Rudy "Butch" Stanko: The Score (1986). EXTRACTS ONLY.
      [4-5] INTRODUCTION
      Upon graduating from the University of Wyoming in 1970, I nmediately went into the meat industry with my father, Rudy Stanko, Sr. or fourteen years I worked 80 to 100 hours per week, doing everything om lugging beef, soliciting accounts, and buying cattle, to traveling to >reign countries to establish markets for the by-products of American ;ef. I borrowed as much as $5,000,000 for working capital that would rn over thirty times a year, and established the largest boneless beef ocessing business in America. By 1983,1 was a wealthy, successful, young businessman. At one time, I was approached to take the beef companies public, and I was told that 40% of the stock of the companies could be sold in excess of $40,000,000 on the American Stock Exchange.
     
      Therein lay the problem. I had become, perhaps, too successful. In my rise to the top, I had naively failed to perceive that the real world was unrolled by an elite few. My first inkling of a flaw in the system occurred in 1978. At the time I was growing prosperous with three plants in Glasgow, Montana; Gering, Nebraska; and Gordon, Nebraska; and, along with huge profits and a growing family, I was young and felt that the world was my oyster. In that year, however, I had my first major legal run in with the U.S. government and its judicial system. I was accused by the Government's attorney general (prosecutor), through the grand jury process, of twenty-five violations of federal meat regulations. The accusations were blown up by the press into a possible fifty year jail sentence if convicted.
      The Grand Jury is led by the prosecutor's desires and whims. The prosecutor is the only one allowed to present the case to the Grand Jury, while the defendant's attorney is not allowed to confront, let alone speak to, the grand jury. To the public, this process appears legitimate; but the Grand Jury is nothing more than a rubber stamp for the government. I was outraged at the system and accusations, but was equally disgusted with the press coverage. I had not been proven guilty of anything, but already I had become a notorious figure as portrayed by the press. Later, all of the charges against me in this incident were dropped if I would plea to a misdemeanor, and I would then receive a small fine of a $1000 dollars and *** months probation. While I will develop the particulars of this case in a laterr chapter, the reader might find it amusing to note that the crux of the o*** centered on whether a 6000 pound shipment of "beefalo" sent to a jerky manufacturer should be labelled "beef or "buffalo." But, for the first time my life, I was really confused about how the system worked and to whose advantage. Why should the U.S. Justice Department, of the country I adore fanatically, pursue an industrious American businessman who paid millions of dollars in taxes; employed hundreds of people; did nothing but make the system better; and, on top of it all, improved the cattle market for the cattle producer and lowered the price of meat to the consumer through an increase in competition? More interestingly, why should the government and the press be so anxious and willing to leap before they looked? Was there more to it than met the eye?
      During the next five years, however, the companies continued to grow and to prosper, and, in fact, succeeded far beyond what I had expected, especially for a young man in his mid-thirties. In 1981, I leased/purchased a modern slaughtering and processing plant in Denver, Colorado, from Monfort Packing Company. Eighty-five percent of the plant was newly built, with great potential right in the heart of the populace and distributing center of the Midwest. The best demand and the highest dollar for fresh boneless beef is almost always received inland and in the metropolitan areas of Denver and Kansas City. These inland cities are not as severely affected by the large influx of boneless beef imports from South and Central America, or Australia and New Zealand. From Denver, I knew I could give instant service (a marketing advantage lacking in the rural plants of Nebraska), and disperse product to all the large commercial outlets located in Denver, who then distributed to the surrounding areas: Safeway, King Soopers, Wendy's, and many other distributors and end users. In addition, my company would become the largest manufacturer of ground beef for the federal school lunch program and largest supplier of ground beef for the U.S. military. (This was because Denver had huge storage and freezing facilities.) The combination of my ambition and the background of three generations in the meat packing business gave me the expertise to produce a premium quality product at a lower cost than my competitors.
     
      In 1983 things were going, well and each plant had adequate management and continued to grow in volume and profits. Then, on September 18,1983, when I was on a Canadian fishing trip, the bomb fell.
     
      That Sunday afternoon, NBC's First Camera, a new program patterned after CBS's Sixty Minutes, launched its premiere show, supposedly to expose the inadequacies in the inspection service of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Actually, it turned out to be an attack on Cattle King Beef Company. They accused Cattle King of unsanitary processing conditions, rat infestation, unfair labor practices and other illegal [6-7] operations. All of this information had been gathered and collated by an independent consumer safety agency, the Better Government Association, based in Chicago. However, the BGA was working for and financed by NBC (National Broadcasting Corporation).
     
      When I returned from Canada, I was amazed at what had already taken place. Within three days, the secretary of the USDA, John Block, had suspended Cattle King and Nebraska Beef from receiving any future government contracts; and they would embargo and condemn all of the future meat production (21,000,000 pounds) purchased by the government. Jier, my name, Cattle King's, and Nebraska Beefs were plastered across the front page of every major newspaper in the country, again without any proof of the allegations. Not one allegation aired on the original show was ever proved. But this lack of substantiation never slowed the pursuit. The NBC financially-backed consumer advocate group, the BGA, and the government agencies, through the cooperation of the national wire service offices of AP and UPI (Associated Press and United Press International), continued to spread "headline rumors". During the next six months, my life, and my family's lives, not to speak of the reputation of the meat companies, were turned upside down.
     
      From the beginning of this witch hunt, I decided to fight this injustice with all of my resources. I enjoy a challenge, and I am a fighter, and I do not take anything lying down. But, unlike earlier in life when I could face an opponent one on one, and on a fair field of battle, this time I gradually grew to realize that those who sought my undoing had all the cards and the deck was stacked against me. During the next year, various accusations continued to be made. One was that we had allowed staples to enter the packaged meat. It was alleged that people who had purchased Cattle King meat from grocery stores had contracted salmonella, a sickness caused by uncooked pork. Another was that we distracted federal inspectors so we could process rigor mortis cattle that had died in the yard. Again, none of these media charges were ever proved. But, by the end of December, 1983, the damage had already been done.
     
      On December 14, a so-called congressional hearing was organized to determine if there was any truth to the accusations. I became confused because it was chaired by only one congressman. There was no committee, not even a congressman or congresswoman from the agricultural committee that was stationed in Washington, DC, from our district. The congressman was Tom Harkin, from faraway Iowa, who would in the future receive excellent press coverage and become a U.S. Senator. I finally realized how awesome the opposition was. The entire procedure was rigged and was actually instigated by the influence of the media, which was led by NBCs-financed BGA, and then the'administrative government in Washington, DC could and would take over. The United States administrative government the prosecution was allowed twelve hours of testimony, almost entirely provided by disgruntled ex-employees of Cattle King who had been released for being unreliable and who had been provided expense money by the BGA. Cattle King was allowed only four witnesses in one hour, at 7:00 p.m., which was at the end of the day after all the newspaper reporters had left to meet their deadline in the evening news. The reporters, and consequently the readers, had a horrified and distorted view of the true picture. The headlines read: POISONED BY CATTLE KING BEEF. During the proceedings, I realized what writer Al Knight said in his editorial a few days later;"... that BGA director Terrence Brunner was orchestrating the entire play." Aside from Terrence Brunner actually being on the panel of the "so-called" Congressional hearing committee, he directed the NBC cameras which were there for the express purpose of following up their initial September 18 expose' in January. When I went home that night and thought about everything that had happened and how, I knew that I was in for the fight of my life.
     
      False accusations from media systems assaulted my companies with no mercy. The press pictured the Cattle King Beef Company, the Nebraska Beef Packers, and their owner, Rudy "Butch" Stanko, as outlaws, comparable to J.R. Ewing on the infamous TV show Dallas. The constant headlines and the results of the media coverage at the "so-called" congressional hearing would inflame the public and substantiate action by the Justice Department. The sole purpose of the congressional hearing was not to discover the true story but to make news to instigate prosecution. The news would inflame the public, that would justify immediate bureaucratic action. Four months later, actual charges were finally stipulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), working through the Department of Justice, and, again, rubber stamped by the Grand Jury. The outcome was a trial and my conviction. For many people, this would be the end of the story; but in my case it is only the beginning. During the past two years, I have spent every waking moment realizing the power behind the "force" that is hidden from almost every mind that strives to progress and pursue the ultimate life style in this world of opportunity. In this land of freedom, [8-9] why should the government, in this case, the U.S. Department of Agriculture : (USDA), so quickly and totally cut off and punish a business and its owner who was its new main supplier and provided the bulk of the competition that previously was non existent? Why would a private consumer group, the EGA, seek out and destroy someone with whom it had no prior contact? Why would a duly elected official, Harkin, run a public witch hunt? Why would the press, which is the supposedly the nation's and the world's bulwark and guardian against the enemies of truth, print so much falsehood? Could , there be certain individuals who would profit greatly from my ruin? The 1 evr - from September 18,1983 until now didn't just happen-they were placed.
      i One group had become envious of my success, and that group alone had reasons to eliminate a competitor who had become a major threat to its I monopolistic control of America's food supply. As many people who followed the Cattle King and Nebraska Beef stories said: "He must have !stepped on the wrong toes." j I had always known of the dominance of a group of people in our industry, but I had never been exposed to the historical facts, or the possibility of a controlled market, and the reason for this lack of competition. I did not realize how their close knit organization affects the world until I had the time to study the history and the creation of credit. Ihen, with my past pragmatic business experience, I was able to put pieces of lie puzzle together. It can be recognized that I am an authority on the beef Business, had a natural instinct for discovering the various economic narketing channels for success, and had the ability to identify my various competitors. By using that same common sense business experience I icquired in dealing with my customers and competitors, I can now conclude hat the competition that remains is studiously concealed and masked. The esson to be learned is frightening; and I hope that this book will open the jyes of the freedom loving citizens of America and the world so they, too, can see what is happening.
      One of the most startling facts of my research in writing this book is that the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States is not a government entity. It is a private corporation as are its central banking counterparts in Europe, such as the Bank of England and the Bank of France, and its central banking counterpart in Russia, the Gosbank. The Federal Reserve Corporation, like its counterparts, is owned and controlled by the same foreign bankers who have historically controlled the world's money and trading systems. Why was I not taught any of this in my college business and economics courses? Why are these facts hidden?
      Have our political leaders become puppets servicing the accumulation of vast wealth by the international bankers? Does the same big money that controls our media have the power to make or break any politician, businessman, or organization by destroying its credibility?
      We are fast becoming an "enslaved" society. The average American family--as well as those around the world-has both parents working all year long for an average of two weeks paid vacation. Yet that family may not be able to save enough for a week's trip out of town. We have become nations that simply survive on the bare necessities of life. Why does this include the almighty nations of America, with all its power, modern technology, and natural resources that are supposedly increasing our standard of living? Through its control of our money, the media, and the merchandise, this group of people has attained power and influence in every sector of our economy and at every level of our society. It is dedicated to the financial control of the naive and brainwashed citizens of the world, as a first step toward enslaving them. Without financial freedom, there is no freedom. Whoever controls the issuance of money or credit controls you.
      Until I spent the time researching for this book, I was as suspicious, but ignorant, as most freedom loving citizens of the world about this "worldwide conspiracy". Taking over my meat companies was only a small part of the larger conspiracy. However, my companies did pose a threat to the meat cartel's monopolistic control over the United States' food supply. The most important question to be asked about the takeover of my meat companies must be, "Who would benefit from the elimination and takeover of Rudy "Butch" Stanko's Nebraska Beef and Cattle King beef companies"?
      The answer is that a group has become professional manipulators. The members believe they are the intellectual and wealthy rulers of man. They consider you to be the slaves of this organization. This, my friends, is The Score.
      You may ask: "Who is this group, and do they resemble the Mafia?" What I will say now is that the mafia is a small faction, which is limited in their influence to primarily the United States and Sicily, whereas the [14-15] EARLY YEARS Chapter 1 Early Years: Pre-1970 "In 1970,1 left the fun behind and began a steady business career, utilizing all of the knowledge and experiences of my youth, and, unexpectedly learning about the 'supermen in the meat cartel." Rudy "Butch" Stanko
      Rudy "Butch" Stanko is a rowdy. All my life I have been a beer drinking hell raiser, and, at thirty-seven, I was still drinking pitchers of beer and kicking hippies' asses in the honky-tonk saloons. I was hardly what a Christian preacher would call a saint; rather he would probably say that I was on the road to hell or, at best, that I was obnoxious. However, I would rather drink and tell dirty jokes with the boys at the bar than listen to his boring Sunday morning sermons. I rather liked my reputation-a rough, tough, Polish cowboy from Wyoming spent a lot of money on parties, cold beer, big cars, and, of course, fast airplanes. It's the good life if you don't have to look the preacher in the eye on Sunday morning.
      I no doubt inherited many of my personality traits from my tough dad and the rough-tough atmosphere of the drinking, happy-go-lucky meat packing crews that I have been around since I was able to walk. Dad and I were both raised in the environment of the wide-open ranges of Wyoming, so naturally we were accustomed to the free spirited way of life. This free education outside the classroom taught me more about how to take care of myself, and how to deal with high-pressure situations, than any school system I had graduated from. But more than raising hell and having a reputation as the toughest guy around, I love my wife and family more than anything in the world. So, in 1980,1 retired with my beautiful wife and three children to Jackson Hole, Wyoming, the paradise valley of the United States.
      Having made enough money to retire for life, I had decided to do what my Dad, Rudy Stanko Sr., who had worked his tail off since he was twelve years old and at sixty-two was still putting in sixty-hour to seventy-hour weeks, had never been able to do nor wanted to for that matter-take it easy and enjoy the good life. Many of my friends and business associates thought I was crazy for quitting when I 'was so successful. I was one of the top meat producers in America, and still young. However, two things had occurred which made my move attractive, if not necessary. First, I had been the object of a probe by the government for various alleged violations of the meat processing regulations. This was especially aggravating to me because I had been one of the largest taxpaying citizens during Jimmy Carter's administration (I was in the 80% tax bracket), and also because I had worked so hard to become a success. I remember telling Joe Richter, a drinking companion who was always planning how to make a fast buck, that: "A person could make more money legally than illegally." I was legally making millions, and it would be pure stupidity for a man in my position to cheat anyone. We had hundreds of employees and our reputation was the main reason for our success. Now, the government was calling me a criminal.
      Second, I wanted to achieve my personal dream of living in the mountains, hunting, fishing, hiking, skiing and doing all of the outdoor activities with my wife and kids.
