The Gangsters And The Ghetto

Grim events at the end of the Second World War have cast a certain shadow over the nation of Poland.

It was on its soil that stood Nazi concentration camps such as Auschwitz and Treblinka and Poles have sometimes been judged culpable in some ancillary way for the actions of the occupying Nazi regime.

But important light is shed on this issue by Polish historian Ewa Kurek in her book Polish-Jewish Relations 1939-1945.¹

Drawing on predominantly Jewish sources, her research and analysis completely demolish conventional certainties about how guilt for the mass Jewish deaths can be apportioned.

Despite the dates cited in her title, she in fact goes right back into history to provide the context for the situation during the Second World War. Jews had been living in Poland for about a thousand years, she explains, with their status initially solidified by King Casimir the Great (1333-1370), who passed legal decrees “which pertained to privileges granted to Jews enabling them to establish Jewish settlements on land belonging to Poland”.² Rumours apparently abounded that the Jews gained the favour of the king “thanks to the royal banker, Jew Lewko”.³

The most important feature of the picture Kurek paints is how separate the Jewish population always remained from the Christian Poles – only a small proportion were assimilated into society in the way we have seen in Western Europe, the USA, Australia and so on. The Jewish and Polish worlds “existed alongside each other but never actually came into contact with one another. Each one revolved around its own self-sustaining life, barely even catching a glimpse of or tolerating the other, or even feeling any particular need to unite”.⁴

Describing the period between 1580 and 1764, she says: “It is clear that Jews fulfilled a specific role within the economic structures of the civil state. They resided in Polish cities, towns and villages, but in Poland they had their own Jewish Parliament, Jewish court system, Jewish religion, and their rhythm of life was dictated by their religion”.⁵

“It must be admitted that this notion of ‘being left to one’s own devices’ was very appealing to Jews, if for no reason other than it did create a sort of ersatz little Jewish state they could call their own”.⁶

Kurek explains that the stable existence on Polish soil of the kahal, the Jewish community, began to break down in the second half of the 18th century. The abolition of higher structures of Jewish self-government was provoked by “the economic claims of the aristocracy (collecting debts ‘from the synagogues’) on the one hand, and on the other an attempt to curtail the kahal’s ‘plutocratic extortion tactics being imposed on the plebs’”.⁷

While claims of anti-semitism among Poles are often heard, Kurek makes it clear that a certain distrust and even hostility existed on both sides. She quotes Wladyslaw Bartoszewksi’s account of life in a Jewish community, or ghetto: “Inside this neighborhood, there was not a single Jew, a homeowner, who would have even considered renting an apartment to a Christian, be that a Pole, a German or a Czech. This was an impossibility for a very basic reason: it was a sin for a devout Jew to have an outsider living amongst their own, within their community”.⁸

In his account of the ghetto, Krzysztof Burnetko writes: “Regarding themselves as monotheists, the Jews reckoned that they should not come into contact with any other religion, and particularly with its sacrum. For example, in the XIII century orthodox Jews suggested that when Christians walked the streets during the Corpus Christi procession, a religious Jew could 194 not leave his house. A similarly motivated advice said that pious Jews should not live in a house whose windows overlooked a church”.⁹

Most Jews in Poland did not even speak Polish, just the Yiddish of their own tightly-knit communities.¹⁰ Remarks Kurek: “Marian Milsztajn, who was born in 1919 in Lublin, captured the character of the linguistic relations which prevailed in Jewish neighborhoods in Polish cities in the twenty-year period between the wars: ‘The place where we lived… I never heard a single word uttered in Polish. I didn’t know that such a language existed. As for its existence, I knew that it was the language of the goys. Poland? No idea. I first encountered the Polish language when I was seven years old’”.¹¹

Jewish historian Professor Chone Shmeruk explains that Jews often had a strong prejudice against the Latin alphabet in which our European languages are written. “Regardless of the language in which it was used, this alphabet was associated with Christianity, as is clear from the term ‘galkhes’ (from galekh, Christian priest), the Ashkenazi designation for the Latin alphabet”.¹²

Kurek adds that our alphabet “similarly to other matters associated with Christianity, carried with it the stigma of something contaminated and unclean in its form, and therefore not worthy of the attention of a devout Jew”.¹³

She takes a close look at the origins of a Christian Polish parade featuring Judas as a stereotypical Jewish figure. And she suggests that it may have emerged as a Polish response to the Jewish celebration of Purim, which marks the news that, in the words of Jewish writer Hilary Nussbaum, “the king has allowed the Jews to assemble and defend themselves against murder or destroy any army of any people which represents a threat against them, not sparing children or women, and to then plunder their booty”.¹⁴

In this religious story, the arch-enemy of the Jews is Haman. Kurek relates: “In Jewish communities throughout Europe, a custom that had been passed down from Babylonian Jews was that of hanging and burning Haman in effigy…Polish Jews dressed the Purim Haman in a cassock. By doing so, the biblical villain and enemy of the Jews came to resemble a Catholic priest in Poland”.¹⁵

As Rabbi Meir Yaakov Soloveichik has pointed out, hatred is an acceptable part of Jewish religion¹⁶ and Haman represented the evil non-Jewish “Amalek” which had to be destroyed. In Poland, Jews would even pay some local Christian to play the role of Haman at Purim: “They paraded and pushed him around while beating him with reeds – just like (they did) Jesus”.¹⁷

This anti-Polish, anti-Christian, anti-gentile prejudice among Jews is every bit as toxic as actual (rather than invented and instrumentalised) anti-semitism – especially today when that particular people has gained so much power in the world.

But the root of the problems between Jews and the local population in Poland seems to have resided mainly in the separation, both physical and psychological, of the two communities. They simply did not view reality from the same perspective.

Kurek explains, for example, that when Poland lost its statehood at the end of the 18th century, “Polish Jews imagined that the partitions of Poland had very little bearing on the seemingly smooth flow of Jewish life that had gone on for centuries. For how could the fact that, as of tomorrow, the Jewish Speaker representing Jewish interests, instead of residing at the Polish royal court, shall reside at the Russian Tsar’s or the Austrian Emperor’s court have any impact on anything?”¹⁸

This outlook meant that very few Jews, with some honourable exceptions, took part in the long series of battles for Polish independence from foreign control¹⁹ and Polish attitudes towards their Jewish population were inevitably adversely affected by this.

Kurek writes: “During the time of the partitions, Poles needed human solidarity in a way that they had never needed it before, or since. They went in search of it to all corners of the world. Above all, they had counted on the solidarity of their fellow-inhabitants, the Polish Jews. Berek Joselewicz, and a handful of likeminded Jews, ignited a hope that other Jews would follow in their footsteps, for they had all grown up on the same land, and therefore must share the same feelings and thoughts”.²⁰

That hope of Jewish solidarity with the Polish nation was dashed and the situation became worse in 1812. Poles had been counting on Napoleon liberating them through his invasion of Russia, but Jews in the country again saw things differently and openly celebrated Napoleon’s eventual defeat.

Jewish legend has it that the famous sage Kozienice Maggid “despised Napoleon with every fiber of his being” because he saw him as an enemy of his religion. He is said to have declared: “He, Napoleon, drafted Jews into the army and forced them to mutilate their Saturdays and blight other sacred commandments! Let all those who trespass into temptation and sin perish!”.²¹

All of this contributed to a “rapidly expanding and ever deepening chasm between the Poles and Jews”,²² notes Kurek. A special Committee to the Matters of the Peasantry and Jews was called and the presiding head arbiter Prince Adam Czartoryski wrote in 1816: “Jews are not indigenous inhabitants of our land. They are nonresidents, foreigners, outsiders”.²³

A century later the lack of Jewish enthusiasm for Poland was again a bone of contention. Jewish historian Meir Balaban said of the Polish Jews of German-ruled Poznan in 1912: “They go around clearly declaring themselves as Germans and they openly express their German patriotism… spin their declaration of love for the Germans”.²⁴

Kurek writes: “A mere fragmentary glance at Jewish traditions and religion will suffice in stating that Polish Jews, although they had resided on Polish lands for nearly one thousand years, never identified with Poland as a homeland in the contemporary meaning of the word, that is with the country for whose freedom one sacrifices one’s life… First of all, they had a very keen awareness of being members of a nation that had been chosen by God. Secondly, they possessed their own history, and Israel never ceased to be their true sole homeland, for a return to which they prayed at least once a year”.²⁵

The Polish reaction to this was to regard Jews in general as having failed the citizenship test and they were not held in high esteem by the newly re-formed Polish state after WWI: “In characterizing the fight for regaining freedom of their once mutual state as not being a Jewish matter, Polish Jews behaved not like citizens of the Polish State, but rather like foreigners”.²⁶

This break-down in trust did not prevent some Jews from seeking a special status in the new Poland. Kurek writes: “The Zionist Conference that had been in session in Warsaw on October 21 and 22 in 1918, in its resolution pertaining to ‘The matters of politics of the country’ came forth with the demand for granting Jews a constitutional guarantee of a national autonomy within the reconstructed Polish State”.²⁷

The following year, when the Polish Parliamentary forum was discussing the future Polish constitution for the very first time, Izaak Grünbaum, who was to become the first Minister of the Interior of Israel, insisted: “We are demanding one thing, that Polish Jewry be granted the ability to organize itself for the sake of meeting our own specific needs that no one else could possibly meet. We are not saying that no one else would want to meet these needs, only that no one other than Jews are capable of achieving this… We are demanding that we be able to create an organization, based on constitutional principles, that would be obligated to meet the specified needs of Polish Jewry”.²⁸

Samuel Hirszhorn said Jews should have 200 their “own self-government to oversee the areas of culture, schooling in one’s native tongue, social services and charity, in other words a national-cultural autonomy”.²⁹ It was thus not just a question of asking for equal rights as human beings, which they received, but also for a privileged status as Jews.

