charlatan named Aaron Sapiro. Sapiro was a Jew. He beginning in the West, he was from California, and moving East began organizing farmers into his notion of cooperatives. Ford’s Independent denounced him as part of an international Jewish conspiracy to control, in essence, food stuffs. A corner on food, so to speak.
Whether he was part of a larger organization or on his own Sapiro decided to sue Ford for defamation not only of himself but the Jewish people as a whole. An innovation. The suit did go to trial ending in a mistrial. However judging from existing accounts, most notably Miss Victoria Woeste’s ‘magisterial’ history of the situation, there seems to be the notion that Ford made false allegations.
Apparently no one on Ford’s side came across a statement Sapiro made before a convocation of Jewish notables in Detroit in which he said:
We will show that Henry Ford’s attack, on the part I have taken in promoting cooperative marketing among the farmers of this country means but one thing…that Ford and his hirelings are bent upon eliminating the Jew from agriculture. But little do these men realize that the efforts exerted by those who would apply to agriculture the sound methods which obtain in modern business will result in placing agriculture on a basis of prosperity and productivity, without which it is doomed. And these malicious individuals do not know or do not wish to know, that it was men like the late David Lubin, A Californian Jew, who laid the foundation for a new and significant era in American farming.
David Lubin? Not only did Henry Ford and his ‘hirelings’ not know of David Lubin but neither did Miss Woeste or else for some reason she wished to conceal the fact. But then I never heard of David Lubin nor has any other writer on the topic.
But to consider the paragraph of Sapiro in which he says a great deal that undermined his suit against Ford. David Lubin was only one of perhaps several like minded men according to Sapiro. Who were these other men, were they all Jews and what was this foundation for a new and significant era in American farming that they laid? Those are interesting questions which inevitably lead to a ‘conspiracy’. Sapiro was obviously a disciple of Lubin, while the so-called Sapiro Plan must have been the same as Lubin’s or based on that plan.
Sapiro believed that agriculture was ‘doomed’, that is dead, without applying to agriculture the sound methods that obtain in modern business. He doesn’t tell us exactly what he means so we can only guess. However on thing to which Ford objected was that Sapiro wanted to form large aggregates of farmers and then withhold their produce from the market until they got the price they wanted. Well, that’s equivalent to a strike against the public interest. Calvin Coolidge during the Boston police strike laid down the rule that no one has the right to strike against the public interest. But it isn’t stated exactly what Sapiro meant. In any event it appears that Sapiro was participating in a larger movement or conspiracy as Ford claimed.
Now, who was this David Lubin of whom Sapiro considered himself a disciple? What is his story?
David Lubin was neither an American nor a Californian although for a part of his life he lived in America and a smaller part in California. He was born a Jew in Klodawa, Poland in 1849 moving to England in 1853 then moving to New York as part of his family in 1855.
According to Wikipedia: ‘He received a scant education and at an early age was placed in a jewelry factory in Attleboro, Massachusetts…he drifted to California…where he opened a store in Sacramento in the 1870s.
While in Sacramento he bought a fruit ranch…and land for raising wheat. His knowledge of agriculture assisted him when he helped found the California Fruit Growers Union. He then helped settle Eastern European Jewish refugees who worked on various farms in the area and, in 1891, he became the director of the International Society for the Colonization of Russian Jews. He then began a campaign for subsidies and protection for farmers, initially in California but eventually on an international scale.
So David Lubin was the archetype of the international Jew with no settled place of residence. From California he would move to Italy, dying in Rome in 1919. In Rome he continued his organizational efforts to create unification of Jewish American and Jewish European food merchants.
During his life he was more interested in Jews than Americans which was part of Ford’s complaint about Sapiro. The word ‘international’ runs all through his history. Lubin was placed in charge of the worldwide, that is international, settlement of Russian Jewish colonies. He established ‘colonies’ of Jews in California, then sought subsidies, that is grants of public money, for them through the US government.
Lubin is the role model of Aaron Sapiro. It is this role that Ford objected to. Miss Woeste doesn’t tell us whether Sapiro was in contact with Rubin, I suspect he was, and certainly his associate, Bernard Baruch, who was a commodities expert, who was in close contact with Sapiro, most likely had some sort of contact if not association with Lubin. In fact Lubin may have recruited and tutored Sapiro who at the time was merely unsuccessful hack lawyer in San Francisco.
Interestingly it appears that David Lubin made his mark on the world. While in Rome Lubin established the International Institute of Agriculture, backed and supported by the King of Italy, which continued in existence until 1945 when it was incorporated into the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. Lubin was not exactly a non-entity even in 1919 when he died.
