The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, Part 08

The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 8 thumbnail

by Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

THE PROSECUTION in the Leo Frank case never mentioned the word “Jew” until it was brought up by the defense — and lead prosecutor Hugh Dorsey had a long history of friendly relations and close collaboration with Jews throughout his life and career. So the accusation, common today among pro-Frank partisans, that the indictment and prosecution of Leo Max Frank was motivated by “anti-Semitism” simply doesn’t stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

In this, the eighth audio segment of this ground-breaking work originally published by the Nation of Islam — part of their series called The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews — we also learn that Frank himself denied that anti-Jewish feelings played any part in his arrest and trial.

Play Audio – Click Here ::

In this section of the book, we also learn of the amazing, blustering, and mysterious entry into the case of prominent Atlanta lawyer — shyster, really — “Colonel” Thomas B. Felder. Felder tried to present himself as a merely a public-spirited attorney, working for the Phagan family to “get to the bottom” of the mystery of Mary Phagan’s death. But when he was caught trying to bribe police officials to illegally obtain original documents related to the case — and when the Phagan family denied any connection with him — he beat a hasty retreat while loudly proclaiming his belief in Leo Frank’s guilt and claiming that “Jew money” was causing the authorities to “shield Frank.” Despite his strident attacks on Frank after he was discredited, the evidence is very strong that Felder was actually in Frank’s employ.

This new audio book, based on the Nation of Islam’s The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, the best investigative effort made on the Leo Frank case in the last 100 years, will take you on a trip into the past — to the greatest American murder mystery of all time; a mystery that will reveal to you the hidden forces that shape our world even today.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

We at The American Mercury are now proud to present part 8 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above — or at the end of this article — to hear part 8 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site,

Play Audio – Click Here ::

The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, Part 07

The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 7 thumbnail

by Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

WE HEAR A LOT today about people “playing the race card” — using race unjustly in a dispute, or as a moral bludgeon to obscure the facts. In 1913 Atlanta, the Leo Frank defense team played the race card — and in a very big way. Interestingly, the pro-Frank forces used race in a way that most people would find grossly unacceptable today: crudely attacking prosecution witness James Conley, a black man, in open court and on the record as a “dirty,” “lying,” “thieving” “nigger” — and characterizing the sex killing of Mary Phagan as a “Negro crime” of which “white man” Leo Frank, president of the Atlanta B’nai B’rith, would be — they insinuated — “incapable.” (ILLUSTRATION: Leo Frank’s lead attorney, Luther Z. Rosser, who, along with Reuben Arnold and other members of the Frank defense team, played the 1913 version of the “race card” with vigor, attacking James Conley in particular and, in his words, “niggers” in general.)

In this, the seventh audio segment of this ground-breaking work originally published by the Nation of Islam — part of their series called The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews — we also learn that the Frank defense promoted the idea that there was a separate category of testimony — “Negro testimony” — which wise jurors ought to ignore or regard as false. Nevertheless, the race-baiting strategy failed and the all-white jury believed the black man.

Play Audio – Click Here ::

We also hear about Leo Frank’s own statement to the court. We can’t really call it testimony, because under Georgia law at the time, the defendant had the right to make an unsworn statement and deny the prosecution the right to cross-examine him on it — which is exactly what Leo Frank did. Frank spoke for hours on end, and almost all of that time was spent telling the jury about the intricacies of managing the accounts of the pencil factory where he was superintendent — presumably to give the impression that he would have been so busy with his books on that fatal day that he simply wouldn’t have had time to commit the murder and move the body to the basement. It was ultimately unconvincing.

This new audio book, based on the Nation of Islam’s The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, the best investigative effort made on the Leo Frank case in the last 100 years, will take you on a trip into the past — to the greatest American murder mystery of all time; a mystery that will reveal to you the hidden forces that shape our world even today.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

We at The American Mercury are now proud to present part 7 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above — or at the end of this article — to hear part 7 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site,

Play Audio – Click Here ::

The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, Part 06

The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 6 thumbnail

by Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

PARTISANS OF Leo Frank have often tried to discredit Jim Conley’s testimony by pointing out that his account of the visit of Corinthia Hall and Emma Clark to the pencil factory where the murder of 13-year-old Mary Phagan took place was off by more than an hour. But these Frank partisans fail to note that Conley never stated that he saw the two young woman at all — he was merely told that they were there by Leo Frank, who had hustled him into a dark, locked closet after Frank announced the two were coming. Could it be that Frank was making preparations for murdering Conley — the only man on Earth, besides himself, who knew about Mary Phagan’s murder? (ILLUSTRATION: Testimony indicated that Leo M. Frank, shown, led a secret sexual life at the factory where he supervised dozens of teenage girls.)

In this, the sixth audio segment of this ground-breaking work originally published by the Nation of Islam — part of their series called The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews — we hear the words of James Conley, and also the testimony of the many girls and women who were witnesses to Frank’s sexual behavior.

Play Audio – Click Here ::

Leo Frank’s lead attorney, the famous Luther Z. Rosser, known for his ferocious cross-examinations, could not break James Conley and his story of a panicked Leo Frank employing him to move Mary Phagan’s body and write the deceptive “death notes” — and, in attempting to break him, actually succeeded in eliciting far more information injurious to Frank, such as details about his illicit sexual escapades with young girls — than even the police and the Pinkertons had uncovered.

This new audio book, based on the Nation of Islam’s The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, the best investigative effort made on the Leo Frank case in the last 100 years, will take you on a trip into the past — to the greatest American murder mystery of all time; a mystery that will reveal to you the hidden forces that shape our world even today.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

We at The American Mercury are now proud to present part 6 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above — or at the end of this article — to hear part 6 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site,

Play Audio – Click Here ::

The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, Part 05

The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 5 thumbnail

by Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

JIM Conley’s testimony in the Leo Frank case riveted the attention of not only all those present in the courtroom, but the entire state of Georgia and beyond hung on his words as they were reported. Despite being a member of a disparaged minority, Conley’s word was given respectful attention — and ultimately was even believed over the word of Leo Frank, an elite Jewish man considered white by the standards of the American South. This was unprecedented, but it was also inevitable given the detail, plausibility, and unshakable nature of Conley’s evidence. Even the best legal minds in the state, led by Luther Rosser, widely acknowledged to be the toughest cross-examiner in the business, could not discredit the “ignorant” Black man, no matter how hard they tried. (ILLUSTRATION: Jim Conley, who gave history-making testimony in the Leo Frank case)

In this, the fifth audio segment of this truly indispensable work originally published by the Nation of Islam — part of their series called The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews — we hear the words of James Conley as he actually spoke them on the stand as that all-White 1913 jury leaned forward and strained to hear.

Play Audio – Click Here ::

And that Black man — a man who admitted helping Leo Frank move Mary Phagan’s body, but who ultimately failed to return and destroy it as Leo Frank wished — set in motion a chain of events that would lead to the solution of the mystery and a verdict of guilty in the case. The detectives, the police, the prosecution, the jury, and the vast majority of the people believed that the well-connected businessman — Leo Frank — was a liar and a murderer; and they believed that the lowly factory sweeper, Jim Conley, was telling the truth.

This new audio book, based on the Nation of Islam’s The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, the best investigative effort made on the Leo Frank case in the last 100 years, will take you on a trip into the past — to the greatest American murder mystery of all time; a mystery that will reveal to you the hidden forces that shape our world even today.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

We at The American Mercury are now proud to present part 5 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above — or at the end of this article — to hear part 5 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site,

Play Audio – Click Here ::

American Pravda: The ADL in American Society

In our modern era, there are surely few organizations that so terrify powerful Americans as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B’nai B’rith, a central organ of the organized Jewish community.

Mel Gibson had long been one of the most popular stars in Hollywood and his 2004 film The Passion of the Christ became among the most profitable in world history, yet the ADL and its allies destroyed his career, and he eventually donated millions of dollars to Jewish groups in desperate hopes of regaining some of his public standing. When the ADL criticized a cartoon that had appeared in one of his newspapers, media titan Rupert Murdoch provided his personal apology to that organization, and the editors of The Economist quickly retracted a different cartoon once it came under ADL fire. Billionaire Tom Perkins, a famed Silicon Valley venture capitalist, was forced to issue a heartfelt apology after coming under ADL criticism for his choice of words in a Wall Street Journal column. These were all proud, powerful individuals, and they must have deeply resented being forced to seek such abject public forgiveness, but they did so nonetheless. The total list of ADL supplicants over the years is a very long one.

Given the fearsome reputation of the ADL and its notorious hair-trigger activists, there was a widespread belief that my small webzine would be completely annihilated when I first launched my recent series of controversial articles in early June by praising the works of historian David Irving, a figure long demonized by the ADL. Yet absolutely nothing happened.

During the next three months my subsequent articles directly challenged nearly every hot-button issue normally so fiercely defended by the ADL and its lackies, so much so that a friendly journalist soon described me as the “Kamikaze from California.” Yet despite my 90,000 words of text and the 13,000 comments I had attracted, the continuing silence of the ADL was absolutely deafening. Meanwhile, my articles were read more than half a million times, with the following being a list of the most provocative pieces:

When divine wrath fails to smite the heretic and terrifying enforcers of official dogma seem to have suddenly lost their taste for battle, others gradually begin to take notice and may grow emboldened. Eventually leading pro-Russian and Libertarian websites such as Russia Insider and LewRockwell began republishing some of my most controversial American Pravda articles, thus bringing my factual claims to the attention of broader audiences. After the conclusion of the my series, I began directly ridiculing my strangely timorous ADL opponents, publishing a short column entitled “Has the ADL Gone Into Hiding?” which led the redoubtable Paul Craig Roberts to describe me as “the bravest man I know.”

Apparently the combination of all these factors at long last grew too worrisome for the ADL, and stirring from their secret hiding place, its activists have now finally released a short and rather milquetoast response to my material, one which hardly much impresses me. A few days ago, they Tweeted out their column, together with a photo of their new nemesis.

The ADL may boast an annual budget of $60 million and have many hundreds of full-time employees, but its research skills seem sorely lacking. I discovered that they opened their rebuke by denouncing me as a notorious “anti-immigrant activist.” This seems an extremely odd claim given that I have published perhaps a quarter-million words on that contentious topic over the last twenty-five years, nearly all of it online and fully searchable, and my views have never been characterized in that fashion. To cite just one example, my article “California and the End of White America” appeared as a 1999 cover-story in Commentary, the flagship publication of The American Jewish Committee, and surely anyone reading it would be greatly puzzled by the ADL’s description. Indeed, just a few years earlier, I had been a top featured speaker at the October 1994 pro-immigrant protest in downtown Los Angeles, a 70,000 strong political rally that was the largest such gathering in American history to that date.


Over the years, my political activities have been the subject of many thousands of articles in the mainstream media, including a half-dozen front-page stories in the New York Times, and these would provide a similar picture, as did the New Republic cover story chronicling my California successes. Moreover, my views on immigrants haven’t changed all that much over the years as demonstrated by my more recent articles such as “The Myth of Hispanic Crime,” “Immigration, Republicans, and the End of White America” and “A Grand Bargain on Immigration?” Perhaps the intrepid ADL investigators should acquaint themselves with a powerful new technological tool called “Google.”



I was equally unimpressed that they so hotly denounced me for substantially relying upon the writings of Israel Shahak, whom they characterized as viciously “anti-Semitic.” As I had repeatedly emphasized, my own total lack of Aramaic and Hebrew necessarily forces me to rely upon the research of others, and the late Prof. Shahak, an award-winning Israeli academic, certainly seems a fine source to use. After all, famed linguist Noam Chomsky had lauded Shahak’s works for their “outstanding scholarship,” and numerous of our other most prominent public intellectuals such as Christopher Hitchens, Edward Said, and Gore Vidal had been similarly lavish in their praise. Furthermore, one of Shahak’s co-authors was Norton Mezvinsky, a prominent American academic specializing in Middle Eastern history, himself hardly an obscure figure given that both his brother and sister-in-law served in Congress and his nephew later married Chelsea Clinton. And as far as I’m aware almost none of Shahak’s explicit claims about the Talmud or traditional Judaism have ever been directly challenged, while the online availability of his first book allows those so interested to conveniently read it and decide for themselves.


The ADL similarly denounced me for taking seriously the theories of Ariel Toeff, another Israeli academic. But Prof. Toeff, son of the Chief Rabbi of Rome, certainly ranks as one of the world’s leading scholarly authorities on Medieval Jewry, and working together with his graduate students and other colleagues, he had devoted many years of effort to the research study in question, drawing upon extensive primary and secondary sources produced in eight different languages. I found his 500 page book quite persuasive, as did Israeli journalist Israel Shamir, and I have seen no credible rebuttals.

Now the work of all these prominent academics and intellectuals may not necessarily be correct, and perhaps I am mistaken in accepting their factual claims. But I would need to see something far more weighty than a casual dismissal in a few paragraphs contained within an anonymous ADL column, whose author for all I know might have been some ignorant young intern.

Those glaring flaws aside, most of the ADL’s remaining catalogue of my numerous heretical positions seemed reasonably accurate, though obviously presented in a somewhat hostile and derogatory fashion and sorely lacking any links to my original pieces. But even this desultory listing of my mortal transgressions was woefully incomplete, with the ADL strangely failing to include mention of some of my most controversial claims.

For example, the authors excluded all reference to my discussion of the thoroughly documented Nazi-Zionist economic partnership of the 1930s, which played such a crucial role in laying the basis for the State of Israel. And the ADL similarly avoided mentioning the nearly 20,000 words I had allocated to discussing the very considerable evidence that the Israeli Mossad had played a central role in both the JFK Assassination and the 9/11 Attacks. Surely this must be one of the few times that the ADL has deliberately avoided leveling the charge of “conspiracy theorist” against an opponent whom they might have so easily slurred in that fashion. Perhaps they felt the evidence I provided was too strong for them to effectively challenge.

The worrisome incompetence of ADL researchers becomes particularly alarming when we consider that over the last couple of years that organization has been elevated into a content gatekeeping role at America’s largest Internet companies, helping to determine what may or may not be said on the most important Social Media platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.

My local paper is the San Jose Mercury News and a couple of weeks ago it published a major profile interview with Brittan Heller, the ADL Director tasked with policing “hate speech” across the America-dominated portions of the Internet. She seemed like a perfectly pleasant young woman in her mid-thirties, a Stanford English major and a graduate of Yale Law, now living in Silicon Valley with her husband and her two cats, Luna and Stella. She emphasizes her own experience as a victim of cyber-harassment from a fellow college student whose romantic overtures she rejected and the later expertise she had gained as a Nazi-hunter for the U.S. government. But does that resume really provide her with the god-like knowledge suitable for overriding our traditional First Amendment rights and determining which views and which individuals should be allowed access to some two billion readers worldwide?