      To better understand why I wanted to get out of the rat race, I need to tell the reader a little of my history. When my grandfather, Mike Stanko, who was born in 1886 in Stebna, Poland, came to this country in 1912, unable to speak a word of English, he didn't have to contend with the high-pressure business world and government controls that now exist in this country and are counterproductive for our families' operations. The wide open ranges of Wyoming contained no brick walls of government bureaucracies to limit his growth, as they did fifty years later. So when Mike Stanko started his meat business at the foot of the Big Horn Mountains close to Sheridan, Wyoming, his hard work and knowledge of meat processing made him a successful business man within a few years. His primary customers were Polish and Italian coal miners and the few wealthy English landowners and merchants in Sheridan, Wyoming. His prosperity grew until tragedy struck, when Dad was only fifteen years old. One Saturday, when my grandfather was butchering beef on the range for the following Monday's market, his wife, Anna, had an appendicitis attack and died before Mike returned from the field. Had he been there, he could have rushed her by horsedrawn wagon to Sheridan, only fourteen miles away. But in those [24-25] EARLY YEARS EARLY YEARS which I naturally would have done anyway. The law had chased me for twenty miles across the hills and gullies of the desert and did not throw the book at me. They had as much fun as I did. A game warden was listening on the two-way radio and thought it was hysterical. He heard the cop saying that the antelope should take some lessons from Rudy and his hotrod Chevrolet. Nowadays, our uptight system, which is highly influenced by the media, ' -^uld have charged me with everything under the sun. During my father's u~y, the cops would have joined in by drinking beer at the party or by taking my grandfathers eighty miles an hour to the boxing match. It has taken just over fifty years for a "hidden force" that dictates the economy, media, and law, to control every aspect of our lives and to take away the free and fighting spirit that made the new nation of America great. These "hidden forces" are especially powerful within the world's food and meat markets. Plato, Mendelssohn, Nietzsche, all famous philosophers of their civilizations, laid the doctrines that the people would be led by the military class under the rM leadership of supermen? Who are the "hidden forces" or the supermen? I didn't find out until I was thirty-seven years old, and a threat to their power structure.
      The reader must not think however, that I was just a playboy during my school days. I was also an opportunist, and I was always thinking about the meat packing business and how my Dad could make the extra buck in his business. Also, for my efforts, I always had a hundred dollar bill in my pocket for working extra hours at the meat packing plant, as well as making a few deals on the side.
      During my teens, I worked for my father in every capacity. I lugged beef in the plant and learned the various cuts of meat, along with all the in-plant operations of making hot dogs and curing hams and bacons. I also learned how to identify a good piece of meat, and how to judge and to purchase livestock. While a lot of kids were swimming, being lifeguards, or getting suntans in the summer at Alcova Lake, I was out dealing with the plant's customers and making business decisions on the price of meat with buyers twenty to forty years older than myself; so very early in my life I was learning every phase of the meat packing business. To reinforce these skills, I became active in Deca, the distributive education program at the high school, winning the State Salesman and the Student of the Year Awards in my senior year, and a free train trip to Chicago. By the time I went to college, I had already a better education in making a living in the real world than any college graduate.
      I was probably the wildest rounder the University of Wyoming has ever seen. If you think Animal House was a crazy movie with lunatics who couldn't possibly exist in real life, you're mistaken. Along with Gunnars Hvaskos, Rob "the Roach" Snedden, Mouse Miller, whiskey-drinking Bear Butt McCarrol and some of my other buddies, we were the first to bring a horse up to the third floor of the dorm. It mysteriously died and had to be butchered by the dorm proctors with a hand saw when rigor mortis set in the next day. With my wrestling and boxing background, I was able to kick the. hell out of any football player who thought he was the toughest guy on campus. I had the right connections to locate any exam for the other students, who were my partymates for a slight fee~a case of beer. I especially enjoyed walking into a bar filled with half-drunk toughs and teasing them. If they were good-natured and took the kidding in the right way, we bought each other drinks; but sometimes it ended in more than an ordinary debate. Like my dad, I didn't lose any fights, and this included those where I took on as many as three and four at one time. One night while I was home for Christmas vacation, three black guys decided to jump me at Black's Chili joint. As I was running outside, the timing was just right. I turned around and the bastards were all in line, so with the straight right that my Dad taught me, in three punches I left all three lying on the ground.
      I always had plenty of expense money in college to finance my escapades. Working for Dad selling meat in the summer vacation months, I was able to make what a family man would. I was also a distributor for butcher knives, trout flies, buffalo skulls, and anything that would make a buck. Besides having a fullride wrestling scholarship, I threw an annual Polish May Feast that made a consistent $3000 a year. At this feast on Mother's Day, I would order forty kegs of beer and a ton of Polish sausage, and I would charge five dollars for a couple or three dollars for a stag. This was the biggest party Wyoming had ever seen, and it showed what an enterprising young American could do if he had ambition. On top of that, I was a consistent winner in dorm poker games. But in 1970, as I closed my senior year and received my degree in accounting, I left the fun behind and began a steady business career, utilizing all of the knowledge and experiences of my youth.
      [30-31] ROCKY MOUNTAIN ROCKY MOUNTAIN are no different than the operating procedures of the local meat market. The USDA has assumed this police authority and delegated this power to classroom scholars. Through the use of 38,000 regulations, the USDA has curtailed, stymied, and now eliminated the production of the small, rural meat packer. This assumed authority and encroachment by the USDA has created a high priced meat product for the consumer and benefited the monopolistic ironment of the "supermen" in the meat cartel. In other words, our USDA, through the federal meat veterinarians, unconsciously has been trained to stymie and control the meat business for an "elite few," or a meat cartel. If this is not true, then where is the competition that existed in the early 1950's? The big four-Swift, Armour, Cudahy, and Wilson-have closed most of their plants or scaled down their operations and merged with the international conglomerates. The owners of the small, independent slaughtering and processing plants that existed in all rural areas, like the Sheridan Meat Company (my uncle's plant on my mother's side of the family) and the Rocky Mountain Packing Company, have given up the ship. The pressure from the USDA in Washington, DC, via the federal vets is not worth the battle. My mother's family's sixty-year-old Sheridan Meat Company closed its doors in 1985. It was the last wholesale meat company in the state of Wyoming. Thirty years ago ten such companies existed in this state. The great livestock state of Montana is also practically void of these commercial meat operations. In 1970, Nebraska turned its responsibility of meat inspection of over a hundred commercial meat companies to the USDA. Dr. Roger Krull, a past circuit supervisor for the USDA in the state of Nebraska during this transition period, stated: "My bosses told me to sig-um."^ Krull's bosses were Dr. Breeden and Dr. Shannon, USDA federal vets stationed in Lincoln, Nebraska; and sig-um is the term used in telling a hunting dog to fetch the wild game. After a year, Krull had a guilty conscience in closing or making the requirements so rigid for almost all of the independent meat companies in the state of Nebraska-which subsequently closed down-that he quit his military job. He later stated: "I was told to close the doors on hard working Americans, and these were the type of Americans that built this country and made it great."^ These four states: Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, and Wyoming are typical examples of what has happened or is happening in all fifty of the United States of America.
      The Big Four and the rural independent meat companies have been replaced by large international merchants or metropolitan independent meat companies. Members of certain cartels have historically dwelt in urban areas, which are centers of trade. .However, in the early 1900's, the founder of Swift and Company, Gustavus F. Swift, stated that his past company success centered around building his slaughtering plants near the source of supply. The expense of transportation would verify his conclusion. Why not slaughter and process the animals at the source? The answer is simple. The meat cartel can more readily centralize its monopolistic structure by communicating and organizing its members in the urban areas where they live. Their association governs the USDA in Washington, DC, because their combined wealth and membership has the professional political influence over key appointments within the federal government's administration. This creates a government entirely separate and under little influence from our elected politicians. Once the rural competition was eliminated, the city cartels expanded into the competitive-free rural areas. At present they dominate the entire meat market of the whole country.
      Now that the rural competition has been practically eliminated, the USDA has used my original suggestion. In the early 1980's, the USDA initiated and implemented a new program called TQC (Total Quality Control), which now will benefit only the remaining operators, the meat cartel. Under this program, the USDA veterinarians and their inspectors will no longer be responsible for most of the 38,000 regulations concerning production in the meat-packing industry. Decisions as to the edibility of meat after the USDA veterinarian has placed his stamp of approval on the slaughtered animal will he left up to the quality control personnel under management's jurisdiction.
      The professional meat buyers and the consumers are the ultimate meat inspectors. The customers of the meat companies will not purchase a dirty or an unwholesome meat product. If they have a dirty shop, these independent meat companies will be without customers. Word of mouth is the best or the worst advertising, depending on how clean you keep the meat packing operation. Rocky Mountain Packing Company was a clean business, as testified by its customer rapport.
      Yet Rocky Mountain Packing Company, a typical, expanding meat company from the 1950's through the middle 1970's in the rural United States, was forced to close its doors for the benefit of the "meat cartel." Marvin Dinner, a cattle trader from the Denver area familiar with the [32-33] ROCKY MOUNTAIN meat cartel, told me many years later: "They were worried and concerned about your father's aggressiveness in Wyoming.1"* Marvin Dinner was a member of the synagogue and the men's club where many of the personalities of the meat cartel in the metropolitan area of Denver went to compare notes.
      MY FIRST SUCCESS Chapter 3 My First Success Citations 1. Letter from Stephen Krut, Executive Director of American Association of Meat Purveyors, addressed to NBC News, September 20, 1983.
      2. Conversation with Rudy "Butch" Stanko at Gering, Nebraska in October 23,1983.
      3. Ibid.
      4. Conversation with Rudy "Butch" Stanko at the Centennial Livestock Auction, October, 1981.
      "The youth who can solve the money question will do more for the world than all the professional soldiers of history." Henry Ford, Sr. Dearborn Independent, 1920.
      Gordon is a small town of 2500 people in the middle of the Sandhills of Western Nebraska. Prior to our leasing the meat packing plant in 1970, it had been the ruin of three other meat packers in the previous five years. Boyer Provision, the last of the owners, had lost $250,000 in a short time; and Vern Boyer, the president of Boyer Provision, was anxious to get out of the plant. The plant had been labeled a loser, and in order to entice us, he hadto give it to us for almost nothing. The Chief, my dad, was the only party interested in the idle plant, or the "dead horse"; but in terms of the volume of money needed to operate a meat packing plant, our family was considered broke. Being a meat packing man, Boyer knew we would need all of our accumulated funds for working capital. He agreed to lease us the plant for twenty years for a mere $ 1.50 per head slaughtered, which even included the utilities.
      But the Chief and I were so hard pressed for working capital that we couldn't even come up with the $50,000 to open the plant. The bank in Gordon demanded this sum before they would supply an additional $250,000 working capital, which was the absolute minimum required to finance the inventory and accounts receivable of a small meat packing company. My parents had only $20,000 in the bank after the financial failure of the Rocky Mountain Packing Company, so we had to raise the $30,000 from somewhere.
      This proved to be difficult. All of the Chiefs friends and loyal supporters had invested in Wyoming Beef Packers, the company that was now operating in the Rocky Mountain Packing building and was run by the state of Wyoming and its development corporation. The company demoted the Chief at its inception and, consequently, was having more financial [82-83] JUDAS border, the Jewish meat Kehillah began to plan, in the late 1970's, to build a plant in Omaha, Nebraska, to stop my expansion. Being a Jewish businessman, William Kandor and his right hand man, Joe Popover, had ties with my Jewish competitors in several cities: Denver: 1. Averch Packing 2. Denver Boneless 3. Lyco Boneless Omaha: 1. Cornhusker Packing-largest cow carcass shipper in the Midwest, located at Omaha, and a main supplier to Prime Packing when they were boning cows. Comhusker had made millions selling meat to the U.S. military government in World War II.
      2. Northern States-largest cow and bull slaughterer and boner at one location. It is the number one supplier of government ground beef and is owned by the international firm of Con-Agra (Con-Agra also owns Armour).
      Nebraska : 1. Gibbon Packing-it has become one of the largest cow slaughterers and exclusively supplies Peck Packing in Milwaukee or, occasionally, the Jewish boners in Denver.
      2. McCook Packing-an old plant that went out of business when Gibbon began and was owned by a New York Jewish family, the Romanoffs, who are large meat distributors in New York and would receive large shipments of meat only from Jewish sources after the fading of McCook Packing.
      Kansas City : Carl Wiseman Boneless Beef-compatible to Denver Boneless and Lyco combined. The company sold the majority of the boneless beef boned in the lucrative fresh boneless beef markets of Kansas and Missouri.
      New Mexico : Karler Packing-the only large cow slaughterer in New Mexico, which began to supply the Denver area when a supply was needed, especially after Averch Packing converted to a sheep kill and Cattle King began its operations.
      Wisconsin : 1. Peck Packing-the second largest boneless beef manufacturer in Wisconsin, if not the United States.
      2. Packerland-the largest boneless beef manufacturer upon its purchaseofNebrasjcaBjjgfJ[find it hard to belieyejhat thestout_and racist Frankienthal fjmj[ywould sell^their multi^mill ion dollar operation to a non-kehillah or ajratholic. AJtm^jngh^T^rah^ theTalmud, and reading and ojbsejmn^j^o^gjj_rny personal experience the_Sanhedrin, and its JUDAS practices, it is an impossibility for the Frankenthals to even consider selling its operation to a religious rival.*** The Gillette Group purchased Packerland in 1979. George Gillette is listed as a Catholic and considered the owner of the Gillette Group. I disagree. George Gillette is either hiding his true religious convictions orjhe Gillette Group is a front for a larger financial structure. The Kehillah cannot become too obvious or the Americans will begin to discover what the Axis power did in the 1930's.
      3. Landy-the largest American slaughterer of cull cows from Canada, who lost the identity of the slaughtered carcasses and then sold to the Kehillah government contractors for further processing in government ground beef contracts, which was illegal for Nebraska Beef.
      Minnesota : Robel Packing-the largest cow slaughterer and boneless beef manufacturer in Minnesota.
      Missouri: Robel Packing-the largest cow slaughterer and boneless beef manufacturer in a new plant in Missouri.
      Iowa : Tama Packing-the largest cow slaughterer in Iowa, owned by the Jewish Kane family of New York, and supplier of Prime and Wexler in Chicago, and Lovett in Ohio.
