Fredrick Töben The Personal Face of Revisionism FIGHT OR FLIGHT? THE PERSONAL FACE OF REVISIONISM Fredrick Töben Peace Books 2003 PEACE BOOKS A division of Adelaide Institute PO Box 3300 Norwood SA 5067 Australia © Fredrick Töben 2003 except for material attributed to individual authors. Töben, G. F. (Gerald Fredrick), 1944–. Fight or flight? : the personal face of revisionism ISBN 0 9585466 2 2 National Library of Australia Catalogue-in-Publication information 1. Töben, G. F. (Gerald Fredrick), 1944- - Diaries. 2. Töben, G. F. (Gerald Fredrick), 1944- - Journeys. 3. Holocaust denial. 4. Freedom of speech. I. Adelaide Institute (Norwood, S. Aust.). II. Title. 940.5318 Front: Fredrick Töben and Rabbi Yisrael Weiss at The Barnes Review conference in Washington in 2002. Back: Documentation relating to Fredrick Töben’s travels in search of truth. A Comment A real taboo is a prohibition causing inhibition. Now, if ever you dare to touch it, it may first suddenly bring about an electrical disconnection of your brain cells. You become unable to keep control of your thoughts and language. The most logical person becomes illogical and adrenalin is in command. Few fears could be compared with the fear of the Jews ( metus Judaeorum; this genitive being objective and subjective). In our Western societies no taboo is stronger than the Jewish taboo. It really should be called ‘the taboo of taboos’. Take the examples of professors who, at one point, dared to touch it. Professors are supposed to handle ideas with at least an appearance of logic. But, now, see the example in Lyon of Professor Régis Ladous who supervised Jean Plantin in the preparation of his master’s thesis on Paul Rassinier. Along with another professor he awarded Plantin a ‘mention très bien’, the ‘Very Good’ mark. Eight years afterwards, the Jews discovered the ‘crime’. They launched such a campaign that Ladous began to organize a campaign against Holocaust denial in Lyon! But this was not enough. He had to recant, which he did. At one point he was asked why, with his colleague, he had given Plantin that ‘mention très bien’, and he answered something like, ‘It was a kind of joke because the work was so ludicrous’! And this was not the end of the story. Eleven years after he had awarded this highest mark, Ladous was ordered to organise with a colleague once again a ‘viva voce’ as if Plantin was still at the university. Of course, Plantin did not attend that theatre piece. Ladous and the other professor went into a room, then a few minutes afterwards emerged and a trembling Ladous said that Plantin’s thesis was awarded the ‘Unacceptable’ mark, even though that word does not belong to the official language. Journalists were there and mocked Ladous but they never said that all this was insane and that Plantin was the real victim of that farce. And that was not the end of the story either for Ladous or for Plantin but it would be too long to tell you the whole story. The story of JSA Hayward and Professor Vincent Orange of Canterbury University, New Zealand illustrates the same lesson: if ever you touch the Jewish taboo, be ready for the spectacle of a sinister farce in which supposedly logical actors will behave like beheaded persons or, I should perhaps say, like beheaded chicken. I think I have a possible explanation for the exceptional power of the Jewish taboo and it is precisely because I think I found the very intimate source of that power both in the Jews and in the Gentiles that I was able, when I touched the taboo, to keep some control of my fear, of my thoughts, of my language and of my behaviour. Dr Robert Faurisson Vichy, France 29 December 2002 PS: Intercourse with Satan was physically impossible and Hitler’s gassings, as described, chemically impossible while the alleged Saddam’s WMDs are physically and chemically possible since USA, UK, Israel and few others own such weapons, that they call ‘dissuasion’ weapons. Contents List of Illustrations vii Foreword xvii Preface xxi Introduction 1 A 36-day Revisionist Adventure 2 Auschwitz in Australia? 