Polish opinions of Jews were not improved by the stance of that portion of the Jewish community who supported communism. These individuals favoured the overthrowal of the “bourgeois” new Polish state, the dismantling of parliament and the “dictatorship of the Proletariat” under close alliance with Soviet Russia.

The Jewish Communist leader Maksymilian Horwitz-Walecki condemned former socialist colleagues who took part in the independent Polish state as “clowns, servants, imposters, sell-outs, parasites, kowtowing to festering and hideous bourgeois politics”. He called for the reconstructed Polish state to be “Destroyed! Defied! Ruined! Overthrown! Annihilated! Reduced to ash! Blown up!”.³⁰

Kurek explains that the vast majority of Jews in Poland were not communists, but the stereotype of the “Jew-Communist” stuck in Polish minds as part of a generally unfavourable image. “The idea that was gaining popularity among Poles was that of designating Jews as burdensome tenants, foreigners in the Polish State who, through emigration to Palestine, for instance, must be (...) removed from public life and deprived of their strong economic standing”.³¹

She says this attitude “had always been perceived by Polish Jews to be anti-Semitism, which we, apparently, suckle with our mother’s milk. Perhaps Polish Jews were right. There is no point in trying to conceal the fact that Poles living between the years of 1918 and 1939 had enough with the burdensome Jewish tenants.

Their desire was that Jews leave Poland alone, and find some other Polin [resting place] in which to lead their lives in prosperity and success. In that sense, they certainly were anti-Semites”.³²

The start of the Second World War in 1939, which saw Poland occupied by the armies of Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s USSR, opened up old wounds in this “multi-national” country.

Ukrainians and Bielorusssians in Poland saw a chance to obtain their own independence and did not join Poles in building their “Underground State” to resist occupation – indeed many collaborated with the Nazis. And most of the 3.5 million Jews (around 10% of the population) remained focused on “Jewish matters” rather than “Polish matters” of national independence.

Kurek writes: “Communicating using one language, practicing one religion, and being shaped by one culture, the Jewish nation, of which the Polish Jews constituted a significant portion, stretched from Vladivostok to Paris, according to some; according to others, from Odessa to Warsaw. Its specificity was characterized by a lack of allegiance to any specific land or statehood”.³³

While a small group of Jews formed the Swit (‘Dawn’) resistance movement that later fought in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising in 1943, the majority took no such stance. Conflicts between different non-Jewish states were not something they felt the need to get involved with.

Indeed, it was the Christian Poles who were the initial targets of the Nazi occupiers. Kurek writes: “Today, very few Jewish historians of WWII are willing to remember that the ones who were first in line to bear the brunt of German repression were not Jews, but Poles”.³⁴

In his wartime diaries, Jewish historian Emanuel Ringelblum describes reports that some Christians started wearing Jewish armbands so as not be arrested by the German occupiers.r³⁵ He adds that when the Nazis were rounding up Poles in 1940 “they were checking the identification documents of Jews to make sure they weren’t Christians”.³⁶ The first prisoners at Auschwitz were in fact Poles, rather than Jews, stresses Kurek.³⁷

This was all unfolding in an atmosphere of mutual suspicion between Poles and Jews. Ringelblum writes (March 1940): “One of the saddest symptoms is the ever-increasing hatred towards Christians. It is believed that they are the ones to blame for all the economic restrictions… Today I heard that, within Polish intelligentsia circles, there is the belief that Jews have reached an agreement with the other ones [the Nazis] and that that is the reason why all the mass arrests of Christians are taking place”.³⁸ The truth is that Polish Jews did cooperate with the Nazi administration – in the same way as Zionist groups did in Germany itself.³⁹

Kurek states: “I know of no city or town in Poland occupied by Hitler in which, in 1939, the Jewish community refused to cooperate with the Germans in the broadest sense, and at the same time failed to recognize them as the new governing power”.⁴⁰

Historian Lucjan Dobroszycki describes the case of Chaim Rumkowski, who became known as “King Chaim” after the Nazis entrusted him with governing the Jewish population of Lodz on their behalf: “The system of ruling over the Lodz Ghetto was shaped based on imitating Hitler’s Germany”.⁴¹  “Rumkowski, along with his nomination to the position of Head of Jewish Elders, was also granted a wide range of  authorizations  within  the  internal administration of the municipality. All of its agendas were subordinated to him. Every Jew was obliged to absolute obedience with regard to the leader. It was also simultaneously proclaimed that any opposition against or insubordination to him will be punished by the German authorities. The German authorities also gave Rumkowski permission to move about the city at any and all times, and granted him authorized access to German institutions”.⁴²

And Ringelblum notes in his diary with regard to Rumkowski’s own account of his Lodz fiefdom: “There is a Jewish State over there with 400 policemen and 3 prisons. He has a ministry of foreign affairs and all the other ministries as well”.⁴³

Adam Czerniakow, mayor of the Warsaw Ghetto, kept a diary in which he recorded the day-to-day co-operation which he eventually regretted and on account of which he apparently committed suicide. He created, and became president of, a 24-member Judenrat, Jewish Commune.

Explains Kurek: “The Judenrats were instituted by the German occupiers from among individuals displaying a willingness to engage in a multi-faceted cooperation with them, and the scope of their authority, as granted by the Germans, digressed substantially from the traditional capacity of Jewish municipalities”.⁴⁴

Their role included “employing and directing Jews to forced labor for the benefit of the Germans”, she notes.⁴⁵

“The Warsaw Jewish Autonomy and all other Jewish autonomies in Poland, became part of the composition of the III Reich and the former Senator of the Polish State, Adam Czerniakow, along with other mayors of Jewish autonomies, became the state officials representing the German authorities”.⁴⁶ “At the end of 1941, the authorities of the Autonomy of Warsaw Jews were an enormous bureaucratic apparatus, which consisted of more than two thousand employees, which included subordinate institutions. The situation was similar in Lodz, Krakow, in Silesia and other centers of Jewish life”.⁴⁷

In his diary, Czerniakow reveals that his very close collaboration with the Nazis included discussing with them what exact wording should feature on his official letterhead.⁴⁴ More significantly, he also records in December 1939 that his authority provided Hitler’s forces “with the addresses of wealthy Jews with the goal of requisitioning furniture, lamps, bedding, etc”.⁴⁹

Jewish authorities even identified for the Germans those Jews who had left the fold and converted to Christianity – from a racially-based Nazi perspective they remained Jews and had to be moved to the ghetto.⁵⁰

Kurek explains that there has been some misunderstanding about the Warsaw Ghetto. It already existed before the German occupation, the only change being that assimilated Polish Jews were forced to go and live there. And the notorious walling-in of the ghetto in 1940 was ordered by the Nazis but carried out and paid for by the Jewish community.
It was seen by them as a defence against a hostile Polish world, with Czerniakow describing it as “the fortification of the Ghetto area”.⁵¹ Kurek observes: “In virtually every Jewish source we are able to find praise for being isolated from the Christians, i.e. the Poles”.⁵²

Ringelblum records a festive atmosphere in the Nazi-approved walled-off Jewish enclave as late as 1941: “The Ghetto is dancing. The number of nightclubs is multiplying endlessly… Jewish policemen fill the most elegant clubs [in the company of] beautiful women. They dictate the tone of all the parties. Women are impressed by their elegant, shimmering, tall officer’s boots”.⁵³ He provides this insight into the collaborators: “As it turns out, based on the information from the provinces, in every city there are those Jews who supply the German authorities with everything they need. Some provide foodstuffs, others provide clothing… Recently, an interesting type of people has surfaced. Young Jewish activists under thirty, thirty-five, completely unknown before the war… They are capable of establishing a relationship with them [the Germans]. They do make a pretty penny doing this”.⁵⁴

We are moving here into the most controversial part of the account given by Kurek. Her history is revisionist not in that it denies that a mass extermination of Jews took place, but in that it shows that Jews were deeply complicit in this vile crime.