      Chicago : 1. Wexler-became the largest boner in Chicago after Northern States was built in Omaha and Prime went into steak cutting.
      2. Prime Packing Company-Prime went into steak cutting in the late 1970's. In 1985, rumors were carried back to the Jewish Kehillah about my accusations of Kandor being involved in a Jewish conspiracy. The company business and management transferred over to another newly-acquired steak cutting operation. The steak cutting operation is the largest steak cutting business in the U.S. It was then sold again to who knows who, but it is heavily Jewish owned and operated. Kandor has always concentrated on the exporting and importing of meat throughout the world. Some Central American meat is banned from entering America and is imported into Europe to be processed as Hungarian salami, and then re-exported throughout the world, including the United States.
      Michigan : 1. Murco~the largest cow and boneless beef manufacturers in Michigan.
      *** In lore Dea (Talmud), 334,43 it says: "Anyone who sells his farm to the Akum (Christian) must be sent into exile[excommunicated]— unless he undertakes to make up for all the harm that follows as a consequence of having the Akum near the Jews." In lore Dea (154,2) it says: "It is not permitted to teach any trade to the Akum" (A. Rohl. Die Folem. p. 20) "The life of a Got and all his physical powers belong to a Jew."3 [84-85] JUDAS 2. Marcus Rothbard-the largest depressed meat dealer (buyer of off-condition product) and processor of this type of product in the United States.
      Ohio : 1. Lovett Boneless--is the largest boneless beef supplier in Ohio and the surrounding states and is supplied by Tama and a new plant in ' Hastings, Nebraska.
      Florida : 1. Max Bauer-the second largest boneless beef boners in Ho. .a and one of the largest suppliers of meat to' the government.
      2. Kaplan Packing--the largest slaughterer and boneless beef manufacturer in Florida.
      Texas: 1. Sam Kane Packing~a large beef slaughterer dealing in border trade with Mexico, and is in constant contact with the Baum family. His plant is located at Corpus Christi, Texas.
      2. Supreme Packing-located in Dallas-Fort Worth and the largest producer of meat for the United States government.
      The list is larger and could include the West Coast, which is also heavily influenced by the Kehillah. All of the above firms are Jewish and their owners speak Yiddish. Working with this list alone indicates that the Jewish Kehillah handles, at some time in the distributing network, at least 85% of the cows and bulls processed from Nebraska to the eastern Great Lakes. They control the meat market because of their influence on the Kehillah-controlled "sheet," or the National Provisioner, that decides the meat market. This is a strong .statement, but I challenge the Kehillah to dispute my facts. When they had realized that, even with their best competitive business efforts, they couldn't put me out of business or control my growth, they decided to get me in another way. How else can Grant's repeated returns, twice at his own request, be explained, especially in the light of his own disliking of small Western towns and his supposed disgust with our illegal operations, about which he testified as early as 1977? Later in the book, there will be proof that Grant will be another link in 1983. Kandor's and Grant's efforts worked, for by 1980,1 had to close my Glasgow plant and lay off half of my Gering employees because I was no longer able to bid on the lucrative government contracts, and because of the publicity, my record was tainted.
      Just a few closing thoughts. Wilfred Grant, along with his professed Nazism, is known to have forged a signature on an employee's check in order to steal from a White Hall employee. This man was Harold Coates (an ex-Nebraska Beef killfloor foreman), who was one of Grant's hand-picked foremen, and who informed the government about Grant's true character.
      JUDAS The Justice Department was not interested; they were instructed to pursue a bigger fish, Nebraska Beef. Grant is known to have stolen a box of pork loins from Nebraska Beef which he sold to the owner of the Union Bar in Gering, Nebraska. His drinking compatriots called him "the silver fox." He is known to have conspired to transport illegal aliens across state and national borders for his profit. Yet this is the type of person used by the legal system in the United States to justify justice.
      In contrast, I voluntarily assisted in the capture of an outlaw meat truck driver, who had stolen a truck load of beef from a competitor, Iowa Beef Packers, and who tried to sell me 40,000 pounds of pirated meat for $25,000, with a value of $125,000, or a profit of $100,000. I not only turned him in after he contacted me but strapped myself with a recorder to get the evidence necessary for the prosecution.
      Also, many of the inspectors and graders in my plants testified to the quality of my product and the cleanliness of my plants. Dr. James Hitch, the doctor of veterinary medicine at Glasgow, said he never knew of any attempt by the Stankos to defraud the government and stated that we ran our plant as well or better than any plant he had ever known. Ray Rezac, a USDA employee at the Gering plant, said much the same. Who is the reader going to believe? Do you smell something rotten in the meat industry? Still being naive about the private ownership of the Federal Reserve and the Protocols of Zionism, I blamed the legal push against me on the ignorant bureaucracies of the government and their uncontrollable spending associated with heavy taxation. At the time I thought: "To hell with it. It isn't worth the hassle." So I retired. Later Tom Bamrick made the comment: "Things just don't happen, they are planned." > Citations 1. Eustace Mullins,77iw Difficult Individual, Ezra Pound (Angriff Press, P.O. Box 2726, Hollywood, California 90028).
      2. Grant testifying before the Grand Jury in 1979.
      3. Reverend I. B. Pranaitis, The Talmud Unmasked, (Liberty Bell Publications, Reedy, West Virginia, 25270) p. 71.
      [94-95] CATTLE KING CATTLE KING Before I made a deal with Monfort, I felt I had to eliminate some of the past deficiencies of the Denver plant. Since the plant had no rendering facility, a long-term contract had to be acquired from both the hide processing and the rendering people, who were all intertwined in ownership with the Jewish meat cartel. The hide and rendering business as in Denver were exclusively Jewish. Herman the Jewish German was still alive, and his influence and w~-king capital was being passed on to his future inheritors.
      Also, Denver had a historic reputation as a strong union town. It was my perception from previous experiences that if we became a dominant supplier in the city, the union workers at the large Safeway and King Soopers stores would not accept product from a nonunion plant. Therefore a union labor contract had to be negotiated, but it had to be on the same wage scale as the Nebraska plants. I wanted the plants to be in harmony; a high scale union contract might ruffle the feathers of the hard-working employees of Nebraska Beef in Gering and Gordon. When Monfort operated the plant, it had a small, company-independent union which, Monfort had said: "was company oriented." The Denver plant had been closed down for six months, and its ex-employees' and the union leaders' unemployment benefits had expired. Because of this situation, the independent union's founders were receptive to a contract that was three and four dollars lower than those of the other meat cutter unions. It was my plan just to get the plant started under an equitable union contract, and if at a later date a labor dispute arose, I would be in the ideal bargaining position. I would not own the plant, with millions tied up in a bag of cement in an idle plant due to a strike; I was only leasing. Once I was established, I could always fall back on the Nebraska plants to supply boneless beef to my future Denver customers.
      With a rendering plant in Gordon, the Gering plant was able to use this as a hedge in dealing with the city cartel of Denver and to receive an adequate return for its rendering by-products. Consequently, the Gering plant was now hauling its by-products to Denver. I was able to negotiate the same deal as Gering, except that the new Cattle King plant, being in the city of Denver, would have no freight on its by-products.
      The hide processing was not a big issue, but when dealing with a Jewish hide cartel and a controlled business, it meant that all areas must be covered before an operation could begin. Because of the concentrated population, the large city of Denver had more than its share of environmental controls. For example, the disposal of the enormous amount of salt brine used in curing hides was a problem unless the company had started under the jurisdiction of the grandfather clause (a business established before the environmental permits). A long-term deal was struck with Processors, Inc., for a little over two dollars per hide to brine cure and process the hides for us. This was on the high side, but Processors.'Inc., and Herman the German's old outfit, now called Chilewich, were the only two hide-salting facilities in the city.
      Another area of concern was that of financing. This was always a problem in rural Nebraska with its small banks because the most any bank would loan would be ten percent of its equity. In my case, I banked with the largest bank in the area, Scottsbluff National Bank, and I could never get credit of over one million dollars, even though my net worth was several millions. I was later to realize that this was the plan of the most powerful cartel of all, the banking Kehillah, so as to limit the growth of the rural areas. The demand for credit, or a medium of exchange, grows when industry expands; and the creation of money or credit is controlled by the private owners of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The need for money in rural areas can be compared to the situation in the Depression of the 1930's, when the Federal Reserve Bank of New York decreased the supply of money and made money hard to obtain. This depressed the purchasing power and consequently, the prices throughout the country, and then the money manipulators bought the depressed but valuable assets. I was now in the big city of Denver, and, with my track record, acquiring money should pose no problem. My first stop was the First National Bank of Denver, Sonny Mapelli's bank. I was turned down. My next stop was the American Ag Credit Corporation, which worked through the Colorado National Bank. Colorado National Bank was Averch's and Denver Boneless's bank, but I was still able to secure a participating loan of up to four million dollars to run the new meat packing venture. All areas were now covered: the hides, the rendering, the labor, and the money. An unsuspecting country boy was ready to play the game with the meat cartel in Denver. Later, I found out it was much larger; it was a national Zionist Kehillah.
      A deal was made with Mira Welling, an attractive company attorney for Monfort, for a monthy rental of $15,000 with an option to purchase the plant in five years for $1,500,000, with Monfort financing the ten-year contract. After concluding the deal, I told Mira that I would "give the Jewish boys in Denver a run for their money now." She abruptly informed me she was Jewish. About a year after lease/selling me the plant, old man Monfort married the attractive Mira, and his meat business ceased to have any future [96-97] CATTLE KING CATTLE KING financial problems. In fact, it has blossomed into one of the largest and most profitable beef packers in the nation.
      Nebraska Beef now had one of the finest cow slaughtering facilities in the United States. The plant, which processed an average of 925 cattle per day during Monfort's stay, had been considered small for the choice cattle operations; but it would be comparable to the large cow plants of Packerland in ~-een Bay, Wisconsin, or the Northern States plant in Omaha. Besides, this was my dream, the ideal facility that could now compete with the local meat cartel while getting the top dollar for its product and giving the customers service.
      The Cattle King Beef Company was an instant success-the fulfillment of an American dream. In 1982,1 probably made more money than any young person in the Rocky Mountain area. But within four months of operation, the Kehillah was at work. Colorado National Bank decided to withdraw from its financial commitment; fortunately American Ag was run by a couple of good ole' cowboys, and to the Kehillah's suprise, American Ag did not follow their example. American Ag later paid for not taking the advice of the Colorado National Bank. Their charter for making loans was revoked in 1984.
      *The three largest choice beef processors in the United States are: Iowa Beef Packers (IBP), Missouri Beef Packers (EXCELL), and Monfort. Cargill Co., the international grain cartel, owns the meat giant Excell Corp. Dr. Armand Hammer, the Jewish oilman who is one of the premiere trade arrangers for the Soviet Union, has just recently bought the huge Iowa Beef Processing Co. These processors now dominate the Midwest procurement of fed cattle and the nationwide sale of boxed beef. A twenty-five year Cargill man was made top Undcr-Sccretary of Agriculture in 1983. His name is Daniel Amstutz. He is from one of the six Jewish families from the oligopoly that control the grain companies. The additional five who belong to the world grain cartel which controls the transnational movements of grain and other commodities, are: Con-Agra, Dreyfus, Continental, Bunge, and Andre; but these companies now also dominate most domestic meat markets. Cargill controls all poultry production within Argentina. ^ Parade magazine identified Michel Fribourg, whose Jewish family is the sole owner of Continental Grain Company and worth billions (April 16, 1972, p.2). Continental recently consolidated the third largest boneless beef operation in the United States, Jewish-owned Peck Packing from Milwaukee, while Con-Agra purchased the stock from the Gentile owners of the second largest company, Northern States, and Packerland purchased Stanko's troubled Nebraska Beef, which made them the largest boneless beef company. These three companies are now the largest boneless beef companies on the North American Continent.
      In 1975, when a Senate subcommittee began investigating the six internationals, Senator Church was to say of the grain multinationals, "No one knows how they operate, what their profits are, what they pay in taxes and what effect they have on foreign policy-or much of anything else about them."^ I was now thirty-five years old. Within two years of the founding of Cattle King, a friend approached me to take a minor share of the beef companies public, and I was told that forty per cent of the companies could be sold in excess of forty million dollars on the American Stock Exchange. I have always relished independence and found partners (stockholders) and government bureaucrats to be obstacles. In taking the company public, the company would be burdened with both, and our company did not need the government's SEC (Security and Exchange Commission) looking over its shoulder. I declined the offer and believed my American dream had just begun to blossom.
      The company was an instant success because it filled an economic void that existed in the Western United States-against the wishes of the meat Kehillah. Greed, hate and blood-thirsty vengeance became the dominant forces in the lives of the members of the Kehillah upon the opening and success of Cattle King Beef Company. In 1983, Paul Slater, my head meat salesman at Nebraska Beef in Gering, heard Ralph Auerbach, owner of Lyco Meat Company in Denver, make the statement: "If I had two dollars in my pocket, I would give you two dollars to kill that son-of-a-bitch, but I just don't happen to have two dollars in my pocket." He was talking about me. Tom Bamrick heard the same thing.
      Twenty-one months after Cattle King opened its doors, Auerbach's Lyco Boneless Beef Company made headline news by closing its doors. An article published in Denver's Rocky Mountain News on Saturday, April 2, 1983, shows how dominating my business was. The article points out that "Auerbach's Lyco Meat Company," which had been in business for eighteen years, had halted work at its beef boning plant and furloughed the workers. Four months before, Auerbach had signed a union contract for $10.02-an-hour, and he claimed he was losing money to a competitor who was paying $6.50 an hour or less, so he was now demanding a $2-an-hour cut in wages from his unionized workers. He refused to name his competitor, but everyone knew I was the one he was talking about. This was not the only reason he closed; we captured his premium, paying customers with a quality product because now we could give the Denver customers service. I had now evened The Score with Mr. Auerbach.
