MARK WEBER VEUT CROIRE
Weber fut au centre d’un complot contre Willis Carto, alors responsable de Liberty Lobby et de The Spotlight, aujourd’hui éditeur d’American Free Press et The Barnes Review.
Piper Michael Collins – Leon Degrelle : Warrior for the West (introduction to Hitler Democrat)
Contactez Michael Collins Piper (firstname.lastname@example.org) pour qu’il vous envoie par la poste, gratuitement, les 140 pages qu’il n’a pu inclure dans son livre THE JUDAS GOATS suite aux poursuites intentées contre lui par l’escroc Mark Weber. Ces révélations concernent la trahison du mouvement populiste et révisionniste américain par des infiltrés au service de l’ennemi. Mark Weber est l’un des principaux malfrats dénoncés dans ces pages censurées. Ces pages décrivent le coup d’État du Mossad et de la CIA (aidé de scientologues, de faux révisionnistes, etc.) pour subvertir, éviscérer et anéantir l’Institute for Historical Review. L’IHR est aujourd’hui dirigé par un des leaders de la mutinerie, Mark Weber, manipulé par Andrew Allen qui est connecté au Mossad. Weber a fait des millions en vendant les livres de l’IHR – il s’est départi de toute leur collection. Et même s’il gagne des millions à se faire passer pour un révisionniste, l’IHR n’est plus rien qu’un site web. L’IHR n’a plus de revue. Plus aucune conférences. Weber n’écrit même plus, c’est un escroc millionnaire, le plus riche des prétendus « révisionnistes ».
Voici le document en question:
Author : Piper Michael Collins Title : Coup d’Etat The bizarre inside story of how an intelligence operative tied to the CIA and Israel’s Mossad Orchestrated the take-over of the Institute for Historical Review and Set in Motion the Ultimate destruction of Liberty Lobby. How the IHR now operates as […]
Mark Weber doit démissionner de l’Institute for Historical Review, par Robert Faurisson
Un fait intéressant à propos de Lawrence E. Heller est qu’il est un avocat de l’Église de Scientologie, une «organisation de croissance personnelle» (« self-help organization« ) subvertie par des avocats juifs et décrite avec justesse comme «une école pour les psychopathes». Le pseudo-révisionniste et scientologue Tom Marcellus et l’avocat Andrew Evered Allen ont pris le contrôle de l’IHR en octobre 1993, après avoir arraché son contrôle à Willis Carto à la faveur d’un coup d’Etat interne. Allen, un millionnaire de Californie soupçonné d’être un agent infiltrateur pour le compte de l’ADL, a été impliqué dans les complots de la CIA et du Mossad en Afghanistan et en Birmanie. Après le coup de l’IHR, l’ADL a pu présenter le tout comme une scission au sein d’un groupe de « bigots en guerre les uns contre les autres« . (…)
La Legion for the Survival of Freedom Inc (LSF) a été fondée en 1952 par un groupe de patriotes au Texas. Elle était sur le bord de la faillite en 1966, quand Willis Carto a repris le contrôle de la corporation et de son magazine The American Mercury. Lorsque Carto a fondée l’IHR en 1979, cela fut créé comme une filiale de la LSF. En 1993, l’IHR avait environ 12 000 abonnés, deux grands entrepôts remplis de livres, et un historique de publication presque ininterrompu du Journal for Historical Review. Il y avait quelques personnes âgées pas très en santé qui siégeaient au conseil d’administration de la LSF et qui avaient déjà des problèmes financiers. Les rebelles à l’origine de la mutinerie de l’IHR leur ont dit que Willis Carto «opérait illégalement» et qu’ils pourraient par conséquent avoir des problèmes avec le fisc et même finir en prison – à moins qu’ils ne démissionnent du conseil pour permettre à des «gens biens» de prendre la relève. C’était un tissu de mensonges, mais malheureusement ce plan a fonctionné.
À peine quelques années après que Carto ait été chassé, l’IHR est retombé à quelque 500 abonnés et seulement une dizaine de magazines ont été publiés. Mark Weber, dont la soeur a vécu dans un kibboutz en Israël, est devenu le nouveau représentant de l’IHR. Mais c’est une autre histoire, le fait est que des avocats juifs ont travaillé pendant des années pour mettre la main sur des millions de dollars qui étaient supposés être allés à Willis Carto et à des causes populistes.
Details on Mark Weber’s fraudulent activities: markwebermustgo.blogspot.com
For said years, the IHR/Mark Weber took in the following in « Contributions, Gifts, Grants, And Similar Amounts Received: Direct Public Support. »
Tax Year 2000–$346, 572
Tax Year 2001—$209, 229
Tax Year 2002—$610, 152
Tax Year 2003–$210, 363
Tax Year 2005–$409, 477
Tax Year 2006–$299, 623
Thank you to all truth seekers DO NOT SEND ANY MONEY TO THE IHR OR MARK WEBER!!!
Robert Faurisson unmasked Mark Weber in a letter that he wrote in 2003: Reply to Mark Weber
Revisionist’s time to take a stand (Weber on internet radio)
The rank and file of the Revisionist movement have « gotten wise » to Mark Weber. Your laziness and incompetence have done enormous damage to the IHR, and it is now plain for everyone to see. Your « work » at the IHR is simply a « retirment hobby, » a con game in which you acquire a weekly pay check to help make your child support payments. In fact, you have betrayed and conned the entire Revisionist movement. In my opinion, years ago it was a mistake of mamouth proportions when you conned us all to back you during the height of the Carto-IHR conflict. Thank God you failed to acquire the millions of dollars from the Farrell Bequest–you would have wasted it all away. Your enemy Willlis Carto is not perfect, but the fact of the matter remains is that Carto produces: Carto gets things done: Carto builds effective organizations. Just compare Carto’s record to yours.
Reply to Weber from Arhur Butz (author of The Hoax of the Twentieth Century)
Smith Report Issue #158 | February 2009
Mark Weber and IHR
Are Not Relevant to Revisionism
By Arthur R. ButzLast August, in postings that related to a conference he had recently attended, Mark Weber made it clear that he was not a revisionist.* However one had to read, rather than just skim, Weber’s August articles to see this. In particular, his article « A Zionist Smear: The ADL Attacks an Islamic Peace Conference » (http://www.ihr.org/news/aug08adl.html) endorsed, by implication but clearly, a remark in a speech by Malaysia president Mahathir Mohammed: « The Europeans killed six million Jews out of twelve million. » Though Robert Faurisson and I, and a few others, immediately saw the point, the article had little impact on the community of revisionists, perhaps because its title related to a commonplace ADL activity that the author was protesting.
In September there was activity directed to bringing this important matter to the revisionist community generally, but I suppose that activity was suspended on account of the pressure of other matters, e.g. the Fredrick Töben affair. Incidentally, on Sept. 30 I drove Töben to the airport for that ill-fated flight to London, and I mentioned Mark Weber’s revealing article to him.
On Dec. 2 Faurisson directed the following two questions to Weber:
1. Do you believe that the Germans decided on and planned a physical destruction of the European Jews? (“the specific crime”)
2. Do you believe in the existence and the use by the Germans of homicidal gas chambers or gas vans? (“the specific weapons of the specific crime”)
As I write this Faurisson has gotten no reply. Those two questions relate fundamentally to the historic mission of IHR and were asked of the Director of IHR by a key former associate of the IHR, under circumstances wherein the Director’s adherence to the mission was obviously in question. Weber was ethically obligated to answer.
Arthur Butz wrote:
I suspect that Mark Weber’s new article « How Relevant is Holocaust Revisionism? » was Weber’s way of responding to the pressures being brought by Faurisson. To those of us who have been concerned with this problem since this past summer, the new article reveals perhaps only one new thing that I shall explain below. To others, it reveals that Mark Weber is not a revisionist. Only because the title of the new article is provocative is it now widely recognized by the revisionist community that Mark Weber is not one of us.
The fact that Weber is not a revisionist is important, and its treatment here required only a few words. Mark Weber’s thoughts on the question that the title of his new article raises are less important but require more words. I shall comment on those thoughts anyway.
Weber’s title commits a common sin, namely, challenging or asserting the relevance of something without specifying what the relevance is supposed to apply to. It is obvious nonsense to ask « When will the train reach? » It has to be something like « When will the train reach Detroit? » Therefore I shall try to determine what Mark Weber thinks revisionism is irrelevant to, and frankly the answer is unimportant. If revisionism’s central claims are wrong then it ought to be abandoned. Why wonder about its relevance to anything? For example, I concede that revisionism is irrelevant to baking pies, but that doesn’t make me a non-revisionist. What, then, does Mark Weber think revisionism is irrelevant to?
About half-way through his paper he seems to answer the question begged by his title, by making a curious assumption. He writes
« But despite a discouraging record of achievement, some revisionists insist that their work is vitally important because success in exposing the Holocaust as a hoax will deliver a shattering blow to Israel and Jewish-Zionist power. »
His relevance, then, would appear to be in terms of fighting Israel. I doubt that I know even one revisionist whose revisionism is so motivated. On the other hand, we tend to note that implication as an observation. I suppose all of us agree that the success of revisionism would be bad for Israel, and we understand that much of the persecution we suffer is based on that fact. We do not wish Israel well.