She remarks: “In documentation relating to the Holocaust, the matter of collaboration between Polish Jews and the Germans is rarely touched upon… Meanwhile, everything points to the fact that this very issue holds the key to understanding the Holocaust in general, and in turn to understanding the extermination of Polish Jews specifically. In other words, one must try to answer the question of whether the Germans would have managed to murder so many millions of Jews had it not been for the fact that, from amongst the Jews themselves, they found eager collaborators and perpetrators of criminal acts”.⁵⁵ “What is revealed ever more definitively is the role of Jews not only as victims, but also as executioners of their own people”.⁵⁶

There was Jewish involvement in nearly every step in the extermination process, from gathering all Jews into the ghettos, and later rounding them up for the Nazis, to fooling them into thinking they were merely being taken to work in the East of Poland.⁵⁶ Kurek concludes that the Germans, fighting a war on two fronts, could not have spared the manpower to themselves do the work carried out by the Jewish authorities and that it was therefore Jewish collaboration which allowed the mass murdering to take place: “Without the help of Polish Jews, it would have been extremely difficult for the Germans to realise their plan of annihilating Polish Jews”.⁵⁷

Ringelblum describes the indignation expressed by Szachno Efroim Sagan at the way the Nazi-approved Jewish police in Warsaw directed the programme of “deportation” – to the concentration camps – in 1942. “He felt that the Jewish community, despite German threats, should have refused to participate in the campaign. It would have been better if the Germans did it themselves. Sagan went to the Judenrat to file his complaint against the disgraceful manner in which they were behaving in taking on the role of executioner and assistants to the murderous SS”.⁵⁸

“He couldn’t stand by and watch as the Jewish  Ordnungsmänner [police] captured Jewish children and shoved them into the back of the trucks bound for Umschlagplatz. He couldn’t bear the sight of women being dragged by their hair by their Jewish captors from the Ordnungsdienst”.⁵⁹

Wladyslaw Szpilman, whose autobiographical book The Pianist was later turned into a film by Roman Polanski, paints a vivid picture of the Jewish police in Warsaw. He writes: “They have been infected with the winds of the Gestapo. It seems the only way to describe it. The moment they donned their uniforms and took the clubs in their hands, they turned into animals… When it came time to execute the round-up in May, they surrounded the street with the sharp precision of seasoned, pure-SS men. They were running around in their stylish little uniforms, barking loudly and fiercely as expertly as the Germans, and they beat people with their rubber clubs”.⁶⁰

“They were no less dangerous or merciless than the Germans, perhaps even meaner and more base than them. When they found people who had hid rather than come down to the courtyard, they were easily bribed. But they accepted only money. Neither tears, nor begging, nor the heartbreaking screams of children were enough to move them”.⁶¹

A re-enactment of shocking scenes of Jews being rounded up by the Nazi-serving Jewish police can be viewed in Polanski’s 2002 film.⁶²

The poet Icchak Kacenelson, who died at Auschwitz, expressed it thus: “Traitors who ran up the empty streets in their shiny shoes. As though with the Swastika emblazoned on their hats – they charged angrily wearing the Star of David”.⁶³

Ringelblum describes the Jewish police at Umschlagplatz under the command of the Jewish officer Mieczyslaw Szmerling. “The criminal giant Szmerling, with a horsewhip in his hand. He has entered into the good graces of the Germans. The loyal executor of their commands.The Jewish police had a bad reputation even before the deportations began. Unlike the Polish police which did not participate in the work camp round-ups, the Jewish police engaged in this repugnant act. They were the epitome of corruption and demoralization… Not one word of protest was uttered against their despicable function which entailed leading their own brothers to slaughter. The police were spiritually dedicated to this filthy job and, therefore, performed it willingly and eagerly”.⁶⁴

He adds that the police were not the only Jewish collaborators involved in the “deportation” to the camps: “There were groups and organizations outside the police which voluntarily showed their support for and participated in the deportation campaign. At the top of this list was the Gancwajch Ambulance Service, a faux institution in amaranth hat, which not once, not ever, provided any medical attention to a single Jew… This criminal gang of troublemakers volunteered to do the ungodly job of sending Jews to the other world. It was this gang that was the epitome of brutality and inhumane acts. Their red hats became covered with the blood splatter of the unfortunate Jewish masses. Aside from the Gancwajch Ambulance Service, the deportation campaign was helped along by Jewish Community office/ administrative assistants/clerks, as well as by the KOS Ambulance Service”.⁶⁵

A quick glance at Wikipedia reveals that the Gancwajch Ambulance Service was set up by Abraham Gancwajch, described as “a Jewish kingpin of the ghetto underworld” – a gangster/racketeer and also a Zionist.⁶⁶ The entry notes that Czerniaków mentions Gancwajch in his diary as “a despicable, ugly creature” and that Gancwajch “is also known to have tried to sabotage attempts at the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising”.

In stark contrast to these vile Jewish collaborators, the Polish Underground State punished Poles who worked with the Germans and also set out to inform the world of what was happening to the Jews. To this latter end, a special courier of the Polish Government in Exile, Jan Kozielewski (aka Jan Karski), was sent to the UK and the USA to sound the alarm and seek help in preventing the extermination.

He recalls his exhaustive visit to the USA, in which he even met President Franklin Roosevelt: “I also met with Supreme Court Judge Felix Frankfurter, who after listening to me said, ‘Do you know that I am a Jew?’. I nodded. Frankfurter continued ‘I am unable to believe you’. In Great Britain and the United States, I informed the top people of these world powers of what I had seen. I had spoken with Jewish leaders on both continents. I talked about what I had seen with renowned authors: Herbert G. Wells and Arthur Koestler, as well as with members of the PEN Club in England and in America. They possessed talent and renown. They possessed the ability to describe this better than I ever did. Did they do this?”.⁶⁷ The reason for the inaction is obvious once one knows, as my regular readers do, that the Nazi regime was nothing but a Zionist golem*. The mass extermination of Jews had to go ahead, because it was all part of the Big Plan. This presumably also explains the active and eager involvement of Zionist organised crime in rounding up Jews in Poland. *[The reason for the inaction is obvious once one knows, as regular readers of CODOH do, that the Nazi regime had no plan of extermination of Jews. The harsh treatment as described in the article is one thing, but homicide gass chambers quite another, and here Karski isn't reliable witness at all.

Jan Karski:

Jan Karski (aka Jan Kozielewski, 24 April 1914 – 13 July 2000) was an agent of the Polish government in exile, whose task was to invent and spread “black propaganda” – meaning atrocity lies – in German-occupied Poland (Laqueur 1998, p. 230). During World War Two, the Polish government in exile maintained close relations with the resistance movement in occupied Poland, which, in addition to sabotage activities, had a dense network of agents, couriers and propagandists. These propagandists, for example, sent atrocity stories about Auschwitz to London on a regular basis. (Cf. Mattogno 2021, pp. 105-289.)

In November 1942, Karski created a story he handed to the Polish government in London about Jews being deported en masse in trains whose floors were covered in moist lime and chlorine, resulting in half the deportees dying before arriving at their destination Treblinka, Belzec and Sobibór, where they were mass murdered “by firing squads, electrocution and lethal gas-chambers.” For Belzec, Karski specifically insisted on an “electrocution station” consisting of a huge metal plate as a floor, as was en vogue at the time. That text about Belzec is identical to an earlier text by Ignacy Schwarzbart, hence was simply copied. Karski’s text was subsequently published in England.

Two years later, in 1944, a book appeared authored by Karski and titled Story of a Secret State, where the story changed from trains of torture driving to Belzec, where those who had survived were electrocuted, to a new story line in which people arriving at Belzec got loaded into trains with floors covered with quick lime. This chemical ate away the flesh from the deportees’ bones, killing them in the process. These trains actually drove away from Belzec, then stood in some field for days waiting for the chemical to finish them all off. Then their load of corpses was dumped, burned, and the ashes buried (Karski 1944, pp. 339-351). How could he “know” any of this? Because he claimed to have gotten smuggled, disguised as an Estonian guard, in and out of the Belzec Camp, which he described as being located on a “large flat plain.” In that camp, he was allegedly shown around by a “real” Estonian guard. The problem is that the Belzec Camp was located on the side of a hill, not a plain, and that no Estonian ever served there in any function.
In a 1987 interview, he even tried to bail out of the orthodox narrative completely by stating that he had thought during the war “that Bełżec was a transit camp,” and that he found out about its real role only after the war. (See Jansson 2014.)
The historical framework of Karski’s story is also invented, as he claimed that his mission was to see what happened to Jews deported from the Warsaw Ghetto, and that the Jews present in Belzec had all come from the Warsaw Ghetto; but the Jews from the Warsaw Ghetto were all deported to Treblinka, not to Belzec.

True to his job description, Karski merely spread “black propaganda” about Belzec. This is now also recognized increasingly by mainstream historians who disregard his “testimonies” as “unreliable.” (For details, see Mattogno 2004a, pp. 22-33.)

Karski was the Polish government’s agent who brought the world’s attention to the mass murder allegedly committed at Belzec by the Germans. While his story is now disregarded, transmogrified versions of his themes live on, and Karski himself is still revered as a hero.

