How Google shows "Anti-Semite Henry Ford." Another big Jewish fake, aimed against Americans.

 

I'll write this up as a narrative, explaining the various stages I moved though in disentangling the story.

This review was suggested by comments on an article in The Occidental Observer, King of Kings 1927 by Andrew Joyce, Ph D. This article is on Jewish censorship, in this case of Cecil B de Mille on Christianity. (Few people in the Occidental Observer are aware of symbiotic links between Jews and Christians). Joyce mentions Henry Ford, his 1920 The Internal Jew articles (not written by Ford) and much-publicised Rabbinical discussions against those articles.

The authors of the 40 separate new articles don't seem to be given anywhere. Probably they were Jews: they are familiar with Jewish scandals, and savvy enough to avoid the big ones and war-entangled ones. My computer searches within the bound books clearly show subdivisions by topic; there's little overlap, pointing to separate authors, probably dipping into Jewish reference books, so far as they existed then (1900ish -1920) for the goyim. Jewish policy seems to be non-competitive within Judaism. It's easy to see why: in a ghetto, and following the Talmud, one man might be targetting an aristocratic family; another targetting the drink industry; another dealing with some part of a church; another specialising in peasant loans. (I'm just making these up). There may be nobody with an overview, including 'rabbis'. I'd guess this would work in international affairs, with one set of people in China, separate from Hungarians, Czechs, and all the rest. In the post-1945 world, Jews no doubt specialise in a country or state. So a unified view may not exist. It seems possible that composite Jewish history, if it ever comes into being, might turn out to be mostly the work of 'goyim'.

['Brittany Rothchild' in the Occidental Observer (May 22, 2021) said:
Henry Ford purchased his very own newspaper as a means to educate people on the JQ. He hired the best writers he could find. "The International Jew" was a long running series and it's an amazing read in book form, filled with facts and figures and truth regarding Jewish power.
      'Brittany' does not say who the 'best writers' were.]

My site big-lies.org includes a copy of an article by hexzane527, on Henry Ford, dated, rather incredibly, 2013. I titled it henry-ford-jew-or-freemason-staged-anti-semite.html, including many keywords. So far since 2020 it's only had about 500 downloads. Hexzane527 says, I think, that Jews would not allow a non-Jew to run any large corporation. And deduces that the Dearborn Independent was propaganda for Jews, intended to introduce a set of ideas into the American psyche, the ultimate aim being to provide reasons for Germans to become 'anti-semitic' and support Hitler, a carefully-selected Jew puppet. I recommend that my readers read it too; it's short and sweet.

Kevin MacDonald's Culture of Critique (paperback 1998) says nothing about Ford, or his books. There is a 1-page number in the index, which isn't correct. But MacDonald's Introduction has many pages on Lindbergh, another token 'anti-semite' who I'll mention later. MacDonald has what he regards as a serious review of Henry Ford's life, which restates what he regards as 'scholarly' views. He is low on critical comment. He doesn't yet understand fully that Jews lie systematically.

For people new to Jewish intricacies, let me refer to a paper by 'Josh G', published on Miles Mathis's highly penetrating site. My copy is dreyfus.pdf .
      http://big-lies.org/mileswmathis.com/dreyfus.pdf is Josh G. on the Dreyfus Affair, with its echoes of France, Roman Catholics, swindles over the Suez Canal, early cinema, and a fin-de-siècle atmosphere of Zola and Oscar Wilde and cheap pulp paper. At the time this was a huge event, what would now be called a psyop, and a very effective one. As late as 1966, in his 90s, Bertrand Russell was still a believer. Josh G shows the object of the exercise, to show a Jew as a victim of of the French, and by a less-than-logical extension, Jews generally as innocent, was a success, to be trumpeted by the Jewish media.
      Probably this proved to Jews that carefully-planned campaigns including media, politicians, lawyers, police, the military, and spies, could easily defeat most goyim.

Only about 20 years after Dreyfus, we'll see that Henry Ford was part of a similar propaganda conspiracy. The First World War had just been won, and Jews had taken control of Russia, and done their best to take over many countries, such as Germany and Hungary. Looking at the time taken from buying up the Dearborn Independent in 1918, and the secrecy over the authors—familiar with Jewish crookery, and careful to miss out the worst examples—we have The International Jew.

On Henry Ford's personal life, Miles Mathis's skill in genealogical research ford.pdf demolishes the fantasies of Ford's early, hard-working, man-of-the-people, poverty-stricken life. Don't believe the BS about Ford!

