Lenin’s Willing Industrialist: The Saga of Armand Hammer, Part 1 of 5

Oh, would some Power give us the gift
To see ourselves as others see us!
-Robert Burns

There are few things that provide quite as illuminating a contrast as comparing a man’s testament of his own life against those accounts given by others (friend and foe, alike). In that spirit, then, here is an account of the life of Armand Hammer, the Jewish businessman, oil magnate, concessionaire and art collector, who in his telling was a crusader for human rights and the scourge of cancer. The picture that emerges of Dr. Hammer in the eyes of others (and sometimes in declassified documents and secret recordings) is a quite different face than the one Hammer presented to the world. Here is Part One of a five-part series.

Lenin’s Willing Industrialist: The Saga of Armand Hammer, Part I: Roots and Russia

In public relations agent Carl Blumay’s account of his more than twenty years in service to Armand Hammer, The Dark Side of Power: The Real Armand Hammer, he  relates how carefully Hammer crafted his “disarming, grandfatherly public persona” (Blumay 363) and how the man behind the meteoric rise of Occidental Petroleum never missed an opportunity to disprove the darker rumors surrounding his empire. During his career at Occidental, Blumay himself had become a prop in this campaign, conscripted against his will at times. When, for instance, word of “Occidental’s revolving door” (363) hire-and-fire policy was making the rounds, Dr. Hammer made a constant routine of asking the PR man in public how long he had been working with Hammer. He did this to present an image to the world of “the eighty-one-year-old paterfamilias of one of the world’s great multinational corporations standing side-by-side with his devoted sixty-eight-year-old retainer of a quarter century” (Ibid.). Hammer performed this routine using Blumay so frequently that it eventually approached the level of vaudeville with Blumay gritting his teeth in a forced smile while replying with the requisite “twenty-five years” to the day’s audience, whether it was at a board meeting, fundraiser, or an art gallery.

One would be hard-pressed to find a more auto-hagiographic tale than the one related in Steve Weinberg’s Hammer: The Armand Hammer Story, which “told the entertaining story of a saintly but shrewd man whose life consisted of one triumph after another” (Blumay 437). The book’s coauthor put it mildly when he said that “a lot of sanitizing went on” (Ibid.) in the writing. He was being a bit more candid when he related that “[Hammer’s] character was my creation in a fictional enterprise.” Although the author was compensated to the tune of $500,000 plus another roughly $72,000 in expenses for casting his quarry in a nigh-on saintly light, he still walked away from the project feeling as if he had “flogged every atom of my soul.”

The steps that Armand Hammer took to exaggerate (or even invent) certain aspects of his business abroad (especially in Russia) while downplaying others, were sometimes undercut by his vanity and paranoia.

Hammer’s Nixonian obsession with recording and espionage, “what he called James Bond stuff” (Edward J. Epstein, Dossier: The Secret History of Armand Hammer, 18), involved using moles, spies, and hidden surveillance techniques he’d picked up during his extensive stays in the Soviet Union to gain intelligence and leverage on others. “Hammer found this secret taping system especially useful for recording sensitive events, such as the disbursement of bribes to which he did not want even his confidential secretaries to be privy” (Ibid.). One of Hammer’s mistakes in this enterprise was to enlist his son Julian in the cloak-and-dagger. Julian Hammer was a quintessential case of affluenza, a princeling who seemed to be above the law. Armand Hammer’s son had been arrested for shooting and killing his friend at the age of 24. Numerous other violent and very public outbursts involving guns and drugs followed, but his police record eventually disappeared from the county files. (According to Armand Hammer, this was none of his doing and was probably attributable to poor clerical competency among California public sector employees.)

The main problem with Hammer’s bugging and surveillance operation, though, was not familial nepotism, but that he was unknowingly collecting a trove of evidence against himself that could be potentially damning one day, assuming it fell into the hands of a journalist who wasn’t a friend or on his payroll. Hammer counted the Sulzberger’s New York Times among his allies going back at least as far as when The Times’ notorious Walter Duranty (who won a Pulitzer for his work in covering up the Holodomor) helped him craft his first autobiography, The Quest of the Romanoff Treasure. This tight relationship with the Times might help explain why he initially let the Gray Lady’s own Edward J. Epstein into his orbit. The journalist who eventually defected from the standard effusive and glowing picture of Dr. Armand Hammer was able to gather enough information to write The Secret History of Armand Hammer, which forms a perfect tonic to the poisonous myths surrounding one of the most consummate sociopaths of the modern era. Carl Blumay claims that Epstein would have never gotten close to Armand Hammer during his tenure working PR for him. But Armand’s obsession with “the notion of using his friendship with Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger” (Blumay 392), along with an over-weaning desire for fame and attention, caused him to lower his guard. It also led to the first public revelations regarding just what Armand Hammer had been up to in Russia, and on behalf of the Communists in America.


To understand Armand Hammer, it is necessary to first know something about his father, Julius Hammer. Julius Hammer was a Jewish immigrant from Russia who came to New York ostensibly to practice medicine and thrive as a small businessman. He founded a pharmaceutical supplies concern called Allied Drug and Chemical Corporation. This company was created in “a secret partnership with the Bolshevik government” (Blumay 40). State Department files claim Armand’s father was “one of the first to establish one of the ‘front’ corporations and purchasing agencies” that were controlled by “Soviet-Jewish elements under the direction of the Soviet Government of Russia” (41).