The black propaganda spread by Karski and his many colleagues has served, does serve, and will continue to serve to instigate wars, sustain wars, and escalate them to fiercer levels. A world that makes “heroes” of such people can only be a darker world.
Holocaust Encyclopedia ]

But the question still remains as to how, on a human level, it was possible for Jews in Poland to participate in the slaughter of their co-religionists. There was certainly a class element involved. Kurek says that, according to Ringelblum, the majority of the Jewish police were from the intelligentsia and were lawyers before the war.⁶⁸ Szpilman also remarks that the Jewish police force “was composed mostly of well-to-do young people”.⁶⁹ The victims, on the other hand, were considered by wealthy Jews to be “the lowlifes” – as Ringelblum tells us.⁷⁰ They were seen as less useful and productive members of what Kurek terms “a caste society from the dawn of history”.⁷¹

She also refers to the traditional Jewish outlook that presents “the option of sacrificing the lives of a few Jews with the purpose of saving the lives of the remaining Jewish community”.⁷² Or, perhaps, with the purpose of enabling the creation of the state of Israel and the ensuing glorious victory of the Jewish nation over all its many enemies?

She writes: “It was necessary to sacrifice the lives of those less productive and save the working part of the people. The decision about who was supposed to play the role of the condemned and who the role of the survivors in this horrible theatre of Jewish sacrifice and survival was made, in accordance with Jewish tradition, by the elite – the clerks within the Jewish community”.⁷³

I am reminded of the remarks by Professor Yakov Rabkin about the way in which some Jews, particularly from Eastern Europe, consider that their own people can justifiably be allowed to die in the name of the greater Cause.⁷⁴ He refers to the 1938 statement by David Ben-Gurion (1886-1973), the future founder of the state of Israel, that: “If I knew that all Jewish children could be saved by having them relocated to England, but only half by transferring them to Palestine, I would choose the second option, because what is at stake would not only have been the fate of those children but also the historical destiny of the Jewish people”.⁷⁵

A similar position was taken by the aforementioned Grünbaum during a 1943 discussion about the suggested allocation of some “Zionist money” for rescuing Jews from extermination. He insisted: “I think it is necessary to state here – Zionism is above everything… I will not demand that the Jewish Agency allocate a sum of 300,000 or 100,000 pounds sterling to help European Jewry. And I think that whoever demands such things is performing an anti-Zionist act”.⁷⁶

I would say that this statement, whose meaning is all too clear, completely flips the moral lesson we are supposed to have learned from the Holocaust – particularly when combined with all that we know about the real origins of the Nazi regime and the Jewish networks which collaborated with it.

Instead of boosting Zionism and providing it with unique historic opportunity to assert its power, the mass murder of Jews 80 years ago, when properly understood, should sound the death knell for Zionism.

We see exposed not just the loathsome hypocrisy of Zionists in using the Holocaust, which they enabled, as the moral high ground from which they like to look down on the rest of us, but also the near-unbelievable inhumanity that always seems to characterise the actions of ZIM, the zio-satanic imperialist mafia.

Rabkin remarks of that chillingly callous attitude: “This prioritization of the collective Cause versus individual lives likens Zionism to a modern-day Moloch, seemingly insatiable and demanding more and more human sacrifices to this day”.⁷⁷

This very dark area of Jewish tradition is also raised by Tomasz Tulejski and Arnold Zawadski, two Polish academics whose work I explored in the essay on Thomas Hobbes and Leviathan’s Law.⁷⁸ What I did not include in that piece is this rather disturbing analysis:

“Although the idea of Yahweh’s kingship over Israel (Ps 114:2) and the entire universe (Ps 47:9; 97:1; 99:1; 103:19; 146:10) is very present in the Hebrew Bible, already in very old texts, the title ‘king’ to describe God Yahweh appears extremely rarely, and the first to dare use it so directly was Isaiah (Is 6:5). Such a sparing use of the term ‘king’ (ְmelek) to describe Yahweh by biblical authors of the monarchical period was probably caused by anti-Canaanite polemics, which did not allow for the possibility of Yahweh being similar to El, the highest god of the Canaanite pantheon, called malku – ‘king’. It is also possible that the sound of the Hebrew word melek itself was associated with Moloch, the Phoenician deity to whom children were sacrificed – a custom practiced by the Israelites during the Israelite monarchy (2 King 23:10; cf. also 2 Kings 16:3)”.79

[1] Ewa Kurek, Polish-Jewish Relations 1939-1945: Beyond the Limits of Solidarity (Bloomington, Indiana: iUniverse, 2012). All subsequent page references are to that work, unless otherwise indicated.
[2] p. 16.
[3] p. 162.
[4] p. 41.
[5] p. 62.
[6] p. 63.
[7] p. 64.
[8] W Bartoszewski, Warto byc przyzwoitym (‘It is worthwhile being decent’), (Paris: Editions Spotkania, 1986), p. 25, cit. p. 43.
[9] K. Burnetko, ‘Getto: od azylu do Zaglady’ (‘The Ghetto: from asylum to Extermination’), in Polityka No 1/2008, s. 47, cit. pp. 44-46.
[10] p. 42.
[11] Sciezki pamieci (‘The path of recollecion’), ed. by Jerzy Bojarski, Lublin, 2002, pp. 69-70, cit. p. 142.
[12] Ch. Schmeruk, The Esterke Story in Yiddish and Polish Literature, Jerusalem, 1985, p. 48, cit. p. 149.
[13] p. 150.
[14] H. Nussbaum, Przewodnik Judaistyczny obejmujacy kurs literatury i religii (‘A Judaic guide including the course of literature 217 and religion’), Warsaw, 1893, pp. 124-130, cit. p. 134.
[15] p. 137.
[16] https://winteroak.org.uk/2026/01/05/hate-supremacism-and-the-satanic-world-order/
[17] A Cala, Wizerunek Zyda w polskiej kulturze ludowej (‘The image of a Jew in Polish popular history’), Warsaw, 1992, pp. 85-89, cit. p. 153.
[18] pp. 66-67.
[19] p. 70.
[20] p. 72.
[21] Meir Balaban, Dzieje Zydow w Galicyi (‘A History of the Jews of Galicia’), Krakow, 1914, pp. 86-88, cit. p. 78.
[22] p. 76.
[23] A. Eisenbach, Emancypacja zydowska na ziemiach polskich 1785-1870 (‘Emancipation of Jews on Polish Lands 1785-1870’), Warsaw, 1988, p. 176, cit. p. 76.
[24] M. Balaban, Dzieje Zydow w Krakowie I na Kazimierzu 1304-1868 (‘A History of the Jews in Krakow and in the Kazimierz District 1304-1868’), Krakow, 1912, pp. 162-63, cit. pp. 83.
[25] p. 87.
[26] p. 93.
[27] p. 94. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzhak_Gruenbaum
[28] Stenographic reports from the Legislative Polish Parliament, pos 37, May 13, 1919, I 5-6, cit. p. 95.
[29] Stenographic reports as above, I 66, cit. p. 95.
[30] J. Olczak-Ronikier, Wogrodzie pamieci (‘In the garden of memory’), Krakow, 2002, p. 156, cit. p. 102.
[31] p. 108.
[32] Ibid.
[33] p. 184.
[34] p. 298.
35] E. Ringelblum, Kronika getta warszawskiego wrzesien 1939 – styczen 1943 (‘Chronicle of the Warsaw Ghetto September 1939 – January 1943’), Warsaw, 1983, p. 98, cit. p. 298.
[36] Ringelblum, p. 98, cit. p. 299.
[37] p. 299.
[38] Ringelblum, pp. 118-19, cit. p. 301.
[39] Paul Cudenec, ‘The Nazi regime was a Zionist golem’, https://winteroak.org.uk/2026/01/08/the-acorn-108/#2
[40] p. 196.
[41] L. Dobroszycki, preface to Kronika getta lodzkiego (‘The Lodz Ghetto Diary’), Lodz, 1965, p. xxi, cit. p. 205.
218 [42] Dobroszycki, p. xviii, cit. p. 199.
[43] Ringelblum, p. 154, cit. p. 201.
[44] p. 199.
[45] Ibid.
[46] p. 202.
[47] p. 203.
[48] A. Czerniakow, Dziennik getta warszawskiego 6.IX.1939 – 23.VII.1942 (‘The Warsaw Ghetto Diary 6/9/1939 – 23/7/1942’), May 31 1941, cit. p. 201.
[49] Czerniakow, December 12, 1939, cit. 219.
[50] p. 352.
[51] Czerniakow, September 30, 1940, cit. p. 208.
[52] p. 215.
[53] Ringelblum, p. 240 & p. 254, cit. pp. 214-15.
[54] Ringelblum, pp. 78-79 & p. 103, cit. p. 220.
[55] p. 227.
[56] p. 228.
[56] pp. 238-39.
[57] p. 262.
[58] Ringelblum, p. 71, cit. pp. 229-230.
[59] Ringelblum, summer of 1942. No page reference provided, cit.
p. 230.
[60] W. Szpilman, Pianista (‘The Pianist’), Krakow, 2003, p. 85, cit.
p. 235.
[61] Szpilman, p. 86, cit. p. 240.
[62] https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x9lmls2
[63] I. Kacenelson, Piesn o zamordowanym narodzie zydowskim (‘The Song of the Murdered Jewish Nation’), Warsaw, 1982, p. 23, cit. p. 248.
[64] Ringelblum, p. 404 & p. 407, cit. p. 245.
[65] Ringelblum, p. 410, cit. p. 246.
[66] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Gancwajch
[67] J. Karski, Tajne panstwo (‘The Underground State’), Warsaw, 1999, pp. 288-290, cit. p. 333.
[68] p. 234.
[69] Szpilman, p. 85, cit. p. 235.
[70] Ringelblum, p. 268, cit. p. 281.
[71] p. 282.
[72] p. 278.
[73] p. 279.
[74] Yakov Rabkin, Israel in Palestine: Jewish Rejection of Zionism (Atlanta: Aspect Editions, 2025). See Paul Cudenec, ‘Zionism, 219 Nazism and Moloch’, https://winteroak.org.uk/2025/12/16/zionism-nazism-and-moloch/
[75] Dina Porat, ‘Une question d’historiographie: L’attitude de Ben-Gurion à l’égard des juifs d’Europe à l’époque du génocide’ in Florence Heymann and Michel Abitbol, eds, L’historiographie israélienne aujourd’hui (Paris: CNRS éditions, 1998), p. 120, cit.
Rabkin, p. 89.
[76] https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Yitzchak_Gruenbaum
[77] Rabkin, p. 91.
[78] Paul Cudenec, ‘Leviathan’s Law and the occupation of our lands’, https://winteroak.org.uk/2025/11/04/leviathans-law-and-the-occupation-of-our-lands/
[79] Tomasz Tulejski, Arnold Zawadzki, ‘Golem i Lewiatan.
Judaistyczne źródła teologii politycznej Thomasa Hobbesa’, 2019, Politeja, № 2(59), p. 207-232, Ksiegarnia Akademicka Sp. z.o.o., p.
223, https://journals.akademicka.pl/politeja/article/view/1147/990