The International Jew
As anyone can see on Internet, this remains a cause celèbre, hosted on many Jew lies sites. This in itself is a clue that something wicked this way comes. These websites are very careful not to host serious criticisms of Jews. Ford's stuff is always referred to as 'anti-Semitic', in the same way that NASA actors are always referred to as 'Astronaut' Brainless (or whoever). It's not entirely easy to find even scanned copies of the Dearborn Independent. A copy I have, printed on demand by Filiquarian Publishing, doesn't make it clear which parts are copied, what is transcribed, what's omitted, what dates the originals were published, and so on. But what follows seems to be correct:–

wikisource on The International Jew appears to be accurate, judging by a comparison with online PDFs found by searching for "archive.org henry ford dearborn". I haven't been able to find any of the authors. The contents are:

Volume 1: The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem (20 parts, published from Sat May 22nd to Sat Oct 2nd, 1920)
The titles are: The Jew in Character and Business | Germany's Reaction Against the Jew | Jewish History in the United States | The Jewish Question -- Fact or Fancy? | Anti-Semitism -- Will It Appear in the U.S.? | Jewish Question Breaks Into the Magazines | Arthur Brisbane Leaps to the Help of Jewry | Does a Definite Jewish World Program Exist? | The Historic Basis of Jewish Imperialism | An Introduction to the "Jewish Protocols" | "Jewish" Estimate of Gentile Human Nature | "Jewish Protocols" Claim Partial Fulfillment | "Jewish" Plan to Split Society by "Ideas" | Did the Jews Foresee the World War? | Is the Jewish "Kahal" the Modern "Soviet"? | How the "Jewish Question" Touches the Farm | Does Jewish Power Control the World Press? | Does This Explain Jewish Political Power? | The All-Jewish Mark on "Red Russia" | Jewish Testimony in Favor of Bolshevism

Then we have Volume 2: Jewish Activities in the United States (April, 1921), Volume 3: Jewish Influences in American Life (November, 1921), and Jewish Power and America's Money Famine Volume 4: Aspects of Jewish Power in the United States (May, 1922).

The hypothesis to be tested is that Ford's publication was intended to provide a spark for Germans, to either be taken up genuinely by a Hitler, or as a pretence for a Hitler and his puppet party, to be invented as a secret Jewish party.
      It would be expected that the genuinely deep and long-term arguments against Jews would not be included. But faked ideas and easily debunked material would be included. But to make any sort of resonant case, some of the items would be what non-Jews would regard as clearly evil. So we have to read The International Jew, and the repercussions to it, in that light. For example, legal action might in fact be mutually arranged by Jews on both sides, with a view to censorship or new laws. Another example might be violent agitation, the object being to make ordinary voters fearful. Another example is Jew-owned media reaction: frantic headlines, magazine articles, radio (then new) pieces, movies, courses in colleges and universities and such things as the New School for Social Research. Yet another is reaction from churches with connections to Jews, groups of Freemasons, and so on.

Volume 1 strikes me as the least controversial; it was probably a sighting shot, an experiment to see what Americans thought. Here's the opening of Vol 1 Chapter 7, Arthur Brisbane [apparently a popular journalist of the time; whether Jewish himself is not stated - RW] Leaps to the Help of Jewry:–
     Once more the current of this series on the Modern Jewish Question is interrupted to give notice of the appearance of the Question in another quarter, the appearance this time consisting of a more than two-column “Today” editorial in the Hearst papers of Sunday, June 20, from the pen of Arthur Brisbane. It would be too much to say that Mr. Brisbane is the most influential writer in the country, but perhaps he is among the dozen most widely read. It is, therefore, a confirmation of the statement that the Question is assuming importance in this country, that a writer of Mr. Brisbane’s prominence should openly discuss it.
      Of course, Mr. Brisbane has not studied the Question. He would probably admit in private conversation—though such an admission would hardly be in harmony with the tone of certainty he publicly adopts—that he really knows nothing about it. He knows, however, as a good newspaper man, how to handle it when the exigencies of the newspaper day throw it up to him for offhand treatment. Every editorial writer knows how to do that. There is something good in every race, or there have been some notable individuals in it, or it has played a picturesque part in history—that is enough for a very readable editorial upon any class of people who may happen to be represented in the community. The Question, whatever it may be, need not be studied at all; a certain group of people may be salved for a few paragraphs, and the job need never be tackled again. Every newspaper man knows that.
      And yet, having lived in New York for a long time, having had financial dealings of a large and obligating nature with certain interests in this country, having seen no doubt more or less of the inner workings of the great trust and banking groups, and being constantly surrounded by assistants and advisors who are members of the Jewish race, Mr. Brisbane must have had his thoughts. It is, however, no part of a newspaper man’s business to expose his thoughts about the racial groups of his community, any more than it is a showman’s business to express his opinion of the patrons of his show. The kinds of offense a newspaper will give, and the occasions on which it will feel justified in giving it, are very limited.
      So, assuming that Mr. Brisbane had to write at all, it could have been told beforehand what he would write. The only wonder is that he felt he had to write. Did he really feel that the Jews are being “persecuted” when an attempt is made to uncover the extent and causes of their control in the United States and elsewhere? Did he feel, with good editorial shrewdness, that here was an opportunity to win the attention and regard of the most influential group in New York and the nation? Or—and this seems within the probabilities—was he inclined simply to pass it over, until secretarial suggestions reached him for a Sunday editorial, or until some of the bondholders made their wishes known? This is not at all to impugn Mr. Brisbane’s motives, but merely to indicate on what slender strings such an editorial may depend.
      But what is more important—does Mr. Brisbane consider that, having disposed of the Sunday editorial, he is through with the Question, or that the Question itself is solved? That is the worst of daily editorializing; having come safely and inoffensively through with one editorial, the matter is at an end as far as that particular writer is concerned—that is, as a usual thing. ... Etc Etc Etc

