Judaism discovered

Appendix I

The Russian Petition to Classify the "Kitzur Shulchan Aruch" as

Hate Literature

In 2005, leading journalists, intellectuals and Christians in Russia presented a petition to the government requesting that the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch be classified as racist hate literature. The Kitzur Shulchan Aruch was compiled in the nineteenth century by Rabbi Shlomo Ganzfried. According to Ganzfried's biographer, the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch is "one of the most widely distributed books of religious interest ever published. Drawn from all four sections of Rabbi Yosef Caro's Shulchan Aruch, the bedrock compilation of religious law, the Kitzur set forth the laws required to be known by every Jew, written in simple language and appropriately arranged, as he stated in a notice announcing its publication. While achieving these objectives, he presented the material in a format that was brief and to-the-point. The Kitzur was an immediate and extraordinary success. In the two decades before his death, more than twenty editions appeared...In the century since, it has been reprinted more than any other Jewish work, with the exception of the Talmud, siddur, and the Passover hagaddah." ⁿ⁸° The Encyclopedia Judaica calls it "...the main handbook for Ashkenazi Jewry..."¹¹⁸¹

The Kitzur Shulchan Aruch is so volatile that we have been unable to locate a completely uncensored version in English. This handbook of behavior for Judaics contains many curses on Christians, on the cross and on churches, as anyone who obtains an uncensored translation of the book's section titled, "Concerning Idolatry" will discover. The Russian petition should be understood in the context of the rabbinic-inspired campaign of repression in Canada, Australia and Europe which makes it a crime to publish literature critical of the Talmud or skeptical of either the figure of Six Million dead Judaics or the homicidal gas chambers of Auschwitz.

"The French anti-revisionist.. .Fabius-Gays sot law...dates from July 13, 1990...It provides for a prison sentence of up to a year as well as a maximum fine of €45,000 (approximately $66,000) for anyone who publicly disputes the

.

1028

reality of one or more 'crimes against humanity' as defined and ruled on, essentially, by the International Military Tribunal of Nuremberg in 1945-1946. In addition to the prison sentence and fine, there can be an order to pay damages to Jewish or other associations as well as the heavy costs of having the decision published in the media: finally, the courts may order the confiscation of any work material, along with books and papers, seized by the police.

"It is inaccurate to say that this law forbids the questioning of the entirety of the Nuremberg judgment, for it forbids only the questioning of the judgment...on crimes supposedly committed against 'humanity,' that is, first and foremost, against the Jews...Consequently, only the crimes alleged to have been committed, above all, against the Jews are decreed legally unquestionable. Let us salute here the granting of an astonishing privilege to the exclusive benefit of God's 'chosen people.' It was the Jews of France who, in May 1986, were the first to call for the establishment of such a law. At the time the State of Israel was preparing to pass an anti-revisionist bill which was approved by the Knesset two months later, in July 1986. The promoter of the French anti-revisionist law was the country's chief rabbi, Rene-Samuel Sirat. It was under his guidance that in May 1986 some Jewish academics, like Pierre Vidal-Naquet, and some Jewish propagandists, like Serge Klarsfeld and Georges Wellers, called for a bill like the Israeli one...¹¹⁸²

"The politician whose action was decisive in the preparation and passage of the...law is former Prime Minister Laurent Fabius...a Jew, a millionaire and a Socialist. In 1990 he was president of the National Assembly. In that Assembly was a rather uncouth and ill-educated Communist, Jean-Claude Gayssot, then Minister of Transport. This man wanted to present, in the name of the Communist party, a... bill targeting Jean-Marie Le Pen, head of the Front National. But Gayssot's bill was badly drafted. It was then that Laurent Fabius made an arrangement with his Communist colleague. He, Fabius, would replace the poorly constructed text with one prepared by the Socialist party which targeted both Le Pen, for 'racism,' and Professor Robert Faurisson, for 'denial of the extermination of the Jews'...

1029

"Once the deal had been concluded between...Fabius and... Gays sot, there remained the procedure of defending their bill before the National Assembly and Senate. The task looked daunting. A number of jurists, academics and politicians came out against the idea of such a law, deemed Stalinist, but then, suddenly, a providential event enabled its passage by the Socialist-Communist majority. On May 11, 1990 there exploded in the world press the outrage of'desecrated' Jewish graves in a cemetery in Carpentras, a small town in the south of France. Fabius took the helm of a thundering propaganda operation meant to have people believe that there was a resurgence of anti-semitism in France, an anti-semitism fueled by revisionism. Tens of thousands of demonstrators, many of them bearing Israeli flags, were to march in the streets, notably in Paris where, for the first time since August 1944 and the city's liberation, the great bell of Notre Dame cathedral was set ringing....the anti-revisionist law was on the statute books (as of) July 13,1990..."¹¹⁸³