There is also a far more serious aspect to the situation. The choice of the ADL as the primary ideological overseer of America’s Internet may seem natural and appropriate to politically-ignorant Americans, a category that unfortunately includes the technology executives leading the companies involved. But this reflects the remarkable cowardice and dishonesty of the American media from which all these individuals derive their knowledge of our world. The true recent history of the ADL is a remarkably sordid and disreputable tale.

Brittan Heller, director of technology and society for the Anti-Defamation League, poses for a photograph in downtown Palo Alto, Calif., on Monday, August 27, 2018. (Nhat V. Meyer/Bay Area News Group)

In January 1993, the San Francisco Police Department reported that it had recently raided the Northern California headquarters of the ADL based upon information provided by the FBI. The SFPD discovered that the organization had been keeping intelligence files on more than 600 civic organizations and 10,000 individuals, overwhelmingly of a liberal orientation, with the SFPD inspector estimating that 75% of the material had been illegally obtained, much of it by secret payments to police officials. This was merely the tip of the iceberg in what clearly amounted to the largest domestic spying operation by any private organization in American history, and according to some sources, ADL agents across the country had targeted over 1,000 political, religious, labor, and civil rights organizations, with the New York headquarters of the ADL maintaining active dossiers on more than a million Americans.

Not long afterward, an ACLU official who had previously held a high-ranking position with the ADL revealed in an interview that his organization had been the actual source of the highly controversial 1960s surveillance on Martin Luther King, Jr., which it had then provided to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. For many years Hoover had been furiously denounced in the national media headlines for his use of tapes and other secret information on King’s activities, but when a local San Francisco newspaper revealed that an ADL spying operation had actually been the source of all that sordid material, the bombshell revelation was totally ignored in the national media and only reported by fringe organizations, so that today almost no Americans are aware of that fact.

I am not aware of any other private organization in American history that has been involved in even a sliver of such illegal domestic espionage activity, which appears to have been directed against almost all groups and prominent individuals—Left, Right, and Center—suspected of being insufficiently aligned with Jewish and Israeli interests. Some of the illegal material found in ADL possession even raised dark suspicions that it had played a role in domestic terrorist attacks and political assassinations directed against foreign leaders. I am no legal expert, but given the massive scale of such illegal ADL activities, I wonder whether a plausible case might have been made to prosecute the entire organization under RICO statutes and sentence all of its leaders to long prison terms.

Instead, the resulting government charges were quickly settled with merely a trivial fine and a legal slap on the wrist, demonstrating the near-total impunity provided by massive Jewish political power in modern American society.

In effect, the ADL seems to have long operated as our country’s privatized secret political police, monitoring and enforcing its ideological doctrines on behalf of Jewish groups much as the Stasi did for the Communist rulers of East Germany. Given such a long history of criminal activity, allowing the ADL to extend its oversight to our largest Social Media platforms amounts to appointing the Mafia to supervise the FBI and the NSA, or taking a very large step towards implementing George Orwell’s ” Ministry of Truth” on behalf of Jewish interests.

In his 1981 memoirs, the far right Classics scholar Revilo P. Oliver characterized the ADL as “the formidable organization of Jewish cowboys who ride herd on their American cattle” and this seems a reasonably apt description to me.


Although I had long recognized the power and influence of the ADL, a leading Jewish-activist organization whose leaders were so regularly quoted in my newspapers, until rather recently I had only the vaguest notions of its origins. I’m sure I’d heard the story mentioned at some points, but the account had never stuck in my mind.

Then perhaps a year or two ago, I happened to come across some discussion of the ADL’s 2013 centenary celebration, in which the leadership reaffirmed the principles of its 1913 founding. The initial impetus had been the vain national effort to save the life of Leo Frank, a young Southern Jew unjustly accused of murder and eventually lynched. Not long before, Frank’s name and story would have been equally vague in my mind, with the man half-remembered from my introductory history textbooks as one of the most notable early KKK victims in the fiercely anti-Semitic Deep South of the early twentieth century. However, not long before seeing that piece on the ADL I’d read Albert Lindemann’s highly-regarded study The Jew Accused, and his short chapter on the notorious Frank case had completely exploded all my preconceptions.


First, Lindemann demonstrated that there was no evidence of any anti-Semitism behind Frank’s arrest and conviction, with Jews constituting a highly-valued element of the affluent Atlanta society of the day, and no references to Frank’s Jewish background, negative or otherwise, appearing in the media prior to the trial. Indeed, five of the Grand Jurors who voted to indict Frank for murder were themselves Jewish, and none of them ever voiced regret over their decision. In general, support for Frank seems to have been strongest among Jews from New York and other distant parts of the country and weakest among the Atlanta Jews with best knowledge of the local situation.

Furthermore, although Lindemann followed the secondary sources he relied upon in declaring that Frank was clearly innocent of the charges of rape and murder, the facts he recounted led me to the opposite conclusion, seeming to suggest strong evidence of Frank’s guilt. When I much more recently read Lindemann’s longer and more comprehensive historical study of anti-Semitism, Esau’s Tears, I noticed that his abbreviated treatment of the Frank case no longer made any claim of innocence, perhaps indicating that the author himself might have also had second thoughts about the weight of the evidence.

Based on this material, I voiced that opinion in my recent article on historical anti-Semitism, but my conclusions were necessarily quite tentative since they relied upon Lindermann’s summary of the information provided in the secondary sources he had used, and I had the impression that virtually all those who had closely investigated the Frank case had concluded that Frank was innocent. But after my piece appeared, someone pointed me to a 2016 book from an unexpected source arguing for Frank’s guilt. Now that I have ordered and read that volume, my understanding of the Frank case and its historical significance has been entirely transformed.

Mainstream publishers may often reject books that too sharply conflict with reigning dogma and sales of such works are unlikely to justify the extensive research required to produce the manuscript. Furthermore, both authors and publishers may face widespread vilification from a hostile media for taking such positions. For these reasons, those who publish such controversial material will often be acting from deep ideological motives rather than merely seeking professional advancement or monetary gain. As an example, it took a zealous Trotskyite leftist such as Lenni Brunner to brave the risk of ferocious attacks and invest the time and effort to produce his remarkable study of the crucial Nazi-Zionist partnership of the 1930s. And for similar reasons, we should not be totally surprised that the leading book arguing for the guilt of Leo Frank appeared as a volume in the series on the pernicious aspects of Jewish-Black historical relations produced by Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam (NOI), nor that the text lacked any identified author.


Anonymous works published by heavily-demonized religious-political movements naturally engender considerable caution, but once I began reading the 500 pages of The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man I was tremendously impressed by the quality of the historical analysis. I think I have only very rarely encountered a research monograph on a controversial historical event that provided such an enormous wealth of carefully-argued analysis backed by such copious evidence. The authors seemed to display complete mastery of the major secondary literature of the last one hundred years while drawing very heavily upon the various primary sources, including court records, personal correspondence, and contemporaneous publications, with the overwhelming majority of the 1200 footnotes referencing newspaper and magazine articles of that era. The case they made for Frank’s guilt seemed absolutely overwhelming.


The basic outline of events is not disputed. In 1913 Georgia, a 13-year-old pencil company worker named Mary Phagan was last seen alive visiting the office of factory manager Leo Frank on a Saturday morning to collect her weekly paycheck, while her raped and murdered body was found in the basement early the next morning and Frank eventually arrested for the crime. As the wealthy young president of the Atlanta chapter of B’nai B’rith, Frank ranked as one of the most prominent Jewish men in the South, and great resources were deployed in his legal defense, but after the longest and most expensive trial in state history, he was quickly convicted and sentenced to death.

The facts of the case against Frank eventually became a remarkable tangle of complex and often conflicting evidence and eyewitness testimony, with sworn statements regularly being retracted and then counter-retracted. But the crucial point that the NOI authors emphasize for properly deciphering this confusing situation is the enormous scale of the financial resources that were deployed on Frank’s behalf, both prior to the trial and afterward, with virtually all of the funds coming from Jewish sources. Currency conversions are hardly precise, but relative to the American family incomes of the time, the total expenditures by Frank supporters may have been as high as $25 million in present-day dollars, quite possibly more than any other homicide defense in American history before or after, and an almost unimaginable sum for the impoverished Deep South of that period. Years later, a leading donor privately admitted that much of this money was spent on perjury and similar falsifications, something which is very readily apparent to anyone who closely studies the case. When we consider this vast ocean of pro-Frank funding and the sordid means for which it was often deployed, the details of the case become far less mysterious. There exists a mountain of demonstrably fabricated evidence and false testimony in favor of Frank, and no sign of anything similar on the other side.

The police initially suspected the black night watchman who found the girl’s body, and he was quickly arrested and harshly interrogated. Soon afterward, a bloody shirt was found at his home, and Frank made several statements that seemed to implicate his employee in the crime. At one point, this black suspect may have come close to being summarily lynched by a mob, which would have closed the case. But he stuck to his story of innocence with remarkable composure, in sharp contrast to Frank’s extremely nervous and suspicious behavior, and the police soon shifted their scrutiny toward the latter, culminating in his arrest. All researchers now recognize that the night watchman was entirely innocent, and the material against him planted.

The evidence against Frank steadily mounted. He was the last man known to have seen the young victim and he repeatedly changed important aspects of his story. Numerous former female employees reported his long history of sexually aggressive behavior toward them, especially directed towards the murdered girl herself. At the time of the murder, Frank claimed to have been working alone in his office, but a witness who went there reported he had been nowhere to be found. A vast amount of circumstantial evidence implicated Frank.

A black Frank family servant soon came forward with sworn testimony that Frank had confessed the murder to his wife on the morning after the killing, and this claim seemed supported by the latter’s strange refusal to visit her husband in jail for the first two weeks after the day of his arrest.

Two separate firms of experienced private detectives were hired by Frank’s lavishly-funded partisans, and the agents of both eventually came to the reluctant conclusion that Frank was guilty as charged.

As the investigation moved forward, a major break occurred as a certain Jim Conley, Frank’s black janitor, came forward and confessed to having been Frank’s accomplice in concealing the crime. At the trial he testified that Frank had regularly enlisted him as a lookout during his numerous sexual liaisons with his female employees, and after murdering Phagan, had then offered him a huge sum of money to help remove and hide the body in the basement so that the crime could be pinned upon someone else. But with the legal noose tightening around Frank, Conley had begun to fear that he might be made the new scapegoat, and went to the authorities in order to save his own neck. Despite Conley’s damning accusations, Frank repeatedly refused to confront him in the presence of the police, which was widely seen as further proof of Frank’s guilt.

By the time of the trial itself, all sides were agreed that the murderer was either Frank, the wealthy Jewish businessman, or Conley, the semi-literate black janitor with a first-grade education and a long history of public drunkenness and petty crime. Frank’s lawyers exploited this comparison to the fullest, emphasizing Frank’s Jewish background as evidence for his innocence and indulging in the crudest sort of racial invective against his black accuser, whom they claimed was obviously the true rapist and murderer due to his bestial nature.

Those attorneys were the best that money could buy and the lead counsel was known as the one of the most skilled courtroom interrogators in the South. But although he subjected Conley to a grueling sixteen hours of intense cross-examination over three days, the latter never wavered in the major details of his extremely vivid story, which deeply impressed the local media and the jury. Meanwhile, Frank refused to take the stand at his own trial, thereby avoiding any public cross-examination of his often changing account.

Two notes written in crude black English had been discovered alongside Phagan’s body, and everyone soon agreed that these were written by the murderer in hopes of misdirecting suspicion. So they were either written by a semi-literate black such as Conley or by an educated white attempting to imitate that style, and to my mind, the spelling and choice of words strongly suggests the latter, thereby implicating Frank.

Taking a broader overview, the theory advanced by Frank’s legion of posthumous advocates seems to defy rationality. These journalists and scholars uniformly argue that Conley, a semi-literate black menial, had brutally raped and murdered a young white girl, and the legal authorities soon became aware of this fact, but conspired to set him free by supporting a complex and risky scheme to instead frame an innocent white businessman. Can we really believe that the police officials and prosecutors of a city in the Old South would have violated their oath of office in order to knowingly protect a black rapist and killer from legal punishment and thereby turn him loose upon their city streets, presumably to prey on future young white girls? This implausible reconstruction is particularly bizarre in that nearly all its advocates across the decades have been the staunchest of Jewish liberals, who endlessly condemned the horrific racism of the Southern authorities of that era, but then unaccountably chose to make a special exception in this one particular case.


In many respects, the more important part of the Frank case began after his conviction and death sentence when many of America’s wealthiest and most influential Jewish leaders began mobilizing to save him from the hangman. They soon established the ADL as a new vehicle for that purpose and succeeded in making the Frank murder case one of the most famous in American history to that date.

Although his role was largely concealed at the time, the most important new backer whom Frank attracted was Albert Lasker of Chicago, the unchallenged monarch of American consumer advertising, which constituted the life’s blood of all of our mainstream newspapers and magazines. Not only did he ultimately provide the lion’s share of the funds for Frank’s defense, but he focused his energies upon shaping the media coverage surrounding the case. Given his dominant business influence in that sector, we should not be surprised that a huge wave of unremitting pro-Frank propaganda soon began appearing across the country in both local and national publications, extending to most of America’s most popular and highly-regarded media outlets, with scarcely a single word told on the other side of the story. This even included all of Atlanta’s own leading newspapers, which suddenly reversed their previous positions and became convinced of Frank’s innocence.

Lasker also enlisted other powerful Jewish figures in the Frank cause, including New York Times owner Adolph Ochs, American Jewish Committee president Louis Marshall, and leading Wall Street financier Jacob Schiff. The Times, in particular, began devoting enormous coverage to this previously-obscure Georgia murder case, and many of its articles were widely republished elsewhere. The NOI authors highlight this extraordinary national media attention: “The Black janitor whose testimony became central to Leo Frank’s conviction became the most quoted Black person in American history up to that time. More of his words appeared in print in the New York Times than those of W.E.B. Du Bois, Marcus Garvey, and Booker T. Washington—combined.

Back a century ago just as today, our media creates our reality, and with Frank’s innocence being proclaimed nationwide in near-unanimous fashion, a long list of prominent public figures were soon persuaded to demand a new trial for the convicted murderer, including Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, and Jane Addams.

