November 21, 1997

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

THE GREAT HATE DEBATE

Note: "HateWatch" (http://hatewatch.org/) recruited one Marc Kaufman to take me on regarding my characterization of their group in a letter I wrote in response to an invitation from HateWatch to appear on their audio program. One indicator of the clout of Ingrid Rimland's Zgram . . . is the fact that once Dr. Rimland reprinted my letter, HateWatch felt compelled to rejoin. Here is my counter to Mr. Kaufman's rejoinder:

From: Marc Samuel Kaufman <mkaufman@mailcity.com>

"With (Hatewatch) Director David Goldman's blessing, I have responded to Michael Hoffman's response to Mr. Goldman's repeated requests for an interview that was circulated by Ingrid Rimland in a recent Zundelgram.

Michael A. Hoffman II wrote:

"Dear Mr. Goldman: Have you read the two articles I wrote concerning your group that are posted in the "Essays on Current Events" section of our website? http://www.hoffman-info.com/enshrining.html If so, then you are aware that your inclusion of 'The Campaign for Radical Truth in History' on your list of alleged hate-mongering sites constitutes libel."

Marc Kaufman of HateWatch replies: "The obvious response to this nonsequitur is that if what is written at Hatewatch is libel, then Hatewatch should be sued in a court of law for committing libel."

HOFFMAN replies: "This is just the rejoinder one would expect from an associate of a site which was initiated at the Harvard University Law School. Mr. Kaufman, the fact is, thanks to that priesthood of shysters known as attorneys, only the wealthy can sue for libel. I cannot sue your organization for stigmatizing me as a 'hater' because I don't have the money to launch such a suit. To pretend that HateWatch hasn't libeled me because I haven't sued is the real "non-sequitur."

Marc Kaufman of HateWatch: "The vast majority of individuals who are profiled on Hatewatch are not 'public figures' as defined in the libel laws and therefore would be able to make a libel complaint as a private individual, in which case they would need only show that what is said about them is not true."

HOFFMAN replies: "In an Anglo-Saxon Common Law court this might be true, that an injured party, 'need only show' the facts of the case. But one cannot simply hail a judge and 'need only show' in American courts today. One must weave through a quagmire of procedure. This procedural labyrinthe was deliberately concocted by the lawyer-priests so that individuals could not on their own approach the inner sanctum of the court, but would instead be compelled to consult one of the priests of the 'bar' who would then escort the injured party, after the prescribed rituals were performed, the litany of jargon invoked and the shekels duly surrendered. Your response to my charge of libel is as worthless as the rest of your 'HateWatch' hokum."

Michael A. Hoffman II previously wrote: "...when you have interviewed the homicidal murderers among the Jewish settlers of occupied Palestine, such as Rabbi Moshe Levinger, and the Talmudists among the Orthodox who believe, with Moses Maimonides, that only Jews are human beings; and after you have interviewed terrorist Irving Rubinstein of the JDL and terrorist Mordechai Levy of the JDO, and after you have interviewed the leading bull dyke 'feminists' on their hatred for men; and after you have interviewed the top Hollywood directors on their hatred for Christianity, then perhaps I will accept your invitation and debate you..."

Marc Kaufman of HateWatch responds: "Any cursory visit to Hatewatch would reveal that anti-Arab and anti-Christian groups are profiled along with anti-Semitic, anti-Black groups, etc."

HOFFMAN replies: "Any 'cursory visit' to HateWatch reveals the overwhelming preponderance of your indexing, cataloging, tracking and other thought cop surveillance activities are concentrated upon the usual, nearly exclusive obsession with whites and Christians as 'haters.' Anti-Arab and anti-Christian groups are barely listed and have been added for token purposes only. Anti-white groups are omitted entirely.

"Moreover, the only reason you have listed the terrorist Jewish Defense League (JDL) is because this writer pressured you to do so. Originally the director of HateWatch refused to list the JDL and claimed the group was not hateful. After I wrote an essay on this subject and posted it at our website, I embarrassed your group into listing the JDL. I would not need to undertake such pressure if your group were in fact an objective information site."

Marc Kaufman: "Radical feminist groups are not advocating such programs as the forcible relocation of men to predefined areas of the country or elsewhere, nor are they advocating the extermination of men. They do not deny crimes committed either past or present against men. Therefore, they do not fit the classic defintion of a hate group, despite the obvious fact that some feminists do, indeed, hate men."

HOFFMAN replies: Your ignorance of the radical feminist ideology is remarkable. Valerie Solanas advocated the extermination of men in her S.C.U.M. Manifesto. Indeed she shot and attempted to kill Andy Warhol. Andrea Dworkin and the Boston University author of "Gyn-Ecology" espouse an ideology of homicide.

"As for 'denials,' Radical feminists have long denied the extent of male casualties incurred during the European witch hunting era. They have styled that era as a holocaust against women, ignoring the fact that male 'witches' were also executed en masse.