The depth of Julius Hammer’s ideological zealotry is hardly disputed, even by Armand Hammer’s own account (though he soft-pedaled his father’s fanaticism as misguided, starry-eyed idealism – a standard (and largely false) account of Jewish involvement in Communism). Victor Hammer, Armand’s brother, said he got his name because it meant “victory over capitalism” (Blumay 38). Armand Hammer would sometimes claim his father named him after Armand Duval, a character in La Dame aux Camélias by Alexandre Dumas, fils, but later in life Hammer would admit that he was named in honor of the arm-and-hammer symbol of the Socialist Labor Party. “Decades later, Armand would use the arm-and-hammer-insignia as the flag on his yacht” (Epstein 35).

A Scotland Yard report confirmed the elder Hammer’s unalloyed ardor for Communism, and also that he worked in tandem with Ludwig Martens (a Russian-born communist appointed ambassador to the United States by Vladimir Lenin) to help grow the “Communist Party of the United States in America” (Blumay 36), especially in New York, alongside Jewish-American economist Isaac Hourwich.

Edward Epstein corroborates this report from across the pond, and also shows that Julius Hammer’s circle of fellow-travelers included not only intellectuals, but men of action, revolutionaries such as Boris Reinstein “who had been expelled first from Russia and then Germany, Switzerland, and France for his radical activities” (Epstein 34). Reinstein had done two years in prison for his involvement in a terrorist bombing, as well. He and Julius Hammer had both come “from Jewish ghettos in the same area of southern Russia” (34).

In later life Armand Hammer would try to downplay his father’s Jewish identity (and his own) to grease the wheels of his oil concessions in the Middle East, since Israel was not exactly enjoying popularity among the various pan-Arab revolutionaries when he made his successful wildcat play for Libya. Armand would even ridiculously claim that he and his family were Unitarians, but the record shows that Julius Hammer was a strongly-identified Jew. Like many Jews though, he yearned to have it both ways, to reap the benefits of assimilation while gaming the nepotistic perks that come with what John Derbyshire calls “absimilation” (sic). Although this attitude displayed by Julius Hammer (and inherited by his sons) may seem schizophrenic on the surface, it reveals itself as simply expedient when studied closer: When being Jewish proved an impediment to making money, the Hammers downplayed being Jewish. In those circumstances when it was advantageous to be Jewish, no such pains were taken.

Armand Hammer’s brother Victor claimed in his talks with Carl Blumay that his father was “violently anti-Semitic” (38),  but to say that he was extremely cautious would be more accurate. Armand Hammer was given toward a tendency to invoke the specter of pogroms at a moment’s notice in his memoirs, but according to Victor Hammer “Pop’s parents were merchants who prospered under the Czar and denied being Jewish” (Ibid.). Dr. Julius Hammer’s obscurantism extended to his medical practice (more on that later), with Victor claiming that “every time he delivered a baby, if Jewish parents gave their children what he considered a Jewish-sounding first name, he changed the name on the birth certificate.”

Screenwriter Michael Herr (whose credits include Full Metal Jacket and Apocalypse Now) mentions in his book on Stanley Kubrick that Jews can comfortably be themselves (that is Jewish) only in the presence of other Jews. The phenomenon is repeatedly apparent in the lives of both Armand Hammer and his supposedly “violently anti-Semitic” father.  Epstein describes this cultural milieu in which the younger Hammers came of age, in New York neighborhoods “strictly divided between Jewish and Irish immigrants” (34):

The burning issue was assimilation: should Jews remain within their own culture and seek a Judaic form of socialism, or should they seek a nonsectarian form? The Jewish radicals subscribed to the latter position. They passionately rejected ghettoization. In doing so, as social critic Irving Howe points out, “the Jewish radicals … hoped to move from the yeshiva to modern culture, from shtetl to urban sophistication, from blessing the Sabbath wine to declaring the strategy of international revolution. They yearned to bleach away their past and become men without, or above, a country” (34–35)

Despite such pronouncements, it was very typical for Jewish radicals to retain a strong Jewish identity, quite often implicitly and involving a great deal of self-deception.

That his father subscribed to radical, violent political revolution does not necessarily imply that Armand Hammer was foreordained to become a Communist, a Communist sympathizer, or a subversive agent of some kind. But it seems that the apple did not fall far from the tree. Despite enjoying all the advantages of American capitalism while incurring none of the costs of Communist revolution, Armand remained Red at heart. These paradoxes made life quite hard for PR man Carl Blumay since he was charged with making sure that allegations against Armand Hammer rarely made it to intelligence agency archives, that nothing unsavory would hinder Hammer’s position in politics or business, or be leaked to the press where the charges could hurt Hammer’s reputation with the public. When Carl Blumay was acting as aide-de-camp to Armand Hammer against one such round of allegations (this time from a member of the Catholic War Veterans), he took the complaint to Armand’s brother Victor and asked him “how to temper his brother’s Soviet ardor” (Blumay 36). Victor’s response was to laugh and to say, “Armand has always looked to the Kremlin with the same kind of reverential regard a deeply devoted Moslem pays to Mecca” (Ibid.).

Revolution (first in Russia and then in Libya) was good to Armand Hammer. Revolution was a kind of religion for him. And even better, revolution made him rich.