57 Australian Speaking Tour, 24–31 January 2000 60 * Diary 2000 – Dr Töben’s return to Africa, Europe, America and Oceania 73 Chapter 1: Departure from Australia 74 Chapter 2: Africa 104 Chapter 3: Europe 153 Chapter 4: The Americas 199 Chapter 5: Australasia 285 * Chapter 6: The Hayward File 331 Chapter 7: Greetings from Holy Mashhad 360 Chapter 8: The Intifada in Perspective 375 Chapter 9: Authentic History and the First Amendment 391 Chapter 10: There Never was any Holocaust 407 Chapter 11: The Finale from a Professional 409 Chapter 12: New Zealand Revisited – 2001 415 Chapter 13: Anniversary of Auschwitz Visit 437 Chapter 14: Australia’s First Revisionist Conference an Outstanding Success 478 Chapter 15: Revisionist Activism in Australia 506 Chapter 16: Richard Wagner and the HREOC 515 v Chapter 17: British Historian David Irving ‘sinks the Auschwitz’ 527 Chapter 18: Anthropological Revisionism 553 Chapter 19: Trieste Conference, 2001 563 Chapter 20: Moscow Conference, 2002 583 Afterword: On Holocaust Revisionism: Some Basic Arguments and the Political Implications 599 Appendix A: 2000 Appeal Result 630 Appendix B: Statement by Vartan Oskanian 649 Index 655 vi List of Illustrations Fredrick Töben and Rabbi Yisrael Weiss, Washington Front Cover Documentation relating to Fredrick Töben’s travels Back Cover An Ode to the Noble Soul xiii My parents’ guide for a wholesome life xiv My parents xv With my parents xv The Oxford Summer School, 1974 xvi A Michael Leunig cartoon, 2002 xvi Sir Karl Popper xli With Professor Konrad Lorenz xli With Professor Werner Heisenberg xlii Hans Werner Woltersdorf xlii With Professors Elisabeth Walther and Max Bense xliii Celebrating final studies with student colleagues xliii With friends after being awarded my Ph.D. xliv Visiting Albert Speer in Heidelberg xliv With Professor Eberhart Jäckel in Stuttgart 45 With Dr Lavinia Merz-Förster in Stuttgart 45 With Pastor Manfred Junger 46 With Mrs and Ms Theo Wink 46 With Lisbeth Grolitsch 47 With Paul Fromm in Toronto, Canada 47 With Richard Widmann in Washington 48 Andrew Gray at the Cosmos Club, Washington 48 Dana Alvi, Los Angeles 49 Dr Michael Shermer, Los Angeles 49 The people’s car takes over a noted British institution 50 The Sydney Quarantine Station 50 The arrival point at the Sydney Quarantine Station 51 vii The ‘gas chamber’ at the Sydney Quarantine Station 51 A fumigation area in the Sydney Quarantine Station 52 Washroom building at the Sydney Quarantine Station 52 Shower area at the Sydney Quarantine Station 53 For fumigating clothes at the Sydney Quarantine Station 53 A laboratory at the Sydney Quarantine Station 54 The Sydney Quarantine Station mortuary 54 The Sydney Quarantine Station hospital 55 Graves at the Sydney Quarantine Station 55 A residential area at the Sydney Quarantine Station 56 A splendid view at the Sydney Quarantine Station 56 Kalgoorlie 65 Open-cut mining 65 Two Icebreakers, Perth 66 The Indian Ocean 66 The Northern Territory and Queensland border 67 Our army 67 To Arnhem Land 68 Bond University on the Gold Coast 68 Adelaide Institute supporters in Brisbane 69 With Richard Krege and a python, Brisbane 69 Charming a python, Brisbane 70 Handling a python, Brisbane 70 En route to Alice Springs 71 On top of Ayers Rock (Uluru) 71 Climbing Ayers Rock 71 Pro Hart with his Rolls Royce 72 Johannesburg and Pretoria, South Africa 145 With Dr Claus Nordbruch, Pretoria 145 With Claus Nordbruch and our latest publications 146 With Jaap Marais, Pretoria 146 The president’s palace, Pretoria 147 The new emblem on the president’s palace, Pretoria 147 Meeting Parkamile Kenneth Mankahlana 148 With Ian Smith, Salisbury, Rhodesia 148 With Ian Smith, Harare, Zimbabwe 149 Paddy, my best man at my 1980 wedding 149 With Paddy and his family and our friend Jean Cooper 150 Yvonne and Réne, Paris 150 With Eric, Weinheim, Germany 151 viii With retired General Gerhart Schirmer, Germany 151 With Ralf Meyer and a friend, Annaberg–Buchholz, Germany 152 With Andreas Röhler, Berlin 152 With Michael Santomauro, New York 269 New York is never boring 269 A free Sunday concert in New York 270 Living in a Manhattan apartment 270 The USA Congress, Washington DC 271 Protesters outside the USA Congress 271 Michael Piper-Collins challenging the protesters 272 The USA Supreme Court 272 Meeting with the editorial board of The Spotlight 273 With John Bennett and Lila McIntosh, Irvine 273 Jürgen Graf 274 The speakers for the 13th IHR international revisionist conference 274 Marc Lemier 275 Jürgen Neumann 275 Robert Faurisson and Jim Beardsley 276 Ron Gray 276 Greg Raven 277 Mark Weber 277 Arthur Butz 277 Ernst Zündel 278 Fredrick Töben 278 Theodore O’Keefe 278 Bradley Smith 278 Robert and Elda Countess 279 John Bennett 279 David Irving 279 Peter McKloskey 279 Charles Provan 280 Robert Faurisson 280 Germar Rudolf 280 John Sack 280 Glayde Whitney 281 Ingrid Rimland and Ernst Zündel 281 With Arthur Vogt, Jürgen Graf and Russ Granata, Mexico 282 At Elizabeth and Willis Carto’s home 282 With Gene Pitney, Melbourne, 1963 283 Meeting Louis Armstrong, Melbourne, 1963 283 ix Meeting Roy Orbison, Melbourne, 1963 284 The Big O on stage, Melbourne, 1963 284 Fire-fighting duties during my university