There is every reason then to believe that Ford was correct in his assessment of Sapiro’s activities. Some sort of international plan benefiting Jews was in the process of being formed. Had Ford pursued the retrial I suspect he would have won. His problem was that it was just too time consuming while he was in the process of ending the Model T and designing the Model A in 1927.
As it was the trial was sort of a public relations triumph for the Jews.
On the international scale, while the Jews and the big Jewish organizations such as the American Jewish Committee, and the Anti-Defamation League were busy battling Ford in America they were involved in street warfare in Germany with German nationalist groups.
The menace to German culture and nationality was severe. As Hitler said to Jewish Communists: We know if we fail our heads will roll in the sand…’ There can be no doubt that was true. The purge of German nationalists would undoubtedly have amounted to millions and perhaps tens of millions. The Jewish offensive against the Germans actually began with their triumph over the Russians in the October Revolution of ‘17. They were waging asymmetrical war from then until the extermination camps reduced their numbers.
Their progress in the US was delayed over the years of the Republican Interregnum from 1921-1933. With the return of Wilsonian policies in 1933 when Roosevelt seized control the Jews flooded back into DC along with their Communist allies. Jews immediately called for boycotts and sanctions against Germany as they enlisted the might of the US in their cause.
Roosevelt accepting Jewish and Communist collectivism quickly enacted laws to empower his side. Using that power the Jews renewed their attack on Ford. Two Judeo-Communist assaults were made on Ford’s River Rouge plant. The paramilitaries had every intention of smashing Fords machines and probably firing the plant to put him out of business. Of course they disguised their assault as a labor disagreement.
As Ford had never had labor disturbances before Roosevelt’s seizure of the government he had no apprehensions about their intent. In the first assault Ford’s lieutenant Harry Bennett amiably went out to talk with the marchers where he was savagely beaten to the ground. Bennett learned his lesson.
In the second assault the so-called Battle of the Overpass Bennett and his men Marched up to the UAW’s Walter Reuther and Frankensteen and began to kick ass. His revenge, of course was reported as mere brutality. The first offense against him was ignored.
The Jewish agitation against Germany was so obvious that with unusual alacrity in 1935 Congress passed strict neutrality legislation. Years before Pearl Harbor, nearly in ‘42, Roosevelt set about circumventing the neutrality laws with all kinds of dodges while preparing for war. Later in the decade Churchill joined Jewish efforts to get Roosevelt into the coming war as he realized that England was incapable of defending itself alone.
Thus in 1940 Roosevelt forced a peace time draft through Congress. This clearly indicated that he intended war. He further violated any concept of neutrality by extending the US territorial waters into mid-Atlantic Ocean beyond Iceland. It was near that island that the Destroyer Reuben James was sunk by a U-boat months before the US entered the European War.
Traditionally the tenure of a president was limited to two terms thus Roosevelt would be expected to vacate the office in 1941. This however did not suit Roosevelt’s plans. If he left office his specific internationalist plans for a United Nations wouldn’t be realized and the whole Wilsonian program would not be realized to his desires.
Resistance to his run for a third term could be expected to be intense while there was a reasonable chance that he would fail. The chicanery of both conventions in 1940 is well known. The most remarkable thing is the Republican nomination of the life long Democrat Wendell Willkie whose views coincided almost exactly with Roosevelt’s thus being completely opposite to the America Firsters and Republicans in general. In fact, Willkie threw the election to Roosevelt.
It would seem then that there was collusion between Willkie and Roosevelt as well as between Roosevelt and traitors within the Republican Party. Willkie was nominated as the Republican candidate and as such then threw the election to Roosevelt making his election inevitable. Not since Jack Johnson lay down in Havana was there a more surprising result.
Roosevelt was swept into office; within the year the US was at war on two fronts. Roosevelt had provoked the Japanese into an attack on Hawaii in the Pacific while on the Atlantic side Hitler was treaty bound to declare war on the US although why he honored the treaty without waiting for the Japanese to honor their agreement to undertake their promised Northern strategy of attacking the Soviets from the East seems incredible. When the Japanese followed their Southern strategy releasing Stalin’s Siberian armies Hitler’s fate was sealed.
And so, despite all Roosevelt’s public promises to the contrary American boys were involved in not one but two foreign wars.
Part II will review the Republican Interregnum under the Presidents Harding, Coolidge and Hoover from 1921-33 including the years 1919 and 1920.
February 20, 2014
Henry Ford And The Aaron Sapiro Case
Whose Heaven On Earth?
Now let’s examine the apparent expectations of the two men, Henry Ford and Aaron Sapiro in light of their ethnic backgrounds and/or religious outlook, what the famed Jewish psychologist would call group psychology. How were their attitudes and opinions conditioned by their respective ethnic educations?