I wrote many years ago, in the Foreword to my book The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, that my historical investigations were motivated by my « Noting the obvious ways in which this legend is exploited in contemporary politics, notably in connection with the completely illogical support that the U.S. extends to Israel ». That political judgment of mine didn’t make me a revisionist; the investigations that were thereby motivated made me a revisionist. I found rubbish.
Serious revisionists promote revisionism because it is historically correct, not because it’s bad for Israel. I would be a revisionist even if it were good for Israel. I suppose one could find people who think we help Israel in some devious or backhanded way.
Mark Weber’s presumption, that we should be motivated to harm Israel, says more about his motivations than ours, and something about his concept of IHR’s mission.
However that is not the worst of it. After seeming to have explained, mid-way through the article, what revisionism is allegedly not relevant to, Weber upsets the whole cart. He notes that in recent years « the Holocaust assumed an important role in the social-cultural life of America and western Europe, » but he also claims that in today’s political context the « Holocaust imagery [is] less relevant. »
It is difficult for me to deal with these less important aspects of Mark Weber’s recent article because of this confusion regarding what revisionism is supposedly irrelevant to and the nature of the current political-cultural scene. The last is, we are asked to believe, characterized by both Holocaust obsession and an irrelevance of the Holocaust legend to contemporary problems.
That is confusing, but unimportant. I think the Holocaust obsession is a contemporary problem, and a big one that sheds light on many other problems.
Others may wish to parse Mark Weber’s thoughts more carefully, but I have no patience for that. It is a waste of time. As I noted earlier, I would be a revisionist even if it were helpful to Israel. Mark Weber is not a revisionist, evidently because he no longer sees revisionism as an effective weapon against Israel. That suggests that in the past his adherence to revisionism was to gain a propaganda tool against Israel. That evaluation of him is new, at least for me.
Jan. 11, 2009
*Here I use the term « revisionist » only in the sense of « Holocaust revisionist » = » Holocaust denier », though I am aware that some comrades dislike the last label.
Continued in the January 2009 issue of Smith’s Report 157.
(…) read the rest here: http://www.vho.org/aaargh/engl/FaurisArch/RF031222.html
I told Ernst I would not get into the frey in a major way, but inside I am seething. I always liked Mark for his outstanding memory of important facts and his impeccable courteous manners, and I intensely disliked him for having run the IHR right into the ground, hogging the limelight as if the IHR existed first last and always to owe him a living at the expense of other activists. Ernst and I have long felt that the revisionist ground work was finished and we had to move on, stopping the bean counting, and employing other means of reaching the masses, but please proactively. Never for a moment did we think, must less assert, in a submissive way that the result of all the work of decades, all the research, all the sacrifices of so many decent and committed people would end up being described by (Mark Weber) as nothing but a « Hindrance ».
[…]Regarding what Ted O’Keefe said about Weber, Ingrid Rimland said: … »Ted O’Keefe speaks to my heart », She quotes Weber on a radio show saying « of course the IHR believes in the holocaust « . He called Ingrid Zundel, said he was concerned about what Ernst Zundel would think of him. She must confess « it was his obvious remorse for saying something that dum, touched me, and I told him, « we all say dum things under ambush, but I have never forgotten this admission by Mark Weber, I will bite my tounge and keep to myself what Ernst, still languishing in prison for a lifetime of commitment to revisionism thinks of Mark Weber now. » (…)
Here is a complete archive of information exposing zioninst-operative inside The Vatican « Father » Malachi Martin: http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/201…hi-martin.html
Specifically this essay: http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/201…ns-coffin.html
BRONFMAN ENNEMI DE L’HISTOIRE, DÉFENSEUR DE LA MÉMOIRE DE L’HOLOCAUSTE
« Le nombre grandissant des révisionnistes ne peut être ignoré. Nous devons user de toutes les ressources disponibles afin d’arrêter le révisionnisme dès maintenant, avant que ce ne soit trop tard .» – Edgar Bronfman
David Irving comments: Billionaire Edgar Bronfman (right) is stated in the Jewish press to have been one of the major financial contributors to Deborah Lipstadt, paying the millions of dollars that were used to finance her neutral expert witnesses to testify as they did in Mr Irving’s libel action against her.
Podcasts de Michael Collins Piper: michaelcollinspiper.podbean.com
February 21st, 2011 · No Comments
Mark Weber has yet to publicly respond to any of the allegations and many good Revisionists continue to donate to the Institute for Historical Review, unaware of this ugly history.
Even many of Weber’s defenders are loathe to admit that Weber—who has since renounced Holocaust Revisionism as a viable means of bringing forth historical truth—was acting in concert in the effective destruction of the IHR itself with San Francisco real estate millionaire Andrew E. Allen who admitted—under oath—that he was involved in two separate political/covert operations that were very clearly under the direction of the CIA and Israel’s Mossad (all of which is described in these interviews).
Sadly, many of those who continue to defend Weber have been known to have received funds from the aforementioned Allen and continue to insist that Piper’s documentation is a « crazy conspiracy theory. » Listeners can decide for themselves if this is all just Piper’s « wild imagination » or « vicious lies concocted to smear a decent historian such as Mark Weber. »
Listeners should also note that just before Michael Collins Piper left RBN he announced that Allen’s aunt (his father’s sister) Beth Allen Straus, had recently died. Mrs. Straus was married into the famous Jewish-Zionist Straus banking-and-Macy’s Department Store empire in New York City (best known for the fact that Isidor and Ida Straus were much-heralded victims of the sinking of the Titanic).
Note, too, that there have been other allegations that the Allen family is also related (either by blood or by marriage) to the Zionist-Jewish Haas family of San Francisco who are the billionaire heirs to the Levy-Strauss garment empire; however, Michael Collins Piper has been unable to document this to his own satisfaction.
Although Allen’s claim to fame as a « revisionist » is that he served as an attorney fighting « war crimes » allegations against a Mr. Bartesch who was falsely accused of such by the infamous Office of Special Investigations, Allen himself (perhaps unwittingly) revealed in an article on the matter (which can still be found on the Internet) that the OSI had bungled the matter from the beginning. In short, it was an « easy as cake » legal endeavor that, in Michael Collins Piper’s opinion, may well have been served up to Allen in the first place in order to establish his « revisionist » bona fides.
The Bartesch family continues to praise Allen, but they perhaps do not understand the bigger picture, having been concerned, and rightly so, first and foremost, with the safety of their father who was under siege from the Jewish Holocaust Industry and its agents inside the U.S. government.
Listeners who can find errors of fact or distortions or misdirection in anything presented by Piper are free to post their comments on michaelcollinspiper.podbean.
Mark Weber, in particular, is invited to participate!
But will he?
Most likely, Weber will adopt the traditional stance of the Anti-Defamation League and say: « I don’t debate these people. »
Here also is the text of a letter Michael Collins Piper sent to Weber on December 1, 2004 outlining precisely how much Weber reaped financially from his conspiracy to destroy and thus take over the assets of Liberty Lobby. Readers will find this interesting.
I am writing this letter to you both as a personal courtesy and at the advice of my attorney who, it should be noted, has no relationship whatsoever with Willis Carto or any organizations or publications with which Willis has been associated.
Please forgive me for my delay in responding, but what with my two week trip in August to Malaysia and then a one week trip, of more recent date, to Japan, in conjunction with the release of my books, FINAL JUDGMENT and THE HIGH PRIESTS OF WAR in those countries, I have been, needless to say, quite busy, during the last few months.
First of all, please note that this is a letter from Michael Collins Piper alone. It represents my personal opinion and should not be perceived as an indirect communication from Willis and/or Elisabeth Carto or any organization or publication with which either of them are associated.
Neither Willis nor Elisabeth will have seen this letter before it is dispatched, although, needless to say, I did advise both of them that I would be writing this letter and both of them provided me bits and pieces of information that I have incorporated in this letter. However, all of the material utilized is that of my own choosing and, in fact, I chose to reject much of what they provided me.
In any case, I am not—repeat NOT—acting as their agent in any way. This letter strictly represents my personal point of view.
In addition, for the record, it should be noted that my involvement with both American Free Press and The Barnes Review is largely peripheral and I have very little, if anything, to do with the day-to-day operations of either of these publications, popular misperception notwithstanding. I have neither an office nor a desk on the premises. I have absolutely no ownership or proprietary rights in either publication and I have no employee benefits of any kind whatsoever.
As such, it was somewhat comical and, actually, ironic, that you included me—of all people—as a co-defendant in your baseless suit against American Free Press which, of course, you subsequently withdrew . . . and wisely, for your own sake, I might add.
In any event, with that having been said, permit me to continue.
This letter is stimulated, of course, by your communication (both hard copy and by e-mail) addressed to me in care of the office of American Free Press and via an email address for me which appears on the website of American Free Press. Your letter was a follow-up to a brief discussion between us during the Labor Day weekend conference sponsored by David Irving in Cincinnati, Ohio. For the record, it should be noted that I was attending the Irving conference at the invitation of Mr. Irving who made the invitation directly to me, without first mentioning the subject to Willis Carto. I was not attending the conference as an agent or spokesman for Willis Carto, although, of course, I did distribute copies of The Barnes Review and American Free Press.