When Armand Hammer was pressed regarding his loyalties or his ideology, his answer rarely wavered. In Hammer, he says “I always … tell the Russians that I am a capitalist, that I believe our system is better than theirs and that I want us to coexist peacefully” (159). The pretext of peace glosses much of Armand Hammer’s description of his own philosophy. A claim to be helping the effort toward détente, a thawing of relations between East and West during the Cold War, and a desire to avert nuclear war (for the sake of future generations, of course) allowed him to increase his fortune as well as the influence of Communism, all while shifting attention away from his activities or hiding his true intent behind a veil of philanthropy.

As a result, his jaunts in his Gulfstream jet, OXY 1, to visit characters like genocidal dictator Nicolae Ceaușescu were written off as attempts to find some common ground between two opposing political systems. Incidentally, before Ceausescu was found guilty of genocide and executed, Hammer related to Carl Blumay that the General Secretary of the Romanian Communist Party was his “best friend” (251), not to mention “a great leader, a fine, warmhearted man, and a humanitarian who loves his people and has compassion for them” (Ibid.). The throwaway addendum that “he’s so easy to do business with” gets a little closer to the truth of why Hammer (as usual) was willing to look the other way to enrich himself while people were dying.

A memorandum from assistant director of domestic intelligence, William Sullivan, to J. Edgar Hoover classified “Hammer [as] a type who would do business with the devil if there was a profit in it” (Epstein 211). This was only slight hyperbole.


Although intelligence gathering had begun on the Communist activities of the Hammers since at least as early as 1921 (under the aegis of a young Justice Department assistant named J. Edgar Hoover), including “a tip from an informant alleging that Hammer was a courier for the newly-organized Communist International” (Epstein 22), it wouldn’t be the political activities of the Russian-Jewish émigré and his son that first exposed them to the light of the law. Rather it was the gross medical malfeasance of Dr. Julius Hammer and his son Armand, then still in medical school:

A woman had died after undergoing an abortion at the clinic at Hammer’s house. The dead woman was Marie Oganesoff, the 33-year-old wife of a Russian diplomat who had come to America from the Czarist regime. According to the testimony of her chauffeur, she had gone to the Hammer house for the abortion on July 5 and collapsed when she returned home later that day. … When questioned by prosecutors, Julius Hammer did not deny that an abortion had been performed, but he claimed that it was medically justified, and that he, as her doctor, had the right to make such a decision. Nevertheless, he was indicted (Epstein 42).

Julius Hammer had had earlier close calls with the law, having been surveilled in the belief that he may have been the one supplying material for bombs given to subversives and of furnishing dynamite to the radical Boris Reinstein. This suspicion was especially harbored by the NYC Red Squad formed initially “to counter a spate of anarchist bombings in Manhattan” (Epstein 36) and alluded to in an interview Victor Hammer gave to Carl Blumay, in which he admitted “Pop even gave dynamite to a young radical” (Blumay 39). Considering that Julius Hammer was a doctor involved in the pharmaceutical supply business, it would have been easy for him to amass precursors required to make explosives without arousing suspicion, although at this remove it is hard to say which violent crimes he either did or did not help facilitate.

But the law eventually caught up with him anyway.

On June 26, 1920, “the jury found Julius Hammer guilty of first-degree manslaughter. The judge then pronounced his sentence: three and one half to twelve years of hard labor at Sing-Sing” (Epstein 42).

The most provocative aspect of this whole morbid affair was that journalist Edward J. Epstein claims Armand Hammer knew that he had let his father go to prison as an innocent man (or at least one who wasn’t guilty of this specific crime in question):

He would keep his knowledge a secret for three decades. Then, afraid that he was dying, he explained to his longtime mistress that it was he, not his father, who had performed the illegal abortion in 1919. He was then only a first-year medical student, unlicensed to practice medicine, and would certainly have gone to prison if his father had not stepped in to take the blame. Ordinarily, doctors in New York State were permitted leeway in performing such abortions and were rarely prosecuted (46).

As with so many other aspects of Armand Hammer’s life (especially suspected crimes) there is an aura of mystery that remains, even after the files from the collapsed Soviet Union have been disgorged to prove Hammer’s guilt in other realms. Adding ‘back-alley abortionist’ and ‘manslaughter’ to his curriculum vitae would certainly run counter to the image Hammer yearned to project of himself, but it certainly rings truer than the implausible obstetrical escapades he describes in his autobiography. If Armand Hammer would have the reader believe that he “missed the lecture on breech deliveries” (Hammer 83) at Columbia College but was somehow able to skim through Cragin’s Obstetrics in the bathroom of an apartment, “memorize the illustrations on technique” (84) and then perform an emergency cesarean section on an imperiled woman giving birth, then one could be forgiven for thinking he was capable of killing a woman in a botched curetting, letting his father take the blame, and continuing on undeterred in his quest for money and power.

With the old radical warhorse Julius Hammer temporarily sidelined by his prison stint, his sons were ready to take up the mantle of world revolution. Armand was the older, more calculating, and ambitious of the two brothers, and it was while acting in his capacity as go-between for his father in prison and the Comintern on the outside that Armand Hammer would first execute his father’s wishes and then start to fulfill his own much grander schemes for power at any cost. Armand Hammer was about to become one of the most influential players on the global scene and would play no small part in shaping the twentieth century, mostly for the worse.

Go to Part 2.

Works Cited

Blumay, Carl. The Dark Side of Power: The Real Armand Hammer. Simon & Schuster, 1992

Epstein, Edward J. Dossier: The Secret History of Armand Hammer. Random House, 1996.

Hammer, Armand and Neil Lydon. Hammer: The Armand Hammer Story. Perigee Trade, 1988.