Ironically enough, Lasker himself plunged into this crusade despite apparently having very mixed personal feelings about man whose cause he was championing. His later biography reveals that upon his first personal meeting with Frank, he perceived him as “a pervert” and a “disgusting” individual, so much so that he even hoped that after he managed to free Frank, the latter would quickly perish in some accident. Furthermore, in his private correspondence he freely admitted that a large fraction of the massive funding that he and numerous other wealthy Jews from across the country were providing had been spent on perjured testimony and there are also strong hints that he explored bribing various judges. Given these facts, Lasker and Frank’s other major backers were clearly guilty of serious felonies, and could have received lengthy prison terms for their illegal conduct.

With the New York Times and the rest of the liberal Northern media now providing such massive coverage of the case, Frank’s defense team was forced to abandon the racially-inflammatory rhetoric aimed at his black accuser which had previously been the centerpiece of their trial strategy. Instead, they began concocting a tale of rampant local anti-Semitism, previously unnoticed by all observers, and adopted it as a major grounds for their appeal of the verdict.

The unprincipled legal methods pursued by Frank’s backers is illustrated by a single example. Georgia law normally required that a defendant be present in court to hear the reading of the verdict, but given the popular emotions in the case, the judge suggested that this provision be waived, and the prosecution assented only if the defense lawyers promised not to use this small irregularity as grounds for appeal. But after Frank was convicted, AJC President Marshall and his other backers orchestrated numerous unsuccessful state and federal appeals on exactly this minor technicality, merely hiring other lawyers to file the motion.

For almost two years, the nearly limitless funds deployed by Frank’s supporters covered the costs of thirteen separate appeals on the state and federal levels, including to the U.S. Supreme Court, while the national media was used to endlessly vilify Georgia’s system of justice in the harshest possible terms. Naturally, this soon generated a local reaction, and during this period outraged Georgians began denouncing the wealthy Jews who were spending such enormous sums to subvert the local criminal justice system.

One of the very few journalists willing to oppose Frank’s position was Georgia publisher Tom Watson, a populist firebrand, and an editorial he reasonably declared “We cannot have…one law for the Jew, and another for the Gentile” while he also later lamented that “It is a bad state of affairs when the idea gets abroad that the law is too weak to punish a man who has plenty of money.” A former Georgia governor indignantly inquired “Are we to understand that anybody except a Jew can be punished for a crime.” The clear facts indicate that there was indeed a massive miscarriage of justice in Frank’s case, but virtually all of it occurred in Frank’s favor.

All appeals were ultimately rejected and Frank’s execution date for the rape and murder of the young girl finally drew near. But just days before he was scheduled to leave office, Georgia’s outgoing governor commuted Frank’s sentence, provoking an enormous storm of popular protest, especially since he was the legal partner of Frank’s chief defense lawyer, an obvious conflict of interest. Given the enormous funds that Frank’s national supporters had been deploying on his behalf and the widespread past admissions of bribery in the case, there are obviously dark suspicions about what had prompted such a remarkably unpopular decision, which soon forced the former governor to exile himself from the state. A few weeks later, a group of Georgia citizens stormed Frank’s prison farm, abducting and hanging him, with Frank becoming the first and only Jew lynched in American history.

Naturally, Frank’s killing was roundly denounced in the national media that had long promoted his cause. But even in those quarters, there may have been a significant difference between public and private sentiments. No newspaper in the country had more strongly championed Frank’s innocence than the New York Times of Adolph Ochs. Yet according to the personal diary of one of the Times editors, Ochs privately despised Frank, and perhaps even greeted his lynching with a sense of relief. No effort was ever made by Frank’s wealthy supporters to bring any of the lynching party to justice.


Although I have now come to regard the NOI volume as the most persuasive and definitive text on the Frank case, I naturally considered conflicting works before reaching this conclusion.


For nearly a half-century, the leading scholarly account of the incident had probably been Leonard Dinnerstein’s book The Leo Frank Case, first published in 1966, and Dinnerstein, a University of Arizona professor specializing in Jewish history, entirely supported Frank’s innocence. But although the work won a national award, carries glowing blurbs from several prestigious publications, and has surely graced the reading lists of endless college courses, I was not at all impressed. Among other things, the book appears to be the original source of some of the most lurid examples of alleged anti-Semitic public outbursts that apparently have no basis in reality and seem to have been simply fabricated by the author given his lack of any citations; the NOI authors note these stories have been quietly abandoned by all recent researchers. Even leaving aside such likely falsifications, which were widely cited by later writers and heavily contaminated the historical record, I found the short Dinnerstein work rather paltry and even pitiful when compared to that of its NOI counterpart.


A far longer and more substantial recent work was Steve Oney’s 2003 And the Dead Shall Rise, which runs nearly 750 pages and won the National Jewish Book Award, the Southern Book Critics Circle Prize, and the American Bar Association’s Silver Gavel, probably establishing itself as today’s canonical text on the historical incident. Oney had been a longtime Atlanta journalist and I was favorably impressed by his narrative skill, along with the numerous fascinating vignettes he provided to illustrate the Southern history of that general era. He also seemed a cautious researcher, drawing heavily upon the primary sources and avoiding much of the falsified history of the last century, while not entirely suppressing the massive evidence of bribery and perjury employed by the Frank forces.

But although Oney does mention much of this information, he strangely fails to connect the dots. For example, although he occasionally mentions some of the funds spent on Frank’s behalf, he never attempts to convert them into present-day equivalents, leaving a naive reader to assume that such trivial amounts could not possibly have been used to pervert the course of justice. Furthermore, his entire book is written in chronological narrative form, with no footnotes provided in the text, and a large portion of the content being entirely extraneous to any attempt to determine Frank’s guilt or innocence, contrasting very sharply with the more scholarly style of the NOI authors.

To my mind, a central element of the Frank case was the massive financial temptations being offered by Frank’s Jewish backers, and the huge number of Atlanta citizens, both high and low, who apparently shifted their positions on Frank’s guilt in eager hopes of capturing some of that largess. But although this obvious theme was heavily emphasized in the NOI book, Oney seems to mostly avoid this obvious factor, perhaps even for personal reasons. Print publications have suffered massive cutbacks in recent years and I noticed on the book flap that although Oney is described as a longtime Atlanta journalist, he had subsequently relocated to Los Angeles. Once I checked, I immediately discovered that Oney’s book had became the basis for an independent film entitled The People v. Leo Frank, and I wonder whether his hopes of capturing a sliver of Hollywood’s vast lucre may not have encouraged him to so strongly suggest Frank’s innocence. Would an account of Leo Frank as rapist and murderer ever be likely to reach the silver screen? The quiet influence of financial considerations is no different today than they were a century ago, and this factor must be taken into account when evaluating historical events.


The NOI authors devote nearly all of their lengthy book to a careful analysis of the Frank case provided in suitably dispassionate form, but a sense of their justifiable outrage does occasionally poke through. In the years prior to Frank’s killing, many thousands of black men throughout the South had been lynched, often based on a slender thread of suspicion, with few of these incidents receiving more than a few sentences of coverage in a local newspaper, and large numbers of whites had also perished in similar circumstances. Meanwhile, Frank had received benefit of the longest trial in modern Southern history, backed by the finest trial lawyers that money could buy, and based on overwhelming evidence had been sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a young girl. But when Frank’s legal verdict was carried out by extra-judicial means, he immediately became the most famous lynching victim in American history, perhaps even attracting more media attention than all those thousands of other cases combined. Jewish money and Jewish media established him as a Jewish martyr who thereby effectively usurped the victimhood of the enormous number of innocent blacks who were killed both before and after him, none of whom were ever even recognized as individuals.

As Prof. Shahak has effectively demonstrated, traditional Talmudic Judaism regarded all non-Jews as being sub-human, with their lives possessing no value. Given that Frank’s backers were followers of Reform Judaism, it seems quite unlikely that they accepted this doctrine or were even aware of its existence. But religious traditions of a thousand years standing can easily become embedded within a culture, and such unrecognized cultural sentiments may have easily shaped their reaction to Frank’s legal predicament.

Influential historical accounts of the Frank case and its aftermath have contained lurid tales of the rampant public anti-Semitism visited upon Atlanta’s Jewish community in the wake of the trial, even claiming that a substantial portion of the population was forced to flee as a consequence. However, a careful examination of the primary source evidence, including the contemporaneous newspaper coverage, provides absolutely no evidence of this, and it appears to be entirely fictional.

The NOI authors note that prior to Frank’s trial American history had been virtually devoid of any evidence of significant anti-Semitism, with the previous most notable incident being the case of an extremely wealthy Jewish financier who was refused service at a fancy resort hotel. But by totally distorting the Frank case and focusing such massive national media coverage on his plight, Jewish leaders around the country succeeded in fabricating a powerful ideological narrative despite its lack of reality, perhaps intending the story to serve as a bonding experience to foster Jewish community cohesion.

As a further example of the widely promoted but apparently fraudulent history, the Jewish writers who have overwhelmingly dominated accounts of the Frank case have frequently claimed that it sparked the revival of the Ku Klux Klan soon afterward, with the group of citizens responsible for Frank’s 1915 lynching supposedly serving as the inspiration for William Simmons’ reestablishment of that organization a couple of years later. But there seems no evidence for this. Indeed, Simmons strongly emphasized the philo-Semitic nature of his new organization, which attracted considerable Jewish membership.

The primary factor behind the rebirth of the KKK was almost certainly the 1917 release D.W. Griffith’s overwhelmingly popular landmark film Birth of a Nation, which glorified the Klan of the Reconstruction Era. Given that the American film industry was so overwhelmingly Jewish at the time and the film’s financial backers and leading Southern distributors came from that same background, it could be plausibly argued that the Jewish contribution to the creation of the 1920s Klan was a very crucial one, while the revenue from the film’s distribution throughout the South actually financed Samuel Goldwyn’s creation of MGM, Hollywood’s leading studio.

In their introduction, the NOI authors make the fascinating point that the larger historical meaning of the Frank case in American racial history has been entirely lost. Prior to that trial, it was unprecedented for Southern courts to allow black testimony against a white man, let alone against a wealthy man being tried on serious charges; but the horrific nature of the crime and Conley’s role as the sole witness required a break from that longstanding tradition. Thus, the authors argue not unreasonably, that the Frank case may have been as important to the history of black progress in America as such landmark legal verdicts as Plessy vs. Ferguson or Brown vs. Board. But since almost the entire historical narrative has been produced by fervent Jewish advocates, these facts have been completely obscured and the case entirely misrepresented as an example of anti-Semitic persecution and public murder.

Let us summarize what seems to be the solidly established factual history of the Frank case, quite different than the traditional narrative. There is not the slightest evidence that Frank’s Jewish background was a factor behind his arrest and conviction, nor the death sentence he received. The case set a remarkable precedent in Southern courtroom history with the testimony of a black man playing a central role in a white man’s conviction. From the earliest stages of the murder investigation, Frank and his allies continually attempted to implicate a series of different innocent blacks by planting false evidence and using bribes to solicit perjured testimony, while the exceptionally harsh racial rhetoric that Frank and his attorneys directed towards those blacks was presumably intended to provoke their public lynching. Yet despite all these attempts by the Frank forces to play upon the notorious racial sentiments of the white Southerners of that era, the latter saw through these schemes and Frank was the one sentenced to hang for his rape and murder of that young girl.

Now suppose that all the facts of this famous case were exactly unchanged except that Frank had been a white Gentile. Surely the trial would be ranked as one of the greatest racial turning points in American history, perhaps even overshadowing Brown v. Board because of the extent of popular sentiment, and it would have been given a central place in all our modern textbooks. Meanwhile, Frank, his lawyers, and his heavy financial backers would probably be cast as among the vilest racial villains in all of American history for their repeated attempts to foment the lynching of various innocent blacks so that a wealthy white rapist and murderer could walk free. But because Frank was Jewish rather than Christian, this remarkable history has been completely inverted for over one hundred years by our Jewish-dominated media and historiography.

These are the important consequences that derive from control of the narrative and the flow of information, which allows murderers to be transmuted into martyrs and villains into heroes. The ADL was founded just over a century ago with the central goal of preventing a Jewish rapist and killer from being held legally accountable for his crimes, and over the decades, it eventually metastasized into a secret political police force not entirely dissimilar to the widely despised East German Stasi, but with its central goal seeming to be the maintenance of overwhelming Jewish control in a society that is 98% non-Jewish.

We should ask ourselves whether it is appropriate for an organization with such origins and such recent history to be granted enormous influence over the distribution of information across our Internet.

Related Reading:

Article Source:

The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, Part 04

The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 4 thumbnail

by Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

WHEN LEO FRANK was first arrested for the murder of Mary Phagan, his and his defense team’s major focus was placing the blame on Newt Lee, the Black night watchman who discovered the murdered girl’s body. They were so eager to avoid any attention being given to another Black man, Jim Conley, the factory sweeper who later was shown to be Frank’s accessory after the fact — that they totally ignored the sighting of Conley by a witness on the day of the murder. This was a most unusual and revealing omission, since the sighting could have been used by the defense early on to place suspicion on Conley, but they deliberately decided not to do that. This lends considerable credence to the prosecution theory, backed up by Conley’s own testimony, that Conley helped Frank move the body. (ILLUSTRATION: Jim Conley, center, being led away in custody)

In this, the fourth audio segment of this excellent book originally published by the Nation of Islam — the best book we have seen on this subject — we also learn how the Frank team, having failed to fix the murder on the watchman, suddenly “discovered” Jim Conley and tried to blame him for the crime.

Play Audio – Click Here ::

Leo Frank even attempted to take credit for alerting investigators to the fact that Jim Conley could write (he had been feigning illiteracy to avoid any connection with the “death notes” found by Mary Phagan’s body), though the testimony of all the detectives, even the detectives hired by Frank, was that Frank had nothing to do with that discovery.

This new audio book, based on the Nation of Islam’s The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, the best investigative effort made on the Leo Frank case in the last 100 years, will take you on a trip into the past — to the greatest American murder mystery of all time; a mystery that will reveal to you the hidden forces that shape our world even today.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

We at The American Mercury are now proud to present part 4 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above — or at the end of this article — to hear part 4 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site,

Play Audio – Click Here ::

Amazon Bans the Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews

The banning of four Nation of Islam Black history books by Amazon, the largest bookseller in the world, provides a perfect opportunity to examine the wickedly racist ways Jewish power is wielded in America. Amazon provided no warning, no reason, no hearing, and no opportunity to respond—it was a blatant mockery of Amazon founder Jeffrey Bezos’s own creed, “Democracy Dies in Darkness.” It is, however, perfect proof of what The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad said: the mental resurrection of Black people will anger our oppressors and cause them to react punitively and viciously.