My purpose at the conference, at Mr. Irving’s invitation, was to speak about Willis Carto’s history in the Revisionist movement and, only in passing, about the Farrel legacy. The only part that Mr. Carto played in the preparation of my remarks was to provide, at my request, a list of the books and magazines and journals that he had published or republished.
In our discussion at the Irving conference you told me that you (and presumably the controllers of the Legion for the Survival of Freedom, whomever they may be) wanted to enter into some form of settlement agreement with Willis Carto regarding the ongoing litigation and other conflicts stemming from the dispute over what I shall refer to as “the Farrel legacy.”
During our brief conversation, you noted that, previously, you had made a public statement (to an audience at the Irving conference) indicating that you would like to reach a settlement with Willis, and, in fact, a number of persons who were attending the conference confirmed that you had made such an offer.
Parenthetically, I would note that you made your public pronouncement after, earlier that day, I had told the audience in attendance at my lecture that the Legion for the Survival of Freedom had received some $1.7 million in total from two estates—those of Adelaide Allen and Bob Keifer—that had originally been earmarked for Liberty Lobby.
This information came as a surprise to many people, including several stalwart Revisionists who later informed me that, just hours prior to that, you had, in one gentleman’s words, “been poor-mouthing” and saying that the IHR was in dire financial straits, largely, you said, as a consequence “of Carto.”
(Funny thing, but the IHR was never in dire financial straits when Willis Carto was in charge, but that’s another story altogether. And nor was Liberty Lobby ever insolvent until the massive judgment you and certain parties orchestrated against Liberty Lobby, but that’s also another story altogether.)
Briefly, you suggested that Willis Carto should “return” all of the remaining funds from the Farrel legacy and drop any existing lawsuits against you and the Legion and that the Legion would also drop any further claims. The remaining funds, you suggested, would be placed in a trust fund to be administered by independent parties and distributed for the good works of Revisionists worldwide. I think that is a fair assessment of your comments at that time, or at least as I understood them. If there is any minor misunderstanding, and I don’t think there is, I stand corrected. However, for the purposes of this letter from me to you, that offer, as you shall see, is largely moot, as we shall see.
In any case, Mark, after you mentioned your desire to make a settlement “with Carto,” I suggested that you put the offer in writing. Further, I suggested, that you consult with an attorney in preparing the settlement offer and then direct the letter to Willis and/or one of the attorneys who has been representing his and/or Liberty Lobby’s interests in the related cases stemming from the circumstances surrounding the conflict over the Farrel legacy.
Upon returning to Washington from the Irving affair, I advised Willis of the rough parameters of the proposed settlement and indicated to him that you had told me that you would put the offer to him in writing.
Well, needless to say, I was quite surprised to subsequently receive your hard-copy letter and your e-mail (the two items being identical), both addressed to me, rather than to Willis or to any attorney representing him or Liberty Lobby. I also had the distinct impression—although I could be wrong about this—that you had written the letter on your own without benefit of legal counsel.
In addition, that part of the letter which was not a rehash of the rulings of Judge Runston Maino but which purported to contain the framework of a “settlement” was actually rather difficult to understand, and I say this as someone who is, at the least, semi-literate and who also had one year of legal training supplemented by some twenty years of working closely with attorneys and legal documents of all kinds, in addition to having been (at least at one time) fairly well versed in the details surrounding the Farrel legacy and the legal bloodbath that followed.
Legal documents, by their very nature, often tend toward the abstruse and opaque, but, in my humble opinion, your “settlement offer” was so unclear that no serious legal negotiations could emerge from it.
Your offer should have been framed in very specific language and, even more importantly—as I’ve already said—sent directly to Willis Carto.
To be honest, Mark, I felt as though your letter was simply what one might call a “jiffy job” and that it was a production designed to have the “look and feel” of a settlement offer, something that might be flashed in front of the naïve and unknowing as “evidence” of your good faith—somewhat along the lines of “Here’s the settlement offer I made to Carto, but he refuses to negotiate.”
The truth is that the letter was NOT a settlement offer and it was NOT made to Willis Carto.
Regarding the actual amounts received by both Liberty Lobby and the Legion from the Farrel legacy, let us first of all consider what Liberty Lobby actually did receive. And note, too, that the monies received by Liberty Lobby were ALWAYS in the form of LOANS, not grants. All of these loans were earmarked to be REPAID BY LIBERTY LOBBY TO THE CORPORATE ENTITY ESTABLISHED TO ADMINISTER THE FARREL FUNDS!
That is something that is hardly known by most Revisionists.
In addition, the fact remains that the money loaned from the Farrel legacy to Liberty Lobby had not even come due at the time the Legion was wrested from the control of Willis Carto. The amount received by Liberty Lobby constituted UN-REPAYED LOANS that were not yet even yet due!
Judge Maino ruled that Liberty Lobby “owed” the Legion (vis-à-vis the Farrel legacy) some $2,650,000, based on the fact that this amount, essentially, had been lent to Liberty Lobby. And had Liberty Lobby been able to continue functioning, not hampered by the lawsuits initiated by you and the Legion, these funds would ultimately have been repaid. So this, again, is something that is not widely known.
The system of loans set up by Willis Carto (at the encouragement of then-Legion attorney Bill Hulsy) were designed to protect both the Farrel legacy and Liberty Lobby from the Mel Mermelstein lawsuit that was in litigation at the time the Farrel affair was settled. It was a good business move and it made good legal sense. It only became “embezzlement” when you and your associates seized control of the Legion and used that as a springboard to launch the assault on Liberty Lobby. That is the cold, hard truth, Mark and you know it.
All of the funds advanced to Liberty Lobby were accounted for in detailed bank records, including wire transfers from Switzerland to Liberty Lobby and thence from Liberty Lobby to the Sun Radio Network which, in actuality, was the prime beneficiary of the loans, channeled through Liberty Lobby.
I personally sat in with Willis Carto and Liberty Lobby’s controller Blayne Hutzel and our attorney, Mark Lane, when the records were put together for presentation to your attorneys in the process of preparing for the trial before Judge Maino in Los Angeles. I know this for a fact. I saw these records. I saw the totals, Mark. I know that these records were provided to the court and to your attorneys. And that is why I was astounded when you repeatedly said to me, to my face, at the David Irving meeting, that Liberty Lobby had “never provided an accounting of the Farrel funds that it received.” Frankly, Mark, I was so shocked at your audacity in making this claim—which I knew to be patently false—that I was hard pressed to respond. I couldn’t believe that you would sit there and tell me that I had not seen what I saw. In fact, it was on the basis of these very records that Judge Maino made his ruling, at least in part, insofar as Liberty Lobby was concerned.
Needless to say, Mark, I have told many people—including some very respected Revisionists—that I think you and your associates were quite shocked to find out that the Farrel funds advanced to Liberty Lobby were no longer extant, that they had actually been expended. It is my belief that you believed that Liberty Lobby was somehow “sitting” on this money when, in fact, it had already gone to the Sun Radio Network! This must have been a very real shock to you, but it is a fact that you cannot dispute. The records prove it. Judge Maino made his judgment based on these records.
And, as I said, these funds would ultimately have been repaid. This is the TRUE story of the money received by Liberty Lobby from the Farrel legacy.
And it should be added that the original charter of the Legion—prior to the time that you and your associates re-wrote that charter, which went back to the original founding of the Legion in the 1950s, very specifically cited radio outreach as one of the ways of communication that the Legion hoped to advance its message.
And as an aside, here’s another point that many Revisionists also are unaware of; that is the fact that the IHR was always a subsidiary of the Legion, just as was the Noontide Press. Historical Revisionism—Holocaust or otherwise—was never, repeat never, the primary or sole purpose of the Legion. It was one of many missions in the realm of free expression to which the Legion was committed.
Your constant claim that the Farrel legacy was earmarked exclusively for Revisionism, specifically Holocaust Revionism, could not be further from the truth. This is a point that even Willis Carto often failed to mention when he became bogged down in fighting off the Legion’s assault, but it is a fact that cannot be denied.
Now regarding the funds received by the Legion itself from the Farrel legacy (specifically the bank account in Switzerland) it is important to note that, contrary to what Judge Maino ruled in court, there is some real dispute about how much was actually received by the Legion.
And I hasten to add that while you claim that the Legion only received $100,000 from the Farrel legacy, there are numerous financial records in existence which suggest that this figure is far less than the actual reality.
For example: • In September of 1991, Legion received $100,000 from the Farrel funds. • In March of 1992, Legion received $200,000 from the Farrel funds. • In September of 1992, Legion received $150,000 from the Farrel funds. • In October of 1992, Legion received $100,000 from the Farrel funds. • In addition, beginning on February 11, 1991, many invoices from printers and authors who were billing the Legion were paid from the Farrel funds totaling some $100,000. • Also, employee benefits and salaries at Legion, totaling another $98,000 were paid over a period of 15 months.
By my accounting, based on the above information, that is at least $748,000—some $648,000 more than the amount you have stated in court that Legion received from the Farrel funds!
According to Elisabeth Carto, the total that she can reconcile from the materials she has available is slightly higher: $755,927 paid to the Legion. However, Elisabeth says, she is certain that the figure is closer to about $900,000.