The leading characteristic of the Jews is that their approach is based on domination, the need to be Top Dog ‘by any means necessary.’ While I am not aware of Ford’s religious beliefs, if any, he reflects a Christian-American point of view, that is to say he considered service the highest virtue. Therefore he violated all established business practices by offering the highest value for the lowest price.
In that light then Ford founded his company and conducted its business on the basis of service, possibly what the Communists mean by ‘social justice.’ In constrast Sapiro exploited the farmers he claimed to represent extorting the highest fee for little value while aggrandized his persona. Ford created benefits for the many in everything he did including more than doubling the wage rate.
Just as Sapiro’s actions were based on his religion or ethnic collective, Ford’s activities were based on Christian-American ideals. Americanism could be placed on the same religious level as Judaism while Ford was busy developing his own variant of Christian-Americanism. It seems to have been his intent to reform the socio-economic basis of American life as a sort of American religion with himself as its prophet.
The clash between Ford and Sapiro was essentially ‘religious.’ As Miss Woeste points out Ford had his own vision of the farmer’s well fare based on service which clashed with Sapiro’s vision of dominance.
Ford had been a farmer while Sapiro never was.
Now, if one considers the psychological yearnings of the Ford Plan and those of the Sapiro Plan one has something like this: Ford’s Plan was essentially utopian in which he sought to create a heaven on earth for everyone while Sapiro’s Jewish Plan was millennial with the intent of creating a heaven on earth for Jews, they dominating everyone else.
Ford, believing he had the industrial key for bettering conditions for all was busy reforming every institution he came into contact with from industrial conditions to hospital care to electricity generation, not to mention his railroad. He was, like many of his generation, including W.K. Kellogg and his corn flakes and Bernarr Macfadden and his juice bars, interested in finding the miracle food, and he thought he may have found it one time in soy beans. In fact it was nearly a miracle bean. Ford established the bean as a premier American crop which had more than a little to do with aiding the farmer.
Sapiro’s notion can be seen in this photograph where he stands at the head of a group of Canadian farmers symbolically their master.
As should be clear the Jewish War Against Ford was long standing before the Independent articles. Jewish animosity toward him began with the five dollar day and added to by the six dollar day and eight hour five day week improvements.
Ford in a religious sense was working miracles that threatened to overturn the Jewish system. If Ford were able to establish his earthly utopia that would obviate the Jewish millennium. It will be remembered that the Jews believed the advent of the millennium was imminent at the time so Ford was construed as a very dangerous threat to the Jewish millennium as well as the Communist Revolution in which the Jews were also heavily involved.
Thus when the Communists attacked Ford plants in the thirties, the Jews through Roosevelt were undermining his authority through legislation finally forcing a union on him in 1942.
Ford was quite right to challenge Sapiro. It would be nice if Ford or Uwayne State published the Ford Sapiro articles for all of us to study. While Miss Woeste laughs at them claiming them full of misrepresentations we are obligated to either take or reject her word for it. Uncharacteristically as a historian she offers no examples.
For instance what was Sapiro’s relationship to Albert Lasker and Bernard Baruch? What publicity was Lasker, as a publicist, giving Sapiro? How was he represented in the press? If he was, what kind of advice was the commodity expert Baruch giving Sapiro?
Are we to believe the articles lie when they say Sapiro was involved with these men? It just doesn’t seem reasonable or if not Miss Woeste might have given examples and refuted them. Her charges don’t have to be insinuated. After all, while not a historian, she is a lawyer.
That UStanford, one of the most prestigious universities in these United States, would imply that they accept Miss Woeste is a credible scholar leads me to ask the question, Why?
February 19, 2014
Henry Ford And The Aaron Sapiro Case
The Vampire Rises
Woeste, Victoria Saker: Henry Ford’s War On Jews And The Legal Battle Against Hate Speech, 2012, UStanford Press.
Let’s take a moment to look at the aftermath of this puzzle. Miss Woeste in her polemic of the forged apology of Henry Ford and financial arrangements extorted from Ford in the amount of a couple million dollars by Louis Marshall, the AJC and Aaron Sapiro laughs off the cash as just a couple days income for Ford. Trifling enough in Miss Woeste’s eyes but nothing compared to the hundreds of millions that followed in the thirties, forties and apparently up to the present.
The compensation the Jews extort for no injury whatsoever are drawn out to the farthest extreme. A recent case in point is that of the designer John Galliano in France. Galliano had jobs bringing in over a hundred millions of dollars over a ten year period. This was enough to excite the cupidity of the Jews who believed that such a large amount of cash would be better in Jewish hands. The question then was how to get Galliano fired and one of their own put in his place.
Not much of a problem, actually. Ever heard of that cash cow called anti-Semitism? In the US and Europe over the last few decades dozens of people have been fired whose future income was perhaps worth billions of dollars combined. A mere comment that neither affected or damaged any one, possibly made in private, has been enough to get individuals blacklisted forever, completely destroying their social standing and hence self-respect. Cruel and unjust beyond belief.