Bezos’s book purge came in the midst of the extraordinary political spectacle engineered by an awakened Congressional wonder woman named Ilhan Omar. Her exposé of the Zionist-Judaic underbelly of the American political system happened in the most unflattering way. Rep. Omar asked, “Why is it ok for me to talk about the influence of the NRA, of fossil fuel industries, or Big Pharma, and not talk about a powerful lobby that is influencing policy?” She was referring to AIPAC, of course, the most powerful foreign lobbying group, which, while protesting that it was powerless, promptly brought ALL the business of the United States of America to a screeching halt to demand an instantaneous group hug from the 535 Congressional members on its payroll!

The tweet heard ’round the Jewish world.

Rep. Omar’s adroit maneuver exposed the fact that 12 of the top 20 political donors to the American election system are Jewish Zionists, their money amounting to a whopping 78% of the total contributed. What began as a campaign to officially repudiate, isolate, and control this freshman Muslim phenom, dramatically backfired. In effect, she forced the nearly all-white boys’ club to go on record to condemn “discrimination and bigotry against minorities as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contrary to the values and aspirations of the United States.” Symbolic, for sure—but Dr. King couldn’t do it; Pres. Obama couldn’t do it. It took but a few weeks and a tweet for Ilhan Omar. She even signed the resolution. For the first time, the annual March meeting of the AIPAC caliphate will have far more attention than it wants, and Omar’s political star rises ever higher.

It’s been that kind of year for the satanic “Jews,” who have had a hell of a time trying to keep alive a plausible mythology about themselves while maintaining control over their gentile brethren and over the non-white world. From all angles and directions new research has chipped away at the holy patina that almost everywhere surrounded in solemn reverence these unholy imposters. A review of the litany of recent Jewish and Israeli crises is in order:

  • The United Nations issued a report that accuses Israel of “war crimes” when its forces killed 189 people and shot more than 6,100, most clearly unarmed. Israeli “snipers shot at journalists, health workers, children and persons with disabilities, knowing they were clearly recognizable as such.”
  • Jewish historians now admit that today’s brutal occupants of Palestine are genetically unrelated to any of the good people in the Bible, thus establishing that their 71-year tyranny in the holy land is but another white supremacist colonization scheme.
  • Though Israel is one of 200 nations on earth, a google search of the general term “apartheid state” results in nothing but Israel-related articles. And that is reinforced by a damning United Nations report concluding that Israel “has established an apartheid regime that dominates the Palestinian people as a whole.”
  • The Boycott, Divestment, & Sanctions Movement (BDS), which has isolated the apartheid state, has forced Israel to take ever more desperate and repressive measures.
  • The “war in Syria” was exposed as an Israeli oil theft operation.
  • There is the increasing momentum of charges that Israel masterminded 9/11 and that Israeli operatives are the likely suspects in the continuing false-flag terrorism attacks around the globe.
  • So despised is the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) that it was run out of its “racial mediator” role in last year’s Starbucks incident by a single tweet from activist Tamika Mallory.
  • The Women’s March continues to grow in influence and power despite Jewish attempts to undermine its progress.
  • American police departments with atrocious records of racism and shootings in case after case are shown to have been “trained” by ADL and Israeli forces.
  • Artists and athletes are refusing to perform in Israel, and Black Lives Matter blindsided the ADL with their policy statement on Israel which says that Israel is “complicit in the genocide taking place against the Palestinian people.”
  • The manipulation of “anti-Semitism” statistics by the ADL—which were found to be inflated by thousands of “anti-Semitic incidents” that were committed by a single Israeli Jew—has been exposed.
  • A series of sexual harassment and human trafficking crimes by Jewish men of wealth and prestige has been exposed as epidemic. Names like Weinstein, Lauer, Epstein, Dershowitz, Moonves, Kraft are appearing with unseemly regularity.
  • Morris Dees was unceremoniously fired from the organization he founded, the Southern Poverty Law Center. The SPLC is the “race issues” arm of the ADL, and has scammed millions from unsuspecting and fearful Blacks and Jews, claiming to be America’s “hate watchdog.” Dees was fired for sexual harassment and for creating an intolerable climate of racism toward the group’s Black staff.
  • The opioid epidemic—which is now said to be responsible for at least 100 deaths a day—is being laid at the doorstep of the billionaire Jewish Sackler family, owners of Purdue Pharma, makers and relentless pushers of OxyContin. The devastation on the workforce is so extensive that Fed chairman Jerome Powell said in a recent 60 Minutes segment that the OxyContin scourge is negatively affecting the U.S. economy.
  • Harsh Jewish condemnations of the awakening voices of Black critics of Israel, like Angela Davis, Tamika Mallory, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Marc Lamont Hill, Michelle Alexander, and Alice Walker, have only brought them Black hero status.
  • The exposure of Israel’s secret and ongoing espionage operation against Black youth in America, called “Israel Cyber Shield,” was a fatal blow against the alleged Black–Jewish “alliance.” The COINTELPRO-like operation is responsible for the attacks on the above-mentioned Black thinkers, as well as the instigation of Amazon’s book purge.
  • Israel’s longtime face of Apartheid, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, was indicted for corruption. His leadership of the now internationally acknowledged genocide against the Palestinians has made it nearly impossible for Israel to maintain international toleration.
  • Netanyahu merged his right-wing party with the “Jewish Power” Party, the most racist party in Apartheid Israel. And this follows the Knesset’s passing of the nation-state law giving civil rights only to Jews.
  • The Talmud, the ancient Jewish rabbinical writing that the Israelis would like to make the law of the land, has come into intense scrutiny as a document that says Jesus deserved death by being boiled in excrement and that his blessed mother, Mary, was “a whore.” Israel’s chief rabbi called Black people monkeys, admitting that he learned that from the Talmud.
  • Christian churches in Israel continue to be defaced and burned by Jewish gangs.
  • The college cheating scandal to admit less-than-deserving rich kids to elite schools was masterminded by a Jewish man and brought focus on other, past college scams that benefitted Jews.
  • Black Jews in America are now in open revolt against white Jews, with their main spokesperson, Nylah Burton, publicly declaring, “that the only way to fix the Black-Jewish alliance is to destroy it….We need to destroy the idea that Black people owe white Jewish people support because some Jews marched with Martin Luther King more than half a century ago…” Black Jews in Israel have long suffered discrimination, poverty, and police violence.
  • Boston Globe columnist S.I. Rosenbaum had to admit what the Nation of Islam has always known: “A shocking number of Jews have become willing collaborators in white supremacy.”

Nothing in the above litany of recent racist Jewish horrors says “Chosen.”

In 2010, The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan wrote a letter to the ADL’s Abraham Foxman and copied all the major Jewish organizational leaders. His warning to them was most certainly prophetic:

“[T]he more you fight and oppose me rather than help me to lift my people from their degraded state, Allah (God) and His Messiah will bring you and your people to disgrace and ruin and destroy your power and influence here and throughout the world. I pray that you will make the wise and best choice.”

Clearly, that “disgrace and ruin” is now here. To this arrogant and intractable Jewish leadership, however, the problem IS NOT their objectionable, detestable behavior—what disturbs them is the mental awakening that they can neither control, curtail, nor redirect.

The above review of recent history is dreadful enough, but it is the long-term Jewish record of wickedness that eats away at the carefully crafted and generationally protected mythology. The sanctimonious Amazon notice is almost comical: Amazon says it prohibits

“[p]roducts that contain violent or offensive material that has no historical significance. Amazon reserves the right to make a determination on the historical value of the item….”

All of academia ought to be frightened at these words, because The Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews series by the Nation of Islam is carefully constructed to present the words of the most respected Jewish scholars, and if the “historical value” of these books is now left in the hands of Amazon’s own backroom “historians” (read ADL), and not determined by readers themselves, we have a book burning of the Nazi variety. Each of the NOI books delves into the lengthy and contentious history of interactions of Blacks and Jews—through the eyes of Jewish scholars, historians, and rabbis. No matter the scholarly source, Jews MUST control the intellectual diet of the goyim at any cost and create the false idols they worship.

An accompanying ADL-Amazon notice: “We reserve the right to determine whether content provides a poor customer experience and remove that content from sale.” Each of the NOI books had hundreds of reader reviews with a collective rating of 5 of 5 stars. So the “customer experience” is evident—by Amazon’s standards, such as they are. It is entirely understandable that some of Amazon’s customers may have had a poor or even shocking experience with the content of the 4-book Secret Relationship series. But that, in truth, is only proof that they are woefully ignorant of the voluminous works of their own Jewish scholars.

Sins of the Fathers

It is useful, then, for those who have not seen or read the four controversial Nation of Islam books, to present some of the most provocative content to understand why in 2019 Goliath—after nearly 25 years of selling Secret Relationship—has now outlawed slings and smooth stones (1 Samuel 17:40). And though the book series is fully footnoted, replete with literally thousands of citations, references, and sources, for this exercise we pick a few examples from the most celebrated of Jewish scholars (all of them PhDs with impeccable academic credentials, two of them rabbis) that allow the reader to weigh the import of the works—and Amazon’s deceitful ban—in their proper contexts:

(1) In the trans-Atlantic slave trade nine out of ten Africans were shipped to Brazil. Dr. Arnold Wiznitzer described the early Jewish presence there:

“Besides their important position in the sugar industry and in tax farming, they dominated the slave trade….The buyers who appeared at the auctions were almost always Jews, and because of this lack of competitors they could buy slaves at low prices.”

Dr. Wiznitzer was a professor at Jewish Theological Seminary of America and president of the Brazilian-Jewish Institute of Historical Research—even though his words and authority rewrite the popular mythological version of Black–Jewish relations.

(2) According to Simon Wiesenthal Center scholar Dr. Harold Brackman, during the 1600s “slave trading in Brazil became a ‘Jewish’ mercantile specialty in much the same way it had been in early medieval Europe.” Here, almost unwittingly and in a single sentence, Dr. Brackman places Jews at the center of both African and European slavery. Dr. Brackman also wrote, “Jews were about twice as likely to be slave owners as the average white Southerner.”

(3) Rabbi and historian Dr. Bertram W. Korn was the acknowledged expert on 19th-century American Jewry, and a president of the American Historical Society, and on the executive board of the Central Conference of American Rabbis. He wrote:

“It would seem to be realistic to conclude that any Jew who could afford to own slaves and had need for their services would do so….Jews participated in every aspect and process of the exploitation of the defenseless blacks.”

Rabbi Korn gives a lecture on the subject that can be heard on the Nation of Islam Research Group website.

(4) Columbia University professor Jonathan Schorsch wrote, “some Jewish merchants routinely possessed enormous numbers of slaves temporarily before selling them off.”

(5) Dr. Abraham Peck was the director of both the American Jewish Archives in Cincinnati and the American Jewish Historical Society in New York, the two leading institutions on American Jewish life and history, as well as the director of the Holocaust Museum Houston. Dr. Peck was unmistakably clear:

“The first two centuries of the Black–Jewish encounter in America were highlighted by a fairly extensive record of Jewish slave-holding. Indeed, during the colonial period, in the small Jewish community of the time, almost every Jewish household of any form, North or South, possessed at least one slave.”

Jewish scholar Cecil Roth says Jews were “greatest” slaveholders. His books are available at Amazon.

(6) At the office of the British Jewish Historical Society, there is a bronze bust of the celebrated Jewish historian Dr. Cecil Roth, who with his many awards and honors was the editor-in-chief of the Encyclopedia Judaica. He wrote that the Black slave revolts in parts of South America “were largely directed against [Jews], as being the greatest slave-holders of the region.” Jews set up militias with the sole purpose of destroying Africans who had escaped from Jewish plantations. The Jewish militias murdered the escaped slaves and cut off their hands to award to their fellow Jews as trophies.

(7) In his 1983 book Jews and Judaism in the United States, Rabbi Dr. Marc Lee Raphael, the longtime editor of the most prestigious of Jewish historical journals, the Publications of the American Jewish Historical Society, published one of the most definitive statements on Jewish involvement in the Black Holocaust. In Brazil, “Slave auctions were postponed if they fell on a Jewish holiday. In Curacao in the seventeenth century, as well as in the British colonies of Barbados and Jamaica in the eighteenth century, Jewish merchants played a major role in the slave trade.”

“In fact,” he stated, “in all the American colonies, whether French (Martinique), British, or Dutch, Jewish merchants frequently dominated.” He continues:

“This was no less true on the North American mainland, where during the eighteenth century Jews participated in the ‘triangular trade’ that brought slaves from Africa to the West Indies…”

(8) The Jewish Encyclopedia adds that “Jewish commercial activity” in the time of the Triangular Trade and its Middle Passage included a “monopoly of the slave trade.” It also states: “[T]he cotton-plantations in many parts of the South were wholly in the hands of the Jews, and as a consequence slavery found its advocates among them.”

The fact is that Amazon and the ADL can no longer conceal the incredible collection of facts in The Secret Relationship Series that place the Jewish people among the Black man’s worst historical enemies. What had previously been considered the racist acts of white Christians alone are now shown to have had significant Jewish culpability. Jewish merchants owned, insured, and financed slave ships and Jewish chandlers outfitted them with chains and shackles. Jews became the major traders in “refuse slaves”—Africans who were weak and sick from the Middle Passage voyage. Jewish traders bought them cheap, “fattened them up,” and sold them at a profit. The Gradis family of Jewish shippers had a monopoly on trade to the notorious slave dungeon at Gorée Island—the Auschwitz of the Black Holocaust. They owned 26 ships and extensive plantations in the French colonies St. Domingo and Martinique, and they developed a plan to import 10,000 slaves into Louisiana. When early New Yorkers decided to start slavery in the colony, records show they contacted “the jobbers and the Jews,” who were the recognized international dealers. The largest shipments of Africans arriving in New York in the first half of the 1700s were commissioned by Jewish merchants.

These are irrefutable examples of the Jewish scholars whose works on this subject are represented in The Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews, Volume One. And all of those Jewish works remain unassailed and ready to purchase at, where they face no “community standards,” sanctions, or even a review. In stark contrast to the massive evidence of slave-trading Jews is this damning 1853 statement by America’s leading abolitionist organization: Jews “have never taken any steps whatever” against slavery. Dr. Brackman adds that the most influential rabbi in America, Isaac Mayer Wise, believed that abolitionism “was the major threat to Jewish existence.”