The ADL, the Southern Poverty Law Center,¹¹⁸⁴ the European Union, the Simon Wiesenthal Center¹¹⁸⁵ and the Israeli Knesset and Ministry of Foreign Affairs are attempting to make these thought crimes apply to the Internet as well. In seeking to shut down forms of expression which compete with their own ideology, the ADL and similar thought cops are exhibiting

1030

their loyalty to totalitarian Talmudic and rabbinic injunctions against "heretical" books, beginning with the New Testament as described in cryptic language below:

It is forbidden to make anything that is needed for idols; even windows for the house of idol worship. It is forbidden to sell books that are exclusive to idol worship, [or books of Biblical Scriptures, that were copied with alterations designed to make them heretical and to strengthen their beliefs.]

Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 167:6

Christopher Wolf, Chairman of the ADL's "Internet Task Force" speaking at the "Combating Anti-Semitism in Cyberspace"" conference held in February, 2008 in Jerusalem, under the co-sponsorship of the Israeli government stated: "The Role of Law in Addressing Online Hate Speech — An understandable immediate reaction to the hate found on the Internet is 'there ought to be a law.' But, in the United States, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution applies with full force to the Internet, the Supreme Court has ruled. And that freedom of expression protection means most speech is permissible unless it threatens imminent violence directed at identifiable victims...hate speech, online or off, can be used in some jurisdictions as evidence to show a prohibited motivation for a crime. In Europe and elsewhere around the world, by contrast, there are laws prohibiting online hate speech and images. Why the difference in approach? Although freedom of expression is a valued principle in most modern democracies, it is counterbalanced by the belief that government has a role in protecting its citizens from the effects of hate and intolerance...there are laws in Germany and elsewhere in Europe that prohibit words and images attacking religious, racial and sexual minorities...In Germany, Volksverhetzung (incitement of hatred against a minority) is a punishable offense under Section 130 of the Germany's criminal code and can lead to up to five years imprisonment. Volksverhetzung is punishable in Germany even if committed abroad and even if committed by non-German citizens, if the sentiment was made accessible in Germany. A famous instance of German prosecution of someone whose hate speech was launched from abroad but was available in Germany is Ernst Zundel. Zundel is a Holocaust denier who published... 'Did Six Million Really Die' while he lived in the North America.

1031

Ziindel was deported from the U.S. to Canada and onward to Germany, and tried criminally in the state court of Mannheim on outstanding charges of incitement for Holocaust denial dating from the early 1990s, and including for materials disseminated over the Internet. On February 15th, 2007, he was convicted and sentenced to the maximum term of five years in prison.

"Similarly, an Australian Holocaust denier, Frederick Toben, used his Australia-based web site to publish his benighted views. Upon visiting Germany, he was arrested, tried, and convicted of violating German law as a result of his Australian-based web site that was viewable in Germany. In addition to national laws like that in Germany used to convict Toben and Zundel, the Council of Europe has included in the Cybercrime Treaty a prohibition against online hate speech. Specifically, the provision bans 'any written material, any image or any other representation of ideas or theories, which advocates, promotes or incites hatred...against any individual or group of individuals...' It also outlaws sites that deny, minimize, approve or justify crimes against humanity, particularly the Holocaust. The treaty is beginning to be implemented through legislation among European member countries. The United States is a signatory to the Cybercrime Treaty but did not sign the protocol on online hate speech, in light of its invalidity domestically under the First Amendment. And the European Union recently passed legislation extending to the Internet its 'broadcast rules' that restrict hateful and other content deemed inappropriate...countries — like Germany — criminalize Internet hate speech and issue orders requiring people to take down web pages and video...Indeed, people have been arrested and jailed because of their online content.

"...So what are other possible antidotes to hate speech online? The voluntary cooperation of the Internet community — Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and others — to join in the campaign against hate speech is urgently needed. If more ISPs in the U.S. especially block content and following their Terms of Service, it will at least be more difficult for haters to gain access through respectable hosts...in the era of Search Engines as the primary portals for Internet users, cooperation from the Googles of the world is an even more important goal. The experience with Google concerning the hate site 'Jew Watch' shows how Search Engine companies can help. When entering the search term 'Jew,' the top result in Google was the hate site 'Jew Watch.' The high ranking of Jew Watch in response to a search inquiry was

1032

not due to a conscious choice by Google, but was solely a result of an automated system of ranking. In response to contacts from the Anti-Defamation League, Google placed text on its site that apologized for the ranking, and gave users a clear explanation of how search results are obtained, to refute the impression that Jew Watch was a reliable source of information.