Paul Cudenec

Welcome to the New Resistance!

The fog of lies has lifted and the enemy is finally in plain sight

Steven Pinker comes off as a fool, a high-IQ moron…

 

"Writes Berman: “We need to consider the endless propaganda that surrounds us on a daily basis, broadcasting the notion that our lives are so much better than they were in previous times.

“We are literally soaking in this ideology of progress (or more accurately, ‘progress’) which is so pervasive that we don’t realize that it’s an ideology…

“Most of the citizens of modern industrial society experience their lives as oppressive, a rat race, the ‘daily grind’. They live for weekends (TGIF), holidays, retirement, and call this ‘life'”. [18]

He points to Steven Pinker as one particularly insidious propagandist for the modern ideology, with works such as The Better Angels of Our Nature and Enlightenment Now.

Berman remarks: “The latter book was pretty much reduced to ashes by the British philosopher John Gray, who pointed out that ‘the message of Pinker’s book is that the Enlightenment produced all the progress of the modern era and none of its crimes’. [19]
“Pinker (pictured) comes off as a fool, a high-IQ moron… Not surprisingly, he has a large following, including Bill Gates, another non-historian, who has praised Pinker’s work to the skies”. [20]

Underlying all the propaganda is the assumption that modern industrial society, sometimes called “the West”, is the pinnacle of human achievement, as opposed to those lowly parts of the world that are said to be “underdeveloped”.

Berman refers to Muslim intellectual Shahid Bolsen’s view that this “is a term that the West likes to apply to those countries that lag behind the West in terms of economic and technological expansion and industrial growth, which are seen as the purpose of life.

“But these, Bolsen argues, are not the only possible yardsticks, or criteria, of development. The West, he tells us, is underdeveloped in terms of morality, spirituality, ethics, equality, sustainability, community, and so on. It seems hard to argue with this”. [21]

[19] John Gray, ‘Unenlightened thinking: Steven Pinker’s embarrassing new book is a feeble sermon for rattled liberals’, New Statesman, 22 February 2018, cit. p. 92.
[20] p. 92.
[21] pp. xv- xvi.

From A book* review by Paul Cudenec
* Morris Berman - Against Civilization: The Anthropological Critique of Modernity

https://winteroak.org.uk/2025/12/27/breaking-free-from-this-modern-hell/

Profiteering From War After War

There was a period in the 19th century when the Rothschilds gained a certain reputation for defending the peace in Europe, but with hindsight this appears to have been yet more expediency on their part.

When their self-interest in the form of their investments required stability, they were against the disruption caused by war, but this was never a moral principle.

Indeed, the whole success of their dynasty was founded on the way in which they exploited the opportunities presented to them by the wars that followed the French Revolution of 1789.

Ferguson writes that “the Rothschilds were presented with undreamed-of business opportunities by the revolutionary wars”, [60] while Bouvier defines the Rothschilds as “that family of merchants made rich by the long European war of 1792 to 1815”. [61]

According to historian Egon Caesar Corti, “it was in the profits made from war at that time that we can find the real origins of the subsequent enormous fortune of the House of Rothschild”. [62]

The Rothschilds made money out of war in a range of different ways, not all of which were entirely legal. “The disruption of established patterns of trade and banking created room for ambitious risk takers”, as Ferguson puts it. [63]

In their home city of Frankfurt they took advantage of food shortages and spiralling prices to operate on the black market and sold provisions to armies at a considerable profit. [64]

From 1808 onwards, Nathan Rothschild exported English guineas to the continent. Ferguson describes this as a “lucrative line of business” [65] and Bouvier adds that “the profits were no doubt proportionate to the risks”. [66]

British goods, including cotton fabric, sugar, indigo and tobacco, were also transported across the Channel, via the Rothschilds’ warehouses, in defiance of Napoleon’s blockade. [67]

Close to Wilhelm IX, the Elector of Hesse-Kassel, Mayer Amschel Rothschild was involved in his purchase of thousands of mercenaries to join the British-led fight against the French forces. [68]

Wars are expensive affairs and the financing has to come from somewhere.

“As the scale and cost of the conflict between France and the rest of Europe rose, so too did the borrowing needs of the combatant states”, says Ferguson. [69]

“The defeat of France in the Napoleonic Wars had been financed to a large extent by British loans and subsidies to Austria, Russia and Prussia. With their establishments in Frankfurt, London and Paris, the Rothschilds had been in a uniquely good position to facilitate these transfers”. [70]

He says that their activities at this time ushered in a new era in financial as well as political history.

“The Rothschilds stretched their credit to breaking point, sometimes losing sight altogether of their assets and liabilities, gambling everything they owned for the sake of govern-mental commissions, interest payments and speculative gains from exchange rate and bond yield fluctuations. In 1815 alone, Nathan’s account with the British government totalled close to £10 million, a huge sum at that time”. [71]

Particularly striking is the way in which Nathan Rothschild used funds entrusted to him by Wilhelm IX as if it was his own capital, investing in hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of British government bonds and thereby securing the proximity to the British state for which his family is still known. [72]

The Rothschilds’ network of agents across Europe also famously enabled them to be the first in London to have news of Napoleon’s final defeat at Waterloo in 1815, which, says Bouvier, perhaps enabled Nathan Rothschild to pull off a spectacular coup at the Stock Exchange. [73]

Writes Ferguson: “The Rothschilds emerged in 1815 as sterling millionaires. Almost at once, Nathan embarked on perhaps the most successful transaction of his career: a huge investment in British government bonds (consols) whereby he rode the upswing caused by the government’s postwar financial stabilization, taking his profits just before the market peaked. This was Nathan’s supreme Meistergeschäft, realizing profits of more than £250,000 at a stroke”. [74]

Financing wars became something of a speciality for the Rothschilds; they loaned £1 million to Brazil to fund its war with Argentina and Uruguay in 1851, for example. [75]

A couple of years later, they were back in action floating the British Government’s Crimean War Loan, [76] a reflection of the near monopoly enjoyed by Rothschilds over British war finance. [77]

Their involvement in this 1853-1856 conflict torpedoes the idea that they had a vested interest in maintaining the peace.

Ferguson insists: “Far from weakening the Rothschilds’ position, the Crimean War had precisely the opposite effect in that it emphatically reasserted the Rothschild houses’ primacy in the field of public finance.