      This was good strategy on Auerbach's part by which he united the union organization on his side. He was blaming the furlough on the low-priced non-unionized labor at Cattle King, not on the fact that we had absorbed most of his business with a fresher boneless beef product. It was a fact that $2-an- [114-115] FACTS FOR THE CONSPIRACY international Con-Agra and operated by Adolph Raskin. The part that Packerland owner George Gillette played is easy to analyze. Why would a stout Jewish family sell an extremely profitable business? And to a Christian? The answer I get is that nobody could run the business once Ziggy was gone. George Gillette is neither a cow man nor a packing house operator. He would not know the difference between a springer or an open cow. He would not know the difference between a cor ^rcial cut or a choice cut until it was in his mouth. If nobody could run the plant once Ziggy was gone, why would an NBC Television owner buy Packerland, a highly management-orientated business dealing with perishables, and then let it fade out of its primary and historically profitable business-that of supplying the huge USDA school lunch account? What could he gain from this, unless he had received an order? His withdrawal from the federal contracts at Packerland and his early bid to buy my plants (operations which were centered around the profit made on the USDA school lunch business) made me more than suspicious. Maybe the following incident will explain why.
      Within a few weeks of my public exposure on all the television networks, starting on September 18, 1983, Gillette called me about purchasing my meat packing operations. I priced the companies at $40 million. A basis for assessing an immediate price for any company is to calculate ten times the company's earnings. Our earnings were running about $350,000 per month, which would justify the $40,000,000 asking price. However, I did not want to sell. I have been on my back before and won the match, and I believed our companies would easily weather the storm. When Gillette called me, he referred to a picture of me that he had on his desk, saying that I was a handsome guy. Why did he have my picture, and for how, long had he had it? I never received any offer from Northern States or anyone else, and I finally ended up selling all of my Gering holdings to Packerland (Gillette). They bought me out for ten cents on the dollar. These holdings were worth millions more, but I had no choice, because in a few short months the media and the government had destroyed the companies' reputations.
      The question I ask is: "What is the importance of George Gillette's expertise and connections to the meat packing industry?" He served his apprenticeship under the direction of Abe Saberstein of the Harlem Globe Trotters, which is entertainment. George Gillette is listed as Roman Catholic, and he doesn't fit the typical personality type found in the meat packing business, with its low margin of profits. There is no question that he is an "odd duck" in my line of business.
      One final detail concerning Gillette that is of increasing significance as I probe for the final solution to my dilemma is that after leaving Abe and the Globe Trotters, he became one of the largest owners of NBC-TV affil iate stations. Could such a FACTS FOR THE CONSPIRACY person be a front man, disguising the true financial backing of the TV and meat packing industry? Is he legitimate, a pawn, or a crypto-Jew?* * Jews have consistently converted to Catholicism or Christianity but remained Jews at heart du1 the Spanish, Portuguese, and Central European inquistions in the late fifteenth century or their recent confrontation in Germany.
      [116-117] ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE Chapter 10 The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) \The secret police in countries where the institution is native (Hitler's Gestapo was copied from the Asiatic model, which had a century-old tradition in Russia and Turkey) have the entire power and resources of the state behind them; indeed, they are the state. In America, Zionism built the nucleus of a secret police nearly as effective in many ways as those prototypes. It could only become equally effective dfit gained full control of the state's resources, including the power to arrest and imprisonment, and in my judgement that was the ultimate goal. Douglas Reed, Controversy of Zion, 1952.1 Because of the challenge my companies mounted against the meat cartel, I had become a target. My comments during some of my business conversations pointed out the dominance this group had exercised in controlling the beef business, and the fact that they were our competitors added to this vendetta. While I was showing my feathers by being cocky, I am sure my opposition thought I was thumbing my nose at them. I had repeatedly said to our upper management: "We will give up kissing their asses, and from now on, they will kiss our ass before we will kiss theirs." I was referring to the beginning operations in Gordon when we had coolers of shrinking carcasses, and I had to use the Jewish cartel as my customer to distribute meat, and subsequently I had to handle them with kid gloves. Now I was determined to sell the meat direct and eliminate the role of the middlemen of their meat cartel. One of my meat salesmen, Itchie Rosenblum, who happened to be Jewish, walked out of the sales office after a few weeks on the payroll during one of my lectures to the sales Dffice personnel on how the Jewish meat competitors operated. Itchie stomped out Df the office saying: "I've listened to enough of your Nazism." My philosophy is actually quite different from one which requires a society controlled by a police state, such as Nazism. I am a laissez-faire advocate-a believer in individual Freedom, free enterprise, and the right to make decisions which are free from the ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE interference of the centralized, bureaucratic government of the state. I am sure that my lecture on how the Jews controlled the meat industry, delivered in Itchie's presence, was not the only example the Anti-Defamation League heard of my remarks. Itchie, who was seventy-three years old at the time, was an old-time patriarch of the Jewish community of Denver, Colorado. I always suspected Itchie of being an informant anyway, as everything that went on at Cattle King was conveyed to my competitors; but it did not matter because we had nothing to hide.
      Itchie would always try to get me to visit Seymour at Denver Boneless. Itchie would tell me that he had spoken to him, and Seymour wanted to make a deal on meat so he had invited me over to his office. I would tell Itchie to have Seymour come over to my office at Cattle King, and we could negotiate a deal here. I felt that I was in the driver's seat, and it is always good business psychology to negotiate from strength. The first indication of strength would be who dictated the home field advantage. I knew we had now taken Averch's place as the only large cow and bull slaughterer in the area, and we were drying up Denver Boneless's source of supplies from the small area slaughterers who had temporarily taken Averch's place. Denver Boneless's new source of supplies from Colorado, since Averch had started to kill sheep, were the small slaughtering companies in Pueblo, Elizabeth, Kersy, Colorado Springs, and Delta.
      After I refused Itchie's invitation to venture over to my competitor's place of business, another smoke signal was sent to me. One morning, Itchie brought me a yamulca (the Jewish beanie). I was a fairly big, tough cowboy who liked to wear five gallon cowboy hats. I couldn't see myself in one of those little beanies. I didn't think the beanie fitted my image. I threw the thing in my desk and told Itchie that if Seymour wanted to talk, to get his ass over here. The next morning, Itchie stomped out of the sales office, calling me a Nazi. The yamulca was white; I very much doubt if it meant surrender. It was my feeling that even if I did venture over to the Jewish camp, I would always be a goyim in their eyes.
      Through my research, I have decided that I am among the ten people most wanted by the Jewish police agency of the Anti-Defamation League, the main branch to the Zionists' B'nai B'rith Fraternal Lodge, which is nothing more than a surveillance tentacle of the world-wide Zionist organization. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) was organized in 1913 in Chicago. The heavily-staffed headquarters knits together fifteen branches in the large cities. Sigmund Livingston was the first chairman and was succeeded by Meyer Steinbrink of Brooklyn, a member of the New York State Supreme Court. When Steinbrink retired, ten fellowships were established to provide annual awards in colleges and universities for writers of top essays on the study of group prejudice.2 [118-119] ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE The ADL is a police agency operating throughout the world, which surpasses either the FBI, CIA, or the KGB in surveillance and record keeping. It admits maintaining a force of more than two thousand expert investigators in the cities across the country, with thousands of helpers born with loyalty. The ADL keeps files I listing the names and records of every man and woman who, for any cause, might be [ of the slightest interest to the Kehillah.3 The organization has been correctly labeled an "invisible government."4 The ADL is, in reality, an unregistered branch of a forei^ jovernment operating without a license in the United States and every other I country in the world.
      Under the Freedom of Information Act, it was discovered that in 1947 this ^ organization was officially funded to the tune of over five million dollars a year to carry out its activities. Unofficially, however, the Anti-Defamation League has unlimited funds with which to conceal the truth of its objectives, intrigues and manipulations from the American public.
      , The ADL's professed aim is to combat racial, religious and radical intolerance.
     
      ( The prime targets of the ADL are Caucasians who openly speak of the Zionist conspiracyin the United~States and throughout the world. Even though I anrnot a racist, while I was in business I openly professed that the Jewish meat cartel dominated the meat market in the United States. I also continually repeated my story of the Mexican bull hide and tripe experience. Because I made that statement openly and because I was stepping on the toes of the meat cartel by infringing on their monopolistic meat market, I became one of their main targets.
      In proof of the extent of their surveillance and my presence on their most-kwanted list, read this letter from the ADL, which was sent to every small town i newspaper in Nebraska and Wyoming.
      May 16,1985 Mr. Jack D. Lewis Gering Courier P.O. Box 70 1428 Tenth St. Gering, Nebraska 69341 Dear Mr. Lewis: The Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith is a human relations agency devoted towards the ideals of pluralism and tolerance, and the fulfillment of the most essential ideals of American democracy. Our deep civil rights concerns make us acutely aware of the importance of a free press, and the First Amendment rights which are so essential for protecting the liberties we all enjoy as American citizens.
      An important role of our agency is the monitoring of efforts by those groups in our society which are fundamentally opposed to the democratic ideals described above. Bigotry of any kind, be it racism, anti-Semitism or intolerance towards a particular religious or ethnic group, is of concern to the League. We are especially sensitive to efforts by professional bigots to manipulate the media, whose First Amendment rights they ultimately seek to destroy, in their efforts to create hatred and divisiveness in our society.
      The small Jewish community of Scottsbluff, which has long enjoyed cordial relations with its fellow citizens, has contacted us in anguish over a very large anti-Semitic ad placed in a number of newspapers in western Nebraska by Rudy "Butch" Stanko, an individual convicted of several crimes. The advertisement was blatant anti-Semitism, without any subtleties. It made patently false charges, which have been repeated through the generations by professed anti-Semites, alleging Jewish control of the media which carried his ads, among other things.
      In attempting to respond to the bigotry reflected in the advertisement, we were also sensitive to the legitimate First Amendment interests of the media. We have consulted with Mr. Harold Andersen, publisher of the Omaha World-Herald Mr. Andersen indicated his strong belief in the fair-mindedness of Nebraska [120-121] ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE newspaper publishers, and highly recommended we direct this letter to you and your colleagues. What we are concerned with is preventing in the future utilization of the media by bigots to promote hatred against any segment of our community, whether the targets be Jews, Blacks, Catholics, or other minorities.
      In my capacity as director of ADL for this region, I frequently hear complaints regarding discrimination from many segments of the mosaic which makes up the people of Nebraska. With your cooperation, we will strive to insure that, in the future, those who ish to undermine our American democracy, with its principles of tolerance, respect for our fellow citizens and freedom of expression, will not be permitted to do so in the form of a newspaper ad containing falsehoods designed to promote animosity and divisiveness amongst the people of our state. Should a request for such ads be submitted to your newspaper in the future, we suggest that appropriate discretion be exercised, and our office contacted.
      I appreciate your taking the time to read this letter and I would welcome any suggestions you may have in our common cause of preserving those ideals which are fundamental to our national character.
      Sincerely yours Sheldon Filger Director This is my letter in response to Mr. Sheldon Filger of the ADL.
      June3,1985 Sheldon Filger, Director Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith Dear Mr Filger: I would like to take this time to respond to your letter that was sent to most of the small newspapers in Nebraska. You made one correct statement in this letter which is the importance of a free press and the First Amendment rights which are so essential for protecting the liberties we all enjoy as American citizens.
      I am exercising these rights which I have found to be now available only in the small rural newspapers of America. The large city newspapers are either controlled or heavily influenced by an organization of which you are a member. Your affiliated organization (Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith) is officially funded according to the Freedom of Information Act in excess of $5,000,000 a year and unofficially the Anti-Defamation League has unlimited funds in order to conceal the truth of your precious monopolies. Those monopolies are the Federal Reserve Corporation and National media coverage (who decides what makes the news). This excessive power controls the labor of the Christian American people or for that matter the Christian world.
      Your fellow members have majority ownership of the Federal Reserve Corporation which has never been allowed to be audited. This corporation is shrouded in secrecy and mystery. This excessive monetary power dictates the tax laws and monetary regulations imposed on a supposedly free society. .
      In addition, I take Offense to your label "anti-Semitic." Just recently, I had a Jewish patriot stay the evening in my house. If any people are anti-Semitic, it would be the Zionists who have removed the Arab Moslems and Christians from their homeland in Israel and the Middle East. The Arabs are as Semitic as any people on earth.
      If any group of people is responsible for distorted propaganda, . .
      it is your powerful Jewish-Zionist group. I will continue to utilize this rural free press in order to communicate the truth to the American people. I want to thank the small rural newspapers for their concern in the direction and future of America and its rights to individually express itself.
      Rudy G. Stanko Scottsbluff, Neb.
      B'nai B'rith, which means "sons of the covenant" in Hebrew, was founded in New York City in 1843. B'nai B'rith had more than five hundred thousand members in 1960, with four thousand units in forty-six countries. In the United States alone ii had more than three hundred and fifty thousand members at that time. Today its membership is even larger. This organization operates worldwide with international headquarters in Washington, DC. It is heavily staffed, with arms reaching throughou the United States and the world.
      Power behind the organization in the 30's was Nebraska attorney Henry Monsky of Omaha. He was made president of B'nai B'rith in 1938 and held the posi until his death in 1947, longeY than anyone has since. He was appointed by U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt to head the Office of Civil Defense. To outsiders, Monsky looked like an outstanding American. He was active in a wide range of welfare and educational organizations, that concealed his racial and prejudical philosophy. He had been a member of the board of trustees of Father Flanagan's Boys Home since 1925, was a member of the national board of the Community Chest in 1935, a member of the national council of Boy Scouts of America, and served on the voluntary committee of the Office of Civilian Defense during the war. He was an honorary member of the United Palestine Appeal and the United Jewish Appeal. Samuel I. Rosenman, adviser to the late Franklin D. Roosevelt both at the governor's mansion in Albany, N.Y., and later at the White House, writer of documents and speeches for both Roosevelt and Truman, was Monsky's New York state chairman of B'nai B'rith.5 [122-123] ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE Henry Monsky, president of U.S. B'nai B'rith. Krom American Jewish Yearbook, 1947 48. Philadelphia, Pa.
     
      123 TRIAL BY MEDIA Chapter 11 Trial by Media "NBC was one of the largest broadcasting networks in the world, and I was the villain on prime time of their premiere show "First Camera." Rudy "Butch" Stanko.
      The question must be asked: Why should any group be allowed to operate a Gestapo-like organization in the United States? The answer is understandable when you realize they have such power because the owners and managers of major mediae in this country and throughout the world are B'nai B'rith members. No wonder the U.S. Congress has refused to question the motives of this police force as it goes about accomplishing its assigned task of world supervision.
      Citations 1. Douglas Reed, The Controversy ofZion (Dolphin Press Ltd., PO Box 3145, Durban, Natal, South Africa, 1978), p. 340.
      2. ' Robert H. Williams.TVz^ Anti-Defamation League (Liberty Bell Publications, Reedy, West Virginia 25270,1975), p. 1.