41 replies
  1. Charles Frey
    Charles Frey says:

    For once the advantageous side of a lawyer’s training; if I recall your profession correctly.

    ” Nothing but the facts mam ” terseness of Sergeant Joe Friday, delivered with a fittingly harsh choice of words, in staccato.

    01 I well remember the baking-soda, used by housewives to deodorize their fridges. ARM AND HAMMER, with your described crest.

    02 Said NYPD BOMB SQUAD was also used at that time to surveille the thousands of Jews, primarily from the NE US states, who, though mostly impecunious at that time, travelled to St. Petersburg/Petrograd to bolster the Bolshevik revolution: artificially magnifying its popular ” Russian ” support.

    03 A long-time resident British agent, mandated to report on the upcoming revolution wrote to his Foreign Office of the thousands of new faces on the streets, comparatively well-attired in Western clothes and supplied with ample funds, sporting red carnations in their lapels. And of their nights out.

    04 They had travelled from primarily NY, via Chicago, Winnipeg, Vancouver, Yokohama, Vladivostok and Moscow to St. Petersburg/Petrograd.

    05 The Bomb Squad, prior to the FBI, surveilled them as far as Chicago, from where their regular itinerary took them to Winnipeg.

    [ The erstwhile domicile and ‘ traditional business ‘ location of Samuel, father of Edgar Bronfman [ WJC ] money lender, chief bootlegger into the US during Prohibition and proprietor of several Hotels with attached beer halls and whorehouses: who may well have offered Hotel and attendant Services pro-bono to these mainly male ” fellow travelers ” ] .

    06 From Winnipeg the then Dominion Police took over surveillance to Vancouver, with regular reports to Ottawa.

    07 In Vancouver the Harbour Master took charge with a bolstered support staff, including Police, as well reporting to Ottawa.

    08 This Harbour Master wrote a report to Ottawa, detailing a conversation with a returning Captain of the Pacific Empress [ ? ]. These steerage passengers had forced their way from the lower decks into the less occupied second and first class, creating such chaos that he felt obliged to issue on-board weapons to his crew.

    [ Not quite the way I observed them as tourists in Cairo and innumerable other places, but close enough for a comparison ].

    Again, many thanks for this early, virtual Christmas present, as well as for those four yet to follow.

    You picked on the right pig. There are several more of this caliber who need your future attention and non-kosher dissection.

    • Charles Frey
      Charles Frey says:


      • Charles Frey
        Charles Frey says:

        Dear silly me, misquoting Friday. ME CULPA-ME CULPA-MEA CULPA. And here I was mistakenly thinking, that bringing up the fact that a considerable proportion of those who actually revolted in Petrograd were paid-for imports, was my central point.

        I should have left it to you to tell the entire story instead of botching it so badly; even using that other contraction of madam.

      • enochered
        enochered says:

        I thought it was Stan Freberg who said that.
        When I was a little kid, I can remember listening to News reports, on the wireless, about’The man the Russians could trust, Armand Hammer’. Funny how you never forget a name like that.I suppose he was dealing in Russian oil and apparently he was, at the time, the only Westerner doing business in Russia.. They never mentioned the fact that he was a Jew of course nor that he was in reality looking after Baron Rothschild’s investments. Which were dutifully handed over in 1990, to the man who had been secretly financing Russia ever since the coup d’etat.

        • Charles Frey
          Charles Frey says:

          There also was the Canadian-American millionaire industrialist, Cyrus S. Eaton, born in Pugwash, Nova Scotia, after which town the Pugwash Conferences were named.

          This fine fellow promoted greater understanding with the Soviet Union, for which he was awarded the Lenin Peace Prize.

          When WW II ended there were several slow US freighters still en route, carrying medical supplies AND equipment which routinely docked at Bremerhaven. Cessation of hostilities reduced this need by 80-90 %.

          Eaton bought this ” surplus ” for pennies on the dollar and sold it directly to the SU through his personal friend Stalin, whom he flew in to visit, in his private plane, the only such aircraft permitted to enter Soviet air-space.

          Who could tell whether the US suppliers were {{{ co-operating}}} with Eaton, in their interest and that of the SU, well after their demand all but dried up, emptying their warehouses, even finishing off their manufacturer-held internal supplies.

          Allegiance to the Soviets; philanthropy; sexual aberrations; lies by the trainload; ostentatious lifestyles : all FUNDED BY THE THEN HOLDERS OF ” LIBERTY ” BONDS. And still today and into tomorrow.

          This shit died at 97. Close to the age attained by Armand Hammer.

    • Curmudgeon
      Curmudgeon says:

      Most of the lawyers I know, consider “facts” as “facts” only when they fall into the context of the picture they paint. I believe this is the second thing learned in law school, right after maximizing billable hours.

      • Pierre de Craon
        Pierre de Craon says:

        Dear Curmudgeon,

        When my closest friend was getting his JD at Yale in the mid-seventies, he told me that the standard term for the category of facts you refer to was “bad facts.”

        An aside: This term was, my friend said, the third thing he learned, not the second. The second was this: never tell any prof that you’ve found an error or even a disputable point in a published work written by him or even by any of your other law profs. One of my friend’s fellow students very respectfully did the latter—i.e., raised a question in private conversation about Prof A’s published conclusion with Prof B—and was ratted out. He survived to tell the tale but was made to feel heat for an entire semester.