“Indeed, it demonstrated that the Roths-childs had for years been exaggerating the financial dangers of war. In reality, wars – and especially short wars of the sort which characterised the period from 1854 to 1871 – created financial opportunities which they, with their distinctive multinational structure, were especially well placed to exploit”. [78]

As well as lending Britain a total of £26 million for the Crimean War, which was added to the £782 million existing national debt subsequent to the Napoleonic Wars, [79] they also lent money to France and Turkey. [80]

While those two powers were both British allies in that conflict against Russia, between 1859 and 1870 the Rothschilds “would find themselves repeatedly on both sides of decisive conflicts which were to recast the map of Europe”, writes Ferguson. [81]

“The wars of the 1850s and 1860s were fought by states which were, by and large, strapped for cash; this more than anything else explains the importance of the role played by bankers in the period – and the substantial profits they could make”. [82]

He adds that their internal communications 19 reveal that the Rothschilds “were calculating carefully to ensure that both sides in the conflict paid them for their financial services”. [83]

Ferguson stresses that it would be absurd to argue that there was no connection between the overall profitability of the period for the Rothschilds and the recurrence of military conflict.

“Far from damaging their position as the world’s leading multinational bank, the wars of the mid nineteenth-century generated unprecedented business for the Rothschilds, just as fifty years before it had been war which had set them on their way to fortune and notoriety”. [84]

I will mention later the political Rothschild-linked machinations behind the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian War in 1870, but suffice to say here that they were involved with both sides and as a result their power in France and Europe was further enhanced. [85]

Having been lured into launching the war, which they lost, the French were landed with hefty reparations.

Of course, the Rothschilds were on hand to provide loans to the French state to pay off Prussia. “It was, quite simply, the biggest financial operation of the century, and arguably the Rothschilds’ crowning achievement”, [86] writes Ferguson.

“As a percentage of GDP, French public debt was already 44 per cent in 1869, before the war, and 59 per cent in 1871, before most of the indemnity had been paid. So the total internal and external debt burden in 1871 was in the vicinity of 80 per cent of GDP”. [87]

It was an “immense risk” [88] for the Rothschilds in France to be identified with paying such large sums of money to Berlin, he adds, and it is “extraordinary” how little criticism was levelled at Alphonse de Rothschild for his “great operation”, as the family termed it. [89]

“Great racket” would be nearer the truth!

I have already described [90] the Rothschild connections to South Africa, where the Boer War of 1899-1902 was essentially a grab of gold and diamond resources for Rothschild interests including De Beers.

It is worth recalling that this conflict saw the first use of concentration camps, in which the families of Dutch-origin settlers were shockingly imprisoned. A few years later the Rothschilds semi-secretly helped finance the Japanese in their war against Russia in 1904-1906 and then openly loaned a further £48 million issue to help build back the post-war Japanese economy. [91]

They performed the same role on the other side of the conflict, when “Russian industry recovered spectacularly thanks to the Rothschilds and other international bankers who poured massive loans into the country”, [92] as Docherty and Macgregor note.

The Rothschilds’ role in the conspiracy to start and prolong the First World War is of utmost importance, but since I have already examined it in detail elsewhere, I will not repeat myself here.

I will simply remind readers that the Rothschilds and their associates were able to profit from the bloodbath in multiple ways – through loans to finance the war and subsequent “build back better” projects, yes, but also very directly through their heavy involvement in the arms trade.

One important player in this respect was wealthy international arms dealer Basil Zaharoff, deeply involved in both munitions and international politics at the time and “a Rothschild man”, in Docherty and Macgregor’’s words. [93]

By 1914, Zaharoff sat on the boards of Vickers and Le Nickel, both Rothschild-financed and influenced. [94] He would no doubt have agreed with James de Rothschild, who proudly told his nephews in 1866: “In a war there is money to be made from having money”. [95]

The Enemies of the People
Paul Cudenec

From Winter Oak page

 

Elite pedophilia is the world’s best protected secret. And it makes sense, because the perpetrators need to ensure that you, the reader, will never focus on them. They prefer that we all keep busy with the many distractions they throw at us to keep us divided: dysfunctional siblings of the global family, with psychopaths and narcissists for parents. We should do anything but look to the source of Western society’s ills, which is the utter selfishness of the leadership, so extreme that it is an emotional disease, of which symptoms such as heartlessness and superiority turn its hosts into monsters. Those who do what it takes to belong to the power establishment are the most lost, the most emotionally infantile, the most broken, and the most evil among us. They do not deserve our trust, our confidence, our acceptance of their political savvy and expertise, or our admiration for their power or wealth—it is all smoke and mirrors. If we can absorb the reality that many of the most rich and famous rape and kill children with impunity, how can we possibly continue arguing and vilifying each other over differences of opinion?

from the book Quest for Love: Memoir of a Child Sex Slave
Anneke Lucas

All of us suffer, on a permanent basis, from the evil inflicted upon this world by the psychopaths in power. [1]

It is in the very air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat, the society in which we are caged.

But most of us do not encounter members of the global mafia in our personal lives – they remain abstract, even slightly unreal, figures whom we merely read about.

This is not the case for Anneke Lucas, (pictured below) [2] a Belgian woman who, between the ages of six and eleven, was used as a sex slave by what she calls “the secret gang that forms the world’s elite, who put their own slaves and puppets in roles at the top of the global power structure of privilege and entitlement”. [3]

Her abusers were, she explains in her 2022 book Quest for Love: Memoir of a Child Sex Slave, “the most elite crowd in the country – aristocrats, famous politicians, doctors, judges, lawyers, top businessmen”. [4]

It cannot have been easy for her to speak about what happened, in view of “network rule number one: Never Challenge the Absolute Power of the Bosses”. [5]

Lucas and I were born in the same year, 1963, and so, while reading her account of events happening in 1973 or 1974, I pictured who I was and what I was doing at that age and at that time.

And the contrast between my own unremarkable English suburban upbringing – protected by the basic decency of all the adults around me – and her experience is, well… simply mind-blowing.

If I had heard her account a decade ago, when she first went public, I am not sure I would have believed her, so far removed is what she describes from anything I have personally encountered or imagined.

But in the meantime I have, like so many of us, become aware of the vast scale of systematic child abuse in this wretched world and the way in which it forms part of the system’s control of politicians and other key individuals.

I have read all about Jimmy Savile (pictured below on the left) – that great friend of the current British monarch – as well as about Ted Heath, Greville Janner, Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, with his links to that same monarch’s brother Andrew. I have also watched, and written about, the 2024 film Les Survivantes, which includes Lucas’s testimony. [7]

THE REIGN OF THE BEAST →
https://winteroak.org.uk/2025/10/24/the-reign-of-the-beast/

What can we do when our societies have been taken over by a gang of murderous psychopaths who, rather than stalking the corridors of power, should be confined in padded cells in high-security mental institutions?

The first step is to tear away the mask of respectability, even “superiority”, with which they hide their true character and agenda from the rest of us.

Says Anneke Lucas, whose book I presented in the second part [1] of this trilogy: “If we see the insanity of what is happening in the world, we have a duty to also see the insanity of those who are behind it”. [2]

“We regard these people as either better than us or as powerfully evil, but both of these viewpoints give them power, and hide their utter insanity”. [3]

“They do not deserve our trust, our confidence, our acceptance of their political savvy and expertise, or our admiration for their power and wealth – it is all smoke and mirrors”. [4]

Andrew M. Lobaczewski stresses, in the book on psychopaths that I have already described, [5] that such manipulative people have a need for self-concealment: “The pathological face must be hidden from the world somehow”. [6]

BREAKING THE EVIL SPELL
https://winteroak.org.uk/2025/10/27/breaking-the-evil-spell/

Something is smelling decidedly ‘off’ in today’s world, with nauseating levels of corruption, mass murder, lies, hypocrisy and repression. These three essays are based on three books I happen to have recently read, each of which provides fascinating but necessarily limited insights into the reality of contemporary society. Placed alongside each other, however, they can help us to identify the source of the odour.

“The French government has been totally captured by Israel. The president behaves like a Zionist agent. The mass media are controlled… I am astonished by the power of the Jewish lobby. It practically dictates the Middle East policies of France and of Europe”. [1]

“Here are people who control most of the mainstream media, who have at their disposal intermediaries in the highest spheres of the state, not to speak of considerable financial clout, and they cannot tolerate the existence of a little rebel group… These people have decided to attack all forms of pro-Palestinian expression. They are everywhere, they are powerful and above all are diabolically efficient. They must certainly be working with intelligence services”. [2]

The two statements above are fictional. Or rather, they are fictional in that they have been put into the mouths of fictional characters in a work presented as a fiction.

However, author Jacob Cohen clearly does not want his readers to imagine that the contents of Le Printemps des Sayanim (‘The Sayanim Spring’) bear no relation at all to real life.

He chooses to describe his book as an “account” (récit) rather than a novel and his double-edged disclaimer declares: “Despite the troubling proximity to reality of the related facts, all resemblance to existing persons would only be the product of a coincidence”. [3]

One such coincidence concerns the central fictional character Youssef El Kouhen, the history teacher of Moroccan background who becomes involved in Freemasonry in France and whose support for Palestine provokes reprisals from the Zionist sayanim who play a leading role in the organisation.

No connection here, obviously, to Moroccan-born Jacob Cohen (pictured), with a degree from Science-Po in Paris, author of a book exposing the activities of those same networks.