And that just covers a small portion of the contents of The Secret Relationship, Vol. 1. Volume Two of The Secret Relationship series, released in 2010, quotes B’nai B’rith officials like Bernard Postal, whose 1928 Jewish Tribune article is titled “Jews in the Ku Klux Klan: Klan-Like Organizations Have Existed Since the Adoption of the Constitution; Jews Played a Part in All of Them.” Volume Two traces the earliest investment in the KKK to the Jewish slave owner and Confederate leader Judah P. Benjamin. Nation of Islam researchers uncovered a photo of a proud Jewish merchant receiving 50 roses from hooded klansmen in a public park to celebrate his “golden business anniversary.”

The post-slavery sharecropping system that kept the ex-slave in desperate poverty and ignorance for decades after emancipation was a product of the vast network of Jewish bankers, moneylenders, and cotton traders, who flooded the South to reap the immense cotton profits.


The Jewish wealth generated from these slavery- and Jim Crow-based enterprises helped finance Jewish community development, built synagogues, homes, schools, businesses, and institutions, and in many untold ways enriched their lives, congregations, and communities. Actually, one is hard-pressed to name a single prominent American Jew in the slavery era who did not own slaves or profit from Black African slavery.

Over centuries Jews built this prodigious and ill-gotten wealth, then wrote themselves out of the history of slavery, and left the white Gentiles to take the entire blame for the slave trade, slavery, sharecropping, and Jim Crow.

The 144-page companion volume to the Secret Relationship series is titled Jews Selling Blacks: Slave-Sale Advertising By American Jews. In effect, this collection of Jewish advertisements—the largest collection of its kind ever published—is the “dashcam video” of Black–Jewish history. The value of these original documents is that they are not filtered through any historian, rabbi, or scholar. Jewish slave traders PAID to place these ads, and the graphic detail can not be explained away.

For instance, some Jewish scholars have used U.S. census records, which show “modest” Jewish slaveholding, to diminish the role of Jews as major “owners” of Black human beings. This, however, is highly misleading. The 1830 census shows that all the Jews of Charleston, South Carolina, claimed to “own” a total of 104 Black human beings. But a single Jew, Jacob Cohen, on a single day in 1857, offered for sale “125 rice negroes.” That same year, the same Mr. Cohen teamed with a Gentile and advertised almost twice that number—210—in a single day. Those warehoused Africans were not counted in the census records as slaves owned by Cohen, a prominent member of Charleston’s Jewish community. Today, Mr. Cohen might have a seller page on selling slaves as both “new” and “used” and then encouraging 5-star customer feedback.

The third and latest volume of The Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews was released in 2016 and focuses entirely on the notorious Leo Frank case of 1913–1915, the problematic episode that purportedly started the ADL and the KKK and is reputed to be the worst incident of “anti-Semitism” in American history—except that such claims are untrue. Leo Frank was the B’nai B’rith president in Atlanta and arguably the South’s most important Jew. He was convicted of the murder of a 13-year-old Gentile girl named Mary Phagan and he was ultimately lynched for the crime. She was a child worker at Frank’s factory who came to get her pay and was later found dead. The NOI’s ground-breaking work explodes the notion that Frank was innocent and powerfully refutes the claim that there was any anti-Semitism in the case at all. The common belief in the oppression and victimhood of the Jews in America is based almost entirely on that 1913–1915 incident, and through it they created an entirely new sympathetic image of themselves as friends of and co-sufferers with the racially oppressed.

The NOI’s 536-page meticulously footnoted book (2,000 footnotes and many more citations and references) refutes this century-old propaganda point by point. Frank is proved to be a lecher who had a sordid history of sexual harassment of his 100 gentile girl employees. Frank and his Jewish defenders committed massive perjuries and planted and tampered with evidence, among other felonies—all to frame two Black men for his crime. Court records show that Frank actually claimed that murder and rape were “negro crimes” and thus he, as a white man, could not be guilty! He further said that “negro testimony” was unreliable so the Black witnesses who testified against him should be ignored. As Frank’s lawyer so elegantly told the jury: “If you put a nigger in a hopper, he’ll drip lies,” after referring to one witness as “a dirty, filthy, black, drunken, lying nigger.”

Of course, this reality betrays as false the victimhood image that was carefully prepared for Leo Frank, who for a century has been used to portray Jews as friends of Blacks with a common white enemy. So well documented is the NOI research that the grand-niece of the victim and a scholar and author of her own book on the case, Mary Phagan-Kean, wrote this in 2019:

“The Nation of Islam volume is the most well-researched book published regarding the rape and murder of little Mary Phagan to date.”

So completely does the book uncover the hidden truths about this case that one might confidently speculate that it may have actually altered the Congressional “anti-Semitism” resolution that was originally intended to target Rep. Omar. The first draft of the document mentioned the Leo Frank case as the most egregious example of “anti-Semitism” in American history, yet the mention of Leo Frank was removed in the final draft voted on by Congress. After a century of parading an invented history of “anti-Semitism,” the Jewish propagandists may have been forced by the Nation of Islam book to retire the Leo Frank myth.

S.I. Rosenbaum’s assessment in the Boston Globe that “A shocking number of Jews have become willing collaborators in white supremacy” is only shocking in its understatement. This article provides but a page or two of direct Jewish testimony of Jews in the Black Holocaust, but the 1,600-page Secret Relationship Series goes much, much deeper.

And while all this rich and untapped wealth of data has now been banned, any number—even thousands—of books on the African slave trade that not only conceal the Jewish role but place the entire culpability on white gentiles are readily available at Wholesome offerings to Amazon customers include the full retinue of Jerry Springer program “highlights” he calls “Undressed and Unleashed” and “UNCENSORED!” Also available is Elie Wiesel’s book Legends of Our Time, in which he counsels: “Every Jew, somewhere in his being, should set apart a zone of hate—healthy, virile hate—for what the German personifies and for what persists in the German. To do otherwise would be a betrayal of the dead.” Meir Kahane’s book The Ideology of Kach is available, even though his Kach party was on the U.S. State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.


The Talmud can be purchased on Amazon, though the notorious Jewish “holy book” says some of the ugliest things about Blacks, gentiles, and women ever recorded. And, most significantly, an Amazon customer can still purchase Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, with the introduction written by—wait for it—Abraham Foxman of the ADL. This is not to say that these books should be banned, but since Amazon arrogates to itself “the right to make a determination on the historical value of the item,” one can readily see Amazon and Jeffrey Bezos’s supreme hypocrisy.

“The Man of Sin MUST be revealed.”


We are at that moment in time The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad told us about in His Our Saviour Has Arrived:

The Bible says (Mt. 25:32) “Before Him shall be gathered all nations.” The Holy Qur’an says, “you shall see all nations kneeling before Him and they shall be judged out of their own books. [HQ 45:28]” The government keeps a record of their governmental accounts. They have books in the library and in the courtswhich tell how they have ruled the people. They have a record of how they have judged the people.

The Nation of Islam researchers are under the direction of The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan, whose mission is to expose Satan—a dangerous assignment that necessitates a spiritual and mathematical grounding. 2 Thessalonians 2:3 emphatically states: “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed”—with his own books and his own Jewish scholarship.

The privatizing of the First Amendment and doling out its privileges to Jews alone are where this Satanic cabal is moving. Blacks and white Gentiles are taking a new look at the presumptions they have always taken as fact, and new racial alliances based on Truth are being formed and solidified in the process.

The banning of The Secret Relationship is a sure sign that victory is near.

ALL Amazon-banned books may be purchased here:

Amazon Bans More Books by Respected Scholars

One suggestion for dealing with Amazon’s book-burning spree is to nationalize the company, which has a “monopoly in the digital public sphere,” and put Jeff Bezos on trial for treason.

By Dr. Kevin Barrett

The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America—and American tradition—enshrines freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Nowhere is this more evident than in the book publishing industry. Historically, few books have been banned or restricted in America for any reason other than obscenity or indecency, and even those restrictions have largely collapsed. Since the mid-1960s, a book can only be banned if a reasonable person would consider it prurient, in violation of contemporary community standards, and completely devoid of literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

But since 2017 our tradition of freedom from book censorship has been annihilated. We are living through the worst-ever assault on the Bill of Rights. This crime is being committed by a monopoly in service to an organized crime syndicate. Amazon, under pressure from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and allied groups, has “kindled” the biggest book-burning bonfire ever. And the books Amazon is burning are not those brimming with obscenity. You can still buy the Marquis de Sade’s pornographic incitements to rape, torture, and murder, alongside thousands of similar abominations, on Amazon. What you can’t buy are scholarly books that carefully and dispassionately document facts that pose a threat to the continued reign of what certain hotheads have (not entirely inaccurately) called ZOG, the Zionist Occupation Government.

On March 11, Amazon—which holds an effective monopoly on book sales in the United States—notified professor Kevin MacDonald that two of his scholarly books, The Culture of Critique and Separation and Its Discontents, had been banned: “During our review process, we found that this content is in violation of our content guidelines. As a result, we cannot offer this book for sale.”

What content, specifically? Which guidelines did it violate, and how?

MacDonald reports: “In subsequent emails, they just keep repeating that these books were found to violate ‘content guidelines,’ even though I pointed out that they were published 21 years ago by a respected academic publisher. No specifics. No appeal process.”

Amazon doesn’t just ban scholarly works by professors who advocate for white people. America’s leading pro-black-people historical research team, the Nation of Islam (NOI) Research Group, has also been the victim of an Amazon book-burning bonfire. In his article “American Pravda: Amazon Book Censorship: Banning Black Historiography During Black History Month” Ron Unz discusses Amazon’s scandalous banning of the NOI Research Group’s multi-volume series The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews. Volume 3 of that series convincingly exposes the ADL as an organized crime syndicate founded to protect the Jewish rapist and murderer Leo Frank.

Though I do not agree with MacDonald or NOI about everything, I cannot help but recognize that their banned books feature high-quality scholarship. The same cannot be said of the rabidly Islamophobic books of Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer, and a long list of other Zionist-funded propagandists who together make up the $50-million-per-year Islamophobia industry. Though almost uniformly characterized by poor scholarship and reckless animosity to the people they write about, these authors are not only allowed to sell their deceptive and hateful wares on Amazon but are relentlessly promoted by Zionist big money. In other words, essentially the same organized crime syndicate is forcing Amazon to ban dispassionate scholarly works as “hate,” while simultaneously spending hundreds of millions of dollars promoting actual hate propaganda sold by the boatload on Amazon.

Spencer, the Zionist-paid hate propagandist who inspired child-murderer Anders Breivik, is peddling 37 very bad books on Amazon. At least nine editions of Hitler’s Mein Kampf are likewise being sold there. Thousands of books that offend modern liberal sensibilities are equally available. So are books that offend traditional conservative sensibilities. And that is as it should be! Two-bit hate hacks like Spencer, as well as important historical figures like Hitler, should be refuted, not silenced.

And speaking of Hitler: The current wave of Amazon censorship began two years ago with the wholesale banning of revisionist books about World War II. On March 6, 2017, Amazon banned 68 titles from Castle Hill Publishers, which specializes in scientific and forensic historical investigations. Germar Rudolf of Castle Hill asserts that his company was not the only one targeted, and that, in fact, hundreds of revisionist history books were banned that day.

Our Constitution, and the tradition of liberty it enshrines, is being shredded. But there is a simple solution: Force Amazon to respect the Bill of Rights. Like Facebook, Twitter, and Google, Amazon has a monopoly in the digital public square. It is a de facto public utility not a private company. If Jeff Bezos keeps spitting on our Constitution, we must nationalize Amazon—and try Bezos for treason.

Kevin Barrett, Ph.D., is an Arabist-Islamologist scholar and one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. From 1991 through 2006, Dr. Barrett taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin. In 2006, however, he was attacked by Republican state legislators who called for him to be fired from his job at the University of Wisconsin-Madison due to his political opinions.



The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, Part 03

The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 3 thumbnail

by Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

THE JEWISH Anti-Defamation League (or ADL) — back in the days when they and their allies had a near-monopoly on public discussion of the Leo Frank case — once made the claim that Leo Frank was arrested and indicted and convicted of the murder of Mary Phagan “without evidence.” Listen to this audio book and learn of the vast amount of evidence amassed during four separate investigations into the case — evidence that strongly indicates Frank’s guilt — evidence that convinced the coroner’s jury, the grand jury, the trial jury — and evidence that on appeal was reviewed and found unexceptionable by every possible level of the judicial system, up to and including the Supreme Court of the United States. (ILLUSTRATION: Leo M. Frank on his way to the coroner’s inquest)

In this, the third audio segment of this excellent book originally published by the Nation of Islam — the best we have seen on this subject — we also learn of the very strange behavior of the pro-Frank forces when it came to the factory sweeper, James Conley, who said he was hired by Frank to act as a lookout during Frank’s hoped-for tryst with Mary Phagan — an encounter that ultimately led to her death.

Play Audio – Click Here ::

After hearing the evidence, you will never again be able to take seriously the “received narrative” of an innocent Leo Frank, persecuted by vicious “anti-Semites,” which the major media continue to vend to the public.

This new audio book, based on the Nation of Islam’s The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, the best investigative effort made on the Leo Frank case in the last 100 years, will take you on a trip into the past — to the greatest American murder mystery of all time; a mystery that will reveal to you the hidden forces that shape our world even today.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

We at The American Mercury are now proud to present part 3 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above — or at the end of this article — to hear part 3 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site,

Play Audio – Click Here ::

The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, Part 02

The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 2 thumbnail

by Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

LOOK AT THE headline and lead article in the Atlanta Georgian newspaper of April 29, 1913, we have illustrated above. Click on this link to see a large and easy-to-read version. “LEE’S GUILT PROVED, Detectives Assert” — “SUSPICION LIFTS FROM FRANK” — “We Have Sufficient Evidence Now to Convict Negro Nightwatchman of Killing Mary Phagan” — “Additional clews furnished by the head of the pencil factory [Leo Frank] were responsible for the closing net around the negro watchman” — “what suspicion had rested on Frank was being rapidly swept away by the damaging evidence against the black man.”

Newt Lee, the nightwatchman of the National Pencil Company was being framed for the murder of Mary Phagan. We know now without the slightest doubt that Lee was innocent. But the pro-Frank forces, even at this early date in the case, were already engaging in the planting of evidence, impersonation of detectives, and other skulduggery in order to pin the crime on an innocent man — and this would not be the last time they would do this.

Play Audio – Click Here ::

Just as there is no doubt today that Newt Lee was innocent, there should just as little doubt today that the principal behind this framing attempt was not innocent. The framing of a man who had nothing to do with the murder is not the act of an innocent man.