      • Charles Frey
        Charles Frey says:

        All of the lawyers; not most: and you got that sequence right.

        A case is scheduled before the Supreme Court of Canada, to overturn the Superior Court of Ontario decision, the appellate Divisional Court upheld decision and the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld decision to ‘ certify ‘ [ permit ] a class action suit.

        An ordinary single mother of two, from Brookl”i”n, [ north of Whitby ], had signed the Law Society-prescribed retainer agreement [ objectives and attendant fees ] with Neinstein & Associates; Personal Injury Lawyers. Father Gary, two sons, six associate lawyers and a staff of ca, 60; domiciled at probably Canada’s highest rent building, on the NW corner of Bay at Bloor.

        This little helpless woman got ca. 12,000 out of a 150,000 insurance settlement. She objected: now, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, YES ! 6,000 OTHER SIMILARLY CHEATED CLIENTS HAVE JOINED HER IN THE ABOVE CLASS ACTION SUIT. [ In total I spoke and emailed with lawyer PW, having carriage of that matter, 6 times, for reasons which will not escape you ].

        I had my own, self-represented suit against that firm, seeking intervener status, to bring to the attention of the courts in their N disbarment-reinstatement decisions and appeals, the fact that N had solicited his biker-client TT and friend MT to ” murder his Senior Legal Secretary MR; to seriously harm her [ 5 year-old ] son and to lay a beating on her sister K “, a junior secretary of said firm.

        Why ? Because N had impregnated MR, ordered her abortion, failing which ” she would never work as a legal secretary again “. MR sued prior Neinstein & Glueckstein for 420,000, reported N to the Law Society and filed a complaint with Ontario’s Human Rights Commission. Sufficient reason for murder; don’t you agree ?

        Assessment Officer Thomas, mediating the 196,300 N bill to murder-solicited TT, reduced it to 12,000. Thomas also threw out a bill by N, charging his client TT for three hours, while having sex with his sister CT, ” for taking extra care for her brother “, at the Park Plaza, at Avenue Rd. and Bloor.

        I had to SCAN into my record, because of its sheer incredibility, a statement by the Assessment Officer Thomas, citing N., on transcript, as having stated during the assessment: ” THEY [ THE LAW SOCIETY – DURING A MEDIATION ] WANTED TO GET THIS THING OVER WITH SO I ALLOWED MY CLIENT TO DRINK !!! ” N, LACKING A PRESCRIPTION, ALSO SENT OUT FOR PERCODAN, WHICH WAS MIXED WITH ALCOHOL FROM THE MEDIATING LAWYER FIRM’S BAR FROM 16:30 TO 19:30.




        By this time I probably stretched or destroyed my credibility.
        I ask you to google Charles U. Frey and you will get Frey v Law Society of Upper Canada and Gary Neinstein. 2006.

        Put on some coffee first and particularly find a new spring-loaded clothes pin to close off your nostrils before you delve into the center of the iceberg. Enjoy !

        • Charles Frey
          Charles Frey says:

          Curmudgeon, I haven’t looked at it for years on google. It’s the longer of the two quoted posts with my name and address, with “beverley”, as in McLaughlin, Chief Justice, in the http.

          The other one is ‘just’ about our Ontario lawyers having stolen a mere 1.3 [ ?] Billion from the public through admitted and LS reported-on mortgage frauds; insured by you and me.

          It took two weeks to write the 43-pager: looking at every comma from 360 degrees, from the perspective of slander/defamation. PROOVABLE, DOCUMENTED FACTS, CHRONOLOGICAL CAUSE AND EFFECT, THROUGH ” NECESSARY INFERENCE “, IF NEEDED.


          I assume it is available on the US Google: can’t access it from outside of US to check. Perhaps someone will be kind enough to tell me.

  2. Arch Stanton
    Arch Stanton says:

    Every time I read a new account of a Jew, it is worse than the last. Without any shred of doubt, Jews are the sickest, most insane race of psychopathic mass murderers on the planet. Yet no one notices.

    Last night I was reading the account of Moses’ forty years wandering in the desert (yeah right). During the last six months of their desert sojourn, Jews, at the behest of a god that took numerous census’ to determine how many soldiers he had available, commit mass murder after mass murder against the various indigenous people along with the utter destruction of fifteen cities!

    If one desires to know how sick Jews really are read their goddamned un-holy book. This is quite literal as YHVH repeatedly damned and then mass murdered the Israelites. At one point YHVH has the earth open up and swallow them whole into Sheol without so much as a burp. Mass murders, mass murdered by a mass murdering god. And to think this god-awful book is venerated by idiot Christians.

    The Jew’s psychopathic insanity is all there in the stories and they have obviously not changed one whit. Yet the stupid, gullible Christians cannot see their Jew god’s handwriting writ large upon the wall of their goy consciousness.

    • Theodora
      Theodora says:

      Don´t confuse Christians with protestants !! Christians follow the New Testament!! It is Protestantism that returned to the Old Book. It´s a shame because the OT was perverted by the synagogue of satan and was therefore replaced with the NT through Christ.

      But then…, Protestantism is Judaism light or Talmudism for goyim. The Reformation was a Jewish coup on Catholic Europe – with the help of a bribed royalty and aristocracy !!

      Protestants drifted even so far away from Christianity that it adopted circumcision! What a shame!!

      And don´t start with ´the Catholic Church is corrupt as well´. That´s what happened to the Church by the communists – and we know who they are. Bella Dodd told us about this latest infiltration.