Cohen’s “fiction” begins with a page of non-fictional quotes describing the existence and activities of the sayanim, a volunteer force of millions of Jewish Zionists across the world who are deployed by Mossad to defend and advance Israel’s interests.

Here former Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky states that this is the Israel intelligence service’s key asset – whereas a branch of Russian intelligence in any given country might need a staff of at least 100 people, Mossad can function with six or seven, the rest of their personnel being from civilian sayanim. [4]

Cohen has his fictional alter ego muse over the psychology of these fanatic Zionists, for whom Israel is the most wonderful country in the world.

THE STENCH OF THE SYSTEM: SAYAN
https://winteroak.org.uk/2024/11/04/the-stench-of-the-system-sayanim/

Paul Cudenec

Revised 2025 Definition of ‘Zionist’

i. A follower of the ethno-cultural nationalist movement that emerged in the late 19th century and aimed to establish a national home for the Jewish people.

ii. A person who today defends or champions the Israeli state.

iii. A person not resident in that state who nevertheless prioritises its interests over those of the country in which he or she resides.

iv. A person who maintains that Jewish people have the moral or historical right to occupy Palestine.

v. A believer in Jewish exceptionalism and/or supremacism.

vi. A person who defines opposition to Jewish 21 exceptionalism or supremacism as “anti-semitism”

vii. A person or group deliberately exploiting their Jewish identity and/or connections in order to advance their own economic or political interests at the expense of the public as a whole.

viii. A practitioner or promoter of so-called “Jewish philanthropy”.

ix. A person who considers it acceptable or even commendable for the Jewish 0.2% of the world’s population to wield disproportionate economic, cultural or social influence over the 99.8% non-Jewish majority.

x. A person who seeks to classify any criticism of activity dominated by Jews (such as banking, mass media or property development) as an “anti-semitic trope”.

xi. A person who seeks to censor criticism of the activities of certain Jewish people or families (such as the Rothschilds) on the basis that this is necessarily anti-semitic.

xii. A person who claims that any suggestion of a group of very rich and powerful people secretly controlling the world, whether or not a Jewish dimension is mentioned, is effectively anti-semitic.

xiii. A person unable or unwilling to explain why the suggestion, per se, of a secret group controlling the world should automatically be deemed anti-semitic.

22 xiv. A person who frequently warns of anti-semitism while not accepting the reality of Jewish prejudice against non-Jews.

xv. A person who insists that the deaths of Jews in Nazi-controlled Europe in the 1940s represents a totally unique historical event to which no other can ever be compared without committing an anti-semitic hate crime.

xvi. A person attempting to establish the events of October 7, 2023, as a lesser but similar “Holocaust”, any questioning of which should be regarded as anti-semitic “denialism”.

xvii. A person seeking to instrumentalise historical Jewish suffering in order to justify, promote or advance a contemporary agenda or project.

xviii. A person who claims that anti-Zionism, or indeed this current broader definition of Zionism, amounts to anti-semitism.

Having set this out, I now feel free to continue to refer to the single global mafia as Zionist.

[1]https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/cliffords-tower-york/history-and-stories/massacre-of-the-jews/
[2] See, for instance, Mees Baaijen, The Predators versus The People, https://thepredatorsversusthepeople.substack.com/
[3] https://www.tribusconscientes.com/post/for-localism-and-the-love-of-humanity
[4] https://winteroak.org.uk/2023/08/25/phoney-anti-fascists-target-the-real-thing/
[5] https://winteroak.org.uk/2025/01/17/the-truth-about-davos/

ZIM Unzipped Investigating and Opposing the Zio-Satanic Imperialist Mafia 
Paul Cudenec

Authenticity: A Quality To Defeat Quantity

 

I use the word “authentic” quite a lot in my writing: it describes, for me, an essential quality that is at the heart of everything I consider good.

Like many adjectives, it means slightly different things in different contexts, but its most obvious use is as a synonym of “genuine”.

Its opposite, in this case, would be “fake” or “false” and so we might conclude that “authentic” relates mainly to veracity, to truth.

But there is more to it than that. If, for example, I bought some “farmhouse cider” and later discovered that it was produced in a large factory on an industrial estate next to the motor-way, I might judge that this was not authentic “farmhouse cider”.

However, what if the product was truthfully named “cider produced in a large factory on an industrial estate next to the motorway”?

Would that surprising veracity mean that the product was now authentic?

Not for me, no – so my understanding of authenticity evidently goes deeper than the truth-fulness, or not, of the label attached to some-thing.

It reaches, in fact, into that something’s origins, the source from which it has emerged.

An authentic folk culture, for instance, would be one that had been handed down from generation to generation and which, while it might have changed a little over the decades, represented an obvious continuity from the past.

Its opposite, a fake folk culture, would be one that had been cobbled together by the local tourist industry to attract visitors and sell trashy souvenirs.

While describing this pastiche version as real folk culture would obviously be deceptive, the actual core inauthenticity derives not from that deception but from the origin – the essence – of that so-called culture.

My dictionary tells me that “authentic” comes from the Late Latin authenticus, which in turn came from the Green authentikos, from authentes, meaning one who acts independently.

This provides an interesting insight into the spread of meanings associated with the word today. I would say that these are “trustworthy”, “first-hand”, “just” and “natural” – with the opposite concepts being “untrustworthy”, “second-hand”, “unjust” and “artificial”.

That set of negative qualities seems to me to very much describe the world we live in today, a world that is far from being authentic.

There is certainly no place in this society for “one who acts independently”: laws, restraints and obligations are imposed on us from the outside by a system that has deliberately made us completely dependent on it.

And much of our contemporary culture is every bit as inauthentic as the fake folk culture manufactured by the tourism industry.

This is because everything in our society has to serve the hunger of one sole god – Mammon.
Value has been replaced by price, creation by consumption, quality by quantity.

And, while some kind of weakness in the human mind must have allowed this situation to come about, it is certainly not due to a positive desire of the majority to live this way – it is not because we generally and instinctively regard material wealth and power as the most import-ant elements of our being.

Far from it. Many people are screaming out against the hollowness, the ugliness, the hope-lessness, of this society in which we are trapped and are yearning for a different kind of world.
This industrial society is not authentic, because its roots are not in our hearts, in our dreams, in the archetypal tendencies and desires that stir our blood and guide our tastes and pref-erences.

It is not authentic because it does not form part of the beautiful becoming of the cosmos, the harmonious symbiosis of all the living parts of the Whole.

It is, rather, an aberration – a civilisational wrong turn that has led to the construction of a massive prison-system, a world-occupying and increasingly “inclusive” work camp designed to extract wealth from enslaved peoples and from a violated Mother Earth.

We all know who the slave-masters are.

They are the psychopaths who have built a global empire based on war, crime, slavery, drugs, plunder, usury, blackmail and deceit.

They are a tiny group, with a twisted, callous, life-hating outlook, who have somehow managed to get a stranglehold on the whole of humankind.

There is nothing they despise more than the notion of authenticity, which describes everything they are not.

It has much the same effect on them as a clove of garlic waved under the nose of a vampire!
They are afraid of people who act independ-ently, who are genuine, natural and committed to justice.

They are even afraid of people who think in those terms rather than obediently adopting the anti-values of their rancid reign of quantity, those who understand that authenticity is the quality of belonging to the natural order which they have overturned and whose past and potential existence they deny.

This is why I think we need to adopt the value of authenticity as a pillar of our philosophy of resistance and renewal.

We need to speak again its good old language, shout out loud the words the slave-masters would rather we forgot.

Let’s call for magic and for mystery, for spirit and for soul!

Let’s share tales of our ancestors, our folklore, our myths and our dreaming!

Let’s talk once more about essence, instinct, intuition and the inborn!

Let’s cry out our love of truth and beauty, of honesty and humanity, of wisdom and withness!

Let’s sing the praises of the natural and the organic, the rooted and the real!

Let’s declare ourselves to be partisans for life itself and for the victory of its affirming authenticity over the grim grey forces of artifice and death!

Paul Cudenec

The Global Gang Running Our World and Ruining Our Lives

Your government wants you dead

On the very first day of 2025, The Acorn warned that the British population was under attack from Keir Starmer’s regime, which even appeared to want them dead and was poisoning their food, freezing them to death, polluting their water, bombarding them with radiation, jabbing them to death and encouraging them to commit suicide.

Half way through the year we see no reason to change our minds!

For instance, the UK Parliament, which is under the control of the zio-imperialist mafia, has just approved the legalisation of “assisted suicide”, aka euthanasia for non-profitable units of human capital.

Commented blogger and former lawyer Clare Wills Harrison: “We are a failed nation whose NHS can’t even offer adequate care. Now it is to offer death as a service”.

One citizen journalist remarked: “No joke here. Keir Starmer is a psychopath and he is doing Aktion T4”.

This refers, of course, to what Wikipedia defines as “a campaign of mass murder by involuntary euthanasia which targeted people with disabilities and the mentally ill in Nazi Germany”.