      3. Brig. Gen. Jack Mohr, Jewish Power (113 Ballentine St., Bay St. Louis, MS 38520).
      4. Ibid.
      5. Williams, p. 2.
      Most people's lives in the United States are dominated by television-^ medium which appeals to all age groups with programs ranging from music videos for the teeny hoppers, sitcoms for relaxing the blue collar laborers, to news documentaries for those seeking more in-depth answers to current controversies. Television has become so pervasive in our lives, surveys show that the average American views close to six hours of TV a day, that it is rare to find a person who has beliefs about such topics as apartheid, the unrest in Lebanon and Israel, or the controversial traffic and seatbelt regulations that have not been determined or at least influenced by ABC CBS, or NBC. This would be a very positive condition if the networks were presenting unbiased, in-depth reports, especially in the news portion of their schedules. But if they are controlled by a special interest group, and if they do not use the expository method which presents both sides of controversial issues, they are a threat to our freedom. If people in a society do not have access to truth, and in fact are taught untruths, they cannot make correct decisions on matters which affect the lives of everyone in America and the world. Add to this a written media which jump on the bandwagon of any sensational story, and you have a truly threatening situation.
      According to Marshall McLuhan, the mass media expert of the twentieth century, television is a cool medium because of its relatively "low definition," which engages the viewer actively; whereas, print is a hot medium whose high definition encourages detachment and isolation. Simply translated, this means that the TV viewers must be entertained and informed in a dramatic way. While this is a positive situation in sitcoms and variety shows, it is something less than desirable in newscasts or historical or contemporary documentaries. Such shows as CBS's Sixty Minutes, ABC's 20/20, and NBC's defunct First Camera should try as much as possible to avoid dramatizing what they present so that the viewers will receive a clear picture in contemplating their facts and theories. This did not occur in my situation, as you will clearly see. But before I tell my story, let's look at a few [128-129] TRIAL BY MEDIA TRIAL BY MEDIA 12' utterance in the program came from Delaney. "Bad meat." Another TV witness, Rodriquez immediately responded, "Bad meat." Out of what context this phrase was muttered, the viewer hadn't the slightest idea. It was not even a sentence and therefore made no assertion, but the viewer was made to believe that the meat at Cattle King was bad meat. Rodriquez continued by calling the meat "green;" Delaney interrupted: "Rotten meat?" Rodriquez couldn't quite make the total accusation and repeated "Green meat, almost rotten." Does this seem coached to yoi t did to me the first time I viewed it, and even more so every time since.
      With the "green meat" (sounds horrible, doesn't it?) fresh in the viewer's mind, the camera takes you to a crowded elementary school lunch room where children were shown eating this horrible meat. In one shot a child at point-blank range was shown biting and chewing what appeared to be a cabbage burger. While this went on, Delaney enumerated the percentage of the federal school meat that Cattle King supplied. Immediately after this innuendo, Joe Padilla said he would not want his young children eating it, nor did he want it fed to other children. But it got worse. Rodriquez blurted, "I wouldn't feed my dogs this meat." Isn't it just a little hard to believe that a company that supplied 30% of the federal school lunch program's meat, that sold to the professional meat buyers of Safeway, King Soopers, Wendy's and hundreds of other outlets nationwide, didn't produce a good enough meat product to feed Ray Rodriquez's dog? Yet this is what the NBC report alleged. Near the end of the program, Dr. Houston, head of the inspection division of the USDA, was asked by Delaney if he would eat Cattle King meat. "Yes," he responded. Delaney incredulously repeated the question. Houston, on the defense, again responded, "Yes." This is as much defense from anyone on the program as Cattle King was going to get. No one from Cattle King was interviewed except two disgruntled ex-employees, a confused meat inspector, Joe Padilla, and a silhouetted ex-employee both of whose stories were later reversed. At the very end of the program, the commentator of the First Camera program, alluding to the overall sanitation problems at Cattle King, showed a picture of the company building, and made one parting shot: "If you think the meat you are eating is safe, think again." Three days after this twenty minute program on national television, the federal government impounded 7,000,000 pounds of hamburger, and forbade Cattle King and Nebraska Beef to bid on any future government contracts. But suspension from government business was not the only implementation, by provision of the governmental agency law, that the USDA would use against my companies. Because of a twenty minute dramatized documentary, they disclaimed any agency responsibility for wrongdoing by the plant, and refused to support the plant, even though all events complained of, were alleged to have been performed under intense inspection by as many as thirteen USDA inspectors and graders on their federal payroll. The USDA then launched an intensive testing program of the meat and increased the number of paid federal employees at the plant, and initiated an intensive criminal investigation in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Justice into the activities of the plant. During this intense scrutiny, the Department of Agriculture ended up condemning the future production of fourteen million pounds that were still on contract and an obligation of Cattle King and Nebraska Beef.
      In a country where you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, the USDA's boss in Washington, DC, Dr. Donald Houston, under the advisement of USDA's attorney Marshall Marcus (Jewish), cooperated immediately and fully in killing my meat companies and destroying my family's reputation. Houston had thirteen employees under his agency's jurisdiction while intensely inspecting die operations and sanitary conditions of my plants. Sanitation was a vital part of their job in the process for producing meat for the consumer as well as the federal school lunch program and the military, yet the boss, Houston, made his decision before any investigation was done or any facts were accumulated. Why he did not back hi inspection service for a job well done remained a mystery to me. Later, I realized he was a professional politican who knew that his job and reputation depended on cooperating with the controlled media and the national meat cartel. A professional politican made this statement in U.S. Congressman Paul Findley's book: You don't need many examples of intimidation for politicians to realize what the potential is. The Jewish lobby is terrific. Anything it wants, it gets. Jews are educated, often have a lot of money, They are unique in that respect. For example, anti-abortion supporters are numerous but not that well educated, and don't have that much money. The Jewish lobbyists have it all, and they are political activists on top of it.^ Immediately after these accusations and sanctions, Dr. Jay Jones, who is the USDA veterinarian supervisor of the federal Colorado slaughtering plants, under Houston's jurisdiction, said: "the charges of obnoxious conditions [at Cattle King) are not warranted."^ Dr. Jones constantly-monitored the meat-packing plants of Cattle King, Litvak, and Pepper. Because of the innuendo on NBC where Houston stated he would eat Cattle King meat, I did not completely realize Houston's positioi until December 14, when he shared the panel with BGA executive director Terrene*. Brunner and U.S. Congressman Thomas Harkin, and read from a twenty-three page prepared statement, vowing to pull inspection service from all the Stanko factories. I then knew the boss, his federal agency, and his immediate advisors were against me I was doomed. Dr. McNabb, one of the veterinarians in charge of the Nebraska [140-141] TRIAL BY MEDIA TRIAL BY MEDIA M hearings. Item (3) was as ridiculous because the USDA had thirteen of their own paid, federal employees working in the facility who could and would shut down the facility at any time, it did not meet their standards. I've seen the inspectors stop production when the steaming hot water sterilization containers for the boners' knives were a few degrees from conformance. Your local meat butcher does not even have this type of container in his meat market. I have also witnessed the stc ;ng of production when the condensation of a very few drops of water from the ireshly slaughtered beef gathered on the ceiling. To put the accusation in proper perspective, note the response by the same debarring officer, Eddie F. Kimbrell, at an interview three months later on January 5,1984. Reporter Dan Green asked Eddie Kimbrell if Cattle King's suspension was justified. Kimbrell responded: "Information presented for the record on sanitary conditions, as well as alleged violations of labor laws, if considered exclusively, would not in my judgement warrant continued suspension." Kimbrell goes on to point out that the suspension was continued because of Cattle King's supposed inclusion of dead or dying cattle in the slaughtering operation. Based on the evidence, my indictment and Cattle King's closure should never have proceeded past November 1983; but due to continued pressure from the controlled media and the USDA's reports, all relying on false testimony, the onslaught continued. Brunner, Houston and Harkin had another hearing in the making. This time it was called a congressional hearing which would also be held in another court room, the Supreme Court Room, in Denver, Colorado, on December 14,1983. Since my plants were receiving all of this free advertising, several of the area residents attended the hearing. They found out about the legitimacy of our government politicians (Harkin), watchdogs (BGA) and agencies (USDA).
      WITCH HUNT! was how local Scottsbluff Star-Herald writer Janice Grauberger described the hearing. In her editorial the following morning, she wrote: When I climbed aboard the commercial jet to head to Denver very early Wednesday morning I had absolutely no feelings one way or another about the allegations against Cattle King or the impact the hearing could have on my life in the Twin Cities. When I got off the plane at Scottbluff late Wednesday night I was afraid. I was afraid of the power our system has and how easy it is to abuse that system. I am afraid that once these kinds of wheels are put into motion, there is little that can be done to change their direction or stop them altogether.8 Others who attended the congressional hearing in Denver on December 14, 1983, were later to call this a travesty during which medieval tactics were used to arrive at the truth.
      Anyone who has ever studied American history is familiar with the Salem witch trials of 1692.* I believe the federal hearings, which were my witch hunt, were a repeattof the Salem trials of almost 300 years ago. Terrence Brunner was a combination of Samuel Pafrish and Tituba. Like Minister Parrish, he had initiated and continued charges from long before the original First Camera show of September 18,1983. Who was he protecting? Why, the American people, his beloved children for whom he had an edict from whatever god you might choose: consumerism, special interests, self-righteousness. It's hard to question the motives of a man who stands for apple pie, motherhood and the flag. Aside from being a witness at my hearing, he collaborated with Harkin, the only congressman at this so-called congressional hearing serving on the panel. In an editorial four days after the hearings, Al Knight, assistant managing editor of the Rocky Mountain News, said of the hearing process: "If it had been an orchestra, he [Brunner] would have been the conductor." The witnesses for the prosecution were such unreliable sources as Leon Simmons and Sam Henderson, exemployees and union leaders; Concepcion Giove, the Maggot Lady; Ann Hollinger, a wife and mother who supposedly contracted salmonella after purchasing Cattle King meat from King Soopers; various union-oriented meat inspectors and BGA personnel. The tribunal was headed by Representative Thomas Harkin of Iowa, a man who opened the hearings by saying he was in Denver not only because he was chairman for the federal subcommittee for livestock and poultry, but because he had a second grade son who ate in public schools, so his concern was motivated by not only public duty but also fatherly responsibility. Nice, emotional words for what was supposed to be a federal hearing of the facts.
      *During these trials, which were initiated by the village's fanatic minister, Samuel Parrish, testimony was provided by his nine-year-old daughter Betty, and her eleven-year-old cousin Abigail Williams, who had supposedly fallen into "odd postures" and "foolish ridiculous speeches". The concerned father had consulted a local doctor who, diagnosing no physical illness, raised the possibility of—witchcraft! This made the issue one of good versus evil.
      With such a noble cause, Tituba, a slave woman who had come from the West Indies and introduced the two young girls to the practices of voodoo, came forward at the pretrial examination and willingly, in a declamatory fashion, gave further testimony about what people wanted to hear. For three days, she told them stories of her activities with witches Sarah Good and Sarah Osborne and the Devil. She described rides through the air with the Devil and how he looked: "A tiling all over hairy, all the face hairy, and a long nose." As she continued, she mentioned other people's names, written in the Devil's book, even though she could not read. Before the hearing was over, and it lasted nearly a year, some twenty people were hanged and crushed to death because of false testimony. Later it was discovered that the true cause of the disaster was economic rivalry. This heinous crime was not really promoted by zealousness for right and good over wrong and evil, but by profit.
      [148-149] TRIAL BY MEDIA WHO RULES AMERICA Citations 1. Ranery, James Alle,n, Omaha World-Herald.
      2. BGA's Annual Report, 1983, p. 11.
      3. U.S. Congressman Paul Findley, They Dare to Speak Out (Lawrence ":U & Company, Publishers, Inc., 520 Riverside Avenue, Westport, Connecticut 06880,1985), p. 70.
      4. Knight, Al, Rocky Mountain News, December 18,1983, p. 95.
      5. Lilienthal, Alfred M., The Zionist Connection II (North American, Inc., P.O. Box 65, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, USA, 1982), pp. 314-15.
      6. Time Magazine, December 12,1983, p. 85.
      7. Diques, Dr. J. C. A. Immigration (Veritas Publishing Company Pty. Ltd., P.O. Box 20, Bullsbrook, Western Australia, 6084, Australia), 1985.
      Grauberger, Janice, Scottsbluff Star-Herald, December 15,1983.
      Findley, p. 46.
      Ibid., p. 47. Knight, p. 96.
      Chapter 12 Who Rules America? Through the Press we have gained the power to influence while remaining ourselves in the shade; thanks to the Press we have got the gold in our hands ... PROTOCOLS OF THE LEARNED EWERS OF ZIONISM, ABSTRACT FROM PROTOCOL NUMBER TWO There is no greater power in the world today than that wielded by the manipulators ol "public opinion." No king or pope, no conquering general was more powerful than the few dozen men who control America's mass media.
      Their power is not distant and impersonal; each waking hour it reaches into every American home. It is a persuasive power that shapes and molds the mind of virtually every citizen, young or old, rich or poor, simple or sophisticated.
      The mass media forms our image of the world and then tells us what to think about that image. Everything we know (or think we know) about events outside our own neighborhood or circle of acquaintances comes to us via radio, television, the daily newspaper or the weekly magazine.
      It is not only the heavy-handed suppression of selected news stories or the blatant propagandizing of such grossly pro-minority TV extravaganzas such as Roots or Holocaust which characterizes the opinion-manipulating techniques of the media masters. These media manipulators exercise both subtlety and thoroughness in their management and presentation of both news and entertainment.
      A multitude of things profoundly affect our attitudes. For example, note the way the television news is covered-which. items are emphasized and which are played down, the reporter's choice of words and the commentator's tone of voice, and the choice of headline and illustration.
      On top of this, of course, the columnists and editors help remove any remaining doubt from our minds as to just what we should think! They guide our thoughts and opinions so that we can be in tune with the "in" crowd, the beautiful people, and the smart money.
      But the really insidious thing about this form of thought control is that even [150-151] WHO RULES AMERICA WHO RULES AMERICA 151 when we realize the news presentation is biased, the media masters can still manipulate most of us. They cleverly slant the news they present as well as establishing tacit boundaries and ground rules for the "permissible spectrum" of opinion.