So even granting the lesser amount of $748,000, that is a much higher level of funds that Legion did receive and of which there are existing bank records from the now-depleted bank account in Switzerland that held the Farrel legacy.
These are facts that are not known to most Revisionists, even those who have followed the case closely!
One final point regarding the Farrel legacy. You have constantly made a point, even in swearing out a search warrant for the Carto home and property in Escondido, that there may have been some amounts in uncut gems from the Farrel legacy that somehow were in the hands of Willis and Elisabeth Carto. This is a myth.
As you certainly know, when the Farrel legacy was placed in the hands of Roland Rochat, a Swiss notary given the assignment by both sides in the dispute over the Farrel legacy, Rochat was charged with liquidating these diamonds. These diamonds were sold by Rochat as part of the liquidation of the legacy and placed into the entire amount for distribution between Willis Carto and the Legion and Joan Althaus, with whom the Farrel legacy was in dispute.
In short, Mark, ALL of the funds that Willis Carto assumed control of from the Farrel legacy were either distributed to Liberty Lobby or to the IHR or to other parties (including attorneys, accountants, etc) who were involved in the procurement of the estate. No funds remain from the Farrel legacy.
Now here is something else that MUST be considered if an actual settlement offer is made in good faith. I note, Mark, that the Lennon company of Costa Mesa, which acted as a receiver for Liberty Lobby in its bankruptcy, collecting sums on behalf of the Legion, issued a report dated September 24, 2004, detailing the fact that between 1998 and 2004, some $1,031,780.32 had been collected from Liberty Lobby directly or from letters containing money and checks that had been sent to Liberty Lobby during this time frame.
This amount also included a number of substantial payments made directly by Liberty Lobby as part of the bankruptcy settlement—including sums as high as $200,000 on at least one given occasion—until the bankruptcy court effectively voided the settlement after the Legion charged Liberty Lobby with violating the agreement, the circumstances of which are beyond the purview of this letter.
(The sum also includes the amount of money taken from personal accounts of Willis and Elisabeth Carto and the residue of funds left over from the sale of their home which was seized by the Legion.)
Nonetheless, the fact remains that Liberty Lobby did, in fact, give the Legion $1,031,780.32 under these circumstances—a point that many prominent Revisionists, to this day, are unaware.
Many persons remain under the illusion—should I say delusion—that Liberty Lobby paid little, if any, to the Legion following the institution of the bankruptcy settlement agreement.
So it is that this $1,031,780.32 is a substantial amount indeed and, in fact, quite a large chunk of the actual funds advanced, via loan, from the Farrel funds in the bank account in Switzerland.
Add this amount of $1,031,780.32 to the $748,000 given directly to the Legion from the Farrel legacy funds in Switzerland, this is a total of
This is the actual amount of money that the Legion had already received, directly from the Farrel legacy and from the money taken from Liberty Lobby.
Then, Mark, please add to this the $1.7 million that the Legion has now received from the Adelaide Allen and Bob Kiefer estates. This brings the total to:
Quite a substantial amount indeed. And this is far more than the $2,650,000 that Judge Maino ruled that Liberty Lobby owed the Legion.
Dare I say, Mark, noting the current reported desperate financial straits of the Legion that you described to persons at the David Irving conference, one might logically ask: WHERE DID THE MONEY GO?
And, of course, the fact remains that this is a substantial chunk of the Farrel legacy that Willis Carto assumed responsibility for at the time of signing the settlement agreement with the attorneys for Joan Althaus in 1990.
And, again, this does not include all of the money paid out to attorneys, accountants, expeditors and others who were involved in the procurement of the Farrel legacy, including, I recall, some $650,000 paid to Swiss banker Francois Genoud, a longtime friend of the Revisionist movement, who played a key role in securing the legacy.
I have been told that you denounced Genoud as a “Nazi,” a point that will surprise many Revisionists who worked closely with Genoud over the years, prior to his untimely death in, I believe, 1991.
And at this juncture another little understood matter should be pointed out for the benefit of those who may not be in tune with all of the seemingly peripheral details surrounding the Farrel legacy and the Liberty Lobby bankruptcy. And this is very important! Many of the funds listed in the previously mentioned total of money ($1,031,780.32) seized by the Lennon Company included payments for books, videos and other materials, including SPOTLIGHT subscriptions, that people sent to Liberty Lobby AFTER Liberty Lobby had actually gone out of business and was denied the opportunity to continue functioning.
Unfortunately, however, those who sent these payments never received the books they ordered or the subscriptions. Instead, your receiver, the Lennon Company, took the money and checks out of the mail addressed to Liberty Lobby and directed the funds to the Legion and presumably itself and your attorneys.
I personally received numerous letters from individuals who had ordered copies of my book, FINAL JUDGMENT, but never received them. I was forced to write them letters explaining that the Legion was taking the money they sent to Liberty Lobby and not attempting to satisfy the orders or return the money in any way, shape or form. God only knows how many good patriots and Revisionists across America, really from around the world, were cheated out of their money.
For my own part, I attempted to provide gratis copies from my own extra supply of copies of FINAL JUDGMENT to those who bothered to write, but one can only imagine how many people did not know how to reach me or how to reach the former staff of Liberty Lobby.
In one instance an elderly woman in the Mid-West returned to Liberty Lobby’s address what I recall to be $1600 in silver that she had purchased from Liberty Lobby some years before. She hoped to redeem the value of the silver and had Liberty Lobby still been operating, she would have received that money.
Instead, the Lennon company took the silver and never gave the woman the $16,000. She has since died, I understand, and is unable to pursue any legal action on her own, although it is conceivable, of course, that her heirs may choose to do so, and this would be a legal difficulty for the Legion, not to mention an utter PUBLIC RELATIONS DISASTER.
Imagine the headlines: “Revisionist Group Sued by Elderly Woman’s Estate.”
All of this is not to mention the untold thousands of unfulfilled SPOTLIGHT subscriptions and Board of Policy memberships that were left hanging.
What follows are the number of SPOTLIGHT subscribers and the members of Liberty Lobby’s Board of Policy and the total count at the time of the last issue of The SPOTLIGHT. The dollar amounts listed are the values of the remaining subscriptions.
Subscribers: 45,732 $1,818,302.99 BOP 7,527 $154,233.14
This means that at least 53,259 total patriots and Revisionists were left wanting. To my knowledge, although the Legion effectively assumed “ownership” of Liberty Lobby and its assets—including forthcoming estates earmarked in wills and trusts for Liberty Lobby—the Legion never made any effort whatsoever to satisfy any of these outstanding subscriptions and memberships.
Considering the fact that the Legion was receiving in excess of $1 million in Liberty Lobby funds, issued directly by Liberty Lobby and seized from its mail, it seems that the honorable and rightful thing to do would have been to at least write these good folks a letter and offer them a free book or back issue of The JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL REVIEW. This would have not only been good “public relations” for the Legion, but it might have won over potential new contributors and subscribers in a show of good faith. But no such show of good faith ever materialized.
Frankly, Mark, if you had done your job in making some effort in this regard, you might have literally conjured up another “Jean Farrel” out there in SPOTLIGHT Subscriber Land who—in the end—might have left another fortune to the “new” Legion and the Institute for Historical Review.
Now, of course, Jim Floyd, the outspoken Alabama Revisionist, has been spearheading efforts to organize these, shall we say “disenfranchised” SPOTLIGHT subscribers and Jim puts it bluntly: “Anyone who would open up the letter of a good patriot or Revisionist and take his money and then consciously refuse to send him what he’s ordered or even return the money if his order couldn’t be filled cannot and will not ever classify as an honest man in my book.”
And, Mark, I’m sorry to say, this problem is one that is going to hang over your head and that of the Legion as long as all of these people are left in the lurch. Frankly, your credibility and integrity as at stake.
Even if your Jewish lawyer and your collection agency, the Lennon Company, chose to operate in this underhanded fashion, you could have personally made some effort to resolve this matter. But you did not.
So this is really a matter that—for the good of all concerned, especially those who have lost out—must be considered in the matter of a “global” settlement of this most unfortunate affair surrounding the Farrel legacy. NO REVISIONIST, NO PATRIOT should be cheated of his money.
Only good can come if you make some effort to resolve this and make it a factor in any settlement proposal. I’m confident the names of those who lost out—or at least many of them—are probably available, even at this late date. How about it, Mark? Why not try to make good on this matter.
And regarding the Liberty Lobby mailing list. Here’s a point that should be noted. Although your failed lawsuit against American Free Press failed precisely because of the fact that, contrary to the claims you made, American Free Press had NOT run off with the Liberty Lobby mailing list, the fact is that your agents who came to Liberty Lobby’s headquarters in Washington never took the list with them when our then-controller Blayne Hutzel made the entire list (subscribers and Board of Policy members) available when these individuals came to our office on Capitol Hill, along with, I might add, all of Liberty Lobby’s financial records. (If I recall correctly, those acting as your agents were local members of the Church of Scientology who volunteered their services, a point that is interesting, especially regarding your constant denial that this Church played any part whatsoever in the circumstances surrounding the demise of Liberty Lobby.)
It was the fault of YOUR agents and your agents alone that the Liberty Lobby mailing list (quite a valuable asset) was never secured. And perhaps, in the end, that is for the best, considering quite convincing stories that you and your associate Greg Raven discussed selling the list to either the Anti-Defamation League or the Church of Scientology—a point I have heard that you have disputed, but not convincingly, in my humble estimation.