If you doubt whether the “involuntary” element is relevant here, take a look at the chilling list of amendments to the bill that were rejected during its passage, as compiled by that same amateur sleuth, “eyuplovely”.

https://x.com/eyuplovely/status/1936788757727895645/photo/1

This shows that Parliament rejected amendments which would have ensured “doctors only discuss euthanasia if the patient explicitly requests it first”, would have insisted on “proof of non-coercion” and would have introduced the eminently sensible safeguard of allowing family or next of kin to challenge the state-sanctioned killing “if they suspect coercion”!

When you add to this the fact that MPs rejected the idea of excluding from the suicide scheme “those who might choose euthanasia due to financial hardship”, we are looking at something very dark and ugly indeed.

This all seems to be part of a convergence between ZIM’s pseudo-democratic fiefdoms and the openly totalitarian ones that it created and ran in the 20th century, such as Nazism and Soviet Communism.

Meanwhile, MPs have also voted to decriminalise abortion up to full-term pregnancy.

Ben Rubin of UK Column went online to say this was undeniably giving the green light to the killing of viable human beings – of children in fact.

Condemning the “hideous agenda” of what can only be described as a death cult, he declared: “These people are pure evil… We are ruled by soulless demons, psychopaths, who place no value whatsoever on human life”.

When tyranny is disguised as moral necessity

Satanic inversion is a key aspect of the brainwashing and gaslighting techniques used by the ruling criminocracy to control and manipulate us.

From its Commonwealth operation’s mendacious self-depiction as “a compelling force for good” to its US branch’s absurd claims to “defend democracy” across the world, its language is never far from the Orwellian satire of war being peace and slavery being freedom.

What has been less obvious to most of us is the way in which the system has been gradually manufacturing a highly complex totalitarian apparatus around its inverted notion of ethics.

Fortunately, the blogger known as Escapekey (whose work featured in The Acorn last year) has been on their case and explaining, in some depth, what they have been up to.

In a key June 2025 essay entitled ‘The Complete Architecture’, he says he has discovered “deliberate replication of governance mechanisms that defined the worst totalitarian regimes of the 20th century”.

But, he adds: “The difference is scale and sophistication: where Hitler, Stalin, and Mao operated at national levels through crude political apparatus, this system operates globally through technical expertise and ethical mandate, making it far more insidious and potentially irreversible once fully activated”.

He says that in this globalist mechanism, “science” is positioned as the source rather than subject of ethical frameworks across all aspects of human experience.

Non-compliance with this false god of “science”, creator of all ethics, becomes literally unthinkable, with dissent and resistance appearing not just wrong, but immoral.

The “ethical” framing also gives enforcement bodies “moral” authority to destroy careers without legal process, he stresses.

And he notes we saw this in operation during Covid, when refusal to toe the line was represented as some kind of moral failure.

“Healthcare workers were fired during COVID-19 not for illegal activity, but for ‘ethics violations’ — questioning vaccine mandates, discussing alternative treatments, or prioritising individual patient assessment over standardised protocols”.

Likewise, he observes, scientists face “ethics reviews” for challenging the official climate narrative.

We might add that opposing the official pro-Israel line or the power of the transgender industry is also presented as “hate crime” and thus an ethical “offence”.

Escapekey writes: “Information control operates through the weaponisation of ‘fact-checking’, ‘content moderation’, and ‘media literacy’ frameworks.

“Alternative perspectives are eliminated not through overt censorship but through ethical frameworks that define dissent from expert consensus as ‘misinformation’ or ‘disinformation’“.

He explains that the model for all this is the “clearing house” one, first perfected in the British banking system – providing an obvious clue as to who is behind it!

This involves a deceptive veneer of decentralisation, while in fact power is controlled at the centre – such as “local” banks being subservient to clearing banks, which themselves are subservient to the central bank (the Bank of England).

He writes: “The pattern was methodically exported: the Federal Reserve replicated the British model in 1913, the Bank for International Settlements scaled it globally in 1930, and the same template now governs virtually every aspect of modern life”.

And he warns: “The systematic merger of law and ethics represents the completion of a governance model that defined the worst totalitarian regimes of the 20th century.

“Hitler’s dictum that ‘the total state must not know any difference between law and ethics’ was implemented through identical mechanisms under different guises across Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, and Fascist Italy — despite their supposed ideological differences.

“The pattern was consistent: undermine existing institutions, attack traditional sources of authority, create permanent crisis requiring expert management, replace legal frameworks with ethical mandates, eliminate dissent as moral failure rather than legitimate disagreement.

“The result was arbitrary rule disguised as moral necessity — exactly what we observe today at global scale”.

https://winteroak.org.uk/2025/06/30/the-acorn-104/

Electoral fraud: the illusion of democracy

With big elections looming up all over the place, I thought this would be a good moment to remind people of what a fraud they are, on many levels.

i. Captured parties.

It has become very obvious to very many people, particularly since Covid, that the main political parties everywhere are all controlled by the criminocracy. No politicians are allowed anywhere near power unless they are signed up to the whole agenda of totalitarian “sustainable development”, public-private “partnership”, pouring money into Ukraine and pretending that Israel is not carrying out mass murder in Gaza. Control of the political parties has been in place for a very long time indeed, not just by means of bribery and blackmail but also through infiltration by the public-funded “intelligence” services set up to serve the criminocrats’ interests. Even the smallest and most insignificant political group is targeted and it is only a matter of time before any new initiative, no matter how genuine, will be taken over. If it cannot be successfully turned in a direction that suits the powers-that-shouldn’t-be, it will be destroyed from the inside by bitter disputes and splits, playing on existing fault lines and personal weaknesses.

ii. Why parties anyway?

A month or two ago, some friends and I secured a meeting with our local deputé (member of parliament), who is in the main left-wing opposition party, La France insoumise, to ask him some questions. High on our list was the threat of the WHO treaty, giving unprecedented control to a global body in the case of a future “pandemic”. Since he hadn’t even heard of the issue, one of our group explained it all to him and then asked him whether he agreed with us, in principle, that this was a worrying prospect. He wouldn’t give a personal opinion, insisting that he was committed to a collective outlook and that, basically, he would have to go and find out what the party line was before he could answer. This raises the question of to what extent an MP belonging to a political party really represents the people who elected him, or whether he in fact represents the party whose line he defends and which is in turn controlled by other interests. What is the purpose of the party system if not to prevent representatives from speaking and voting from their own convictions, or in response to the views of their constituents?

iii. The problem with representation

A deeper problem here is that of representation itself. When a population accepts to be “represented” by a politician they are essentially handing him a blank cheque to act as he (or his party) sees fit. He is under no legal obligation to carry out the promises on which he got elected and, when some new issue arises, is not expected to return to his constituents to seek their opinion. This clearly does not amount to democracy. One of the big demands of the Gilets Jaunes here in France in 2018-19 was for citizens to have the right to call for a referendum on important issues, with the direct voice of the public thus taking precedence over the indirect filter of the controlled “representative”.

iv. The shaping of opinion

There are issues even with this notion of direct democracy, though. One of these is the way that public opinion is itself moulded by mass media that are owned by the same criminocrats who control the political parties and, thus, the elected representatives. Covid showed us how effectively the majority can be conned by constant full-spectrum propaganda. These techniques could equally be used to sway a referendum. At election times, “opinion polls” relayed by corporate media form part of the manipulation, their real aim being not to reflect public opinion, but to shape it. If, for instance, a “problem” party was doing well and clearly had a chance of coming to power, the polls would announce instead that they had virtually no support and that people would do better to vote for one of the lesser-of-two-evils options. No real democracy seems possible without an independent media to properly inform the public.

v. Centralised society

A further barrier to democracy is the centralised nature of our societies – centralised nationally, transnationally (such as Europe) and globally. Power flows from the top downwards, not from the people upwards, as would be the case in an actual democracy. Agendas are imposed, institutionally, and elected representatives on any level can do very little to affect them, even if they wanted to. The prime example of this is the “development” and “economic growth” which is the motor of the criminocracy’s expanding wealth and power. The “need” for this has been written into the structure of our social organisation to the extent that public opposition to some new proposed monstrosity will always come up against a centrally-imposed brick wall. (For more on this, see this article). Real democracy would involve the localisation of decision-making, the end of global corporate imperialism and the restoration to communities everywhere of the right to shape their own destinies.

vi. A rigged game

Given everything I have been describing, do the criminocrats ever need to physically “fix” an election? I don’t know, but I am sure that if they felt the need, and had the ability, they would do so. We should not be so naïve as to imagine that they would simply stand back and watch, with a wistful shrug, if a population anywhere voted in a government that represented a genuine threat to their power and interests. If the worst comes to the worst, there is always the option of assassinating troublesome political leaders. Or of declaring yet another “emergency”, suspending elections and switching to the kind of direct authoritarian rule favoured in Nazi Germany or the USSR. At the end of the day, their “democracy” is merely a device with which to distract and control us and, while it has served their purposes well, they do not consider it indispensable.

https://winteroak.org.uk/2024/06/25/the-acorn-94/

Paul Cudenec