      As an example of opinion boundaries, consider the way news of the Middle East is treated. Some editors, columnists and commentators are lavishly pro-Israel in ever' -nerance, while others seem nearly neutral. No one, however, dares to be pro-PaleSt.aian or anti-Jewish, and no one dares suggest that the U.S. government is backing the wrong side in the Arab-Jewish conflict.
      Congressman Paul Findley wrote in his book, They Dare To Speak Out; AlPAC-the American Israel Public Affairs Committee-is now the pre-eminent power in Washington...."1 AIPAC crafted the strategy which produced a $510 million increase in aid for Israel in 1983--an astonishing increase because it came just after indiscriminate bombing of Beirut and the massacre of Moslem and Christian refugees in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps, events that aroused unprecedented public criticism of Israeli policy.2 By 1984, the aid level had risen to over $2 billion a year-all of it in grants with no repayment~and the approval margin was 112 United States Congressmen! It is amazing that Israel receives one quarter of all U.S. foreign aid.^ Many congressmen are embarrassed at their involvement in voting for this high level of aid but are more intimidated by the power of the controlled media over their lives and profession.^ Congressman Findley was one of the very few congressmen who criticized the Zionist policy. He was defeated after serving twenty-two years in Congress, while being a senior member of the House Middle East Committee. He dedicated his book to his grandsons, Andrew and Cameron-may they always be able to speak without fear. ' Thus, even the citizens who complain about "managed news" fall into a trap. They think that, because they are presented with an apparent spectrum of viewpoints on each major issue, they can believe the editor or commentator of their choice. They do not realize that it's one of those proverbial "heads I win, tails you lose" arrangements. The media masters do not leave viewers any options except the ones they don't mind an audience choosing. I wonder if other Americans have been as surprised as I was by the paucity of news stories on the high price of gas and oil in the U.S., especially since the dramatic drop in world oil prices? Who are the all powerful masters of the media? Whose interests do they serve? For a partial answer, consider the TV news broadcasting industry. This is probably the single most influential mass medium, and its example provides the answer to all of the other media.
      Virtually all national and international TV news in the United States is filmed, edited, and broadcast by just three corporations: American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. (ABC); Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. (CBS); and National Broadcasting Company (NBC). Each company has been under the absolute control of one man over a long period of time-ranging from 30 years to 55 years. Each of these men has been able to staff the corporation at every level with officers of his own choice. In each case, the top executive or owner has been a Jew.-* TV NETWORKS The chairman of the board of directors and chief executive officer of ABC is Leonard Harry Goldenson, who has effectively headed the network since he became president of the predecessor corporation, American Broadcasting-Paramount Theatres, Inc., in 1953. (The name was changed to American Broadcasting Companies, Inc., in 1965.) CBS has been under the domination of William S. Paley virtually since its formation. The son of a Russian immigrant, Paley left the family cigar business in 1928, when he was twenty-seven, and bought United Independent Broadcasters for $500,000. He renamed it Columbia Broadcasting System and made himself president. He became chairman of the board in 1946 and held that post until his partial retirement in April 1983. He remains one of the largest CBS stockholders, a consultant, a director, and the Chairman of the Board's Executive Committee, although his old post of chairman of the board is now filled by Thomas H. Wyman.
      CBS has a separate TV subsidiary, CBS Television Network. Its president, a Paley appointee like most other top CBS officers, is James H. Rosenfield.
      ABC and CBS employ hundreds of persons in executive positions, and there are continuous important personnel changes. It is estimated that at least one-third of the current executives are Jews. Three men who have played the most important role in setting the policies and picking the leading personnel of the two networks-James Rosenfield, Leonard Goldenson, and William Paley-are all Jews.
      NBC is a wholly owned subsidiary of RCA Corporation, which was controlled by David Sarnoff until his death in 1970. Saraoff was a Russian-Jewish immigrant who became president of RCA in 1930 and was chairman of its board of directors in 1947. His son, Robert, took over in 1970 and ruled until the end of 1975. Since 1975, there has been a succession of different chairmen, but the power has remained with the senior officers of the corporation and with a close-knit Jewish faction on the board.
      Of fifteen RCA directors listed in the 1982 edition of Broadcasting Cablecastin Yearbook, five are Jewish, namely; George H. Fuchs, Julius Koppelman, [152-153] WHO RULES AMERICA WHO RULES AMERICA Roy H. Pollack, I. Owen Funderburg, and Andrew Sigler.
      Of twelve executive vice-presidents, six are Jews. They are the first three of the above-named directors plus: Irving K. Kessler, Herbert S. Schlosser (formerly president of NBC), and Eugene A. Sekulow. Finally, both the RCA treasurer, Melvin Cornfield, and the controller, Stanley N. Roseberry, are Jews.
      The Jewish influence on NBC's programming policies does not stop with the par' "t corporation. NBC itself has had a succession of Jewish chief executives. One of u,c most recent chief executives was Fred Silverman. He was replaced in 1981 by Grant Tinker, a Gentile; but the present vice-chairman of NBC is Irwin Segelstein, a Jew. Furthermore, the former vice-chairman, Richard Salant, who became a "general advisor" to NBC's top management in 1981 is a Jew.
      The situation is no different in NBC's news subsidiary. The president of NBC News (since March 1982), the man in charge of all of NBC's television and radio news programming, is Reuben Frank, also Jewish.
      The list of 137 NBC vice-presidents in the latest Broadcasting Cablecasting Yearbook reveals a heavy preponderance of the same tight-knit minority throughout the executive structure of the corporation-beginning with Lenore Cantor, Lucille Chazanoff, and Aaron Cohen and running through some forty more distinctly Jewish names, all immediately recognizable as Jewish by surname alone.
      The aforementioned "Big Three"«ABC, CBS, and NBC-have a virtual monopoly on network television broadcasting in the United States, and they account for most network broadcasting, as well as broadcasting, throughout the world. Their only significant competitor in the latter arena is Mutual Broadcasting System (MBS), which has 941 affiliated radio stations (but no TV stations) across the country. The president and chief executive officer of MBS is Martin Rubenstein, a Jew.6 Many naive members of the nation's TV and radio audience believe that they have the option of tuning into one of the noncommercial "educational" stations for objective, unbiased programming. Alas, the same minority interests have fastened their grip on America's "public" broadcasting even more tightly than on the commercial sector. The president of the Public Broadcasting Service is Jewish personality Lawrence Grossman (Memphis Commercial Appeal, January 10,1976, p. 14)7 The author of the best-selling American classic, TtieAuerbach Will, and Our Crowd, Stephen Birmingham, wrote: "broadcasting...the major networks are headed by Jews."° Stephen Birmingham is a descendant of prominent Jewish families in this country, and has studied and written about Jewish lifestyles and occupations.
      THE PRESS Controlling interest in the leading national daily newspaper, the New York Times, is held by the Sulzberger family. Founded by a Jewish newspaper baron, Adolph S. Ochs from Philadelphia, in 1896, the paper has gradually grown in size and influence. Arthur Hays Sulzberger, Adolph's son-in-law, succeeded him on his death in 1935. Thirty-one years later, the paper rests in the hands of his son, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger. The company owns nine slightly smaller dailies, four weeklies, six magazines, two broadcasting companies, three book publishing companies, and part of three Canadian paper mills. The Times employs the nation's largest full-time news staff: 550 journalists in New York, 32 outside the U.S., 40 in Washington, and 19 throughout the country. One has to travel across the country and abroad to appreciate fully the influence and uniqueness of the Times? This, as syndicated columnist Nicholas Von Hoffman pointed out, is because the Times spends the kind of money on foreign correspondents that other papers, magazines, and networks will not.10 It is also because, "So few print or broadcast editors are able to make independent judgements of their own on the news, simply because of their distance from the source of news or their lack of knowledge on the subject, and prefer the safety of letting the nation's most prestigious paper do their decision-making for them." This, according to Von Hoffman, is particularly so on the Israeli issue, where any adverse publicity can bring down vociferous abuse on tlu editor from the nation's most meticulously organized lobby. There is no newspaper in the world that can compare with the New York Times for sheer coverage of news. both domestic and foreign.11 Another important influence the Times exerts stems from the often reported I'm that it has long been read by many of our elected officials, from the President down. They may curse it or toss it into the wastebasket, but they cannot entirely ignore it.' - Abe Rosenthal is fanatically devoted to the Times. He was first hired as a $12-; week stringer at New York City College, spent nine years as a foreign correspondent, and became metropolitan editor in 1963. Under the patronage of Sulzberger, he became managing editor in 1969 and was elevated to executive editor in 1977.
      He has ruthlessly shifted and rearranged the staff, installing his own men as editors, including Managing Editor Seymour Topping, Deputy Managing Editor Arthur Gelb, Assistant Managing Editor James Greenfield, News Editor Allan Siegal, and Foreign Editor Robert Semple. There has been a gradual disappearance of Christians from the staff; those who remain, like Washington Bureau Chief [154-155] WHO RULES AMERICA WHO RULES AMERICA Hedrick Smith or Assistant Foreign Editor Terence Smith, show a distinct Zionist leaning. (Smith recently returned from a four year stint as the Times correspondent in Israel.)13 The next most important daily of the nation, the Washington Post, is printed in its capital. The Post has almost as much influence on American and world minds as the Times, and many of its stories are imitated by the smaller dailies throughout the co-'ntry. The Post was purchased by Zionist Eugene Meyer after World War I. Iv. yer had been one of the most powerful men in the United States during World War I. He was appointed by President Wilson to chair the War Finance Corporation.14 Meyer came out of the chairmanship with many millions of dollars, after which he proceeded to buy Allied Chemical Corporation, the Washington Post, and other properties. ^ The Post is now controlled by the same Jewish-Zionist theories of his daughter, Mrs. Katharine Meyer Graham. Eugene Meyer, claims Myron Fagan, a well-respected authority on the ADL, was a top brass of the ADL. He also stated: "Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Associated Press at one time was Eugene Meyer."1" In December 1930, Eugene Meyer became the governor of the Federal Reserve Board. Meyer's father had been one of the partners of Lazard Freres of Paris and the Lazard Brothers of London. Lazard Freres and the Lazard's are blood related to the Rothschilds, and compatible with Kuhn-Loeb as international bankers, and foremost in the importation and exportation of gold.
      In a recent book by Ben J. Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, the author documents that the media monopoly is steadily closing down more newspapers and magazines. Washington, DC, with only one paper, the Post, is unique among world capitals. London has eleven daily newspapers, Paris fourteen, Rome eighteen, Tokyo seventeen, and Moscow nine. Bagdikian cites a study from the 7952 World Press Encyclopaedia that the United States is at the bottom of industrial nations in the number of daily newspapers sold per 1000 population. Sweden tops the list with 572, and the United States is at the bottom with 287. However, there is still a universal distrust of the media, because of the worldwide bias monopoly. ^ The Jewish influence has been less visible on the greatest national financial daily newspaper, the Wall Street Journal; but the president and a director of its publisher, Dow Jones & Co., Inc., is Warren Henry Phillips, son of Abraham and Juliette Rosenberg Phillips. The editorial policy of the Wall Street Journal is 100% Zionist-inspired and controlled.1^ The impact of Jewish influence in the daily newspapers is compounded in the news of the two leading U.S. news magazines, Time and Newsweek. The wife of the chairman of the board of Time, Inc., Andrew Heiskell, is Marian Sulzberger Dryfoos Heiskell, sister of Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, President of the New York Times. Mrs. Katharine Meyer Graham, Chairman of the Washington Post, owns Newsweek magazine.1" The same is true for news magazines as with newspapers. Jewry owns many outright (Esquire, McCall's, U.S. News and WorldReport, etc.), and controls the remainder through advertising "persuasion."^ The largest circulation of magazine readership, with 19,168,096, is TV Guide, owned by Walter H. Annenberg, the president, and son of Moses L. Annenberg. It is followed by Family Circle, with a circulation of 8,364,442, and owned by none other than the Sulzberger family of the New York Times.^ The list can go on, but the point is made and becomes repetitious.
      National advertising can often make the difference between a local newspaper's profitability or loss. Most of the national firms hire Samuel I. Newhouse's agency for their advertising campaigns. The extent of the power of National Newspaper Representative (Newhouse's advertising agency) is immense. The prestige of this organization is so extensive, with the consignment by national firms for their exclusive advertising, that Newhouse is able to increase or reduce the flow of national advertising revenue to any given newspaper.
      The Jewish newspaper baron, Newhouse, son of Meyer Newhouse, owns in whole or part more newspapers than anyone else in the United States (Time, July 27, 1962, p.56). His leverage in gaining a position to buy these newspapers was through his firm's National Newspaper Representative, Newhouse Newspapers and Metro Suburbia, Inc.,22 while he was financed through the leading Kehillah bankers in New York. Because of his diversification in the ownership of various newspapers throughout the country, it was only natural that Newhouse should organize and centralize the National Newspaper Representative. Since, the NNR has contact with every major newspaper headquarters. With this ability, the major merchandising firms in the nation give NNR the exclusive right to represent their advertising budget in regard to nationwide newspaper advertising. A Jewish member or owner of a major merchandising firm in New York City is thus able to significantly affect the financial revenue and well-being of a newspaper in California, Texas, Vermont, etc., because he requested the Newhouse agency to handle the national advertising of his firm. The mechanics, especially in regard to a small newspaper, would be to significantly reduce national advertising allotments to a paper which might deviate from support of Jewish positions.
      Many newspaper columnists constantly push the Zionist line. Only some of these columnists are Jewish; but practically all of them, because of the Kehillah's control of the media, must take a pro-Zionist line or face the loss of their clients.
      A good example of what happens to a columnist who does not conform was the [156-157] WHO RULES AMERICA furore against syndicated columnists Evans and Novak when they made the slightest shift from a 100% pro-Israeli position. The barrage of letters from Jews to the newspapers carrying their column forced them to proclaim their support of the survival and security of Israel.
      On the newspaper level, there are at least 909 major newspapers which are either owned or controlled by Jews. This summary list was provided by Lord's C~"enant Church, P.O. Box 30000, Phoenix, Arizona 85046. y^ABAMA—Birmingham News, circulation 179,252; Owner, Samuel Newhouse ARIZONA— Phoenix Republic, circulation 202,242; Owner, Howard Rothenberger ARKANSAS—Little Rock Gazette, circulation 120,452; V.P., B. Gingold CALIFORNIA— Los Angeles Times, circulation 1,000,866; Director, Simon Ramo Los Angeles Examiner, circulation 398,421; Director, Harrison Aaron Mitnick San Francisco Examiner, circulation 155,733; Director, Mitnick COLORADO— Rocky Mountain News, circulation 220,250; Director, Karl Frishman.
