- Summaries of Jewish Agency in Immigration, "Hate Speech", Multiculturalism, etc.
- The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and the Anti-Jewish Congress of Dresden
- E. Michael Jones: Who is the Real Enemy?
- Brendon O'Connell's Hunger Strike
- Self Defense & EqualPartyUSA Video
- Noahide Proselytizing: "The Lubavitcher Rebbe said to me ..."
- Father Coughlin's "Jews Support Communism"
- Dupes of Judah
- The Second Republic Project
- Banks & Smith on AIDS, Opium, Diamonds and the Elders' Empire
- Not Anti-Semitism but Anti-Communism
- The Scofield Bible, Oxford Publishing and the House of Rothchild
- Jew as Criminal (Keller and Andersen, 1937; intro by Streicher)
- Late Chess Master Bobby Fisher tells like it is on Zionist Jews in an "infamous" interview
- Catholic Response to JWO: "Synagogue Rising"

Comments
Toben on O'Connell Situation
FredrickToben's comments:
1. Brendon had the audacity to challenge a young Jew about his religious convictions, which Brendon rightly claimed, has led to the Palestinian nakbar. Unfortunately the issue whether ‘Jew’ is a religious or racial category was not fully explored during the trial – an academic claimed ‘Jew’ is a religion while a rabbi claimed it is a race.
2. The jury was also not impressed with Brendon’s attempt to run legal argument that questioned the legality of the court itself, much like some lawyers are doing in the USA. When put to the test the example of successfully defending oneself in court in such a manner often turns out to be the negation of a traffic fine – but Brendon’s matter is more serious than that and it is futile for an unrepresented person to mount any kind of defence when it gets to issues raised under the Racial Discrimination Act.
3. Note how some US courts are openly adopting the ‘hate’ category, which is simply a watered down version of defamation law where truth is still a defence – but this was not to be in Brendon’s case.
4. His matter is much like the contesting of a charge under Section 130 of the German Criminal Code. Imagine, if a lawyer defends you too vigorously in court, as Ludwig Bock did Gunter Deckert during the 1990s, then the lawyer himself is subject to prosecution. Bock was fined about DM10,000, and that is why when he defended me in 1999 he remained silent and refused to defend me, this being the ground for my having a re-trial that since last year’s advice from Dr Meinerzhagen has been adjourned indefinitely.
5. As well, some of Brendon’s supporters believe that invoking Angel-protection will lead to victory.
6. During Brendon’s two-hour appeal on 13 December 2011 I watched how Chief Justice Martin sat there continuously grooming and biting his fingernails. I have never in my life seen anyone do that kind of thing for two hours. Was it boredom or nervousness, or both?
7. A final note: were it not for Brendon’s strong mind and religious belief, then I think he would have trouble coping with his current action. But support from outside also helps a lot, so write to him at:
Brendon O’Connell, Locked Bag 1, KWINANA WA 6966, Australia.
Thanks
Fredrick