student holidays 319 A fire-fighting camp in Victoria 319 Dangling on a tree in Victoria, 1965–66 320 Part of the Forest Commission’s Mobile Support Crew, Victoria 320 Fredrick Töben in a Commer van in the Grampians, 1965–66 321 A cartoon about Fredrick Töben’s fire-fighting duties 321 My home at Lumsden, New Zealand, 1968 322 The final steam train leaves Lumsden Railway Station, 1968 322 The staff of Lumsden School, New Zealand 323 My Form 4B class at Lumsden School 323 My Form 4A class at Lumsden School 324 With the soccer squad at Lumsden School 324 ‘Puss’ in New Zealand, 1967 325 ‘Puss’ in New Zealand, 2000 325 A love of poetry 326 Poetry readings in a cemetery 326 A student prank at Massey University, Palmerston North 327 Dr Joel Hayward’s office at Massey University 327 The Wanganella and the Manapourie Power Project 328 The Manapourie Power Project, New Zealand 328 Overlooking Deep Cove, New Zealand, 1969 329 Deep Cove, 2000 329 Yvonne Sharp at the end of the world 330 At Christchurch, New Zealand 330 Welcome at Tehran 371 On Iranian Air heading for Mashhad 371 After dining in Mashhad 372 With Dr Khaji at the conference centre 372 An Iranian advertisement for the conference, Mashhad 373 The conference banquet 374 Conference delegate card 374 Adelaide Institute’s International Revisionist Symposium, 1998 559 With Richard Wagner’s great-granddaughter, Adelaide 560 With Max Tompkins and Albert Bensimon, Adelaide 560 With Wagner’s great-granddaughter and Richard Hornung 561 With Christopher Steele, Doug Collins and David Brockschmidt 561 ‘Mungo Man’ was found in western New South Wales 562 Near where ‘Mungo Man’ was found 562 x Newspaper report of the Moscow Conference 595 With Eugenia Marjanova, Moscow 596 A departing present from Eugenia Marjanova 596 A plea for fathers’ temperance in Russia 596 Professor Kalinnikov, Königsberg 597 Immanuel Kant’s tomb, Königsberg 597 Memorial to Immanuel Kant, Königsberg 597 Immanuel Kant’s statue 598 Immanuel Kant’s statue 598 Alexander Balabajev, Kalinningrad 598 xi xii Foreword * * * * * Dr Fredrick Töben is a hero for our times. He is a hero because he is one of those rare individuals in the present day for whom principles – and particularly the right of free speech and the uninhibited pursuit of truth – are more important than creature comforts, social ostracism, and even jail. But Dr Töben’s heroism is of a special character because he is willing to stand against what is perhaps the most formidable power in the world, and to speak truth to the grand lies which that power supports. That power is what I call the Jewish Establishment – the men and women who command the organisations – and most importantly, the money, power and prestige – of the international nation of Judah. As a philosopher, I wish now to pause and comment on what I have just said – somewhat after the fashion of Laurence Stearne in his famous pathbreaking seventeenth century novel Tristram Shandy This pause is necessary because of the peculiar difficulty of speaking about Jews, and particularly their power and influence, especially when it is spoken of in a negative light. My pause here is for the purpose of saying that it is at this point in my discourse that a great hue and cry typically arises from Jews and their shabby goy factotums, generally consisting of a collection of the most powerful of modern-day anathemas: ‘bigot’, ‘hater’ and ‘anti-Semite’ to name just three. These are what I call ‘shut-up words’, i.e., words intended to intimidate the speaker and silence his further comment. They are also words to which the madding crowd has been Pavlovianly conditioned to respond by shutting their ears, a conditioning achieved by the constantly-repeated politically-correct mantras of the mass media. But curiously, these anathemas – powerful as they are – are beginning to lose that power, not merely because of severe overuse, but also because the ideas xvii – or more precisely, the ‘truths’ – which they attempt to suppress are simply too powerful to suppress for long. There is only so much time that a top can be kept on a pressure cooker, and the modern-day pressure-cooker of politically incorrect ideas is getting close to the point of explosion. When that explosion happens – and there does not now seem to be any way to avoid it – the result is going to be a very nasty – and lethal – mess. The Jews are a smart and clever people, and in a way it is a tribute to them that they have discovered the power of shut-up words, and have made such effective use of them. But the curious thing about shut-up words is that – like so many other lies to which the Jewish Establishment has