There is probably much more that could be said, but I have touched on the relevant highlights that you MUST acknowledge and consider when you make a genuine, formal settlement offer—not a letter to Michael Collins Piper.
Your letter indicated that copies were being sent to members of the board of directors of the Legion for the Survival of Freedom, although no individual names of said directors were listed.
As I do not have their e-mail addresses nor do I even know the names of the board, I am taking the liberty of sending copies of this letter to you to a number of prominent Revisionists so that I can be certain that my comments, at least, will be on the record, inasmuch as you involved me in this matter by addressing your initial letter to me.
In addition, inasmuch as this matter certainly does involve other Revisionists, by the very nature of the loose framework of a “settlement” that you have been discussing, I feel it is all the more appropriate that these Revisionists have the opportunity to consider all aspects of the affair, at least as much as I can provide any insights thereon.
In summary: there is NOTHING left of the Farrel legacy, other than (1) the money that was taken from Liberty Lobby by your receiver, the Lennon company, and (2) that money that was earmarked for Liberty Lobby in the Allen and Kiefer estates (and which would have ultimately been repaid by Liberty Lobby, over the long term to the Farrel account in Switzerland).
As a parting note, in the spirit of your initial suggestion, I would comment that I personally will certainly encourage Willis Carto to use the egis of both American Free Press and The Barnes Review to perhaps join with the IHR itself—whatever the IHR constitutes, and it doesn’t seem to constitute much more than an Internet website at this point—to issue a hard-hitting fund-raising mailing to raise money to set up a trust fund to be accessed by responsible Revisionists.
Further, I would be pleased to offer, gratis, my own modest talents as a fund-raising letter writer—and I had largely written, by far, virtually all of Liberty Lobby and The Barnes Review’s fundraising and subscription letters over a 20 year period (no small accomplishment)—in furtherance of such a project. I would be proud to do it.
However, Mark, your dream of procuring some “hidden” or “remaining” Farrel funds is a pipe dream. It will never happen. Your legal hounds have managed to grab back all of the funds—and more—that Liberty Lobby received and the Legion itself received a substantial amount of the Farrel funds, directly and through payment of Legion bills, from the very beginning. These are facts that cannot be denied. You must consider all of this when making a formal settlement offer, and I hope you will.
In closing, I hope that this letter—an honest effort by yours truly to lay out some little-known but highly relevant facts concerning the Farrel legacy—will contribute to the settlement of this matter.
Please, Mark: do not write me in response to this letter.
Instead, sit down with your attorneys and your board of directors—maybe consult with some respected Revisionists such as Fredrick Toben, Jurgen Graf, Germar Rudolf, Michael A. Hoffman II, David Irving, Robert Faurisson, Ingrid Rimland, Arthur Butz, Bradley Smith, Robert Countess, Michael Santomauro, Mark Farrell—the list goes on and on—and get some good solid input and come up with a very real and very solid and reasonable settlement offer. Then, finally, all of this can be resolved. The Revisionist movement is much bigger than Mark Weber or Willis Carto or even the IHR and The Barnes Review. Remember that, Mark. No, better yet—as Mel Mermelstein’s father would say: “Never Forget.”
MICHAEL COLLINS PIPER
from The SPOTLIGHT
with a postscript
IHR Update [On the Takeover Coup of the IHR]
From The SPOTLIGHT, March 22, 1999, p 22-3 – The Update is dated March 11
Only the politically naive reject the facts pointing toward behind-the-scenes conspiratorial involvement in the events that led to the destruction of the California-based Institute for Historical Review (IHR) and the subsequent effort to destroy The SPOTLIGHT. There is no question that Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad, played the primary behind-the-scenes role in the IHR affair.
IHR Update can now state conclusively that the primary Mossad operative behind the IHR upheaval was a high-priced Los Angeles attorney, Lawrence Heller.
Until recently, Heller was best known as the attorney who, in 1991, unsuccessfully represented self-styled « Holocaust survivor » Mel Mermelstein in the final stages of Mermelstein’s decade-long quest to eviscerate the IHR and Liberty Lobby. IHR Update has determined that Heller had other, more interesting behind-the-scenes connections.
Five years before Heller publicly surfaced as Mermelstein’s attorney, it turns out that Heller was part of a small clique that secretly grabbed control of the Church of Scientology upon the disappearance of church founder L Ron Hubbard.
Unknown to even many devout Scientologists, Heller and his clique control a shadowy body known as the « Church of Spiritual Technology » which has a lock on the church’s vast worldwide financial assets. [It has been said that paranormal research scientists Harold Puthoff and Russell Targ, veterans of the Stanford Research Institute/US Army Remote Viewing Project, are involved with the CST. -Birdman]
As IHR Update noted in a detailed special report on Oct. 26, 1998, upon Hubbard’s disappearance (and reported death in 1986) coupled with the overview of Hubbard’s widow as the leading figure within the church, Scientology fell victim to a coup d’etat orchestrated by outside forces with an interest in gaining control of Scientology, its vast wealth and its wide-ranging global power network.
Former high-ranking American diplomat Stephen Koczak (who had been stationed in Israel) told The SPOTLIGHT in 1994 that, according to his sources, it was the Mossad, in conjunction with elements of the CIA, that had seized control of Scientology. Thus, Heller and his group were fronting for the Mossad in the takeover of Scientology. David Miscavige was set up to take the place of L. Ron Hubbard who founded the cult.
The Scientology link to the IHR conspiracy revealed itself on Oct. 1, 1993. On that date, two things happened:
1) First, under the political influence of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL of B’nai B’rith, itself an arm of Israel’s Mossad), the Internal Revenue Service finally granted a highly lucrative tax exemption to the Church of Scientology;; This was something that the IRS had refused to do for over 30 years, particularly when Scientology was under the independent control of church founder L. Ron Hubbard.
2) On the same date, in accordance with a conspiratorial agreement with the ADL/Mossad, longtime Scientologist Tom Marcellus unveiled the secret year-long conspiracy to take over the IHR. Marcellus, the trusted veteran IHR staff director, sent a letter to IHR founder Willis Carto telling Carto that his relationship with the IHR had been ‘terminated. »
This was the first time that Carto learned of the conspiracy. It wasn’t until numerous discoveries were made that the theretofore secret role of Scientology was determined. And it was not until even much later that the full truth about Scientology being a controlled front for the Mossad was uncovered.
For those concerned with detail, it should perhaps be noted that the IRS commissioner who set in motion the groundwork for Scientology’s tax exemption was Fred Goldberg, a law partner of longtime ADL national chairman Kenneth Bialkin.
In fact, Goldberg fixed things for Scientology only one month after Scientology’s Mossad controller, attorney Lawrence Heller, was forced to surrender to the IHR and Liberty Lobby in the aforementioned Mermelstein case.
Having failed through very public means (the Mermelstein lawsuit) to destroy the IHR and Liberty Lobby, Scientology’s Mossad controllers decided, at that juncture, to utilize their « secret weapon » inside the IHR — Tom Marcellus. First and foremost among the « insiders » at the IHR who manipulated events that led to the coup were two members of the Church of Scientology: Marcellus and one Greg Raven.
Marcellus was an open Scientologist and was steadily moving up in the ranks in return for making major financial contributions to Scientology affiliates. In fact, Marcellus today maintains a web site on the Internet which focuses exclusively on his devotion to Scientology.
Raven, on the other hand, denies his association with Scientology although, quite recently, Raven was seen in attendance at a Scientology-sponsored function in Los Angeles.
The gun-toting Raven is a member of Scientology’s Guardian Office, which was disbanded by a federal judge in 1982 but continued under the name « Division 20 » or « The Office of Special Services. » This clandestine section of the huge Scientology organization has responsibility for « cleaning up the rotten spots of society in order to create a safer and saner environment for Scientology expansion and for all mankind. » Translated, that means that agents in Department 20 are assigned highly confidential tasks, and taking over other organizations or businesses is a long-standing strategy of Scientology.
Raven was deployed into IHR by Scientology’s Mossad controllers in late 1992. His mission was to organize the coup. Working in tandem with Marcellus, Raven began manipulating the two other IHR employees (Mark Weber and Theodore O’Keefe) who were utilized in the IHR take-over.
At this juncture, another player popped up. His name was Andrew Evered Allen, a resident of exclusive Tiburon, California (just outside San Francisco).
The scion of a wealthy family with reputed ties to the Levi Strauss garment empire, Allen had moved in the periphery of the IHR for some years, his most notable contribution being the financial backer of one David McCalden, who waged a longtime smear campaign against the IHR, using the research materials given him by a known CIA asset, Elliot Carter, and by his homosexual friend, Roy Bullock, a paid ADL spy. McCalden has since died of AIDS.
While living off his family’s wealth, Allen has also dabbled in intelligence intrigue, including « running » (Allen’s words) what Allen called « supplies » to the Mujahideen rebels in the Middle East — a CIA project that former Mossad case officer Victor Ostrovsky says was dominated by the Mossad.
Allen also had a hand in Far Eastern affairs in a sphere of direct interest to the Mossad: he operated the Burma Foundation which has played a part in the ongoing effort by the CIA and the Mossad to topple the nationalist military government of Burma (now known as Myanmar).