"INACH (International Network Against Cyber-Hate) has reported that over a recent four year period, it received complaints on fifteen thousand cases of online hate. By forwarding the complaints to ISPs and search engines, more than five thousand hate sites, discussion threads, videos and music files were removed....where there are multiple outlets for content, as is the norm on the web, the effectiveness of the take-down remedy is limited. For example, a subscriber to an ISP who loses his or her account for violating that ISP's regulations against hate speech may resume propagating hate by subsequently signing up with any of the dozens of more permissive ISPs in the marketplace. The problem of hate speech on the Internet is not one that is easily solved. The law has a limited role to play, especially in light of the permissive rules in the United States which allows hate speech to be launched for viewing worldwide. The ISP and search engine operators could, if they wished, play a greater role in controlling hate speech..." ¹¹⁸⁶ (End quote).

Seldom is anyone who is prosecuted, fined or imprisoned for authoring or publishing literature which questions the Talmud described in the western media as a dissident or heretic who is being persecuted for publishing nonconformist books or websites. Rather, they are most often presented to the public as "haters" who are guilty of "racial discrimination." No "bastion of democracy," be it the New York Times, the U.S. State Department or the President of the United States has, as of this writing, come to the defense of these dissidents. For example, as we write these words, both the aforementioned Ziindel and the chemist Germar Rudolf are serving several years in prison in Germany for publishing studies skeptical of the claims of execution gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau, in Rudolfs case arguing that from the standpoint of chemistry, no poison gassings could have been

.

1033

conducted in those chambers. Earlier we related the datum that Lady Jane Birdwood was put on trial in London, England for publishing and distributing pamphlets educating the public concerning the Talmud. Due to her advanced age her jail sentence was suspended. She died shortly afterward, having been hit in the street and run over by a man on a speeding bicycle.

When repression is aimed at critics of Orthodox Judaism or at revisionist historians who challenge holy writ and sacred cows related to the "Holocaust," such repression is not an issue for Amnesty International or any otherwise vocal western voice for "democracy and freedom of expression." In light of this situation in the West, the Russians proceeded against Talmudic hate literature with their Petition concerning the contents and distribution of the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch. The Russian petitioners share one opinion in common with the ADL, "Although freedom of expression is a valued principle...it is counterbalanced by the belief that government has a role in protecting its citizens from the effects of hate and intolerance..." Because the Russians believe that the sacred texts of the religion of Orthodox Judaism instill in the adherents of that religion hatred and intolerance for Christians and gentiles, they sought to proceed against it, similar to the manner in which the ADL and the Israeli government proceed against critics of Judaism and Holocaustianity. ¹¹⁸⁷

If any petition similar to the one the Russians circulated was put forth in the United States, as of this writing mostly only very marginal and poverty-stricken persons, ¹¹⁸⁸ along with retired people with a secure pension, would sign and circulate it. But in Russia, dozens of prominent persons with a great deal to lose, including members of parliament (the Duma), newspaper editors, officers in the armed forces, artists, literary figures, the world chess

1034

champion Boris Spassky and the internationally renowned mathematician Igor Shafarevich, signed the petition. Though we do not endorse Russian nationalism or any ideology of modern nation-state "patriotism," ¹¹⁸⁹ the petition is nonetheless a remarkable and historic attempt to document for the commonweal, the rights of gentiles and Christians to be free of the libel and detestation institutionalized in the hortatory rabbinic texts of Judaism; and to assert, against the tunnel vision that decrees that rabbis are only victims and never victimizers, the reality of Judaism's ferocious and murderous hatred of Jesus Christ, Christians and gentiles.

A PETITION

to the Attorney General of the Russian Federation (RF): Mr. V. V. Ustinov

concerning the increasing use against Russian Patriots

of Article 282 of the RF Criminal Code:

"Incitement to ethnic strife" with regard to Jews

103793 Moscow, B. Dmitrovka St., 15A Office of the RF Attorney General Mr. V. V. Ustinov

Dear Mr. Attorney General:

We must appeal to you because of the very unfavorable state of affairs in our country which exhibit the signs of a hidden genocide against the Russian people and its traditional culture. The specific legal part of our Petition to be implemented is presented in its later paragraphs (items 1-4). However, since the issues to which we are referring are under a strong taboo, we feel it necessary not to limit ourselves to matter-of-fact, dry legalistic forms, but to preface them with an explanatory description of the essence of the problem at hand and to show the justifiable reasons for our concerns. On Dec. 18, 2003,

.

1035

President Vladimir V. Putin, during his televised address to the nation, cited the following statistics, demonstrating the government's "fight against extremism:" in 1999, on the basis of Article 282 of the Russian Federation's Criminal Code — "incitement to ethnic strife" — four persons were convicted; in 2000, 10 persons were convicted; in 2003 "there were opened over 60 cases, about 20 were brought before judges. And there were about 17-20 convictions." (V. Putin: a chat with Russia on Dec. 18, 2003. M., 2003. Page 53). We have reasons to believe that the established trend is continuing.