given its imprimatur – they are constructed out of hot air. For example, consider bigotry: As Ambrose Bierce in his Devil’s Dictionary put it, a bigot is ‘One who is obstinately and zealously attached to an opinion which you do not entertain’. (Or to put it more bluntly, anybody who vigorously disagrees with someone else is a bigot.) Likewise, what is the objection to hate, provided only that it is directed against hateful things? (Which is to say that hate is wrong only if the hatred happens to be Politically Incorrect.) And as for ‘anti-Semitism’, this is not – as the Jews and their shabby goy factotums would have it – analytically bad, but is either bad or good depending on whether Jews as a people are bad or good for the nations in which they reside; and this ‘Jewish question’ is therefore one whose answer depends on objective Jewish behaviour, and not on some ethereal Jewish Platonic Form conjured up by a Talmudic scholar to which the quality ‘good’ is attached in pincushion fashion. Or, as my author friend L.A. Rollins put it, ‘An anti-Semite used to be someone who hated Jews, but is now someone the Jews hate’. While Dr Töben has never been intimidated by shut-up words, his particular contribution to free speech consists of his efforts over the last decade to examine what I have called the Orthodox Jewish Version (OJV) of the Holocaust, i.e., the allegation that Nazi Germany killed six million Jews, primarily in gas chambers. His work, along with the work of many other courageous men around the world, many of whom have suffered for their efforts in the same way Dr Töben has suffered, has shown beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt that not only is the OJV false, but in fact is a Big Lie. This in a nutshell is the essence of what has come to be called ‘Holocaust revisionism’ – a curious name because ‘revisionist’ was once a smear word used by communists against other communists who would not toe the party line. But whatever you call it, it is of enormous significance for several reasons. For one thing, the state of Israel has in effect been built Fight or Flight? xviii upon this lie – the guilt and sympathy expressed by the European and American peoples over the treatment of the Jews by the Nazis has been a continuing source of funds for Israel and for Jews, amounting to some $125 billion from America alone since 1948, and continuing in the form of ‘reparations’ for which large companies and whole nations are even now being shaken down. The French have a phrase to describe what for them seems to be their most frequent source of trouble, ‘cherchez la femme’ (look for the woman); but it is apparent from the Holocaust lie that the world might ought to think of re-forming this phrase as ‘cherchez l’argent’ (look for the money) or, as I have suggested elsewhere, ‘cherchez le juif’ (look for the Jew). Certainly the Jews themselves are aware of the financial import of the Holocaust, for they have a phrase that is heard everywhere in Israel: ‘There’s no business like Shoah [Holocaust] business’. But there is another element of importance to the work of Dr Töben and the other Holocaust revisionists. To put it in the bluntest of terms, it is to show that Hitler was right, or at least that he was very much on the right track, when it came to his attitude about Jews. This is not to say that Dr Töben has become a Hitler apologist; but it is to say that the logical implications of revisionist work cannot be avoided by any fair-minded person. In particular, it refutes the notion – pounded into the public consciousness at the Nuremberg trials and in Hollywood movies ever since – that Hitler was a monster. And if Hitler wasn’t a monster, then the next logical question is, Exactly what WAS he? Was he right to identify the Jew as a threat to Germany and the white race? Indeed, with the last 40 years or so filled with Holocaust shakedowns based on a Big Lie for a little country that practices genocide after the supposed Nazi fashion and has brought us to the cusp of World War III as a result, does this in fact prove that Hitler was right, and that the real Nazis are alive and well and living in Israel? But the work of Dr Töben and the other revisionists have brought to light another fact. While we have all heard ad infinitum and ad nauseam that Hitler was an advocate of the Big Lie technique, the fact is that, in his book Mein Kampf , Hitler discussed the Big Lie as being a practice of the Jews. So what that means is that not only did the Jews turn the Holocaust into the Big Lie of the OJV, but they also told another Big Lie in accusing Hitler of advocating it, in both cases