Portraying himself to IHR staff members Weber and O’Keefe as a « loyal revisionist » (his known record notwithstanding), Allen joined in the effort to subvert the IHR from within.
Along with Mossad asset Andrew Allen, Scientologists Marcellus and Raven convinced employees Weber and 0’Keefe — who became willing participants in the conspiracy — that they would become very wealthy and the de facto leaders of the worldwide revisionist movement by collaborating in the conspiracy to grab what they (wrongly) believed was a $40 or $80 million inheritance left by a relative of populist Thomas Edison.
O’Keefe, who ultimately left the IHR following a mental breakdown, appears to have been more of a foolish pawn than anything. Despite O’Keefe’s treachery, many revisionists still express sympathy for O’Keefe’s demise and say: « The poor fellow was being used and he didn’t even know it. »
The case of Weber is another matter altogether. While Weber (possibly) may not initially have known that the Mossad was ultimately the primary mover behind the IHR coup, Weber’s continuing involvement in prolonging the ongoing attack on Liberty Lobby demonstrates conclusively that Weber is definitely « bought and paid for » and a complete shill for his controllers.
(There does remain, however, the question of whether Weber himself has Mossad or CIA connections, dating to his days in Africa where Weber, ostensibly a « racist, » was « teaching English » at an all-black high school in Ghana, one of the Mossad’s major outposts in Africa.)
In any event, Weber continues to publicly front for the Mossad attack on Liberty Lobby which is being financed lock-stock-and-barrel by the deep pockets of the Church of Scientology (which, in turn, is controlled by Mossad asset Lawrence Heller and his associates.)
After The SPOTLIGHT and other news outlets exposed Scientology’s role in the IHR affair, David Miscavige ordered Marcellus to resign his post at the IHR in order to deflect attention from Scientology. Raven, however, remained in place and although Raven had no involvement in IHR affairs until a few months before the coup he directed, he is now « president » of IHR.
Raven’s sole purpose is to continue to perpetuate the IHR’s existence long enough to use the IHR’s lawsuit against Liberty Lobby to destroy the Washington-based populist Institution.
Although Mossad asset Andrew Allen (who says he is not a Mossad asset) has since officially withdrawn from the IHR’s affairs (his job having been accomplished) and Scientology front man Tom Marcellus has gone on to greener pastures, rising further in the ranks of his cult, the Mossad has two valuable assets in place: Scientologist Raven and his willing patsy, Mark Weber.
Liberty Lobby Beats the Odds Again
SPOTLIGHT March 20, 2000 – 21
As a helicopter buzzed overhead and will, snipers in place, some 100 armed officers from the San Diego County’s sheriff’s office and the Costa Mesa, Calif., police department accompanied by agents from several federal agencies including the FBI, the BATF and the IRS — attacked in force.
They maced the Carto’s dog, broke the gate and ransacked the Carto home. Mrs. Carto was brutalized and two young visitors were handcuffed and held captive with her. No one was permitted to use the phone. Mr. Carto was in Washington, D.C., at the time. Then they moved on to The SPOTLIGHT office, adjacent to the house, and turned it upside down, taking away a total of 14 cartons of papers and files.
Tire raid was instigated by Tom Marcellus, Mark Weber and Greg Raven, treacherous employees of the Costa Mesa-based Institute for Historical Review (IHR), a revisionist research group also founded by Carto.
The employees lied to Costa Mesa police investigator Larry Rooker – a friend of their lawyer, William Hulsy and claimed Carto had « embezzled » funds from the IHR. This was part of a carefully coordinated scheme to discredit Mr. Carto and take control of the IHR. At that juncture Rooker made contact with San Diego County Deputy Sheriff Tim Carroll, the longtime liaison between the San Diego sheriff’s office and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), an arm of Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad. The ADL liaison and Rooker crafted a fraudulent request for a search warrant which Rooker turned over to an Orange County judge, Suzanne Shaw, who gave the go-ahead for the raid without properly questioning the integrity of their « evidence. » (Not surprisingly, Shaw was later brought up on ethics charges involving improper judicial conduct, although the charges were not related to her behavior in the Liberty Lobby case.)
The violent raid thus took place. Marcellus, Weber and Raven repeatedly claimed that charges would be filed against Mr. Carte, based upon « evidence » uncovered in the raid. No evidence was found. No charges were ever filed.
They also tried to get Carto indicted by the California attorney general, the U.S. Justice Department and even Swiss authorities. To do the latter, they worked with the ADL’s branch in Switzerland. All to no avail.
Mr. Carto and his wife filed a civil suit against the law enforcement authorities charging their civil rights had been violated. Preferring to keep the case from going public and revealing the forces behind the raid, the officials opted for an out-ofcourt settlement to cover up the malfeasance by the ADL-influenced law enforcement officers in collusion with the corrupt IHR employees.
Actually, Marcellus, Weber and Raven were acting as mere tools for powerful behind-the-scenes manipulators of the events that led up to the raid – which was part of a long-standing scheme to destroy the IHR from within.
Weber, who was on a « power trip » and saw the conspiracy as a « get rich quick » scheme, was probably unaware (at first) that he was a foolish pawn in a much bigger game, but he was nonetheless an eager and willing participant.
Webers « handler » was Andrew Allen, a San Francisco Bay socialite who-by his own admission under oath — dabbled in intrigue in two regions (Burma and Afghanistan) where the CIA and its allied intelligence agency, Israel’s Mossad (the foreign sponsor of the ADL) were involved in longtime joint covert operations. Allen’s mission was the destruction of the IHR. The Mossad was interested in destroying the IHR because the research group had done so much to delve into secrets of history that would-if widely disseminated — threaten the annual multi-billion-dollar U.S. taxpayer subsidies to Israel. Marcellus and Raven were under the discipline of the Church of Scientology, of which they were thoroughly inculcated followers totally devoted to the instructions of their leaders.
Although ostensibly led by David Miscavige, the truth is that in the mid-1980s a secret clique – including Los Angeles attorney Lawrence Heller — seized control of Scietology from its founder, L. Ron Hubbard and his wife and set up a new regime. Miscavige has been only the front man.
Stephen J. Koczak, a veteran U.S. State Department officer (who served in Israel), told The SPOTLIGHT that the Heller group that seized control of Scientology was a Mossad unit. The Mossad was interested in Scientology’s massive financial assets and Scientology’s legendary « mind control » techniques developed by Hubbard. For nearly a century, intelligence agencies have dabbled in mind control.
Thus, when Israel’s Mossad decided to move against the IHR, Scientology zombie Marcellus was already in place. Acting under Miscavige’s instructions, Marcellus then brought another Scientologist, Greg Raven, into the IHR to assist the planned coup. Weber, and a fourth employee, Ted O’Keefe meanwhile, were being manipulated by the Mossad-linked Andrew Allen and William Hulsy, a lawyer who would do anything fur money.
The scheme to take over the IHR was unveiled on Oct. 1, 1993. By pre-arrangement on that date the IRS also granted the tax exemption to Scientology that it had tried to get for three decades.
However, after the Heller group was firmly in charge of Scientology, then-IRS Commissioner Fred Goldberg (a law partner of ADL chairman Kenneth Bialkin) set in motion the process that resulted in the Heller group getting the exemption a major financial boon to the Mossad controllers of Scientology.
In return for the tax exemption, the deceitful Scientology agents pulled off a coup inside the IHR. In events reminiscent of the ouster of the Hubbards from Scientology itself, the Mossad-sponsored conspirators seized physical control of the IHR and announced the « termination » of IHR founder Willis Carto.
When Mr. and Mrs. Carto attempted to regain control of the IHR office and an inventory of hard-to-find books worth more than $1 million, the Cartos were violently beaten and Scientologist Raven pointed a loaded, cocked 9mm handgun in Mrs. Carto’s face. Following these events, the conspirators orchestrated a well-funded series of lawsuits against the Cartos and ultimately against Liberty Lobby. One of the lawsuits resulted in a multi-million dollar judgement against Liberty Lobby, forcing our populist Institution to file for bankruptcy.
The bright conclusion to this dismal story is that on this fifth anniversary of the raid on Liberty Lobby’s West Coast office, your populist Institution has survived. The bankruptcy has been resolved by a settlement. We are still moving forward. Without the support of our Board of Policy and other patriots, Liberty Lobby and The SPOTLIGHT would now be history.