Galliano who was addicted to stimulants while having private opinions to which everyone is entitled but which expressed in public can be used against you to deprive you of fabulous incomes was lured into a bar to have a few drinks to loosen his tongue.
While quietly conversing with his putative friend he was insulted by some Jewish patrons at an adjacent table. Not coincidentally a photographer was handy to film the exchange as ‘proof.’ Even more oddly another photographer behind the first one was there to record the filming of the exchange. At no time during the exchange were Galliano’s tormentors shown.
If the whole exchange was filmed the sequence was edited down to a few remarks none of which were particularly offensive even though elicited by his tormentors. The tort delivered by the reviling Jews was retorted calmly and dismissively by Galliano.
The Jews then blew this setup into a casus bellus. The reaction against Galliano was immediate, one almost might think planned ahead. He was fired from all his jobs in the fashion industry and thrown into Coventry. The last I read he was abasing himself before the Jews claiming he wanted to convert to Judaism. Needless to say a Jew got his very lucrative employment.
Henry Ford was not such a pushover nor were the Jews so well organized. During his lifetime Ford was unrepentant nor did he think he had anything to repent however his son Edsel and his grandson Henry II were pushovers. I don’t know what pressures Henry II was subjected to but he was an absolute embarrassment.
Of course it is difficult to figure out what the Jews think Henry Ford did. The restrictive anti-immigration laws were passed in 1921 to 1924 effectively eliminating further Jewish immigration. Prior to the War the Jews had been poised to transfer the whole European Jewish population to the US through Galveston and New Orleans. Those ports of entry were chosen to deflect from attention a massive importation through New York City.
The War aborted that plan in 1914. However the plan was revived and in the last stages of organization when the 1921 immigration bill closed that down as immigration was severely restricted.
It is possible that the Jews blamed the Independent articles on turning attention to them and perhaps hastening the legislation through. In that case by Jewish thinking Ford would have thwarted their plans subsequently being partially responsible for the Jewish holocaust as otherwise the whole tribe would have been safely out of the way of WWII.
Although the Jews believe the articles collected into the International Jew were responsible for the rise of anti-Semitism in Germany that is absolute nonsense. Europeans needed no help from Ford on that score. Hitler and the Nazis did not need Henry Ford to influence their thinking on the Jews. Besides the articles which expose Jewish machinations in the US have little if any relevance to Europe. No matter what any Nazi may have said I doubt if they could even understand the articles. How many of them would even know who Benedict Arnold was and his relationship to eighteenth century Jews in the US.
In addition, in the United States according to the Jewish Year Book the thirties had very little ‘anti-Semitic’ incidences so whatever they may claim Ford’s articles influenced no one.
Beyond the fact that Jews like no criticism only applause, I can’t understand why Ford’s articles disturbed them so. Sapiro himself appeared to be into self-aggrandizement and looting the farmers.
Nevertheless the Jews never forgive or forget. You could ask the Amalekites about that but unfortunately the Jews exterminated them root and branch. So while Ford was attacked by Labor, the Communists and FDR in the thirties and WWII years they were unable to extract any more millions. Ford died in 1947 leaving Henry II ready for fleecing. The lamb delivered for the sacrifice and this time no god stayed the hand of Abraham.
With the coming of the Roosevelt administration the Jews came flooding back into DC which doubled or tripled their power including not only to bedevil Ford but to cause him real harm. The Roosevelt administration was essentially a continuation of the Wilson government, which had been heavily influenced by Jewish participation if not dominated by it.
Both Franklin and Eleanor had close ties with the Jews dating back to pre-WWI years with heavy involvement in the settlement house period. The Jews then were influential in labor legislation all of which enfranchised labor while hamstringing management. Thus both laws and executive orders were used in the attempt to compel Ford to do the Jewish will.
By 1940 then the constant legal and extra-legal, that is criminal, pounding was beginning to wear Ford down. Of course by 1940 Ford was 77 years old while having suffered two strokes, the second probably reducing his mental capacity significantly. Even then outside pressures did not bring him down. It brought Edsel and Henry II down but not Henry. It also brought Henry’s wife down. Edsel caved while Henry’s wife threatened to leave him if he didn’t bow to the Jews’ will. As Ford told Sorenson, his chief engineer: What could I do?
Ford turned the company over to Henry II in 1943 while he died in 1947. As Henry II learned to his dismay there was no penance that could satisfy the Jews. Let us be clear, Henry Ford’s so called war on the Jews was in response to economic attack. It was self-defense. Henry Ford was a tough nut impossible to crack; Henry Ford II was a rollover pansy who emasculated himself and handed his genitals over on a platter. Brings tears to your eyes to record it.