      The Denver Post was purchased by the Los Angeles Times in 1983. CONNECTICUT— Hartford Courant, circulation 179,569; Managing Editor, Irving Kravsow WASHINGTON, D.C.—Washington Post, circulation 534,000; Chairman of the Board, Katherine Meyer Graham FLORIDA—Miami Herald, circulation 477,556; Director, John Livingston Weinberg GEORGIA—Atlanta Constitution, circulation 210,104; National News Representative, Howard Rothenberger Atlanta Journal, circulation 2,351,012; National News Representative, Rothenberger ILLINOIS— Chicago News, circulation 382,581; Director, Howard Seitz Chicago Sun Times, Director, Seitz Chicago Tribune, circulation 220,653;. Director V.P., Edward Engle INDIANA— Indianapolis Star, circulation 220,653; Director, Harold Meyerson Indianapolis News, circulation 160,491; Director, Meyerson IOWA— Des Moines Register, circulation 228,643; Director, Lessersohn KANSAS—Wichita Eagle, circulation 119,922; Director, Wineberg WHO RULES AMERICA KENTUCKY— Louisville Courier-Journal, circulation 21,348; V.P., Bernard Block Louisville Times, circulation 164,576; V.P., Block LOUISIANA— New Orleans Times-Picayune, circulation 205,105; Owner, Samuel I. Newhouse MARYLAND— Baltimore Sun, circulation 178,205; Editor, Joseph Sterne MASSACHUSETTS— Boston Globe, circulation 276,621; National Newspaper Representative, Wineberg Boston Her aid-American, circulation 337,060; Director, Mitnick MICHIGAN— Detroit Free Press, circulation 623,801; Director, Gingold MINNESOTA— St. Paul Dispatch, circulation 120,162; Director, Weinberg MISSOURI— St. Louis Post Dispatch, circulation 275,121; President, Joseph Putlitzer, Jr.
      NEBRASKA—Omaha World-Herald, circulation 235,726; Purchasing Agent, David Stern. (I have found the Jewish influence on the Omaha World-Herald is considerably less than the other metropolitan newspapers.) Scottsbluff, North Platte, Grand Island, Lincoln, and other major newspapers in Nebraska are owned and controlled by the Seagrest family. For years, the male descendants have been leaders of Masonry. The vast majority of Gentile and Christian Masons believe in liberty, equality, and fraternity. Why was Mr. Seagrest's first inquiry based on "religion" in hiring publisher Mark Anthony? He was only concerned if Mr. Anthony was Catholic.23 Present day Masonry is one of the finest charitable organizations on earth, but I find the history and the basis for Masonry interesting. The symbols of the Freemasons are the Star of David and the reconstruction of the temple of Solomon. The Grandmaster, although known by very few brothers, exists. What possible interest have the working Masons in rebuilding the temple of Solomon under the Star of David? Do they do it on their own account or for the privilege of King Solomon's descendants? The great historians, Nesta Webster and William Guy Carr, confirm that Masonry is the Sanhedrin's invention and led unsuspectingly by Judiaism. In 'Israelite Archives' (p. 651), France's minister of justice, Cremieux, wrote: "And our good Freemasons with their blind eyes help the Jews in the 'great work' of building up this new temple of Solomon."^ [158-159] WHO RULES AMERICA WHO RULES AMERICA NEW JERSEY— Newark Star Ledger, circulation 375,565; Owner, Samuel Newhouse NEW YORK— New York Daily News, circulation 1,941,917; Advertising Manager, L.W: Gold New York Daily Times, circulation 806,495; President, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger ( Wall Street Journal, circulation 1,406,192; President, Warren Henry Phillips OHIO— Cleveland Plain Dealer, circulation 368,670; Owner, Samuel Newhouse OKLAHOMA— Oklahoma City Oklahoman, circulation 169,021; V.P., Gingold OREGON— Portland Oregonian, circulation 224,309; Owner, Samuel Newhouse PENNSYLVANIA—Philadelphia Bulletin, circulation 553,304; V.P., Mel Freeman Philadelphia Enquirer, circulation 409,969; Director, Weinberg Pittsburg Press, circulation 276,070; Editor, Isadore Shransky SOUTH CAROLINA—Columbia State, circulation 101,522; National Newspaper Representative, Rothenberger TENNESSEE— Knoxville News-Sentinel, circulation 103,311; National News Representative, Karl Frishman Memphis Commercial Appeal, circulation 200,531; National News Representative, Karl Frishman TEXAS—Dallas News, circulation 259,569; V.P., Sol Katz Dallas Times Herald, circulation 221,745; Director, Simon Ramo Houston Chronicle, circulation 292,025; Advertising Director, Vern Kastrow Houston Post, circulation 285,209; Sales Manager, Harold Lessersohn WASHINGTON— Seattle Post-Intelligencer, circulation 182,557; National Newspaper Representative, Lessersohn WISCONSIN—Milwaukee Journal, circulation 338,103; National News Director, Weinberg The Kehillah has control of the book and publishing industry, or has the governing say about it. Random House, Rhinehart, Harcourt-Brace, Citadel Press, and Viking Press are just a few examples of Jewish-owned publishing companies.25 U.S. Congressman Paul Findley describes his quest for a publisher in his most recent book, They Dare To Speak Out: My quest for a publisher began in March 1983 and was predictably long and frustrating. Declining to represent me, New York literary agent, Alexander Wylie, forecast with prophetic vision that no major U.S. publisher would accept my book. He wrote, "It's a sad state of affairs." Bruce Lee, of William Morrow and Company, called my manuscript "outstanding" but his company concluded that publishing it "would cause trouble in the house and outside" and decided against "taking the heat." Robert Loomis, of Random House, called it an "important book" but reported that the firm's leadership decided the theme was "too sensitive." Thomas Wallace, of W.W. Norton and Company found it "well-written" but concluded that it would be confusing to Norton's sales force, which would soon be marketing a book on U.S.-lsrael relations by George W. Ball. For various reasons, Dodd-Mead, St. Martin's Press, Dell Publishing, Pantheon Books, and Franklin Watts also rejected it.
      In July 1984, veteran publisher Lawrence Hill agreed to take the gamble, and to him I am deeply grateful.
      Paul Findley Finally finding a publisher, Findley now has difficulty finding outlets. Recently, a Chicago newspaper could find only three copies of his book in one bookshop in the entire city of Chicago, amazing in the light of his having served twenty-two years in the House of Representatives. The reason for this suppression is his outspoken criticism of Jewish power.
      Pressure is exerted upon non-Jewish publishers by the influence of Eugene Katz, President of Katz Agency, Inc.. His company is the main book store distributor for books throughout the world. Another pressure which exists is the American Association of Book Wholesalers, of which Aaron Rabinowitz is president.2" Henry (Hank) Garfinkle governs outlets such as news stands, while Harry Scherman oversees and types out the book-of-the-month clubs. Non-Jewish publishers are inclined to print only what the Kehillah desires.. .if they are to stay it business. Publishers are said to be subservient to Garfinkle's power (Wall Street Journal, July 3, 1969, pp.1, 17).
      Eighteen publishers turned down Eustace Mullins's book, Mullins on the Federal Reserve, without comment; but the nineteenth, Devin Garrity, president ol Devin Adair Publishing Company, gave Eustace some friendly advice in his office. ' like your book, but we can't print it. Neither can anybody else in New York. Why don't you bring in a prospectus for your novel, and I think we can give you an advance. You may as well forget about getting the Federal Reserve book published. I doubt if it could ever be printed."(Mullins has since sold 30,000 through underground channels.) Two articles, "Battle for Press Control" and "Bennett's Struggle," reproduced on the following pages, were written by Henry Ford, Sr., in the 1920's. These [160-161] WHO RULES AMERICA WHO RULES AMERICA 161 articles describe how the Kehillah made inroads in the media industry 65 years ago. These inroads have been developed so extensively in our present lifestyles that we no longer hear what the past great industrialists had to say about our industries, and we have become unaware of the Kehilla's control over our minds.* * THE BATTLE FOR PRESS CONTROL ~~~ ~~ Tlie first instinctive answer which the Jew makes to any criticism of s race coming from a non-Jew is that of violence,-threatened or inflicted. This statement will be confirmed by hundreds of thousands of citizens of the United States who have heard the evidence with their own ears, seen it with their own eyes.
      If the candid investigator of the Jewish question happens to be in business, the "boycott" is the first answer of which the Jews seem to think. Whether it be a newspaper, or a mercantile establishment, or a hotel, or a dramatic production, or any manufactured article whose maker has adopted the policy that "my goods are for sale, but not my principles"—if there is any manner of business connection with the student of the Jewish question, the first "answer" is "boycott." The technique is this: a "whispering drive" is begun first. Disquieting rumors begin to fly thick and fast. "Watch us get him," is the word that is passed along. Jews in charge of national ticker news services adopt the slogan of "a rumor a day." All leading news agencies in America are Jew-controlled. Jews in charge of newspapers adopt the policy of "a slurring headline a day." Jews in charge of the newsboys on the streets (all the street concerns are pre-empted by Jewish "padrones" who permit only their own boys to sell) give orders to emphasize certain news in their street cries - "a new yell against him every day." The whole campaign against the critic of Jewry, whoever he may be, is keyed to the threat, "Watch us get him." "The whispering drive," "the boycott," these are the chief Jewish answers.
      BENNETT'S STRUGGLE This is the story of a boycott which lasted over a number of years; it is only one of numerous stories of the same kind which can be told of America. There have been even more outstanding cases since this one, but it dates back to the dawn of Jewish ambitions and power in the United States, and it is the first of the great battles which Jewry waged, successfully, to snuff out the independent press.
      It concerns the long-defunct New York Herald, one newspaper to remain independent of Jewish influence in New York. The Herald enjoyed an existence of 90 years, which was terminated in 1920 by the inevitable amalgamation. It performed great feats in the world of news gathering. It sent Henry M. Stanley to Africa to find Livingstone. It backed the Jeannette Expedition to the Arctic regions. It was largely instrumental in having the first Atlantic cables laid. Its reputation among newspaper men was that neither its news nor its editorial columns could be bought or influenced. But perhaps its greatest feat was the maintenance, during many years, of its journalistic independence against the combined attack of New York Jewry. Its proprietor, the late James Gordon Bennett, a great American citizen famed for many helpful activities, had always maintained a friendly attitude toward the Jews of his city. He apparently harbored no prejudices against them. Certainly he never deliberately antagonized them. But he was resolved to preserve the honor of independent journalism. He never bent to the policy that the advertisers had something to say about the editorial policy of the paper, either as to influencing it for publication or suppression. In Bennett's time, the American press was, in the majority, free. Today it is entirely Jewish controlled. This control is variously exercised, sometimes resting only on the owner's sense of expediency. But the control is there, and for the moment it is absolute. Fifty years ago there were many more newspapers in New York than there are today; since then, amalgamation has reduced the competition to a select few who do not compete. This development has been the same in other countries, particularly Great Britain.
      Bennett's Herald, a three cent newspaper, enjoyed the highest prestige and was the most desirable advertising medium due to the class of its circulation. At that time, the Jewish population of New York was less than one-third of what it is today, but there was much wealth represented in it.
      Now, what every newspaper man knows is this: most Jewish leaders are always interested either in getting a story published or getting it suppressed. There is no class of people who read the public press with so careful an eye to their own affairs as do the Jews. The Herald simply adopted the policy, from the beginning of this form of harassment, that it was not to be permitted to sway the Herald from its duty as a public informant And this policy had a reflex advantage for the other newspapers in the city.
      When a scandal occurred in Jewish circles (and at the turn of the century growing Jewish influence in America produced many), influential Jews would swarm into the editorial offices to arrange for the suppression of the story. But the editors knew that the Herald would not suppress anything for anybody. What was the use of one paper suppressing if the others would not? So editors would say: "We would be very glad to suppress this story, but the Herald will use it, so we'll have to do the same in self-protection. However, if you can get the Herald to suppress it, we will gladly do so, too." But the Herald never succumbed; neither pressure of influence nor promise of business nor threats of loss availed. It printed the news.
      There was a certain Jewish banker who periodically demanded that Bennett discharge the Herald's financial editor. The banker was in the business of disposing of Mexican bonds at a time when such bonds were least secure. Once, when an unusually large number of bonds were to be unloaded on unsuspecting Americans, the Herald published the story of an impending Mexican revolution, which presently ensued. The banker frothed at the mouth and moved every influence he could to change the Herald's financial staff, but was not able to effect the change even of an office boy.
      Once, when a shocking scandal involved a member of a prominent family, Bennett refused to suppress it, arguing that if the episode had occurred in a family of any other race, it would be published regardless of the prominence of the figures involved. The Jews of Philadelphia, under the influence of Adolph Ochs, secured suppression there; but because of Bennett's unflinching stand, there was no suppression in New York.
      A newspaper is a business proposition. There are some matters it cannot touch without putting itself in peril of becoming a defunct concern. This is especially true since newspapers no longer receive their main support from the public but from the advertisers. The money the reader gives for the paper scarcely suffices to pay for the amount of white paper he receives. In this way, advertisers cannot be disregarded any more than the paper mills can be. As the most extensive advertisers in New York were, and are, the department stores, and as most department stores were, and are, owned by Jews, it comes logically that Jews often influence the news policies of the papers with whom they deal.
      At that time, it had always been the burning ambition of the Jews to elect a Jewish mayor of New York. They selected a time when the leading parties were disrupted to push forward their choice. The method they adopted was characteristic. They reasoned that the newspapers would not dare to refuse the dictum of the combined department store owners, so they drew up a "strictly confidential" letter which they sent to the owners of the New York newspapers, demanding support for the Jewish mayoral candidate. The newspaper owners were in a quandary. For several days [162-163] WHO RULES AMERICA WHO RULES AMERICA 163 they debated how to act. All remained silent. The editors of the Herald cabled the news to Bennett who was abroad. It was then that Bennett exhibited that boldness and directness of judgement which characterized him. He cabled back, "Print the letter." It was printed in the Herald, the arrogance of the Jewish advertisers was exposed, and non-Jewish New York breathed easier and applauded the action.
      The Herald explained frankly that it could not support a candidate of private interests because it was devoted to the interests of the public. But the Jewish leaders vowed vengeance against the Herald and against the man who dared to expose their game.