This new audio book, based on the Nation of Islam’s The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, the best investigative effort made on the Leo Frank case in the last 100 years, will take you on a trip into the past — to the greatest American murder mystery of all time; a mystery that will reveal to you the hidden forces that shape our world even today.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

We at The American Mercury are now proud to present part 2 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above — or at the end of this article — to hear part 2 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site,

Play Audio – Click Here ::

Dershowitz Intro to Dinnerstein’s Leo Frank Case

By Alan M. Dershowitz

The trial, conviction, death sentence and its commutation and eventual lynching of Leo Frank during the second decade of the twentieth century, constitute a major episode not only in American legal history, but also in the development of American political institutions. The Knights of Mary Phagan, formed to avenge the murder of the young factory worker for which Frank was convicted, became an important component of the twentieth century resurrection of the Ku Klux Klan. The Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith was founded in reaction to the anti-Semitism generated – or at least disclosed – by the Frank case.

Sometimes characterized as the American “Dreyfus” case (a reference to the frame-up of a French Jew which fanned the flames of nineteenth century European anti-Semitism), the trial of Leo Frank in Atlanta, Georgia was conducted in a carnival atmosphere. Crowds outside the courthouse sang “The Ballad of Mary Phagan,” which included the following lyrics:

Little Mary Phagan

By Sage Ross – Flickr page of Sage Ross, CC BY-SA 2.0,

She left her home one day;
She went to the pencil-factory
To see the big parade.

She left her home at eleven,
She kissed her mother good-by;
Not one time did the poor child think
That she was a-going to die.

Leo Frank he met her
With a brutish heart, we know;
He smiled, and said, “Little Mary,
You won’t go home no more.”

Sneaked along behind her
Till she reached the metal-room;
He laughed, and said, “Little Mary,
You have met your fatal doom.”

Down upon her knees
To Leo Frank she plead;
He taken a stick from the trash-pile
And struck her across the head.

Crowds inside the courtroom shouted anti-Jewish epithets, and demanded Frank’s death. The smell of the lynch mob was in the air.

The State’s star witness was a black maintenance worker at the factory which Frank managed and at which Mary Phagan worked. He testified that Frank killed the young girl and ordered him to dispose of the body. When the jury convicted Frank, it was the first time in memory that a white man had been convicted of murder on the basis of uncorroborated testimony of a black witness. This apparent advance in racial justice was explained away by a local observer who said: “That wasn’t a white man convicted by that N…’s testimony. It was a Jew.”

Predictably, Frank was convicted, sentenced to death and denied relief on appeal, despite some critical dissenting words from Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. Unpredictably, the Governor of Georgia decided to commute Frank’s death sentence and leave him to serve out a term of life imprisonment. That appeared to be a great victory for Frank and his many supporters around the country, since the evidentiary foundation underlying Frank’s conviction was beginning to crumble as a result of the discovery of new evidence strongly suggesting that it was the government’s star witness – and not Frank – who had killed the victim. It seemed only a matter of time before Frank would be freed from his imprisonment.

In order to prevent Frank’s freedom, several of the “best” citizens of Georgia – including a minister, two former Supreme Court Justices, and an ex-sheriff – decided to take the law into their own hands. They constituted themselves as a vigilante committee and let it be known that they intended to kidnap Frank from prison and lynch him. Despite some perfunctory efforts by prison authorities to protect Frank, the lynch mob had little difficulty breaking into the prison and kidnapping Frank. It was obvious that at least some of the prison authorities were in on the plan. Frank was taken to Marietta, where he was lynched. Everyone knew exactly who was involved in the lynching – indeed some members of the lynch mob boasted about their participation and gave interviews to the press. Photographs of the lynching and souvenir pieces of the rope were sold throughout Georgia. Nonetheless, the coroner’s jury investigating the murder of Leo Frank concluded that it was unable to identify any of the perpetrators. This was typical of lynchings in the South during that era. The only difference is that this victim was not black.

There is a fascinating and largely unknown ethical story behind the public legal story of the Frank case. I use it as a teaching vehicle in my course on legal ethics. It turns out that while Leo Frank was on death row, one of Atlanta’s most prominent lawyers learned that Frank was innocent and that another man – presumably the government’s star witness – was the killer. We do not know for certain whether the real killer confessed directly to the lawyer, or to another lawyer who then sought ethical advice from the pillar of the bar. This is the way the eminent lawyer described it in his own writings:

I am one of the few people who know that Leo Frank was innocent of the crime for which he was convicted and lynched. Subsequent to the trial, and after his conviction had been affirmed by the Supreme Court, I learned who killed Mary Phagan, but the information came to me in such a way that, though I wish I could do so, I can never reveal it so long as certain persons are alive. We lawyers, when we are admitted to the bar, take an oath never to reveal the communications made to us by our clients; and this includes facts revealed in an attempt to employ the though he refuses the employment….The Law on this subject may or may not be a wise law – there are some who think that it is not – but naturally since it is the law, we lawyers and the judges cannot honorably disobey it.

The eminent lawyer (and any other lawyer who may have received the real killer’s confession in confidence) was forced into the most excruciating legal, ethical and moral dilemma a professional can possibly confront. The ethical rules of the profession are fairly clear. There is no available exception to the rule mandating confidentiality of privileged communications about past crimes. It is not a future crime for a guilty client to remain silent while an innocent man goes to his death for the murder committed by a silent, guilty client. The issue is a bit more complicated if the confessing client was, in fact, the witness who testified against Frank, for the client would then be confessing to perjury. Some courts and commentators have suggested that allowing perjured testimony to remain unrecanted, while the victim of the perjury remains under a death or prison sentence, may constitute a continuing fraud on the court, and thus an exception to the lawyer-client privilege. But that line of authority is hazy at best, and the eminent lawyer did not apparently consider it. He saw the legal and professional ethics issue as simple and straightforward. That still left the moral and personal issue of whether any human being – regardless of his or her profession – can and should allow a preventable miscarriage of justice to be carried out, especially in a capital case. My students in legal ethics generally split down the middle over whether they would violate the rules of the profession – engage in an act of civil disobedience against their own client – in order to save an innocent non-client.

In a typically lawyer-like way, the eminent lawyer in the real case apparently saw to it that the governor learned the information known to him, but without his own “fingerprints” being on the communication. This is how he put it: “Without ever having discussed with Governor Slaton the facts which were revealed to me, I have reason to believe, from a thing contained in the statement he made in connection with the grant of the commutation, that, in some way, these facts came to him and influenced his action.” But the eminent lawyer’s compromise did not work. Although the governor did commute Leo Frank’s sentence, he was not able to persuade a vengeful public of Frank’s innocence. I doubt that Frank would have been lynched had the eminent lawyer come forward and disclosed his information. Instead, his client would almost certainly have been lynched. The complexity of ethical and moral issues in the law can rarely be resolved by simple compromise solutions of the kind attempted by the lawyer in the Frank case. Indeed some such issues have no entirely satisfactory solutions.

Nearly seventy years after Leo Frank’s murder, new evidence of his innocence emerged. An eighty-two-year old man, who have been a youthful eyewitness to events surrounding the killing of Mary Phagan, finally came forward and told what he had seen back in 1913. His evidence contradicted the State’s star witness and strongly suggested that the murder was committed by that same witness, the black maintenance man. The murderer threatened the young witness with death if he ever mentioned what he had observed, and he did not come forward for all those years. Now, he has told his story and it seems to have persuaded most objective people that Leo Frank was lynched for a crime committed by someone else.

Finally, in 1986 Frank was posthumously pardoned with following official apology: “The lynching aborted the legal process, thus foreclosing further effort to prove Frank’s innocence. It resulted from the State of Georgia’s failure to protect Frank. Compounding the injustice, the State then failed to prosecute any of the lynchers.” Remarkably, some Georgians continued to resist the pardon.

Alan Dershowitz

Cambridge, Massachusetts
January 11, 1991

Source: Dinnerstein, Leonard. The Leo Frank Case. Notable Trials Library edition, 1991.

Now an Audio Book: The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, Part 01

Now an Audio Book: The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man, part 1 thumbnailby Philip St. Raymond
for The American Mercury

THE AMERICAN MERCURY is proud of its decades-long reputation for seeking the truth without fear or favor. As such, we do not flinch when a part of that truth can best be discovered in the words of those whom the Establishment has deemed “radical” or “controversial” or even “evil.” (When the current murderous regime in Washington, or its Hollywood/New York media machine, says someone is “evil,” we immediately start to suspect that there must be something good about that someone.)

Play Audio – Click Here ::

So even if the New York Times or the Anti-Defamation League excoriate us for saying so, it still remains true that the Nation of Islam (NOI) Historical Research Group — yes, that Nation of Islam, headed by Louis Farrakhan — has published the very best book we have seen so far on the Leo Frank case. It’s titled The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man. It’s a collaborative effort, written by the NOI Historical Research Group, and they have assembled a comprehensive digest of all the known facts surrounding the case, detailed excerpts from the press of the time, relevant (and extremely revealing) passages from books and statements by contemporaries and significant figures in the case, and original research and analysis that will leave you breathless with amazement at how the “mainstream” media have lied to you.

On this, the 105th anniversary of Mary Phagan’s death, we at The American Mercury are proud to present part 1 of our audio version of this very important book, read by Vanessa Neubauer.

To read all the chapters we’ve published so far, simply click on this link.

Simply press “play” on the player embedded above or at the end of this article to hear part 1 of the book.

* * *

Click here to obtain a print or e-book copy of this important work, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Vol. 3; The Leo Frank Case: The Lynching of a Guilty Man.

For further information on the Nation of Islam Historical Research Group, readers are encouraged to visit their Web site,

Play Audio – Click Here ::


After 84 years filled with love and laughter, Leonard Dinnerstein, distinguished historian, beloved husband, father, brother, father-in-law, zeyde, uncle, cousin and friend, died on Tuesday, January 22, 2019. Born on May 5, 1934 in the Bronx to an immigrant father from what is now Belarus and the daughter of immigrants from modern-day Romania, he grew up and lived the first half of his life in New York City. After receiving an undergraduate degree from City College of New York and a PhD from Columbia University, he spent the bulk of his career at the University of Arizona where he served as a Professor of History from 1970 through 2004, as well as the Director of Judaic Studies from 1993 through 2000. He wrote and co-authored numerous books, including the Leo Frank Case, Natives and Strangers: Ethnic Groups and the Building of Modern America, Ethnic Americans: A History of Immigration and Assimilation, America and the Survivors of the Holocaust, Anti-Semitism in America. Donations in his honor can be made to the Friends of the Pima County Public Library ( and the National Immigration Law Center ( A Funeral Service will be held at 11:00 a.m. on Sunday, January 27, 2019, at EVERGREEN MORTUARY AND CEMETERY, 3015 North Oracle Road, Tucson, AZ 85705.


Leonard Dinnerstein, 84, Dies; Scholar of Anti-Semitism in U.S.

Leonard Dinnerstein, a historian whose doctoral dissertation on the 1915 lynching of Leo Frank, a Jewish factory manager, in Atlanta heralded his career as one of the nation’s foremost scholars of anti-Semitism, died on Jan. 22 at his home in Tucson. He was 84.

The cause was complications of kidney failure, his daughter, Julie Dinnerstein, said. He had spent most of his academic career at the University of Arizona in Tucson.

Professor Dinnerstein was a young scholar who had completed postgraduate course work at Columbia University in 1963 and was gravitating toward a thesis topic on political history when his wife proposed a more contemporary subject, like civil rights.

His adviser approved, he recalled, and as he was leaving the building following their meeting an acquaintance reminded him that “the Jews were involved in civil rights before it became a Negro issue,” he would later write. Another friend suggested that the topic be narrowed further to Leo Frank.

“My response was, ‘Who’s Leo Frank?’ ” Professor Dinnerstein recounted.

He went on to research and write about Frank, who ran a pencil factory and was sentenced to death for the strangling in 1913 of Mary Phagan, a 13-year-old employee. After the governor commuted the sentence to life imprisonment, a mob kidnapped Frank and hanged him.

No one was prosecuted for the lynching. As a result, and because the state had failed to protect Frank so that he could pursue legal appeals, he was posthumously pardoned in 1986 by the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles, although not officially absolved of the crime itself.

Professor Dinnerstein’s thesis was published in 1968 by Columbia University Press, titled simply “The Leo Frank Case.” It has never been out of print.

“The book launched my professional academic career in 1968,” he wrote in the preface to a 2008 revised edition, which added an up-to-date perspective to the original exploration of what Professor Dinnerstein described as “the ambivalence that Southerners felt toward Jews” and “the poor judgments that some Jews made when trying to defend Frank.”

Leo Frank on trial in 1913 for the murder of Mary Phagan in Atlanta. Mr. Dinnerstein wrote a book about the case and Frank’s subsequent lynching.

Atlanta Journal Constitution/Associated Press”

The case divided people both by class as well as religion.

After the verdict, based on evidence that some viewed as questionable, prominent Jews across the country — including Louis Marshall of the American Jewish Committee; Albert Lasker, the advertising executive; and Adolph Ochs, the publisher of The New York Times — weighed in on Frank’s behalf.

Professor Dinnerstein’s 1994 book has been regarded as the definitive one on American anti-Semitism.

“There are still people who sincerely believe that Frank was guilty of the crime for which he was convicted,” Professor Dinnerstein wrote. “I have no doubts: Frank was innocent.”

In perhaps his most authoritative work, “Anti-Semitism in America” (1994), he argued that age-old European prejudice against Jews was instilled in the New World by the earliest settlers, reinforced by successive waves of Protestant and Roman Catholic immigrants and ingrained as “an irrevocable part of the American heritage.”

The book has been regarded as the definitive examination of American anti-Semitism and was cited in 2017 by the House Judiciary Committee in a hearing on anti-Semitism on college campuses.

Anti-Semitism peaked in the late 1930s and early ′40s, when, Professor Dinnerstein wrote, Americans were unnerved by the Depression and anxious about another war in Europe. Some, he said, felt trapped between what they imagined was a global cabal of Jewish bankers and an influx of subversive Jewish refugees.

In his book, Professor Dinnerstein quoted one demagogue warning of “200,000 Communist Jews at the Mexican border waiting to get into this country,” a horde that not only threatened democracy but, if admitted, would also “rape every woman and child that is left unprotected.”

But Professor Dinnerstein concluded that relations between Jews and gentiles had improved over time.