Much of the following information is taken from David L. Lewis’ The Public Image of Henry Ford, pp.154-65 of the UWayne State Press paperback edition of 1988.
One of the little known stories of WWII was the Alien Properties division’s confiscation of German and Japanese properties. The division was headed by the Jew David Bazelon. People usually associate the confiscated properties with the Japanese as more sympathy can be generated for them than the Germans but Japanese holdings were miniscule compared to the immense riches taken from the German with no thought of compensation then or later.
These properties, probably worth trillions in today’s dollars were sold for a pittance, a fraction of a penny on the dollar. David Bazelon was a member of what author Gus Russo calls the Chicago Supermob of criminals. As a member of the Jewish and Sicilian Outfit he sold the Japanese assets to Sicilians and Jews while disposing of the really valuable German assets to his Jews making many a many fortune for them.
One asset that got away was the General Aniline and Film Corporation, GAF. It would be a mistake to think that wise heads didn’t see what was coming with the war and plan to benefit from it. Thus General Aniline was transferred to the Rockefeller’s covertly as the war began. After the war when GAF was on the block for fourteen million or less Rockefeller laid claim as its own asset rescuing it from sale by Bazelon for a joke price. Of course Rockefeller was then accused of ‘trading with the enemy.’
GAF was tied up in legislation while the ridiculous charges of trading with the enemy were fought by Rockefeller. When the legal affairs were cleared up at the end of the fifties GAF was sold for a little less than 400 million 1950s dollars. Forty billion or so today.
The interesting thing is that in 1940 Edsel Ford was a shareholder of considerable size in GAF. In the contest between the detestable Walter Reuther and his fiefdom of the United Auto Workers Reuther insisted that Edsel resign his directorship of GAF and sell his shares. A strange demand from a labor organization to an executive of a firm. Edsel did sell at a heavy loss to himself. Had he kept the shares and passed them to his son, Henry II, the son would have realized many millions less than two decades later.
Just as the Rockefellers prepared by protecting GAF from disposal after the war so it is possible that the Jews realized the immense opportunity presenting itself tried and succeeded in removing the Fords from any post war claims. Things really do get involved, don’t they?
After the War with Henry II in charge the Jews bled the Fords white like a giant vampire which they are continuing to this day.
Remembering Henry Ford the Jews moved in to milk Henry II, Ford Motors and the fabulously endowed Ford Foundation.
To add a little substance to the Jewish relationship to the auto industry I am going to make a lengthy quote from Stephen Birmingham’s Our Crowd: The Great Jewish Families Of New York, 1967, Harper & Row, pp. 379-380.
J&W Seligman & Company, though it had been first eclipsed by Kuhn, Loeb and next, by the Lehmans- to whom the Seligmans sold their building- still managed to produce moments of fiscal excitement. In 1910 Joseph Seligman’s ancient rival, J.P. Morgan, was an old man who increasingly allowed others to make his decisions and handle his affairs, and one of those was George W. Perkins, who laughed out loud when a “visionary nitwit” named Will Durant told him that there would one day be as many as fifty thousand automobiles on the roads of America. Shouting “Impossible!” Perkins threw Durant out of the office. This was too bad for Morgan because Durant lowered his sights and approached the Seligmans.
Durant’s burgeoning General Motors Corporation had already absorbed a number of individual companies- Buick, Oldsmobile, Cadillac, and some twenty others. But even the Seligmans, perhaps because they knew they had a Morgan reject, were initially wary. They agreed to take on Durant, but on staggeringly stiff terms. In return for underwriting $15 million worth of Durant GM notes, the bankers demanded that Durant put up all his company’s assets as security, in addition to giving control of his board to the Seligman group. Durant also wanted $2.5 million cash, and for this the Seligmans made him put up $4.5 million worth of stock as security and charged him 6% interest for five years. As an indication of how shaky a venture Durant’s was considered to be, the lawyers who drew up the papers on the deal cut their normal fee to less than half, in order to get cash and not stock for their fee.
This was in 1910. Three years later, Albert Strauss, who, with his brother Frederick had been one of the first non-family Seligman partners and who had gone on the board of General Motors, was offered $30 a share for his General Motors common stock. Strauss declined to sell, and the Seligmans held on to theirs. By the war’s end in 1919, the original GM common was selling for $850 a share.
The house of Morgan’s less than clairvoyant appraisal of the automobile industry is often given as the reason why the Ford Motor Company for so many years refused to go public. Motor stocks of the period were considered so speculative that “Only Jewish banks will handle them,” and this would not have suited Henry Ford, Sr., a virulent anti-Semite. Nevertheless, the leading gentile banker, Morgan, would not see Ford. It was in the Dearborn, Michigan Independent, which Ford controlled, that he caused to be published for the first time in America the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, the spurious document purportedly prepared by an international conference of Jews and Freemasons, outlining their plan to take over the world….As a result of this, it was many years before most Jews would buy a Ford car.