Ici, Michael Hoffman reste très diplomate dans son compte-rendu critique du livre de Cole, mais connaissant Hoffman, cet ancie journaliste de l’Associated Press, on présume qu’il use de diplomatie dans l’idée que son texte va ainsi beaucoup plus circuler et réussir beaucoup mieux à influencer les lecteurs que s’il paraît haineux ou antijuif.Faurisson: David Cole est de retour David Cole a changé de nom pour David Stein, pour devenir un petit con de néocon travaillant au sein du parti Républicain, mais il a été démasqué récemment et a décidé, cet esprit faible et malade, de diffamer tous les révisionnistes, à part ces semi-révisionnistes qui croient aux chambres à gaz (par ex: l’homme brisé David Irving et le mercenaire-traître connecté à la Scientologie-Mossad et aux services secrets Mark Weber). On ignorait à quel point Cole était un vrai fouteur de merde! Il s’est agrippé à Mark Weber qui lui a ouvert des portes et c’est grâce à lui qu’il est redevenu une vedette. Il vient de sortir un livre sur son passage chez les révisionnistes et son virage politique pro-Républicain et carrément Néocon. David Irving s’est fait tordre le bras pour qu’il cautionne certains témoignages sur l’existence de certaines chambres à gaz, mais il faut savoir qu’il a fini par dire cela après des années de harcèlement et même d’emprisonnement. Irving reconnaît maintenant la mort de millions de juifs en lien avec les politiques hitlériennes. Il a fini par céder, mais pensait-il que ses déclarations allaient ensuite servir à mousser la popularité de crapules telles que Weber et Cole? Il existe des raisons objectives de critiquer les révisionnistes sur certains points, mais pas comme le fait Cole.
Weber est un type dangereux lié à notre ennemi traditionnel (via Andrew E. Allen, pseudo révisionniste qui a travaillé comme Weber en Afrique pour les compte des services secrets. Weber c’était au Ghana et Allen c’était en Birmanie, pour une fondation de Soros, ni plus ni moins!) Weber a fait du site IHR un simple site antisioniste– ce qui est tout de même étrange quand on pense qu’il est très proche de Jared Taylor (American Renaissance), qui est tout le contraire de lui: anti-Islam, anti-nazi, pro-juif, ami de rabbins et même d’agents de l’ADL… Le pire c’est que Don Black de Stormfront est ami-ami avec ces connards… Sachant toutes ces connexions étranges, c’est à se demander si le site Stormfront (malgré la relative liberté d’expression qui y règne) sert à cette bande de traîtres pour collecter des noms et influencer et orienter les nationalistes blancs dans une certaine direction?
STRANGE FACTS ABOUT THE ‘NEW’
INSTITUTE FOR HISTORICAL REVIEW
-AND THE STRANGE PEOPLE IN CHARGE!
By Dr. James K. Warner
CAN THERE BE ANY DOUBT ABOUT WHO REALLY IS IN CONTROL AT THE’NEW INSTITUTE FOR HISTORICAL REVIEW?
In THE JUDAS GOATS, Michael Collins Piper denounces the role of a certain « Mr M » (late Matthew Peter Balic, named in the book) :
Secret Coup Inside Scientology SPOTLIGHT October 26, 1998 IHR UPDATE
IHR Update SPOTLIGHT, March 22, 1999, p 22-3 – The Update is dated March 11
‘Big Secret’ of Mermelstein Case Exposed In Helping Mossad Seize Scientology SPOTLIGHT May 10, 1999
Why Would the Mossad Want to Steal Hubbard’s Church SPOTLIGHT May 10, 1999 -13
What Went on Behind Closed Doors America is supposed to be an open society, but the IRS is keeping secret the details of its decision to exempt the profitable Church of Scientology from paying taxes.SPOTLIGHT July 8, 1999
IHR PERPETRATORS SPOTLIGHT November 22, 1999 -23.
Michael Collins Piper just called and sent me the shocking information about Andrew Allen, ally of Mark Weber, that follows.
Some background first:
In January 2009, Weber outraged revisionists worldwide — many of whom have gone to prison for their beliefs, such as my French friend Vincent Reynouard and my Spanish friend Pedro Varela, who entered prison TODAY for at least one year and four months — by stating that the Jewish Holocaust did happen after all. (In fact, Weber had refused to attend the Holocaust revisionist conference of December 2007 in Teheran, Iran.)
Some leading revisionists urged at that time that I become the new Director of the IHR, since 1) the IHR under Weber has been stagnant for years, 2) its director contradicts the very purpose of the organization, which was to question the Establishment’s view of Hitler, the Third Reich and WWII, and 3) I was both dynamic with PR and the media and also a hardcore Holocaust revisionist.
A defamation campaign targeting me by Weber prevented that. In fact, Don Black, a friend of Weber, banned me, five weeks after I began campaigning to replace Weber, from the WN forum “Stormfront,” where my “thread” entitled “Apocalypse of the Psychopaths” was going up by two thousand views a DAY. (Black banned me just three days after Homeland Security came with three squad cars and arrested my personal assistant, gang-rape opponent Henrik Holappa: http://johndenugent.com/henrik-holappa)
Don Black, friend of Weber, who said I was “delusional.”
His son Derek Black (l) and “Jack Boot” (r), called “Stormfront Chief of Staff,” whose poison thread implied I was a homosexual….. despite my two marriages and two kids, Ingrid and Erika…
Weber stills runs the IHR, with a $40K annual salary, while I live hand to mouth.
Mark Weber has strong neanderthal features. His sister lived on a kibbuz in Israel. His benefactor Allen’s father was a wealthy real estate developer whose sister married a Straus of the Macy’s fortune…. Andrew Allen said under oath he spent ten years “running arms” to the Afghani mujahideen (AKA the Taliban), which was, though conceived by Zbigniew Brzezinski, was conducted at the tactical level as a Mossad op.
And now to Mike Piper’s revelation.
* * *
Send Sympathies to “Andy” Allen…
..Michael Collins Piper
Of course, I don’t want Brad to eat his shorts.
That could cause heartburn, and I can tell you that I developed heart burn gulping down my lunch so I could get to the phone and call Willis and tell him that we finally had the goods on Allen’s Jewish connection.
Allen’s father, Howard Allen, is the brother of the late Beth Allen Straus, now of the great “Our Crowd” Jewish family of New York.
From: Michael Collins Piper
Sent: Mon, December 13, 2010 2:08:20 PM
Subject: Send Sympathies to “Andy” Allen
Andrew Allen’s aunt, Beth Straus—wife of Donald Straus, grandson of Isidor and Ida Straus, the great Jewish philanthropists who quite famously went down together on the Titanic—died at age 94 in Maine.
Beth’s obituary appeared in the New York Times the other day, I think it was the 12th. She looks very Jewish herself, but she certainly married into a well-off Jewish family.
Yep, that’s Andy’s daddy!
Elizabeth Allen was born in San Francisco on Nov. 23, 1916, the daughter of Harry Allen, a successful real estate developer, and Winifred Bridge, an accomplished gardener.
I wonder why? His aunt was married into one of the most respected and distinguished Zionist Jewish families in America. The Straus’s—Isidor and Ida—are virtual American (and Jewish) icons, the stuff of song and story, their tales told in all the lore of the Titanic. Hell, I knew about the Straus/Titanic story when I was about 7 years old.
But it apparently slipped Andy’s mind when he was being questioned under oath.
Bradley: Andy Allen is a perjurer. Too bad the statute of limitations has run out on this character.
Plus, Andy Allen worked for the CIA (and the Mossad—more directly the Mossad) running guns in Afghanistan. He admitted that under oath, without mentioning the CIA or the Mossad. But do you think, Bradley—and you are a smart fellow—that “Andy” was just over there for fun, just kind of a lone wolf on a joy ride to Afghanistan.
No, Bradley, Andy Allen, who ran the take-over of the IHR, was an intelligence operative on a mission.
And you can quote me on this: if I ever learn I have six months to live, I’m going to track down Andy and Mark and have lots of fun before it’s all over.
By Carolyn Yeager
On the 9th October, 1942, a confidential information bulletin was sent to all Gauleiters and Kreisleiters entitled « Preparatory Measures for the Final Solution of the Jewish Question in Europe. Rumours concerning the Conditions of the Jews in the East. » This bulletin stated that rumours were being started by returning soldiers concerning the conditions of Jews in the East which some Germans might not understand, and outlined in detail the official explanation to be given. This bulletin contained no explicit statement that the Jews were being exterminated, but it did indicate they were going to labour camps, and spoke of their complete segregation and elimination and the necessity of ruthless severity. …from Section “The Leadership Core of the Nazi Party” under Judgement: The Accused Organizations
Long time holocaust revisionist Friedrich Paul Berg has asked Mark Weber to engage in a debate on a radio program format on the topic of gassing of Jews, but Weber has declined. Weber does not want to answer questions about his stated position that up to a million Jews died in gas chambers in Poland. He says he considers himself a holocaust revisionist, but if that is true he only represents “revisionism-lite,” or better, revisionism-ultra lite.
–Écouter aussi l’entrevue de Germar Rudolf et Fritz Berg sur la catastrophe de l’IHR à l’émission de Yeager (16 dec. 2013).–
The website of the ADL says about Jared Taylor (American Renaissance):
» Taylor eschews anti-Semitism. Seeing Jews as white, greatly influential and the “conscience of society,” Taylor rather seeks to partner with Jews who share his views on race and racial diversity. Four out of the 10 speakers at the initial American Renaissance conference in 1994 were Jews, including Michael Levin, a racist professor at the City University of New York and author of Why Race Matters, and Rabbi Mayer Shiller, then head of the Yeshiva University High School for Boys in New York. Jews have been speakers and/or participants at all eight American Renaissance conferences.