"As for your 'classic definition of a hate group': This writer's Campaign for Radical Truth in History and Bradley Smith's CODOH site have never advocated forcible relocation of any nation or extermination of any nation. Yet both groups are listed as hate sites at HateWatch. How do you explain that?

"On the other hand, the Jewish 'settler' movement, headed by the murderer Moshe Levinger, as well as the Jewish Lubavitch Habad movement, both with their myriad websites and online offshoots, can hardly be found at HateWatch. Why the double-standard?

"You further define a hate group 'as those who deny crimes past or present.' Why have you not listed in HateWatch the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B'nai B'rith which denies the crimes of mass murder the Jewish Bolsheviks committed against Christians? Why do you not list the Israeli government in HateWatch which denies the holocaust it perpetrated against clearly-marked schools, hospitals and apartment buildings in downtown Beirut in the summer of 1982 and which recently denied the massacre Israelis committed at Qana, Lebanon on April 18, 1996?

"If denial of crimes constitutes hate, why doesn't HateWatch list Ken Burns, famed director of the PBS 'Civil War' series who denies the crimes of the Union against helpless Confederate troops imprisoned at Elmira, New York while Burns trumpeted Andersonville far and wide?

"Why doesn't HateWatch list as a hater George Bush, who denies the crimes his US Air Force perpetrated against Iraqi civilians in Baghdad, about which former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark has written a book?

"Why doesn't HateWatch label as a hater Stephen Ambrose who denies the crimes Gen. Dwight Eisenhower committed against helpless German POWs, as documented by historian James Bacque?

"I could go on. The point is, by your ludicrous standard, half the world is involved in a hate crime for questioning someone else's version of history. But of course you do not apply your criterion evenly, do you? You have not listed the ADL, the Israelis, Ken Burns, George Bush or Stephen Ambrose as haters because in fact your 'denial criterion' has nothing to do with denial of crimes against Christians or whites.

"The terms 'denier' and 'denial' in the context in which you wield them are a hysterical function of Jewish theology. You have decreed that alone among the competing schools of historiography, the Jewish concept of Shoah (or for more palatable public consumption, "Holocaust") is invested with immunity from any possibility of error or revision.

"Thus history becomes no longer secular, but mystical. In this realm there can be no ambiguity, mistakes or exaggeration. Here is a dogma which all are compelled to believe on pain of being libeled as 'haters.'

"One may deny the Jewish Communist holocaust against Russia and Eastern Europe. No problem there. One many deny the Israeli holocaust against Lebanon. That's fine. One may revise the history of Reconstruction, suggesting that we now know that Reconstruction was a happy epoch for Southern whites and nothing like the dread Yankee terror chronicled in diaries, letters and by eyewitnesses. Again, no problem.

"But when anyone, however esteemed or scholarly, however wise and wonderful, would dare to raise his pinky finger to propose a doubt about a single aspect of the Divine and Infallible Dogma of the Gassings of Jews at Auschwitz, then that person immediately becomes, in the eyes of your cult, wicked, Satanic, neo-Nazi and above all, a H-A-T-E-R.

"I am sick unto death of the pomposity that informs this hubris of yours. That you, from your celestial seat in Khazar heaven, presume to label all critics, all dissidents, all doubters as ugly and hateful just because they dare to stand up and question your theology of history, is for me the supreme irony and imposture.

"You are Jewish supremacists hiding behind a human rights facade and using that facade as a weapon in your war against the freethinkers who oppose your mind control. But your costume is threadbare and your pose is more than ever becoming transparent."

Marc Kaufman: "On the issue of Hollywood directors, I would again submit that these directors are not advocating separatism from Christians..."

HOFFMAN replies: "Whoa there! That's a new one, isn't it Mr. Kaufman? You sneaked that one through rather deftly--now advocacy of separatism is a grounds for qualifying as a hater? You mean it's ipso facto hateful to want to live with your own kind and marry your own kind? Is there 'model legislation' forthcoming from the ADL for criminalizing same-race marriages and whites who move from Detroit to Boise?

"The desire for separation is a mandate of nature and of God and to suggest that separation is hateful, is profoundly artificial and smacks of the kind of compulsory utopian artifice that Hillary Clinton and her cutthroats are seeking to enact.

"Moreover if separation is hateful, why are my files brimming with advertisements placed in Jewish publications by 'respectable, mainstream' Jewish organizations urging their co-religionists not to inter-marry with non-Jews? If separatism is wrong, on what basis does the Israeli state exist, with its 'Law of Return' only for those who have matrilineal Jewish descent?"

Marc Kaufman writes: "...Hollywood directors...are not advocating... extermination of Christians..."

HOFFMAN replies: "According to United Nations definition they most assuredly are. The U.N. defines genocide as: 'Acts Constituting Genocide Article II. In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such: ...(b) Causing serious...mental harm to members of the group...(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group...'

"I have written a booklet titled 'Hate Whitey: The Cinema of Defamation,' in which I have documented hundreds of Hollywood movies and TV programs which relentlessly promote stereotypes of Germans, Christians and white Southerners as monstrous, despicable and cretinous. These programs constitute the 'mental harm' to which the Genocide Convention referred.