This reads like a tepid bit of unimportant space-filler.

So what of volumes 2, 3, and 4? Some of these look important, and in fact are recognisable as part of the common currency against Jews. The problem we have is, are they accurate? And are they important?

Vol 2 Chapter 25, "Disraeli of America" - A Jew of Super-Power talks of Bernard M Baruch, and says Doubtless not one in every 50,000 of the readers of this paper ever heard of this man before 1917, and doubtless the same number have clear knowledge of him now. My problem is that it may not be true. There may have been a few hundred Jews in each important town and industry during the 'Great War', and what they did was more or less secret.

And there's the issue of what was in fact important at the time; volume 2 has varied articles on concealment, scope of dictatorship in the USA, "Rights|"; and Copper Kings, Theater and Movie problems, and for example Jews, Poland, and the Peace Conference at Versailles; all fairly important, but not perhaps crucial. Where are the reports on the Rothschilds and Britain's money control? What about Jews getting the USA into the war? What about Wilson being blackmailed? Why did the peace negotiations fail? Why did Jews want war? What about mass slaughter?

      To try to get a purchase on such questions, I loaded a PDF of the full four volumes in archive.org, and searched for:–
• Rothschild: 20 hits. Many were related to the Napoleonic Wars issue, and the loss by Napoleon at Waterloo. The history seems reliable, but the surrounding events sound doubtful to me; for example, how could owners of Government gilt-edged bonds mostly be in London at the time?
• Dreyfus appears once. So does Leo Frank. Both only in the publicity sense.
• Keynes (of Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1919) is not here.
• Marconi scandal and Suez have 3 entries
• Opium has one mention, unrelated to China. South Africa had an entry, but there's nothing on the Boer Wars.
• There are 16 mentions of Kahal. “From the first century forward, as any reader can see by consulting the Jewish Encyclopedia, the "community," "assembly" or "Kahal" has been the center of Jewish life. It was so earlier, in the time of the Babylonian captivity. And the last official appearance of it was at the Peace Conference, where the Jews, in accordance with their World Program, the only program that passed successfully and unchanged through the Peace Conference, secured for themselves the right to the Kahal for administrative and cultural purposes.”
• Sanhedrin is spread over about 6 pages.
• Passchendaele, Somme, Ypres each have zero hits. No interest in the 'Great War'?
• Slavery, slaves, slave ships I think had zero hits. I don't know how many references there were in Jewish 'Encyclopedias'; probably some. However there were hits on white slavery, ie prostitution, of course a long-term Jewish interest. But mainly on discontinued investigations. General Bingham ("50% of crime is committed by Jews") appearing here.
• Animal slaughter a few comments.
• Fraud only 5 entries, all to do with fake alcoholic junk spirits and duty.
• Kol Nidre has a few detailed mentions, though not on its practical effects.

It seems fair to say that scandals are mentioned, many very repellent, but really serious issues aren't, as would be expected of a lightish propaganda piece. Some problems are difficult to search for, in this manner. I don't think there's much in the way of systematic exposure of Jews who renamed, or companies owned by Jews. But in general I think hexzane's hypothesis holds up well.

RW   First upload 2021-May-23. If people care to comment, comment [at] big-lies.org is easiest.