      Brother Joseph Natale O.S.B., Founder of Most Holy Family Monastery, was present at one of Dr. Bella Dodd’s lectures in the early 1950’s.
      He relates:
      “I listened to that woman for four hours and -she had my hair standing on end. Everything she said has been fulfilled to the letter. You would think she was the world’s greatest prophet, but she was no prophet. She was merely exposing the step-by-step battle plan of Communist subversion of the Catholic Church.”
      “She explained that of all the world’s religions, the Catholic Church was the only one feared by the Communists, for it was its only effective opponent. Back then [early 1950’s], she said: “Right now they are in the highest places in the Church.”

      “They are working to bring about change in order that the Catholic Church would not be effective against Communism . . . that these changes would be so drastic that “you will not recognize the Catholic Church.”

      “The whole idea was to destroy, not the institution of the Church, but rather the Faith of the people, and even use the institution of the Church, if possible, to destroy the Faith through the promotion of a pseudo-religion — something that resembled Catholicism but was not the real thing.”

      “This would be necessary in order to shame Church leaders into an “openness to the world”, and to a more flexible attitude toward all religions and philosophies. The Communists would then exploit this openness in order to undermine the Church.”

      • Helen
        Helen says:

        Many Latin American countries went into debt shoring up their military to fight Marxist insurgencies. Loans at 18%.

      • Arch Stanton
        Arch Stanton says:

        I am not confused, Christians are confused by their ignorance of the Jew’s religion, laws, customs and culture. The Bible is not about “God”, but about “YHVH’s” law.

        The word “Torah” literally translates as both “law” and “instruction.” Therefore, the Torah is a book of legal instruction as opposed to a “history book.” The metaphorical stories of the Torah set the legal precedence for the Temple priest’s 613 sacrificial laws. These 613 laws, along with the stories are what established the (((Jewish))) concept of sin.

        Paul was an opportunist who saw a chance to replace the Temple’s crumbling sacrificial system by replacing the Temple priest’s YHVH with his new god Jesus, who he claimed had washed away the non-existent sins of the “gentiles” as well as those of the Jew.

        To elaborate on the gentile’s role in the story, I quote the words of Jesus himself:

        “These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. – Matthew 10:5

        “And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Matthew 15:22

        Note Jesus’ refusal to speak to the Canaanite woman! How can such a rebuke be ignored? Could this provide a clue as to how Jesus felt about gentiles? “The lost sheep of Israel” is an unmistakably clear metaphorical reference to Temple followers. So what part of Jesus’ command, “Go not into the way of the Gentiles”, did Saul/Paul fail to understand?

        According to Jewish law and tradition, gentiles are not humans, but “beasts” made by god in human form to serve the Jew. To this day, Jews identify non-Jews with the term “goyim” a word literally translated as “cattle”. Can “cattle” sin?

        Jesus’ ministry concerned Temple Jews whose “sin” was based on specific legal matters ostensibly written in stone. It was this sin that Jesus finally absolved, by offering himself as the Passover’s sacrificial Paschal lamb. It was this sin, and only this sin, that was “washed away” by his blood.

        The story of Jesus is all about first century Temple Jews and has nothing to do with anyone outside the Temple’s sacrificial system. How many Christians ever observed, or were subjected to, any of the 613 laws that delineated the only sins Jesus washed away with his own sacrificial blood? The story of Christianity merely another account in a long list of how the gullible goyim have been duped by the clever Jew.

        Click on my name to view the first four chapters of a book I wrote concerning the story of Jesus.

    • T. J.
      T. J. says:

      I continue to reject the “White weakness” hypotheses.

      The strong and smart have also been thought-controlled. I have been a radical free-thinker since the sixties- eyes wide open. But they might as well have been shut. . .the turning point was in 2003. . .SOLELY due to gaining information. My intelligence up to that year had been of no avail- it was knowledge, and more knowledge, that made the breakthrough.

      I had read The Hoax of The Twentieth Century [Arthur Butz] long before. It just was not enough.

        • Pierre de Craon
          Pierre de Craon says:

          Trenchant: I’m in the same boat with you and T. J. on this. To my shame, I’ve never read Butz, but in the early nineties I stumbled upon some stuff attributed to Rassinier (I can’t recall precisely how any longer, but it was pre-Internet). That was my intro to the dimensions of the Great Fraud, but the Internet provided the real intellectual and moral clinchers: Bradley Smith (RIP) and CODOH.

          Anent the bigger picture of Jewish hatred for and intellectual, moral, cultural, and religious warfare upon the West, the ultimate eye-openers were the writings of Pius X and Kevin MacDonald. Thanks to the latter, I began taking the former far more at his word than I ever had before.

          Put otherwise, I had to get to just about fifty before I was able to come to grips with the fear and shame of being someone who didn’t reflexively regard Tacitus, John Chrysostom, Aquinas, Beethoven, Wagner, Tom Eliot, and several hundred other smart, observant guys as cranks or far worse for their observations on Jews and Jews’ characteristic behavior.

          • Trenchant
            Trenchant says:

            Interesting. Unlike T.J., Butz’ classic was pivotal to my understanding. Once I’d been convinced by its arguments, I was forced to reflect on the power and effort that needed to be expended to keep the Official Version afloat. I hold the revisionists (and public figures like Bishop Williamson who spread their truth) in the highest esteem. The punishment meted out to them is very sobering, given current political trends.