confirming that Hitler was right. The provenance of my own interest in revisionism is my passion for controversial ideas and free speech. Briefly, I have discovered that many perfectly reasonable and rational ideas are violently opposed by this or that Foreword xix group, and it has become a natural for me to jump into the fray wherever angels fear to tread, but devils like me do not. When I first began my writing career, I started with philosophy, and having settled all the Big Questions to my satisfaction – if not quite to the satisfaction of everyone else – I investigated many other things, but never found anything like a Third Rail until I touched upon revisionism and the other issues surrounding Judaism. What I discovered was an incredible nexus of extremely complex and difficult problems, with revisionism being the most public, but not by any means the most interesting to me personally. In fact, many now consider revisionism passe, waiting only to be discovered by the masses, while the rest of us wrestle with far more difficult problems, including the more subtle aspects of the Jewish Question. In fact, this is the reason I established a website (www.thebirdman.org) which has now become one of the most popular in the world (we are ranked in the top half percent of more than 20 million websites worldwide by Alexa.com). What we have discovered is that there is a hunger for seeing these questions explored and the Politically Incorrect truth exposed; and while revisionism remains the subject of greatest popular attention, there is a growing consciousness of the far larger scope of questions relating to Jews. But whatever scope the Jewish Question may have, revisionism remains the principal case study, and most of the larger questions are writ small in the annals of revisionist experience, including that of Dr Töben. With the above remarks, I commend to you a modern hero’s book. A man who has been on the front lines fighting for free speech and real history, as Dr Töben has been, knows a lot more than the pundits and philosophers that keep a safe distance in their bunkers and ivory towers. Not only do we need more men of Dr Töben’s character and intelligence, but we need to learn from him that we may be prepared to better defend ourselves and Western civilisation against a Jewish Establishment which seems so eager in its every act to put six feet under the traditions of freedom which have cost so many lives and taken so many centuries to develop. Dr Töben, we salute you! John ‘Birdman’ Bryant Author of 40 books Webmaster of <www.thebirdman.org> Fight or Flight? xx Preface * * * * * When I floated the idea that I would write another book about my work, a friend responded, ‘Why another book about revisionism?’. Surprisingly, I had little difficulty in justifying this venture: ‘Just for the record. Since I began to detail for myself the issues surrounding ‘Holocaust’ revisionism, I’ve travelled about quite extensively, and Adelaide Institute supporters made it all possible. Hence, I owe them!’. As this current volume is thus heavily autobiographical, I was tempted to give it the subtitle ‘The Human Face of Revisionism’. In effect, this is what this volume is all about. It sheds light on why ordinary individuals are not satisfied with official explanations of World War II events that allege Germans committed this extraordinary genocide against European Jews. By questioning this premise, revisionists are subjected to extraordinary treatment – persecution through legal prosecution, for example. We must be doing something right to be attracting so much attention from powerful individuals who use state instruments in an attempt to silence our voices. It is not easy trying to retain a moral framework in a hostile climate. The urge for creature comforts invites civilised compromise – and to just let the truth slip into a ‘strong opinion’, and declare that perhaps the Jewish ‘Holocaust’ was merely exaggerated. No, I cannot do that. I follow Professor Arthur Butz, Dr Robert Faurisson et al., and I exclaim: The Jewish ‘Holocaust’ is a lie! Professor Butz clearly elucidated the problem faced by the ‘Holocaust’ industry when he drew a striking analogy: ‘We don’t need eyewitnesses to prove that the American Civil War happened’. 