“Not only did Pope John XXIII inaugurate a new emphasis on interfaith dialogue, but the Second Vatican Council specifically ‘exonerated’ Jews for Christ’s death,” he wrote, referring to reforms by the Roman Catholic Church in the mid-1960s.

Audiobook and Article: 100 Reasons Leo Frank Is Guilty By Bradford L. Huie of the American Mercury, April 26, 2013, Read by Vanessa Neubauer

Please listen to the audio book of ‘100 Reasons Leo Frank is Guilty’ read by Vanessa Neubauer

Leo Frank smiles for the camera just one day after the body of Mary Phagan was discovered, Suspicion at that time was directed to his employee, the African-American night watchman Newt Lee.
Leo Frank smiles for the camera just one day after the body of Mary Phagan was discovered, Suspicion at that time was directed to his employee, the African-American night watchman Newt Lee.

Proving That Anti-Semitism Had Nothing to Do With His Conviction — and Proving That His Defenders Have Used Frauds and Hoaxes for 100 Years

by Bradford L. Huie
originally published at The American Mercury

MARY PHAGAN was just thirteen years old. She was a sweatshop laborer for Atlanta, Georgia’s National Pencil Company. A little over 100 years ago — Saturday, April 26, 1913 — little Mary was looking forward to the festivities of Confederate Memorial Day. She dressed gaily and planned to attend the parade. She had just come to collect her $1.20 pay from National Pencil Company superintendent Leo M. Frank at his office when she was attacked by an assailant who struck her down, ripped her undergarments, likely attempted to sexually abuse her, and then strangled her to death. Her body was dumped in the factory basement.

Leo Frank, who was the head of Atlanta’s B’nai B’rith, a Jewish fraternal order, was eventually convicted of the murder and sentenced to hang. After a concerted and lavishly financed campaign by the American Jewish community, Frank’s death sentence was commuted to life in prison by an outgoing governor. But he was snatched from his prison cell and hung by a lynching party consisting, in large part, of leading citizens outraged by the commutation order — and none of the lynchers were ever prosecuted or even indicted for their crime. One result of Frank’s trial and death was the founding of the still-powerful Anti-Defamation League.


Leo Frank Case Stirs Debate 100 Years After Jewish Lynch Victim’s Conviction

Notorious Case Raises Thorny Questions of Race and Hate By Paul Berger Published August 19, 2013, issue of August 23, 2013.

A century ago, Cobb County, Ga., was a sleepy farming community outside Atlanta, home to about 25,000 people. Now the county is an affluent suburb with a population of 700,000, including a booming Jewish community of about 8,000 families served by four synagogues, two restaurants doling out bagels and deli food, and a Kroger supermarket with a large kosher section.

Its changed so much by the influx of new people that its almost like a fairy tale that the lynching ever occurred, said Roy Barnes, former governor of Georgia, as he sat in his wood-paneled office just off the main square in Marietta, the countys largest city and its seat of government.

But the lynching did occur, just a couple of miles from Barness law office, when an angry mob led by Mariettas elite including Barness wifes grandfather stormed a remote prison, kidnapped Leo Max Frank, brought him back to Marietta and hung him from an oak tree in what is believed to be the only lynching of a Jew in America.

Franks lynching provided the denouement for one of the 20th centurys most contentious and consequential murder trials, galvanizing both the infancy of the Anti-Defamation League and the rebirth of the Ku Klux Klan. The gruesome image of Frank dressed in only a nightshirt, his neck broken by the noose, his lifeless body dangling from a tree as townspeople rejoiced has become an iconic illustration of Southern anti-Semitism and hatred, an ugly trope that today still echoes in dark corners of the Internet.

But the story began nearly two years earlier, on August 25, 1913, when Frank was convicted of murdering Mary Phagan, a 13-year-old white girl from Marietta who worked in the factory that Frank managed. Outside the courtroom, a crowd of 5,000 celebrated the verdict, while Northern Jews including Abraham Cahan, editor of the Forverts denounced the trial as a travesty of justice.

Today, the oak tree where Frank was hung is long gone. Strip malls, the I-75 overpass and a 56-foot-tall metal hen, an advertisement for a fast-food restaurant referred to locally as The Big Chicken, have replaced the surrounding woods.

The story of the Frank trial and lynching is buried deep beneath layers of trauma, embarrassment and shame. And 100 years after Franks conviction for the murder of Mary Phagan, the debate over his guilt or innocence continues.

The case [against Frank] is not as feeble as most people say it is, said Steve Oney, a former staff writer at the Atlanta Journal Constitution whose 2003 book, And The Dead Shall Rise, on Phagans murder and Franks lynching, took 17 years to research and write.

“It was a tremendous event,” Oney said. “It’s deeply complicated with all kinds of class and race and religious undercurrents, and then there’s just the overriding question of what happened. Who killed Mary Phgan, and who lynched Leo Frank?”

“It’s a double murder mystery and a social history,” Oney added. “For some reason, these two cases were so charged with deeper implications that the entire country ultimately got caught up in it.”

Phagan took the trolley from her home near Marietta for the 20-mile ride to Atlanta on April 26, 1913, bound for the Confederate Memorial Day parade. On her way into town, she stopped by the National Pencil Factory, in Atlanta, to pick up her pay.

It was a Saturday, and Frank, the factory’s superintendent, was at work as usual. He paid Phagan the $1.20 she was owed and, according to his later testimony, she went on her way. No one recalled seeing her again that day. During the early hours of the following morning, the night watchman found her body in the factory basement.

The girl’s hair and face were covered in soot and cinders; her dress had been pulled up above her knees, and her $1.20 was missing. There was a large gash on the side of her head, and she had been strangled with a piece of cord. Two garbled notes found next to the body implicated a “long, tall, black Negro” in the murder.

Over the following weeks, the Atlanta police botched the collection of evidence and arrested several suspects, including the black night watchman and a black factory sweeper. Eventually they turned their attention to Frank, who was arrested April 29. As the drama unfolded, the city’s newspapers competed for scoop after scoop to bring the Atlanta public and, soon the rest of America, a string of often embellished and sensational stories.

There was plenty of copy to go around. The murder of Mary Phagan and the trial of Leo Frank contained all the ingredients of a blockbuster story.

Phagan, the young, pretty child of a typical lower-class Georgia family, represented all that was innocent and pure among the exploited and downtrodden families of the South. Fifty years after the Civil War —known to Georgians as the War of Northern Aggression — many families were still scrambling to get by. The pencil factory, like many Atlanta mills and factories of the day, profited off child labor.

Frank, 29, represented much of what locals despised about the North. Awkward and effete, he was born in Texas and raised in New York. Frank had a degree from Cornell University. He moved to Atlanta in 1908 to work at the pencil factory, which was part owned by his uncle, Moses Frank. In 1910 he married Lucille Selig, daughter of a prominent German-Jewish family, and together they enjoyed the fruits of Atlanta’s privileged world.

During the trial of August 1913, the star witness against Frank was the black factory sweeper, James Conley, who had initially denied to police that he knew anything about the murder. Following weeks of imprisonment and interrogation, and after changing his affidavit four times, Conley told police that Frank had murdered the girl after she resisted his advances and that Frank had asked Conley to help him move her body. Conley testified that Frank dictated the murder notes to him to throw police off Frank’s trail.

Conley gave convincing testimony and withstood three days of cross-examination. A reader of the Forverts, on August 26, could have been forgiven for suspecting that Frank was guilty. “Several witnesses testified that Frank had a corrupt and immoral character and that he consistently harassed the women and girls who worked in the factory, and these stories very much stirred public opinion against him,” the Forverts reported.

But the Forverts added that there was also a suspicion of anti-Semitism. “Many, however, say that such hatred is prevalent towards Frank because he is a Jew and he is successful,” the paper reported. “His lawyers discussed this openly in court in their defense of Frank.”

The judge was so nervous for the defendant’s safety that he asked for Frank to be kept away from the courtroom for the verdict that day. When the guilty verdict was announced, thousands who had gathered in the streets outside the courthouse cheered.

Fresh flowers, small toys and tchotchkes still adorn the grave of “Little Mary Phagan” in Marietta City Cemetery. Such is the evidence that people still make a pilgrimage up the hillside to where she is buried, surrounded by the tombstones of relatives and some of the old Marietta families that formed Frank’s lynch party.

Even today, new memorials are still being planned. On June 1, The Marietta Daily Journal ran a small news item reporting that Commander Jack Bridwell, of the Georgia Division of the Sons of Confederate Soldiers, announced that that day and every subsequent June 1 would be marked as “Little Mary Phagan Day.”

“They asked for my approval on that,” Mary Phagan-Kean, the victim’s 59-year-old great-niece told the Forward. Kean, who moved to Ellijay, 80 miles north of Marietta, last year, assented to Bridwell’s request with the caveat that Mary Phagan’s name could never be used for “prejudicial purposes.”

“You wouldn’t believe the calls I get from crazy people,” Kean said.

The Frank case has long been a magnet for anti-Semitic groups. A few decades ago, the Ku Klux Klan marched through Marietta to Phagan’s grave to protest a movement to secure a posthumous pardon for Frank.

Anti-Semitic attitudes certainly played a role in Frank’s lynching. But Kean’s family, which is firmly convinced of Frank’s guilt, denies that anti-Semitism explains his conviction.

In this respect, Kean has some support from Frank himself. Cahan traveled to Atlanta in March 1914 to visit Frank in his cell. In the fifth volume of Cahan’s memoirs, published in Yiddish in 1931, Cahan relates that Frank told him the Atlanta police were desperate for a conviction. Mary Phagan’s murder presented a huge challenge for prosecutor Hugh Dorsey, who had just come off the back of two embarrassing courtroom defeats.

“Anti-Semitism is absolutely not the reason for this libel that has been framed against me,” Frank told Cahan. “It isn’t the source nor the result of this sad story.”

Instead, Frank said, police had “taken advantage” of Frank’s Jewishness to undermine his case. They had disparaged Jews in general so “that a Negro against a Jew is believable.“

Indeed, Frank’s lynching stands out — as a white man, his lynching was the exception rather than the norm. Almost a decade earlier, 25 black people were killed and 150 injured during a 1906 race riot in Atlanta that was sparked by reports of a white woman being raped by a black man. In 1915, the year of Frank’s lynching, 21 black people were lynched, including one, John Riggins, who was hanged in South Georgia the same day as Frank.

By contrast, Jews were well integrated into Southern society. Many prominent Atlanta businessmen — the Riches, the Elsases, the Hirsches and the Seligs — were Jewish. Even in Marietta, the small Jewish community owned businesses and prospered. But Frank’s trial, conviction and appeal brought out an ugly side in the community, a side that was inflamed by the press.

Adolph Ochs, publisher of The New York Times, was the most prominent of a number of Northern newspaper owners to wage a campaign casting aspersions on the trial. The perception of Northerners interfering in Southern justice was grist for anti-Semites such as Thomas Watson, a former congressman and vice presidential candidate whose newspaper, the Jeffersonian, railed against “the Northern papers, which are owned by rich Jews.”

“This campaign of lies, abuse, defamation and race hatred gets worse and worse,” Watson wrote in a typical editorial in early 1915. “It must be costing the Chosen People a lot of money.”

While Frank was being retried in the court of public opinion, his lawyers fought to win an appeal. They argued that the hostile public sentiment that had precluded Frank from the courtroom proved he hadnot received a fair trial.

Even Conley’s lawyer, William Smith, joined Frank’s defense. When an analysis of the two notes found at the murder scene appeared to show that Frank could not have dictated them, Smith became convinced the murder could only have been the work of Conley.

Frank’s lawyers appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the justices found 7­–2 against Frank. His lawyers pressed on. In June 1915, they persuaded Georgia Governor John Slaton, then in his last days in office, to commute Frank’s sentence to life in prison.

Overnight, Frank was moved about 100 miles southeast to a prison at Milledgeville. The reaction was swift. A mob of thousands marched on the governor’s mansion. In Marietta, Slaton was hanged in effigy. An inmate at Milledgeville took matters into his own hands and slit Frank’s throat. But he survived.

Most Jews who know about Leo Frank believe that he was innocent. “He was wrongly accused, unjustly tried and wantonly murdered,” said Rabbi Steve Lebow of Temple Kol Emeth, in Marietta.

Lebow has waged a decades-long campaign to raise Frank’s profile and to secure a pardon. He was instrumental in erecting two plaques on the side of an office building closest to the believed site of Frank’s lynching within sight of The Big Chicken. The majority of Atlanta’s Jews have, at best, a vague knowledge of Frank’s case, if they have heard of it at all.

The last major attempt to pardon Frank, during the 1980s, was bolstered by the testimony of Alonzo Mann, a former pencil factory worker who said he had seen Conley struggling to carry Phagan’s body, alone. Mann, who was a teenager at the time of the murder, said his mother had told him to keep quiet.

The appeal was only a partial success. In 1986, the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles found that there was insufficient evidence to clear Frank of Phagan’s murder. Instead, the parole board pardoned Frank on the grounds that the state failed to protect him and to provide an “opportunity for continued legal appeal of his conviction.”

Frank was abducted from the Milledgeville prison the night of August 16, 1915. The scar on his neck, from the attempt on his life less than a month earlier, had barely healed. A group of armed men, thought to number about 25, had driven south from Marietta through back roads earlier that evening, in seven cars. They cut the phone lines to the prison, overpowered prison staff and whisked away Frank, still dressed in his nightshirt.

“It was a feat of some daring,” said Oney, who linked some of Marietta’s elite to the crime by researching the area’s car owners in 1915. “All told, it was a 300 miles round trip, in the dead of night, on largely unpaved roads, in Model Ts and other cars of that vintage, with flat tires and magnesium headlights you had to light with a spark device.”

The convoy arrived at a wooded grove known as Freys Gin, a couple of miles outside Marietta, in the early morning of August 17. Frank was blindfolded, his arms handcuffed and legs bound. He was hoisted onto a table, where a noose was placed around his neck. Then the table was kicked away.

Over the course of the morning, a crowd of gawkers grew around the lynch site. “The crowd was an unruly, fanatically wild mass,” the Forverts reported. “With each passing moment it became even more infused with race hatred, with a lust to kill.” When the body was cut down, a member of the crowd stomped on Frank’s face.

The doctor who examined Frank’s body later told the Forverts: “There were well-defined markings of a sole of a shoe on his nose and near his left eye. His left ear was practically torn off. Many wounds to the skull. His facial expression was one of terror through having been brutalized.”