They instill self-hatred, which in turn leads to a desire for self-destruction. Take a look at the birthrates of the Germans or of whites generally--they are the lowest in the world, with among the highest abortion rates. Take a look at the destructive behavior of these white groups in other realms--politics, education, business. Like a somnambulistic mass they are voting for and supporting their own extinction. People who are burdened with false guilt and told that even to fight to survive is a sin and a 'hate crime,' are going to commit collective suicide. This is what Hollywood has helped to instill."

Marc Kaufman: "...nor are they denying any crimes, present or past, committed against Christians. Thus they are not hate groups either, though some may hate Christians. I honestly don't know."

HOFFMAN replies: "Hollywood directors are denying crimes committed against Christians, as previously cited. They are attempting to undermine Christianity in every way they can. Look at the Jewish-operated Disney Company's movie 'Priest' and its TV show, 'Nothing Sacred.' Christian religious figures are the subject of relentless calumny and mockery.

"Who funded and produced shabbas-goy 'Judas' Scorcese's 'The Last Temptation of Christ,' which portrayed Jesus as a demented sex freak and coward? It was Lew Wasserman of MCA. Who made 'The Passover Plot' which claims Christ 'faked' his crucifixion? The Khazar, Zalman King did. Read my booklet.

If Jewish rabbis were on the receiving end of such calumny we wouldn't hear the end of the protests and outrage until Doomsday, but when Christians are thus vilified, it's 'business as usual.'"

Marc Kaufman writes: "...it would be helpful to define 'Zionist.' If by Zionist you mean any person that supports a state for Jewish people to live in safety, you will find very few individuals--including many Palestinians, including Yasir Arafat himself--who support... an 'anti-Zionist' point of view."

HOFFMAN replies: "Mr. Kaufman, you wear your 24 karat hypocrisy like a front tooth. The 'Human Rights' lobby calls it hate when we desire to build a state for white people to live in safely here in Idaho, but you support such a state for Jewish people.

"What is more, Arafat does not support Zionism, a murderous ideology founded by atheistic Socialists with the help of weapons and recognition from Stalin, which has resulted in mass murder of Palestinians. Jewish people do not live in safety in occupied Palestine. No one can, who visits such oppression upon an occupied people. Of course I support a safe enclave for Jewish people, but Zionism will never bring it about. Zionism thrives on reciprocal terror, bloodshed and warfare. It victimizes Jewish people as well as the Palestinians."

Marc Kaufman: "If by Zionist you mean the rabid Zionism of Meir Kahane you will find such groups profiled, as we have already noted, on Hatewatch,"

HOFFMAN replies: "And as I have noted, you only 'profiled' a laughably minuscule number of such Jewish groups after I pressured you to do so. You originally refused to do so."

Kaufman: "...and we will strive to interview a member of such a group before interviewing you."

HOFFMAN replies: " A member? Just one? Start with Moshe Levinger, the rabbi who machine guns Arab civilians for kicks and served 8 weeks in jail for it, after which the NY Times called on him to comment on 'Arab terrorism.' Then invite Rabbi Perrin on your show, the 'sage' who says that 'one million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail.' After that, feature Steve Rambam and Mike Guzofsky who say that mass murderer Baruch Goldstein was one of the 'sweetest Jews who ever lived.' Next get a Lubabvitch Hasid to expound on his founder Rabbi Shneur Zalman's core Habad dogma that all non-Jews are 'supernal refuse.'

"You will soon find by doing so, that your group's attempt to establish a proprietary relationship between hate and white people or hate and Christians, is as phony as a wooden nickel. The Ku Klux Klowns have no monopoly on hate. Hate is a component of human nature, although I know of only one group that has based a religion on it and codified it in a holy book called The Talmud."

Kaufman: "Bottom line is that you must view Zionism as a spectrum, from those who hold the Zionist view that Israel has a right to exist, but not with any occupied territories (as is the view of Peace Now and the Palestinian Authority) to those who want a Jewish state on both sides of the Jordan river (cf Kahane, early Behar movement, etc.) If you do not qualify the term "Zionist," it becomes meaningless."

HOFFMAN replies: Bottom line is, you must view white separatism as a spectrum, from those who hold the white separatist view that white people have a right to exist, but not by oppressing any other race, to those who want white supremacy (cf. Klassen, Church of the Creator; KKK etc.). If you do not qualify the term 'white separatist' it becomes meaningless."

Hoffman wrote to Hate Watch previously: "I am holding a mirror up to your dull scurrilities."

Kaufman responds: "As we are holding one right back at you. Again."--Marc S. Kaufman, Associate, HateWatch.

"I don't think so. I think you're outclassed and quite out of your depth."

Thought for the Day:

The powers that be are terrified by the internet because they are no longer in control of the information that you can receive. . . We no longer have t owait to be told what someone or some group is saying. We can now get it straight from the horse's mouth. Well, expect the world control freaks to move to crush this situation.

(From The Balance, Fall 1996)