1 The perpetrators of the ‘Holocaust’ fraud know full well that with the rapid ageing and passing of the last few remaining alleged xxi witnesses to ‘homicidal gassings’, the whole edifice will crumble. No wonder laws are now needed to criminalise those individuals who refuse to believe in the ‘Holocaust’ myth. 2 Another example of an historical event needing no eyewitness evidence to prove its physical factuality is the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima. This physical fact can empirically be verified by taking a trip to Japan. However, the claim that Auschwitz Concentration Camp had a homicidal gas chambers’ complex cannot be proven. It is still possible to travel to Auschwitz and to verify or falsify the gassing allegations – simply by going there. To date no-one has proven that the gassing claim is a physical fact. The ‘Holocaust’ myth rests mainly on a couple of unreliable eyewitness reports – and oppressive laws that criminalise anyone from publicly subjecting the alleged murder weapon to rigorous scientific examination. It is also not ‘fair’, even dishonest, to disconnect the ‘Holocaust’ from rational debate via some dubious ‘racist’ or ‘hate’ laws, as is done in various European countries. To date no-one has as yet satisfied Faurisson’s challenge – ‘Show me or draw me that Auschwitz homicidal gas chamber!’. 3 Revisionists simply will not accept any dogma that claims to be resting on a physical fact – without doing basic research. My own interest in this ‘Holocaust’ matter started during the late 1950s at school where, as was usual for someone with a German background, I was subjected to the allegation that Germans did terrible things to Jews, though there was then no talk of any gassings having occurred. It was not until 1994 that I committed myself full-time to the topic, among others of course. Let me reminisce briefly for this preface and go back to my student days. In 1974 I attended the Summer School at Oxford University. I had by then formulated the focus of my thesis to be a comparison of C.S. Peirce’s fallibilism principle and K.R. Popper’s theory falsification principle. As philosopher Karl (later Sir Karl) Popper lived close to Oxford, I rang him and was invited to visit him on 19 July. Over a decade later, in 1987, Popper’s first research assistant, Dr George Zollschan employed me as a sociology tutor at the Warrnambool Institute, now Deakin University in Victoria. Zollschan had by then fallen out with Popper, mainly owing to Jewish Orthodox Zollschan’s zealous and blind Zionist faith, something Popper did not share. Fight or Flight? xxii During the late 1990s the speculations of the international financier George Sorros failed to destroy the nationalist Malaysian financial system. Malaysia simply refused what the IMF and the World Bank wished it to do – open its financial market to the world. Of interest here is that Sorros also claimed to be following Popper’s ‘open society’ philosophy and he set up the Open Society Institute. It is one of the few private foundations involved in funding the legal apparatus set up by the United States of America in Den Haag to try former political leaders of Yugoslavia, such as Slobodan Milosevich. I am certain that Sir Karl Popper would not have approved of George Sorros invoking Popper’s ‘open society’ in such an unjust and victors’ justice enterprise as this Den Haag court so clearly has become. Besides autographing copies of his books – annotated with pithy advice remarks as to what I ought to read first – Popper also recounted how on 25 October 1946 he won a battle for morality’s sake. Influential Jewish language philosopher, Ludwig Wittgenstein, had invited Popper to Cambridge to be a guest speaker at one of his seminars. Wittgenstein introduced Popper to his audience with the comment that all our problems would disappear if we only correctly analysed our language. Popper could not let that stand in silence and responded, ‘What about moral problems?’. Wittgenstein became agitated, picked up a fire poker, waved it at Popper and exclaimed, ‘There are no moral problems’. Popper responded, ‘What about the moral problem when a host threatens a visitor with a fire poker?’. Wittgenstein, who rejected the moral dimension as merely ‘a puzzle’, stormed out the room. Now this ‘academic’ incident – confrontation rather – of long ago has spawned a new book wherein two authors use it to discuss Popper’s and Wittgenstein’s contribution to modern philosophy. 4 Maria Stuempke, an acute observer of the USA scene, commented: It seems quite irrational for a Jewish philosopher to claim there are no moral problems when the Jewish claim of victimhood and need of reparations rests on a platform of accepted moral norms. If there are no morals, then how can anyone claim victimhood, or rather that someone has done them wrong. I heard of a student at a university who had just been lectured by a Jewish professor of philosophy about truth and morals being relative and the need to Preface xxiii