The overwhelming majority of these cases were initiated by Jewish activists or organizations who accuse their respondents of "anti-Semitism." The overwhelming majority of accused and convicted consider themselves to be Russian patriots. Now among the accused, we find a well-known politician and publicist, the former head of the State Committee for the Media, Mr. B. S. Mironov. We admit that statements by Russian patriots about Jews are often sharply negative, excessively emotional, and unacceptable for public discussion, and this is interpreted by the courts as extremism. However, at the above mentioned trials, there has never been an investigation into the reasons for such a sharp hostility and for the primary source of such extremism in this interracial conflict.

Indeed, the main issue that investigators and courts must establish is the following — do the negative assessments about Jewry by Russian patriots correspond to the truth of the matter concerning the negative assessments? If there is no truth to it, then yes, one can say that the Jews are being humiliated and that this constitutes incitement to religious and ethnic strife. If there is truth to it, however, then such (negative) assessments are justified and, regardless of their emotionality, they cannot be considered as humiliating, inciting to (ethnic) strife, etc. (For instance, calling a decent person a criminal is humiliating for him; but, calling a convicted felon a criminal is a true statement of fact.)

Moreover, since in the ethnic conflict at hand there are two parties (the accusers and the accused), one must establish: Which side began this conflict first and is responsible for it, and is it possible that actions on the part of the accused are a self-defense against the aggressive acts of the accusing party? We take the liberty to assure you, Mr. Attorney General, that, concerning this issue, there exists throughout the whole world a large amount of widely recognized facts and sources, on the basis of which one can draw the following

1036

conclusion: negative assessments by Russian patriots about acts, typical for the Jews, against non-Jews, are based on truth. Furthermore, these acts do not happen by chance, but are prescribed by the Judaic Talmud and have been practiced for two thousand years. Consequently, statements and publications against the Jews attributed to patriots, in the majority of cases constitute self-defense, which may not always be stylistically proper, but is justified in its essence. To prove this point, we wish to bring to your attention a book entitled Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, officially published in Moscow by the Congress of Jewish Religious Organizations and Associations (CJROAR) in

1037

Russia, in multiple printings.¹¹⁹⁰ This is a shortened edition of the code of laws known as "Shulchan Aruch," compiled several centuries ago on the basis of the Talmud, and whose prescriptions must still be obeyed today. In the preface to the 1999 and 2000 editions, the head of the CJROAR Executive Committee, Rabbi Zinovii Kogan, makes a candid admission:

"The Editorial Board of the CJROAR deemed it necessary to omit in this translation certain Halachic directives... the inclusion of which in a Russian-language edition could be perceived by the inhabitants of Russia who do not observe Judaism as unprovoked insults. A reader, who wishes to read the full text of " Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, is invited to come to a yeshiva to study this and many other holy books in their original form."

"In other words, one of the leaders of Russian Jewry views as insulting for the non-Jewish population of Russia certain provisions of this Jewish code of behavior, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, yet feels that it is appropriate to invite his co-religionists to learn these insults in yeshivas — rabbinic schools financed to some extent by federal and local Russian government budgets.

"But even in the censored Russian language version published in Moscow by the Congress of Jewish Religious Organizations and Associations, we find the following provisions..." (end quote from the Russian Petition).

The Russian petitioners then furnish a list of quotations from rabbinic works that contain negative and racist views of gentiles and Christians, including a statement from the text of the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch requiring that Judaics recite a curse on a Christian church when they pass it by, and requiring them to recite celebratory words when they see a Christian church that has been destroyed or otherwise razed or ruined. The Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow was destroyed in 1931 by a Judaic Communist leader who was a high official in the regime of Joseph Stalin. The construction of the cathedral, the world's largest Orthodox Christian church, commissioned by Tsar Alexander I, took 44 years. It was consecrated in 1883. But it stood for only 48 years. "When the original church was finally dynamited, Lazar Kaganovich, a loyal Stalinist who built the Moscow subway, said over the rubble: 'Mother Russia is cast down. We have ripped

).

1038

away her skirts." ¹¹⁹¹ Kaganovich's words approximate the spirit of the words of exultant revenge which the Talmudist is commanded to utter when he sees a Christian church that has been destroyed: "Almighty of vengeance, you have revealed yourself." ¹¹⁹²

.

The words of the curse that every Judaic is to recite when encountering a Christian church: "God will uproot the house of the proud." (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 167:8). If the curse is fulfilled and the church is destroyed, then the Judaic recites, "Almighty of vengeance, reveal yourself."

The Russian Petition goes on to state:

"...In the introduction to Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, the head of the Executive Committee of CJROAR, Mr. Kogan, writes that the "Talmud is the unsurpassed memorial of Jewish genius," and that this compilation of Talmudic teachings, the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch — "is the reading book of Jewish civilization of our times...This book is absolutely necessary for you. You may act as prescribed in it and be certain that you fulfilled the will of the M-st High.'