And yet, after Henry Ford’s death, it was a Jewish bank, Goldman, Sachs & Company, which first brought out Ford stock and under the guiding genius of Sidney Weinberg, devised the intricate construction of the Ford Foundation. Today Weinberg is the chief financial advisor to Henry Ford II, and is on the board of the Ford Motor Company. The ironies of high finance never cease. Where great money is to be made, much can be forgiven.
Rather Birmingham should have said where the business could be easily misappropriated, the desire of vengeance could not be resisted. Indeed, it was sought. Goldman, Sachs took Ford public! How many tens of millions was that worth that might have gone to a goy firm. Forgiven my ass.
As can readily be seen shortly after Henry’s death the Jews were effectively in control of Ford Motors and the Ford Foundation the latter alone being worth three billion dollars in the sixties. Henry Ford by his articles in the Dearborn Independent gave the Jews a gift that kept on giving. Nor has the story yet been told. Get ready.
It is difficult for me to understand the concern the Fords gave to the Jews. Whatever harm they could have done to Ford was nothing compared to the harm Ford did himself by failing to keep abreast of development in automobiles so that by the time he shut down in 1927 to retool he sacrificed a half of 50% of the market during that period to reopen with a 50% loss of his previous share to about 25% slightly less actually which turned out to be the new Ford share through the fifties.
Ford stumbled badly through the thirties by once again taking too much time to adjust to changing conditions. While it may be true that Jews refused to buy Fords they were 4% or less of the total market while Ford could have hoped for no better than 25% of the 4%. When Mercedes began being sold in the US post-WWII Jews almost universally swore they would never buy a German car. The didn’t stop Mercedes from becoming the best selling luxury car topping the GM Cadillac.
There were undoubtedly a significant number of goys out there willing to buy a Ford just to spite the Jews negating their influence. When I was growing up in the forties and fifties I actually had no knowledge of Jews except that they existed and I never heard any reference to a Ford-Jew feud. So, certainly post-WWII the issue had been forgotten except by the Fords and the Jews.
Nevertheless the Fords kept on paying and paying and paying while the Jews kept on collecting and collecting and collecting, forever with their hand out. And we are talking hundreds and hundreds of millions of 1950 dollars, billions in today’s dollars. One wonders where they all went.
Not counting Edsel’s strange GAF transaction Ford Motors spent hundreds of thousands of dollars during WWII when it had no cars to sell advertising, essentially funding, hundreds of Jewish publications across the country. As Lewis says the publications were selected by Nathan Seidman of Inter-Racial Press of America, Inc.
Ford II in 1951 gave $1,000,000 to the National Conference of Christians and Jews for a new building.
In 1956 Ford Motors appointed a Jew, Sidney Weinberg to the board of directors.
Even more astonishing, Lewis, p. 155:
…the company retained a Jewish friend, Detroit attorney, Alfred A. May, a fellow alumnus of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to advise the firm on its relations with the Jewish Community. For three decades May’s recommendations have played an important part in many of Ford’s decisions affecting Jews- from lending courtesy cars to Jewish organizations, advertising in Jewish newspapers and banquet programs, and framing a reply to the charges that the company underemployed Jews to deciding how much money should be given to Jewish causes and determining the degree and kind of assistance to be extended to the State of Israel and Israeli institutions. Most of May’s work has been conducted behind the scenes. He advises, Ford acts. Occasionally, however, May negotiates directly with Jewish organizations on Ford’s behalf. But because many leading Jews have come to regard the attorney as an apologist for the Ford Company, his influence within the Jewish Community has declined over the years. In the late 1940s, the Ford Companies also retained rabbis in Detroit, Chicago, New York, and other large centers of Jewish populations to assist in overcoming its reputation for anti-Semitism.
Sweet deal that.
The word retains means all these people were paid large sums for a sinecure, they had no duties or function.
Thus not only were the Jews bleeding Germany and the United States white, Ford spent huge in the hope of obtaining Jewish good will when none was forthcoming. Would you have sacrificed easy money by extending good will? I have my doubts.
I don’t know which to condemn more, the Jews for being vampire blood suckers or the Fords for offering their throat. Remember the Amalekites; the Jews never forgive or forget even when they cause their own problem.
As further compensation the Fords are due to appoint a Jew as president of the company. Good luck.
If you think the Fords were generous to include a foreign country Israel and its institutions when Israel didn’t even exist during the twenties, read this.