      They had not liked Bennett for a long time, anyway. The Herald was the real "society papv of New York, but Bennett had a rule that only the names of really prominent families should be printed. The stories of the efforts of newly-rich Jews to break into the Herald's society columns are some of the best that are told by old newspaper men.
      The whole "war" culminated in a contention which arose between Bennett and Nathan Straus, a German-Jew whose business house was known under the name of R.H. Macy and Company, Macy being the Scotsman who built up the business and from whose heirs Straus obtained it. Straus was something of a philanthropist in the ghetto, but the story goes that Bennett's failure to proclaim him as a philanthropist led to ill feeling. A long newspaper war ensued, the subject of which was the pasteurization of milk—a stupid discussion which no one took seriously except Bennett and Straus.
      The Jews, of course, took Straus' side. The Jewish speakers pictured Bennett as the most vile businessman in "persecuting" a noble Jew. It went so far that the Jews were able to put resolutions through the Board of Aldermen.
      Long before, of course, Straus, a very heavy advertiser, had withdrawn every dollar's worth of his business from the Herald. And now the combined and powerful elements of New York Jewry gathered to deal a staggering blow to Bennett. The Jewish policy of "Dominate or Destroy" was at stake, and Jewry declared war.
      As one man, the Jewish advertisers withdrew their advertisements. Their assigned reason was that the Herald was showing animosity against the Jews. The real purpose of their action was to crush an American newspaper owner who declared to be independent of them.
      The blow they delivered was a staggering one. It meant the loss of $600,000 a year. Any other newspaper in New York would have been put out of business by it. The Jews knew that and sat back, waiting for the downfall of the man they chose to consider their enemy.
      But Bennett was a fighter. Besides, he knew the Jewish psychology probably better than any'other non-Jew in New York. He turned the tables on his opponents in a startling and unexpected fashion. The coveted positions in his papers had always been used by the Jews. These he immediately turned over to non-Jewish merchants under exclusive contracts. Merchants who had formerly been crowded into the back pages and obscure corners by the more opulent Jews now blossomed forth full page in the most popular spaces. One of the non-Jewish merchants who took advantage of the new situation was John Wanamaker, whose large advertisements from that time forward were conspicuous in the Bennett newspapers. The Bennett papers came out with undiminished circulation and full advertising pages. The well planned catastrophe did not then occur. Instead, there was a rather comical surprise. Here were the non-Jewish merchants of America enjoying the choicest service of a valuable advertising medium, while the Jewish merchants were unrepresented. Unable to stand the spectacle of trade being diverted to non-Jewish merchants, the Jews came back to Bennett requesting the use of his columns for advertising. The "boycott" had been hardest on the boycotters. Bennett received all who came, displaying no rancor. They wanted their old positions back, but Bennett said no. They argued, but Bennett said no. They offered more money, but Bennett said no. The choice positions had been forfeited.
      Bennett triumphed, but it proved a costly victory. All the time Bennett was resisting them, the Jews were growing more powerful in New York; and they were obsessed by the idea that to control journalism in New York meant to control the thought of the whole country.
      The number of newspapers gradually diminished through combinations of publications. Adolph S. Ochs, a Philadelphia Jew, acquired the New York Times. He soon made it into a great newspaper, but one whose bias is to serve the Jews. It is the quality of the Times as a newspaper that makes it so weighty as a Jewish organ. In this paper, the Jews are persistently lauded, eulogized and defended; no such tenderness is granted other races.
      Then Hearst came into the field-a dangerous agitator because he not only agitated the wrong things, but because he agitated the wrong class of people. He surrounded himself with a coterie of Jews, pandered to them, worked hand in glove with them, but never told the truth about them, never "gave them away." The trend toward Jewish control of the press set in strongly and has continued that way ever since. The old names, made great by great editors and American policies, slowly dimmed.
      A newspaper is founded either on a great editorial mind, in which event it becomes the expression of a powerful personality, or it becomes institutionalized as to policy and becomes a commercial establishment. In the latter event, its chances for continuing life beyond the lifetime of its founder are much stronger.
      The Herald was Bennett, and with his passing, it was inevitable that a certain force and virtue should depart out of it. Bennett, advancing in age, dreaded lest his newspaper, on his death, should fall into the hands of the Jews. He knew that they regarded it with longing. He knew that they had pulled down, seized, and afterward built up many an agency that had dared to speak the truth about them, and boasted about it as a conquest for Jewry.
      Bennett loved the Herald as a man loves a child. He so arranged his will that the Herald should not fall into individual ownership, but that its revenues should flow into a fund for the benefit of the men who had worked to make the Herald what it was. He died in May 1919. The Jewish enemies of the Herald, eagerly watchful, once more withdrew their advertising to force, if possible, the sale of the newspaper. They knew that if the Herald became a losing proposition, the trustees would have no course but to sell, notwithstanding Bennett's will.
      But there were also interests in New York who were beginning to realize the peril of a Jewish press. These interests provided a sum of money for the Heralds purchase by Frank A. Munsey.
      Then to the general astonishment, Munsey discontinued the gallant old paper, and bestowed its name as part of the name of New York Sun.
      The newspaper managed by Bennett is extinct. The men who worked on it were scattered abroad in the newspaper field and, in the main, retired or dead.
      Even though the Jews had not gained actual possession of the Herald, they at least succeeded in driving another non-Jewish newspaper from the field. They set about obtaining control of several newspapers; their victory is now complete. But the victory was a financial victory over a dead man. The moral victory, as well as the financial victory, remained with Bennett while he lived; the moral victory still remains with the Herald. It demonstrated what could be done by fearless, independent minds, supported by men who knew they worked and loved it for its own sake. It demonstrated what could have been achieved had these men received support of wide­awake, active, non-Jewish Americans. The Herald is immortalized as the last bulwark against Jewry in New York and in America. Today, the Jews are completely masters of the journalistic field in New York as they are in any capital in Europe, and almost the entire world. Indeed, in Europe, there frequently emerges a newspaper that gives the real news of the Jews. There is none in New York or any major city in America.
      And thus the situation will remain until Americans shake themselves from their long sleep, and look with steady eyes at the national situation. That look will be enough to show them all the usurpers of the nation.
      THE END [164-165]
      WHO RULES AMERICA Citations 1. Findley, p. 27.
      2. Ibid., p. 30.
      3. Ibid., p. 51.
      4. Md.
      5. Who Rules America?, Lord's Covenant Church (PO Box 30000, Phoenix, Arizona 85046).
      6. Ibid. TV Networks were copied in its entirety from, Who Rules America ? 7. Ibid.
      8. Stephen Birmingham, Our Crowd (Berkley Publishing Group, 200 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016,1984), p. 428.
      9. Alfred M. Lilienthal, The Zionist Connection II (North American, Inc., PO Box 65, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, USA, 1982), p. 315.
      10. Chicago Tribune, July 6, 1977, syndicated by King Features.
      11. Lilienthal, p. 315.
      12. Ibid., p. 316.
      13. Ibid., p. 345.
      14. Eustace Mullim, Secrets of the Federal Reserve (Bankers Research Institute, P.O. Box 1105, Staunton, VA 24401, 1984), p. 74.
      15. Ibid., p. 99.
      16. -Myron C. Pagan, Freedom of the Press....To Promote Treason (Cinema Educational Guild, Inc., News Bulletin, Nov.-Dec., 1954).
      17. Mullins, p. 61.
      18. Jewish Influence on the United States Media (Sons of Liberty, PO Box 214, Metairie, La. 70004), p. 2.
      19. Ibid., p. 3.
      20. James Combs, Who's Who in the World Zionist Conspiracy (Liberty Bell Publications, P.O. Box 21, Reedy, W.Va. 25270 USA, 1978), p. 7.
      21. Jewish Influence on the United States Media, p. 2.
      22. Ibid., p. 3.
      23. Mark Anthony's conversation with Rudy "Butch" Stanko on March 11, 1985.
      24. Maurice Pinay, The Plot Against the Church (St. Anthony Press, Los Angeles, California, 1982), p. 120.
      25. Combs, p. 7.
      26. Ibid.
      NBC'S EGA Chapter 13 NBC's EGA "The press has become the greatest power within the Western countries, more powerful than the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. One would then like. to ask: By what law has it been elected and to whom is it responsible? Alexander Solzhenitsyn As I mentioned in Chapter 11, "Trial by Media," and followed up with proof in Chapter 12, "Who Rules America?", the American public is influenced and then controlled by the various news mediae. Considering the irrefutable dominance of tin media by this group of people with common interests, the reader must realize that if these same people who monopolize the media have holdings or ties to other businesses, they have the power to sway public opinion for or against whomever they wish. Throughout this book, I have given evidence of the Jewish monopoly of die meat industry on a national level. Given this fact, by 1983, my rapid growth constituted a threat which the Jewish meat cartel felt had to be eliminated. Is it just coincidence that the man who bought me out owns five NBC affiliates? Remember that First Camera was an NBC program. Is it just coincidence that the EGA is located in Chicago, where Wilfred Grant and William Kandor live? By focusing on the EGA investigation and how they gathered their material, the reader will be able to see how they forced and managed to put me out of business.
      The following background information will help the reader to understand the operations of the EGA. It was founded in 1928 by a group of Methodist ministers to keep an eye on the government of Illinois. Once established, it plugged along for the next forty years, doing very little to effectively change the political scene in the state. In 1961, the board hired George Mahin as its executive director, and things changed rapidly. He began "Operation Watchdog," a new approach to unearthing news by investigators whose responsibility was the uncovering of corruption in government. After the investigators made their discoveries, they turned their findings over to the newspapers for publication. This plan worked extremely well and continued into the reign of Terry Brunner, present executive director since 1971.
      In the mid 1970's, however, Brunner began to change the direction of the [166-167] NBC'S EGA BGA from a newspaper-oriented medium to that of television. The first joint venture was with Mike Wallace of Sixty Minutes, in which they did a report on Medicaid rip-offs. From then on, Brunner and the TV networks formed a team, especially with the national networks. A former staff investigator, Ron Berher, put it this way: If you wanted to go up the ladder at the BGA, you didn't want to put in time on a local story. Nobody gave a shit about them. The joke was 'at if you did a local story, maybe Terry would mention it at a Friday otaff meeting and say, "Nice job." But it was the 20/20 stories that got you invited to the barbecue dinners at the Brunner's house.
      This close relationship with TV led Brunner to eventually sign an agreement with 20/20 in 1979 to do eight investigative reports during the next year. This may sound like a great success story to the reader, but it must be remembered that the BGA was founded to act as a watchdog in Illinois, and that it was "privately funded" On top of this, while it is one thing to be on the lookout for violations of the public's rights, it is another to be actively seeking to fill eight spots on a national television program. A conflict of interests could easily occur.
      Now let me plug another ingredient in: Who are the trustees of the BGA? According to Seth S. King, in a New York Times, January 4, 1970, article: "The Association's board of directors includes the heads of many of Chicago's largest corporations and business concerns. These provide most of the funds for its annual budget which reached $175,000 last year." Thus, it is more than likely that certain trustees, with vested interests, could affect the kinds of investigations the BGA initiated. In fact, Terry Brunner stated that, and I quote from Nancy Banks article in the Reader, August 6, 1976: "The board of directors and the board of trustees formulate general policies and help set priorities." While my theory about the origin of the BGA probe of Cattle King may be conjecture, what allowed the BGA to go national in its coverage is not. In 1979 the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation provided a $2,500,000 donation to the BGA over a five year period. This, in addition to their yearly private contributions, gave them an annual budget of $800,000, and with this they expanded their staff to thirty and opened a branch office in Washington, DC. This expansion led to my difficulties, because with an office in Washington, DC, they could lead and propagandize with the national government and other branches of the media. First we need to trace the BGA's evolution from a newspaper to a television medium.
      Along with their 20/20 contract, the BGA continued to provide stories, or investigative support for stories, to Sixty Minutes and later to the NBC's First Camera program. This caused a change in their philosophy and approach to news NBC'S BGA \< stories According to William Mullen in "A Civic Watchdog Under Fire," April 1981: "On the surface, it would seem the BGA has never been more successful. Below the surface, however, that impression may not be entirely accurate." Mullen goes on to state that the Chicago Sun-Times and Tribune had already cut relations with the BGA by 1981 due to questionable motives and shoddy research, as well as devious reporting techniques. William Jones, the managing editor of the Tribune, is quoted by Mullen as saying: "Newspapers have been working less and less with the BGA. We've had this uncomfortable feeling over the last couple of years that-the organization JBGA] tends now to look more at drama than substance." Jones goes on to add: "In trying to go national, in many ways the BGA has gone Hollywood. They are thinking more now in terms of film footage than about the content of their investigations." Later in the article, Ralph Otwell, editor of the Sun Times, says: The strength of the BGA at one time was that it could provide the people to check records and document examinations for reporters whose papers didn't have the staff to do these things. Television has different demands, and obviously to work with them, the BGA had to change its approach.
      This approach led to the same type of tactics that the BGA used against Cattle King. In Mullen's article, Jones accurately identified this approach when referring to a proposed BGA article on the irregularities in the taking of the 1980 census: Their approach was a little too cowboy and Indian. The Tribune is not against undercover reporting, but it has to be done under extremely controlled circumstances only where a story can't be obtained any other way. We basically feel at this point we have more confidence in our own investigations than the BGA's.
      What theSw/i Times and the Tribune recognized by 1981, so did Channel 2, WBBM-TV, of Chicago. In an hour long documentary in April of that year, producers Scott Craig and Molly Bedell and reporter Bill Kurds took the BGA to the cleaners. They exposed them, especially in the case of the show provided for ABC's 20/20, "Arson for Profit in Uptown," for making a story out of hot air. According to Gary Deeb, TV and radio critic of the Sun Times : "Channel 2 proves that the circumstantial evidence gathered by ABC and the BGA may have seemed rather electrifying on the air, but was weak and inconclusive in reality." Deeb goes on to quote Craig and Bedell of accusing the BGA of "never letting the facts get in the way of a good story." In this story, ABC and the BGA did a job on Charles Roberts, slumlord, and his associates, accusing them of "making money as their buildings burn and tenants die" (20/20 program). In Channel 2's analysis, they showed that Roberts didn't own most of the buildings that he was accused of destroying, and that he had sold most of them before the fires occurred. To sum it up, the prosecuting