During the 2006 American Renaissance conference David Duke, who was not a scheduled presenter, accused Jews of being a “power… that has led to the internal destruction of our will and spirit” during a question-and-answer session. Taylor attempted to “clear the air” regarding Jewish participation in American Renaissance conferences with a piece in the May 2006 edition of the American Renaissance journal in which he wrote, “Jews have, from the outset, been equal participants in our efforts.” However, he also compared the question of “the roles of Jews in society” to questions over homosexuality, foreign policy, and abortion and said that these issues should be openly debated in a “free society.” »
http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/jar … tem=taylor
Murder Discussed at High-Level Bronfman Meeting
In 2005 New York magazine noted Edgar Bronfman “belongs to one of the world’s most exclusive clubs, an impossibly elite gathering known as the ‘Mega Group.’ It consists of about a dozen inconceivably rich Jews who get together several times a year, often in either Bronfman’s or [CBS owner] Larry Tisch’s apartment. . . .”
In 1990, an unexpected source advised Andrew St. George—chief correspondent for The Spotlight (forerunner of AFP)—there had been a high-level meeting at Bronfman’s New York apartment attended by top financial patrons and leaders of the Zionist movement. (This was the “Mega Group” although its name was not then known.) Devoted to combating the purported “rise of anti-Semitism,” the meeting’s participants included financier Felix Rohatyn and Jacques Torczyner, president of the Zionist Organization of America.
Andrew’s source told him Torczyner said, in words to these effect: “It’s time that we put a stop to Willis Carto and his newspaper, The Spotlight.” Torczyner said specifically that Carto and his associates should be “hunted and shot like quail.”
Torczyner’s candor disturbed at least some of his fellow power brokers who responded, “We can’t use the tactics of our enemies.”
In fact, it was the aforementioned Rohatyn who told St. George about the meeting. A longtime newsman, St. George knew many people, Rohatyn among them.
St. George took the story to Carto and Mark Lane, The Spotlight’s anti-Zionist Jewish attorney, who wrote a letter to Torczyner warning him against making further threats. Still, a continuing campaign to destroy The Spotlight culminated with the populist weekly driven out of business in 2001. Thank goodness, AFP picked up The Spotlight’s fallen torch.
Carto had reason to be concerned: Bronfman fingerprints were all over the JFK assassination conspiracy. For the tip of that iceberg, see the Dec. 9and16, 2013 issue of AFP.
Michael Collins Piper. American Free Press, Jan 6&13, 2014
« The growing numbers of revisionist supporters cannot be ignored. We must use every resource to stop revisionism before it’s too late »
–Edgar Bronfman Sr
Sur Bollyn et Hufschmid:
FALSE FLAGS–TEMPLATE FOR TERROR
Chapter 28: 9-11 and the New Internet Paradigm: The Necessity for High-Level Manipulation and Control of the Dissemination of Information
(…) Many of these operatives spent much of their time putting out what could only be described as downright “crazy” theories about 9-11 that redirected attention away from sober, responsible research.
In other instances, they specialized in cranking out often-reckless theories that were quite easily refutable, therefore giving credence to the oft-heard claim from the mainstream media that any and all other dissident 9-11 research was just as silly and unreliable.
And in a number of instances, there were several 9-11 “truthers” who, while pointing the finger of blame at Israel, were (at the same time) engaging in other activity that led many observers to believe that these individuals were “black propaganda” operatives trying to bring discredit to those who believed Israel was indeed responsible for 9-11.
Two such individuals, Christopher Bollyn and Eric Hufschmid—whom many believe were “ringers” inserted into the 9-11 truth movement from the beginning—ingratiated themselves with American Free Press (having pretended to be enthusiastic about my book Final Judgment) and, over a period of time, engaged in a concerted effort to influence AFP’s coverage of 9-11—and not in a positive way.
Ultimately AFP discovered that while Bollyn and Hufschmid supplied a lot of “good” information, that data was mixed in with a variety of “bad” data, the consequence of which was that many of the stories the two generated (working hand-in-hand on a daily basis behind the scenes for well over a year) proved to be of rather dubious value.
At one juncture, Bollyn and Hufschmid tried to convince the editors of AFP that outspoken 9-11 survivor, William Rodriguez—who had been honored by 9-11 truth seekers all over the United States and around the world for his integrity—was some sort of “Zionist agent.”
And despite the fact that independently wealthy American philanthropist Jimmy Walter had bankrolled speaking engagements by both Bollyn and Hufschmid, the dynamic duo also spread the word that Walter—who spent millions of dollars of his own money seeking to alert the public to 9-11 truth—was also a stooge for Israeli interests.
For my own part, I spent an entire week in Malaysia in the company of both Rodriguez and Walter and I never saw any sign that they were working to advance Zionist interests in any way, shape or form.
However, considering the record of Bollyn and Hufschmid, I think it’s safe to say that the same thing cannot be said about them.
Considering all of this, more than a handful of 9-11 dissidents (including many who believed Israel was behind 9-11) ultimately came to conclude Bollyn was actually a disinformation agent using a perverse back-handed way of discrediting AFP and those who believed the Mossad was responsible for 9-11.
Bollyn’s critics correctly pointed out that Bollyn had a pattern of misquoting sources, misinterpreting scientific information, and making assertions about certain matters without any foundational authority.
The consequence was that Bollyn’s disinformation gave ammunition to critics of AFP’s contention that the Mossad was behind 9-11 and as such was enthusiastically bandied about by Zionist propagandists seeking to undermine AFP’s thesis even though the questionable material by Bollyn focused on scientific data that had nothing whatsoever to do with the specific matter of Mossad involvement in 9-11.
In the end, after their deception was unmasked, Bollyn and Hufschmid launched a smear campaign against AFP alleging that we were, too, were really “Zionist agents” trying to cover up Mossad involvement in 9-11, an allegation preposterous on its face to anyone familiar with AFP’s work. Bollyn even claimed that Mark Lane—the anti-Zionist Jewish critic of Israel who pinpointed the CIA’s role in the JFK assassination conspiracy—was a Zionist and a secret asset of the CIA!
Unfortunately—and not unpredictably—a few naive folks actually believed these liars, especially people new to the 9-11 truth movement who didn’t have access to the big picture. However, when all was said and done, the romance between Bollyn and Hufschmid came to a bitter end and the two began accusing one another of being Zionist agents!
And the strange outside possibility was that both of them could actually have been right. After all, not all Zionist agents necessarily know the identities of the others. That’s how complex the world of intelligence intrigue happens to be.
Hufschmid’s own website devolved into a mish-mash of weird commentary (often referencing sexual matters, especially human interaction with animals) and once even included a nude photograph of Hufschmid, taken from the rear, ostensibly for the purpose of explaining some “health” matter Hufschmid felt would interest his readers.
That Bollyn, an American, had spent time on an Israeli kibbutz and later married an Israeli woman—who worked for Shin Bet, Israel’s domestic intelligence agency—was a point many found telling. That his own sister was also married to a Jew and had taken up residence in Israel was also considered somewhat suspicious.
It’s always been my suspicion (based on a variety of data too complicated to delve into here) that Bollyn was a long-standing international free-lance intelligence operative who, for at least a substantial part of his career, was working for the Church of England, which—although many people don’t realize it—has always been an arm of British intelligence, active in global intrigue. In fact, Bollyn and his family have multiple “British” connections which also point toward that conclusion.
And, needless to say, the British Empire—which has long been under the control of the Rothschild Dynasty—has always played a peculiar role in advancing Jewish and Zionist interests, even going back to the days when the woman whom Bollyn claims as an ancestor, Anne Boleyn, was a central player in a grand design that disrupted the traditional role of the Roman Catholic Church in Britain and set the stage for the rise of Jewish financial power in Britain in years to come. (And that is a story in and of itself—worthy of a book that has yet to be written.)
But for those who are interested, an English patriot and critic of the New World order with an abiding interest in 9-11 truth—and who does believe Israel was a key player in that tragedy—has put together a remarkably detailed website (complete with a fascinating variety of links and other valuable information) which delves into the bizarre story of Bollyn and his erstwhile friend Hufschmid. See http://www.takeourworldback.com for more.
In any event, all of this having been said, it’s quite clear that the circumstances surrounding 9-11 gave Israel—along with other power players on the world stage—a new understanding of how the Internet worked and how its resources could be utilized (for better or for worse) in manipulating global opinion.
And as a consequence, people in high places began working to lay forth a plan to ensure that, in the future, the Internet could be used for their own benefit and to undercut those—such as the 9-11 dissidents and other truth-seekers who questioned “official” stories about such matters as the JFK assassination and the Oklahoma bombing and other matters—who stood in opposition to the New World Order agenda.
As we shall see, this carefully-crafted endeavor had even further consequences when the plan was skillfully put into actual working order in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting in Newtown, Connecticut and the Boston Marathon bombing that followed not long afterward.
The Internet, as a consequence, was no longer simply a venue for truth seekers to “get the word out” about high-level cover-ups. Instead, it became a vehicle used by the high-level conspirators to not only confuse the work of the truth seekers but also to combat them by discrediting them through some of the most manipulative means possible.
It’s a story that has never been told before, but it is a story that must be told, if real truth seekers are going to be able to deal with the big challenges that lie ahead, particularly when confronted with propaganda and disinformation designed to frustrate their efforts to combat the very real forces of Evil that lie behind the New World Order.
Let us then move forward and examine this extraordinary conspiracy in a way that it has never before been dissected. It’s a shocker . . .