In an increasingly global marketplace in which Israel represents a miniscule percentage of Ford sales, Ford sacrificed the entire Middle East market of the Arab world to gratify Jewish vanity. Per Lewis Israel was extorting funds from Ford for its Weizmann Institute of Science, Hebrew University, Technion and Henry Ford’s personal gifts to the United Jewish Appeal.
The Arabs then extorted an equal sum for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. Not that the oil rich Arab League couldn’t have handled that situation for itself.
American Jews and Israeli’s were also demanding that Ford set up a dealer assembly plant for Israel. The Arab League objected asking Ford not to do it unless they wanted their North African operation shut down. The Jews counter demanded. Ford was willing to sacrifice annual sales of from 20-22K units for less than 2000 sales in Israel which they did.
In addition Ford plants in North Africa worth 60 million dollars were shuttered as Ford was ejected from the market only to be replaced by General Motors. Within three years the company sacrificed 200 million dollars and counting to appease the Jews.
Truly a case of the tail wagging the dog. Israel wasn’t even a viable State existing only on the dole from Germany, the US and…Ford.
One imagines that Aaron Sapiro and Louis Marshall are laughing their asses off down there among the flames while Henry Ford can probably only manage a wry smile up there in the land beyond the sun.
The Jews have every right to consider Aaron Sapiro as St. Aaron Sapiro. Who can be credited with doing more for The People than he?
February 3, 2014
Henry Ford And The Aaron Sapiro Case
Woeste, Victoria Saker: Henry Ford’s War On Jews And The Legal Battle Against Hate Speech, 2012, UStanford Press.
While Miss Woeste’s main concern in her historical polemic seems to be the struggle to stem criticism of Jewish activities otherwise known as ‘hate’ speech one wonders if she has even read any of Henry Ford’s three autobiographies.
Yet in Ford’s first auto, My Life And Work, he clearly lays out what he is doing and why. Miss Woeste incorporates none of this in her polemic or even attempts to analyze Ford’s motives instead belittling and willfully misinterpreting what he does.
The fact is that Ford was one of the top three admired men of America. Nothing built his reputation so much as his doubling the wages of his workmen which made them aristocrats among labor. Actually the increase was more than a doubling for the least skilled laborers at five dollars a day while the more skilled tasks earned commensurately more, six, seven, eight dollars and more. Ford workers then were comparatively much better off than other workers in Detroit and the nation.
Miss Woeste belittles this by writing that the workers were paid at the two fifty rate with the differential being paid at the end of the year. This is untrue. If Miss Woeste had read Ford’s 1922 auto she would have read that the full amount was paid as part of the worker’s bi-weekly pay. She does reference David L. Lewis’ The Public Image Of Henry Ford in which she would have read the same thing.
If she willfully falsified the information then her credibility is definitely destroyed. If she hadn’t read whatever she did read carefully or just assumed that her way was the way Ford would have done it then her scholarship is seriously compromised.
In any event since her work is of an uncompromised prejudiced attempt to build up her Jews while discrediting Ford it has little scholarly value.
If she had read Ford’s my life and work then she would have learned why he was exposing the machinations of the Jews. His explanation is contained in Chapter VIII of My Life And Work entitled ‘Things In General’ p. 250:
The work which we describe as Studies In The Jewish Question and which is variously described by antagonists as ‘the Jewish campaign,’ the attack on the Jews,’ ‘the anti-Semitic pogrom’ and so forth needs no explanation to those who have followed it. Its motives and purposes must be judged by the work itself. It is offered as a contribution to a question which deeply affects the country, a question which is racial at its source, and which concerns influences and ideals rather than persons. Our statements must be judged by candid readers who are intelligent enough to lay our words alongside life as they are able to observe it. If our words and their observations agree, the case is made. It is perfectly silly to damn us before our statement has been shown baseless or reckless. The first item to be considered is the truth of what we have set forth. And that is primarily the item which our critics choose to evade.
Readers of our articles will see at once that we are not activated by any kind of prejudices, except it may be a prejudice in favour of the principles which have made our civilization. There had been observed in this country certain strains of influence which were causing a marked deteriorization of our literature, amusements, and social conduct; business was departing from its oldtime substantial soundness; a general letting down of standards was felt everywhere. It was not the robust coarseness of the white man, the rude indelicacy say, of Shakespeare’s characters, but a nasty Orientalism which has insidiously affected every channel of expression and to such an extent that it was time to challenge it. The fact that these influences were traceable to one racial source is a fact to be reckoned with, not by us only, but by the intelligent people of the race in question. It is entirely creditable to them steps have been taken by them to remove their protection from the most flagrant violators of American hospitality, but there is still room to discard outworn ideals of racial superiority maintained by economic or intellectually subversive warfare upon Christian society.