Marilyn Hurwitz, whose grandparents owned a store in Marietta at the time, said the mood in the town was grim. Her mother recalled how a mob gathered outside the family store the night after the lynching. Hurwitz, now 82, said the family had to rush through the crowd to make it to a streetcar bound for Atlanta. Her grandfather opened his store the following day, but he did not sleep in Marietta for some time afterward, Hurwitz said.

The lynching affected the Jews of Atlanta, too. Tony Montag, whose family owned a controlling stake in the National Pencil Company, said. “My father told me it was the first time he’d ever seen his father with a gun.”

Atlanta’s German-Jewish elite now had to live in a community that included people who supported Frank’s conviction and the lynching. They coped by not talking about Frank. Montag said of his father: “If people did start talking about it in a social context, he would get up and leave the room. It was just a painful memory to him.”

The events of 1913 to 1915 threw two contradictory forces into motion in Atlanta. Frank was president of a local lodge of B’nai B’rith, the Jewish fraternal organization. His lynching galvanized the newly formed Anti-Defamation League, which went on to become the pre-eminent American Jewish organization to fight bigotry and intolerance.

A few months after Frank’s lynching, atop Stone Mountain, about 35 miles from Marietta, the reconstituted Ku Klux Klan held its first cross burning. The Klan was spurred partly by the release in 1915 of the movie “The Birth of a Nation.” But it was also bolstered by the nativist writings in Watson’s Jeffersonian and by the rising xenophobia in Atlanta over the previous two years.

Though the lynching frightened Atlanta’s Jewish community, most Jews remained in and around the city. As Atlanta’s population has grown rapidly in recent decades, the Jewish community has grown even faster.

Until recently, Cobb County had one of the fastest-growing Jewish communities in metropolitan Atlanta, which itself was among the fastest-growing communities in America. During the last population survey, in 2006, conducted by the Jewish Federation of Greater Atlanta, the community had grown 56% in the previous decade, to 120,000 Jews.

A century after Frank’s conviction, there appears to be little appetite in the community — apart from Lebow — to push for exoneration. Oney said that his 17 years of research led him to believe that Conley probably murdered Phagan, but there is enough doubt to “leave the door ajar.” So much evidence has been bungled, destroyed or lost since the murder that to be able to say with 100% certainty that Frank is innocent “would give me a power of clairvoyance that I don’t have,” Oney added.

Today, the trial and the lynching seem unimaginable in Atlanta. But they were unimaginable a century ago, too.

When Cahan visited Frank in 1914, he told Frank that he wanted to send a telegram to New York explaining to readers what it is like to be an innocent man sentenced to death. Cahan said that Frank smiled and took from his pocket a pencil and a piece of card.

“The whole story seems like a dream to me,” Frank wrote. “It seems to me that I’m observing it from the side; it belongs to somebody else, not me. For the moment, I feel no fear at all.”

Contact Paul Berger at or on Twitter, @pdberger

This story “Leo Frank Case Stirs Debate 100 Years After Jewish Lynch Victim’s Conviction” was written by Paul Berger.

Paul Berger

Paul Berger was a staff writer at the Forward from 2011-2016, covering crime and healthcare issues, such as sex abuse, circumcision, and fraud. He is a fluent Russian speaker and has reported from Russia and Ukraine. He also likes digging into historical mysteries.

Forward Tagged as: Jewish, Leo Frank, lynching

Read more here:
Leo Frank Case Stirs Debate 100 Years After Jewish Lynch Victim’s Conviction

Telling Story of Leo Frank From His Jail Cell By Ab Cahan Journalist of

Telling Story of Leo Frank From His Jail Cell
Forward Editor Journeyed South To Interview Convicted Jew

By Ab Cahan

Published August 20, 2013, issue of August 23, 2013.

The 1913 trial and conviction of Leo Frank stoked a fiery public debate across America about race, religion, class and anti-Semitism. Frank’s case was so important to the Jewish community that the Forward’s editor, Abraham Cahan, traveled to Atlanta in 1914 to visit Frank in his jail cell. Cahan devoted 250 pages to Frank in the fifth volume of his memoirs, published in Yiddish in 1931. The following is an excerpt, translated by Chana Pollack, the Forward’s archivist, and edited for length and style.

Read more:

Chapter 29 — I Travel To Atlanta

His cell was on an upper level. Behind iron bars stood a thin, brown haired young man with impressionable, intelligent eyes and next to him, inside his cell, a tall pretty young woman. They were Frank and his wife.

The portraits of him that I’d seen in the newspapers were similar to the original item. I recognized him immediately.

We greeted each other through the bars, and he introduced me to Mrs. Frank.

The neighboring cells — six — were empty. As I immediately realized, the Sheriff had intentionally not placed other prisoners there, in order for Frank to feel more comfortable, and to be able to have friends visit because the Sheriff, a man named Wheeler Mangum, was convinced that Frank was innocent and he did everything so that Frank’s life in captivity would be easier.

He had also permitted him to bring his own bed and bedding from home.

One of the cells was larger than the others, and the Franks and their guests used it as a parlor, sitting or standing and speaking through the bars.

Only Mrs. Frank was permitted by the Sheriff to go inside his cell. The rest of the visitors used to stand outside in the open ‘parlor.’ Mrs. Frank used to spend entire days there in his cell.

I jokingly remarked about the ‘seven room apartment’ that Frank rented here and he laughed heartily.

He told of how loyal the Sheriff was to him. At the time of the trial he was the one who, for the most part, drove Frank back and forth from the prison to court and back.

Once, when the trial neared its end, an angry crowd began pushing over to their car. Sheriff Mangum became upset.

Frank was seated next to him and in order to better protect his prisoner, Mangum told him to go sit behind him. Then, he drew his pistol out saying, “if they want to get you, they’ll have to get to you through my dead body. At any rate I’m an old man. You’re still young.”

Chapter 31 — What Frank Told Me About The Issue Of Anti-Semitism

I spoke with Frank at length in the beginning regarding the connection of anti-Semitism to his case. His answer to my question was as follows: “Anti-Semitism is absolutely not the reason for this libel that has been framed against me. The police harassed me because they have no one else to accuse. Because I’m a Jew, in their incitement they knew they could take advantage of my background too. And it was important to attack Jews overall. Don’t forget that this is the South where a Negro has no value. A Negro isn’t to be believed and one is always ready to blame them for the most serious crimes. And now, how is Conley [the prosecution’s star witness, a black factory sweeper] to be believed against a White? Though a Jew is actually not a Southern Christian, he is still a White. So they found it necessary to belittle the Jews so that a Negro against a Jew is believable.”

“If I were an Italian, they would be inciteful against me as an

Italian,” he proposed in a tone of someone deeply convinced.

Mrs. Frank who was born and raised in Atlanta, supported her husband’s claim. She gave me some examples of Jews in Atlanta who have always felt at home among the Christians.

“We became close, intimate friends, Jewish and Christian girls,” she said. “We frequently visited each other and our families were also close friends. We went to each other’s homes as guests, to each other’s weddings and parties. We knew nothing else. In the North it’s not like that. But here, in the South, it’s always been different.”

I heard similarly from other Jews in town. But the Frank case, with the incitements the police had circulated against the Jewish superintendent of the pencil factory, fired up angry feelings against all Jews — at the very least among the rabble.

“Once the masses were incited, simply insane with xenophobia,” Frank said, “they would just as soon believe even a Negro against a Jew.”

Many Christians, especially the intelligentsia, treated the Jews generally with their usual friendliness, whether they were swept up in the anti-Frank stream or not.

In one of my further discussions with Frank I asked if he had heard of the Beilis Trial. [Mendel Beilis was tried in Kiev, Ukraine, in 1913 for allegedly murdering a Christian boy to use his blood to make matzo. Beilis was acquitted.]

“Yes, I read about it,” Frank answered, “in one of the Jewish weeklies that are published in English. I assure you however, that my case has nothing in common with it.”

“But once the anti-Semitic poison has been poured in, there are certain similarities between your tragedy and Beilis’s. There a libel and here a libel.”

“Yes, a libel!,” Frank responded. “But with Beilis they made a true anti-Semitic libel, the ridiculous accusation that Jews desire Christian blood in their matzo. My case is simply a misfortune. There’s no telling how much trouble it’s created! Further on, this trouble grew into a bitterness against me as a Jew and as a Brooklyner, as superintendent of a factory, and as anything else you can want.”

My impression was that Frank didn’t want to make too much out of the anti-Semitism question in his case. He didn’t tell me that in those words precisely; I however, felt his wish and in several notes I made and in longer sections of a few articles I prepared, I didn’t use it. Now, however, when I write these pages [of my memoir] they are part of my material.

Read more:
Telling Story of Leo Frank From His Jail Cell

Sign up for the newsletter.

Anti-Semitism Taints Leo Frank Murder Case

Aftermath of Jaffa Bombing, Civil Rights March on Washington

Forward Association

Poser: Russian choreographer Michel Fokine was a major innovator in the field of classical ballet. His Ballets Russes, performed for western audiences, were likely a hit with Forverts readers.

1913 100 years ago

Anti-Semitism Affects Frank Case

A committee has been organized to help the cause of Leo Frank, a 24-year-old Jewish factory manager who has been sentenced to death for murdering a 13-year-old girl by the name of Mary Phagan. Franks supporters claim that he is innocent and that the anti-Semitic air of the trial unduly influenced the jury. In fact, Franks supporters argue that the anti-Semitic atmosphere of the entire city of Atlanta poisoned the case. The supporters point to the celebrations that took place all over the city after Frank was declared guilty. The Jewish community, and those who actually know Frank, continues to be shocked at the charges and the sentence and continues to proclaim his innocence. More and more groups, among them a growing number of Christians, are also protesting Franks innocence. It has become evident that the anti-Semitism of a large number of Southerners has infected the outcome of Franks case.

1938 75 years ago

Aftermath of Jaffa Bomb

The tense atmosphere in Jaffa has calmed down a bit only days after a huge bomb in the citys marketplace killed two children. It is evident even the Arabs are saying so that the bomb was not planted by Jews. In fact, many Arabs are claiming that the British planted the bomb as revenge for the recent assassination of Commissioner Walter Moffat. Others say that the bomb was planted by an Arab provocateur intent on inciting the Arabs against the Jews. As far as local Jews are concerned, they arent sure who planted the bomb, and they dont rule out that it could have been a foreign provocateur, or even the Nazis.

1963 50 years ago

See the original post here:
Anti-Semitism Taints Leo Frank Murder Case

The Murder of Little Mary Phagan: Mary Phagan: Books

The Murder of Little Mary Phagan, by Mary Phagan Kean is, in my opinion, insulting not just to Leo Frank who was unjustly convicted of her murder and dispicably lynched by a sick mob, but also insulting to a little girl tragically murdered. This book is a typical example of what a person can make of historical fact and turn it into historical fiction.

There is no denying that all of the subsequent events to Mary Phagan’s death, somewhat obscures the loss of life to this little girl but the narcissitic way, in my opinion, that Mary Phagan Kean portrays her anscestor and herself, is in some way, creepy and sensational. Nobody buys this book because they want to know about Mary Phagan Kean. They buy it because they think Mary Phagan Kean has some greater insight into the events of Mary Phagan’s death and it’s aftermath. However, clearly she does not and instead tries to sew a tale not really including all of the historical facts.

Several poor examples among others are saying that just because her grandfather got hoodwinked by Conley, similar to the jury, (was it hoodwinked or Anti Semitism?) and believes in Conley’s innocence says nothing about the facts of this case. Only that her grandfather is gullible and Conley a good talker. Her father’s lack of opposition to Frank’s subsequent lynching is much much more chilling and revealing about the aleged underlying nature of Kean’s book.

As an attorney and as a former assitant district attorney, I can tell you that just because all of the appeals through the State and Federal court system led to denials of a new trial, one after another, does not speak to Franks guilt, at all really, but rather to the procedural manner in which Judge Roan handled the trial.

The Murder of Little Mary Phagan: Mary Phagan: Books

Neo-Nazis Behind Leo Frank Propaganda Sites

Intelligence Report, Winter 2013, Issue Number: 152, Neo-Nazis Behind Leo Frank Propaganda Sites

Just over a century ago, on Aug. 25, 1913, a Georgia jury found factory superintendent Leo Frank guilty of the horrific murder of 13-year-old Mary Phagan, whose strangled corpse was found in the basement of Atlanta’s National Pencil Company, which Frank ran. Frank, who was 29 at the time, was said to have flirted with the young girl and was supposedly the last person to see her alive. A jury sentenced him to death for the crime.

In 1915, Georgia’s governor, citing concerns about a miscarriage of justice, commuted Frank’s sentence. Soon after that, a mob calling itself the “Knights of Mary Phagan” kidnapped Frank from prison and lynched him.

The Frank case reawakened the Ku Klux Klan, sparking its so-called “second era,” and inspired a wave anti-Semitic sentiment. And though Frank was posthumously pardoned in 1986, 100 years after the fact, his case remains a cause célèbre among American anti-Semites. In August, The Jewish Daily Forward published a groundbreaking article exploring the modern Leo Frank propaganda industry and the websites it has produced.

Most serious historians of the period have concluded that Leo Frank, a Jewish man who ran an Atlanta pencil factory, was innocent of the 1913 murder of a 13-year-old girl for which he was lynched. But that hasn’t stopped websites run by neo-Nazis from pronouncing him guilty — and typical of the Jewish “race.” BETTMANN/CORBIS IMAGES

As the Forward noted, most anti-Semitic sites dedicated to Frank are registered anonymously. On the 100th anniversary of Phagan’s death, The American Mercury, a resurrected and deeply anti-Semitic online version of H. L. Mencken’s defunct magazine of the same name, published an article by the apparently pseudonymous Bradford L. Huie titled, “100 Reasons Leo Frank is Guilty,” which has been widely reposted on white nationalist Internet forums.

Other anti-Frank propagandists are all too happy to take credit for their efforts. The Forward identified Kevin Strom, a bookish neo-Nazi with a fondness for child pornography, as the brains behind, one of the more polished anti-Frank sites. A former deputy to the late William Pierce, leader of the neo-Nazi National Alliance, Strom broke away to form his own radical group, National Vanguard. Later, in 2007, he was indicted for possession of child pornography and eventually convicted. His group dissolved as a result, but Strom since his release has continued to work behind the scenes.

Two of the sites noted by the Forward are run by John de Nugent, a self-styled ombudsman for the “responsible white separatist community” who claims, among other things, that “Whites descend from Nordic Aliens, and this is why we are NOT from this planet and are VERY different from other races.”

De Nugent’s is more obviously anti-Semitic than Strom’s site, but still polished enough to fool a naïve young student.

Recent Posts