            To this site and similar I owe a debt of gratitude. I grew up among Jews and had encountered many of the less attractive stereotypical characteristics, but was totally unaware of the larger social and historical, not to mention biological, framework underpinning their behavior.

      • Charles Frey
        Charles Frey says:

        Butz wrote that in 76. Until 03 [ Iraq ? ] is a total of 27 years. Sufficient for anyone to turn from intelligent to smart.

        • T. J.
          T. J. says:

          Got to get even, huh. Roll out the usual ego defense and waste time.

          I was trying to enlighten anyone- not just you- about the world famous words of Jack Webb.

          When I feel like lashing out I leave the computer for a couple of hours.

          Some basic info- postings reveal more about the poster than anyone else.

          • Trenchant
            Trenchant says:

            I’m Spartacus, too. If I hadn’t had someone I respected point me in Butz’ direction, I’d not have confronted the JQ at all.

          • Charles Frey
            Charles Frey says:

            44 years ago Solzhenitsyn , rightfully celebrated in these pages at length, published his Gulag Archipelago.

            There isn’t a town in America small enough not to have at least a part-time Library, usually with an inter-library loan agreement, reaching into the Library of Congress itself. Internet or no internet. In 73 the Gulag paperback went for 3 and change.

            Those are the simple facts: which is not the same as to expect everyone to come out of the starting gate simultaneously; especially given their difference in age.

            It’s the finish line that counts and I readily agree with the three others above, that TOO is indispensable.

      • JW
        JW says:

        Find Douglas Reed’s “The Controversy of Zion” for a dip into the deep waters of Modern Jewish Thought and it’s roots in the OT. It will reinforce everything said in this thread.

        • T
          T says:

          I can well remember upon Solzhenitsyn’s death a few years ago the BBC journalists disgracing themselves by condemning the man and his life work when announcing the fact to the world. This was much in contrast to the positive coverage by that same media he had experienced during the ‘Cold War’ era, or, was that earlier reporting on the corporate media’s part simply an exercise in making the whole ‘East-West’ struggle look real to a believing West at the time?

          Alexander Solzhenitsyn actually cared about his people, the Russian people, and he did so without being hateful towards others from what I saw. And that’s the way to go about it.

          In the inverted and backward world of multi-culturalism, really and truly caring about people, any people, is what they call hate.

          • Charles Frey
            Charles Frey says:

            When the previously, Soviet-assessed and suppressed dissident managed to smuggle his manuscripts to England, he was jubilantly feted.

            After he got them published he was demeaned to the extreme, because of their realistic content.

            Too bad tarring and feathering of the BBC and the remainder of the world media is no longer in style.

            Irving rightfully criticized historians who wrote a new book based on ten previous others instead of relying on primary sources, as he did.

            Solzhenitsyn was the ultimate primary source and balanced authority of all times. When I recall all the trash I was obliged to swallow and regurgitate, I still feel like asking the UNC graduate department for a full refund. 50 years later.

  3. Ger Tzedek
    Ger Tzedek says:

    I have seen on YouTube a Canadian psychologist, Jordan Peterson. He plainly expresses lip-service sympathy for Jews, but otherwise seems aware of everything. I realized so from his words.
    “(((They))) know exactly what they are doing.”
    “The invention of the day-after pill has had more impact than hydrogen bomb. That might do us in.”
    “Everything good about Freud has been incorporated into our culture.” This is the preface to trashing Freud big-time.

    Now I think that from Marx to this day, everything Jews have written has been wired towards exterminating Whites.

    • T
      T says:

      Yes, Alexander Solzhenitsyn was a brilliant man and a great credit to the Russian people. He quickly saw through the smoke and clutter that surrounds much of this modern world and only a little after four years of his arrest and deportation from the Soviet Union spoke the below in his June 3, 1978 commencement address to the graduating class of Harvard University. Harvard is of course located in a primary center of the ideology of multiculturalism within the United States, Massachusetts, and, integral to that ideology is its advocacy of the ‘convergance’ of a senior Capitalism with a junior Marxism.

      As for your comments Mr Frey regarding the utilisation of primary source materials to determine what actually happened historically I am entirely in agreement with you and am a big proponent of the same.

      A World Split Apart

      ‘Anguish about our divided world gave birth to the theory of convergence between leading Western countries and the Soviet Union. It is a soothing theory which overlooks the fact that these worlds are not at all developing into similarity; neither one can be transformed into the other without the use of violence. Besides, convergence inevitably means acceptance of the other side’s defects, too, and this is hardly desirable.’


      ‘Relations with the former colonial world now have turned into their opposite and the Western world often goes to extremes of obsequiousness, but it is difficult yet to estimate the total size of the bill which former colonial countries will present to the West, and it is difficult to predict whether the surrender not only of its last colonies, but of everything it owns will be sufficient for the West to foot the bill.’


      • Charles Frey
        Charles Frey says:

        T, in a mere 12 lines cited by you, he sums up our entire present conundrum. I my opinion also one of the greatest philosophers; certainly greater than all those Jewish Savant Rabbis and their easily and best forgotten horseshit.