Our work does not pretend to say the last word on the Jew in America. It says only the word which describes his obvious impress on the country. When that impress is changed, the report of it can be changed. For the present, then, the question is wholly in the Jews’ hands. If they are as wise as they claim to be, they will labor to make Jews Americans, instead of laboring to make Americans Jewish. The genius of the United States of America is Christian in the broadest sense, and its destiny is to remain Christian. This carries no sectarian meaning with it, but relates to a basic principle which differs from other principles in that it provides for liberty with morality, and pledges society to a code of relations based on fundamental Christian conceptions of human rights and duties.
As for prejudice or hatred against persons, that is neither American nor Christian. Our opposition is only to ideas, false ideas, which are sapping the moral stamina of the people. These ideas proceed from easily identifiable sources. They are promulgated by easily discoverable methods; and they are controlled by mere exposure. We have simply used the method of exposure. When the people learn to identify the source and nature of the influence swirling around them it is sufficient. Let the American people once understand that it is not natural degeneracy but subversion that affects us, and they are safe. The explanation is the cure.
This work was taken up without personal motives. When it reached a stage where we believed the American people could grasp the key, we let it rest for the time. Our enemies say that we began it for revenge and that we laid it down in fear. Time will show that our critics are merely dealing in evasion because they dare not tackle the main question. Time will also show that we are better friends to the Jews’ best interests than are those who praise them to their faces and criticize them behind their backs.
One can say that Miss Woeste claiming to represent all her people, every one without exception, dares not grapple with the facts still. In fact she misrepresents them. Nor has the attitude changed. To quote Gerald L.K. Smith who was a witness: (
The moment the manuscripts dealing with the Jewish problem reached the public a terrific howl went up from official Jewry. If I were to summarize the campaign of reprisal and abuse which was carried on against Mr. Ford and his Company, this summary alone would require a book. Every instrument of torture and abuse which could be imagined was carried on against Mr. Ford — smear, character assassination, ridicule, physical threat, boycott. The pressure was constant, consistent and endless. The most powerful and enigmatic pressures imaginable were brought to bear on Mr. Ford to stop the publication of ‘’The International Jew.’’ Finally the order came through to cease publication and to destroy the copies which were available. Jews and others went into the bookstores and bought and destroyed all copies and to steal the report out of the libraries. This made the book so rare and unfindable that it became a collector’s item.
Just as Ford was blasted in the 1920s so is he now as Miss Woeste’s polemic attests. Yet neither then nor now with Miss Woeste as an example were facts employed.
Ford wrote, actually dictated, three auto-biographies in his lifetime. Perhaps I am doing Miss Woeste a small injustice in doubting that she ever read them but if she has what she read doesn’t appear in her polemic.
For some strange reason she includes a rather detailed account of a blood libel trial in Russia called the Beilis Affair. Neither Ford nor Sapiro had anything to do with the Beilis case. What purpose does bringing it up serve?
She interjects another detailed account of the Leo Frank murder case in Atlanta, Georgia. True both Beilis and Frank were Jews but nothing in these two accounts pertains in any way to the Sapiro charges against Ford. How is the Ford trial affected by them? Miss Woeste demurs to explain.
In his 1922 auto published just after the first series of articles in which Ford gives valid reasons for publishing the Independent articles Ford also discusses in a number of places his views of the farm situation. One would think Miss Woeste might quote them giving us some idea of what Ford did think contra Sapiro.
We don’t even get an account of exactly what Sapiro was doing or thought he was doing. We have no idea of the results of his activities.
Sapiro’s activities were in the public sphere hence open to review and criticism. Having read the book twice I can’t tell you anything about Sapiro’s plan, that was even known as the Sapiro Plan, according to Miss Woeste.
There were other cooperative plans. How did they function and how did Sapiro differ from them and better them as Miss Woeste claims. Nothing. Instead we are told this was the first hate speech trial and Louis Marshall sabotaged it. Lewis Marshall was one of the Jews’ own.
We weren’t even given any examples of Ford’s hate speech to judge, just told he did it. Not even something like (Expletive deleted) the Jews. What were the hateful comments Ford made? Why was Ford even concerned about Sapiro’s activities unless he wasn’t doing anything for the farmers while collecting exorbitant fees, which he was.
Well, we’ll never learn from reading Henry Ford’s War On Jews. We won’t even really learn that much about the war. Very little substance there also.
What we do learn the most about is the Jewish attempt to turn the trial from a critique of Sapiro’s activities that might have had some similarities to fraud or the long con game to the irrelevant one of Ford purposely attempting to defame Jews rather than expose them.
Personally I don’t find Miss Woeste proving one or the other.
I don’t even know why she wrote this book, to expose this example of the waste of a court’s time, I guess.
Parts I, II and IV are found on my contemporarynotes.wordpress.com site. III and V are here.