  4. JM
    JM says:

    Not on the main theme of the most interesting article, but on these claims:
    “…characters like genocidal dictator Nicolae Ceaușescu were written off as attempts to find some common ground between two opposing political systems. Incidentally, before Ceausescu was found guilty of genocide and executed…”

    In opposition to this I quote a cross referenced (checkable) Wikipedia source:
    “Considered by the BBC a kangaroo court or a show trial, the main charge was genocide—namely, murdering “over 60,000 people” during the revolution in Timișoara.[1] Other sources said the death toll is 689 or hundreds of people.[2][3][4] Nevertheless, the charges did not affect the trial, as the verdict had been already decided before the Tribunal had been created…”

    Even today most Romanians don’t know who was behind this spontaneous revolution that brought in Neo-Liberalism and its grand sell-out of national assets. Many see it as just another version of the Soros inspired Velvet Revolutions.

  5. ariadnatheo
    ariadnatheo says:

    The explanation of Hammer’s dealing with Romania’s dictator (“was willing to look the other way to enrich himself while people were dying”) is incomplete and somewhat inaccurate.
    1. “people dying” is always a totally irrelevant side effect to the likes of Hammer, so it is not even worth mentioning as a possible consideration. The “people” in question were non-Jews.
    2. “enriching himself” was only a partial motivation.
    Profit making is of course always a/the goal but it never runs athwart of larger tribal interests and it certainly did not do so in the case of Hammer’s deals with Ceausescu. They were in fact in sync with the US suddenly packaging the Romanian dictator in the 70s as the “maverick” of the Eastern bloc, supposedly defying the Soviet Union, practically an enlightened man one could do business with. Ceausescu’s “defiance” only amounted to his distancing himself from Hrushchev’s “revisionism” and increasing Romania’s stalinization at a time when the Soviet Union was acknowledging “past mistakes.” None of this determined the sudden embrace of Ceausescu by the US, however; rather, it was Ceausescu’s support of Israel and agreeing to sell to Israel (for $2,000 per capita) all the Romanian Jews yearning for “repatriation” to the Holy Land, at a time when the Soviet Union was clamping down on “refuseniks.”
    The Jewish “art of the deal” practiced by the Jewish tycoons in the “diaspora” consists in successfully marrying the aiding and abetting of Israel’s goals with reaping personal gain.

    • JM
      JM says:

      “…None of this determined the sudden embrace of Ceausescu by the US, however; rather, it was Ceausescu’s support of Israel and agreeing to sell to Israel (for $2,000 per capita) all the Romanian Jews yearning for “repatriation” to the Holy Land, at a time when the Soviet Union was clamping down on “refuseniks.””

      A policy begun in earnest years’ before under Ana Pauker:
      “Born…in a Jewish Orthodox family, Hannah Robinsohn, as she went by in those days, grew up in a traditional Ashkenazi household. With her grandfather, a rabbi, and her father the haham/shohet of the village it is obvious how she probably received a fairly standard Jewish education for a girl. However, one thing is sure, from a young age she learned Hebrew and became highly competent in it. In fact, she knew it so well that she thought Hebrew at a Jewish School in Bucharest.

      …In search for better prospects she moved to France where she became heavily involved in the Communist movement of the early 20”s.

      …In Moscow, where she lived for 8 years she became more educated through Comintern universities, in Marxist and Communist dialectics. However, I suspect that it was also during this period that her famous love and loyalty for Moscow most likely developed. In 1934, after having been exposed to years of Soviet education, she was given a political role in the Romanian Communist Party which she filled fruitfully until her second arrest in 1941 during Romania’s fascist grip. Again, the Soviet Union saved her by compromising with a prisoner exchange. It is easy to see why she was so invested in the Soviet cause.

      After her return to Moscow in 1941, Stalin’s purges were already slowly dwindling away since the 1930’s Show Trials where thousands were murdered and imprisoned. Now here is the kicker which has made everyone think of Pauker as the “cold-hearted” lady of the East. Her husband was convicted of being a Western spy \and killed by the pro-Stalinist factions in 1938, a time when she herself denounced her own husband. Something which cemented her loyalty to Stalin himself. Maybe this played a role in her becoming the leader of the Romanian exiles in the USSR?

      …Stalin with a dress
      By 1947 she became Romania’s foreign minister, the first woman in history to hold such a position, from where she gained international fame. However, once she became head of the party and unofficially the main person in power. She began to implement Stalinist style communism in a rather repressive manner.


      IN FACT, ROBERT LEVY ARGUES THAT ANA PAUKER REJECTED MARXISM-LENINISM’S CLASS-BASED APPROACH TO THE “JEWISH QUESTION” only because the complexity of Jewish culture and acculturation amid the European nations could not be resolved just thorough the equalization of class. In a way she was right as evidenced by Stalin’s persistent antisemitism and the repression of Jews in Eastern Bloc countries.

      …The most controversial point in Romania’s Communist history however was the building of the Danube-Black Sea canal which used thousands of political prisoners in labor camps. The project, which was itself proposed by Stalin, went into effect in 1950 under Pauker. The extent of her involvement, or whether it was her idea to use political prisoners in the construction of the canal is still disputed.”

    • Charles Frey
      Charles Frey says:

      Thanks Yeoman Archer, you can’t possibly imagine the itch caused by the Weinstein-Shiksa essay, to chime in with my Sermon from the Dirtmound at that time.

      Nor is it unrelated to this present essay, with respect to the unchanging MO of these people.

      At my paragraph 23 you can find the Shiksa reference, of 11 years ago.

      This Sermon is neither about me nor Neinstein, but rather about the steaming dungheap frivolously described as our justice system.

      [ I’m managing my budget with my promise to you in mind, regarding the ultimate fate of that broadly announced, ” balanced ” film on the Holodomor ].

Comments are closed.