Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith (known as ADL for short), founded October 20, 1913, Galvanized in Response to the August 25, Conviction of Leo Frank. ADL was the lead in getting Leo Frank posthumously pardoned in 1986, but they FAILED to get him exonerated of the crime.

The Anti-Defamation League Myth of Jewish Lobby Verses Reality

An impressive collection of articles about the ADL

Dr. William Pierce on the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith

William Cooper – The Ugly Truth About the Anti-Defamation League #1 (Full Length)

William Cooper – The Ugly Truth About the Anti-Defamation League #2 (Full Length)

William Cooper – The Ugly Truth About the Anti-Defamation League #3 (Full Length)

William Cooper – The Ugly Truth About the Anti-Defamation League #4 (Full Length)


William Cooper – The Ugly Truth About the Anti-Defamation League #5 (Full Length)

Defamation the Movie About the Anti-Defamation League

Another video censored by Jewish Controlled Youtube (below, but re-uploaded elsewhere)

Louis Farrakhan Challenge to ADL Anti-Defamation League:

ADL Calls For Major Law Enforcement Operation To Deal With Obamacare Critics

Exposing the ADL Lies (censored by Jewish Controlled Youtube, but not at

One of Many examples where the ADL Corrupting the Police:

Videos About the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith Founded in 1913, watch them with an open mind.


Video dealing with the ADL

Antigentilism: ADL’s MONUMENTAL FRAUD; October 20, 2003, Anti-Defamation League celebrates its 90th anniversary of its un-American subversion and commemorates Leo Frank with a tribute to this serial Pedophile, sex killer, convicted of strangling a Christian teenage girl, Mary Phagan. The ADL uses this ugly monument of hate to perpetuate the viciously Anti-Gentile blood-libel of “Anti-Semitism”. We the demand this ugly racist and anti-Gentile monument of Hate be repudiated and removed, or we will start funding our own monuments to educate people about Leo Frank the toilet strangler.




Abraham Foxman of the ADL of B’nai B’rith

The ADL is Born in October 1913, the same year the Federal Reserve and income tax was created in the United States of America, is there a connection?

The documentary “Defamation” (below) about the Anti-Defamation League is censored by (ADL literally works for in their politically incorrect speech censorship division), look for the documentary on sale at

Video Deleted on Youtube.

The Christian Right Wing View of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith (Censored by Youtube, but re-instated)


The African American Perspective on the ADL, Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith


The Anti-Black Roots Of The ADL

The Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith has an international reputation as a respected Jewish “civil rights” organization. Among other things, it keeps track of “hate groups”, a monitoring which, in the cyber-age, has extended to the Internet. In his 1997 book Conspiracy, Middle East watcher Daniel Pipes speaks favorably of the ADL claiming that “For relief from these many hate-mongers, the Anti-Defamation League provides original research and documentation, primarily but not exclusively about antisemitic groups…” (1) Pipes is either a dupe, a mischief-maker or a fellow traveller, for any objective investigation of the activities of the ADL reveals it to be anything but a panacea for intolerance, none more so than an investigation into its origins.

The inspiration for the Anti-Defamation League was the Leo Frank case. The story as it is usually related is that the ADL was founded in response to the anti-Jewish bigotry engendered by the trial and subsequent lynching of the totally innocent Frank who had been scapegoated by the wicked anti-Semitic bigots of the Deep South for a senseless murder which no Jew could possibly have committed. (2) As with many Jewish tragedies though, particularly those which emerged out of World War Two, there is a canyon wide gap between the legend as it is portrayed by a fawningly philo-Semitic media (and its academic lackeys) and a cold appraisal of the salient facts.

Leo Frank was a Jew who was convicted of the murder of a young factory worker at the Atlanta, Georgia pencil plant which he managed known as the National Pencil Company. He was sentenced to death, reprieved, then lynched by a gang which broke into the gaol where he was being held, and kidnapped him for that purpose. Jewish author Leonard Dinnerstein refers to this case as “ONE OF the most infamous outbursts of anti-Semitic feeling in the United States…”, (3) and comparisons have often been made with the Dreyfus case in France. In fact, the conviction of Leo Frank for murder – if not his subsequent lynching – was more indicative of a lack of racial bigotry on the part of White Southerners, and bigotry on the part of Frank’s supporters, many of them Jewish.

After Mary Phagan, a young white girl not quite fourteen (5 weeks shy of 14, born on June 1, 1899), was found battered to death in the early hours of April 27, 1913 by the plant’s Negro watchman, it quickly became clear that there were only two serious suspects: the respectable, upper middle class and Northerner Frank; and Jim Conley, a low class Negro of poor character and with a liking for drink.

Frank was the last person to admit seeing the victim alive, and Conley was the principal witness against him. Conley claimed to have helped Frank cover up the murder, and in spite of his antecedents he made a good impression on the jury. It is doubtful though if Frank’s expensive lawyer made such a good impression because, with his client on trial for his life, he disparaged Conley in the most vile terms asking the jury how could they, decent white people, could convict a respectable white businessman like Frank on the word of a black man. It was absurd, Luther Rosser suggested, that “the word of a ‘filthy, criminal, lying Negro’ should be taken in an effort to hang a man”. (4)

“Who is Conley? Who was Conley as he used to be and as you have seen him? He was a dirty, filthy, black drunken, lying nigger…Who was it that made this dirty nigger come up here looking so slick? Why didn’t they let you see him as he was?” (5) What could be better calculated to alienate a jury of twelve ordinary decent people?

Author Dinnerstein doesn’t seem to realise the lawyer’s folly any more than Frank’s legal team and supporters did themselves, but another Jewish author, and an uncharacteristically impartial one, saw things very differently. The distinguished American scholar Nathaniel Weyl wrote in his book The Jew In American Politics that “Five members of prominent Jewish families were on the grand jury which indicted Frank and most Atlanta Jews seem to have at first believed him guilty.” (6) This is something which tends to be forgotten nowadays in the incessant wailing and whining which always accompanies any allegation of Jewish wrongdoing.

Another Jewish academic whose commitment to historical truth outweighs his commitment to fighting “anti-Semitism” is Professor Lindemann, who in his excellent book Esau’s Tears candidly admits that “Frank’s innocence was less clear at the time of the trial than many accounts have suggested. Similarly, anti-Semitism seems to have been of marginal importance in both his arrest and conviction.” (7) He adds too that Frank had a stiff and distant personality and an odd appearance, (8) which, rightly or wrongly, clearly leant credence to some of the scurrilous gossip which was circulated about him at the time.

Whether or not Frank should have been convicted is a different matter. Most people, including the current writer, would consider it dangerous to convict a man – any man – of so grave a crime as murder solely on the word of a man of the character of Jim Conley, who had not only admitted to helping cover up the crime but had lied repeatedly to the police, but the suggestion that a white man should not have been convicted simply because his accuser was black would have alienated most jurors, even White Southerners in those days, especially when couched in such terms.

There were more than two hundred defense witnesses, most of them white and of good character, and many of them swore that Conley was a damned liar, yet the jury preferred the testimony of a low class Negro to that of a white man of good character. Not even Doreen Lawrence could find racism in that.

Just as his lawyer undoubtedly alienated the jury, so too did Frank’s many wealthy Jewish supporters alienate large tranches of the public by persistently playing “the race card”, and drew comments like: “Are we to understand that anybody except a Jew can be punished for crime?” (9) and “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.” (10)

Jim Conley was sentenced to a year on a chain gang for his part in the crime and lived to a ripe old age, apparently unmolested by the supposedly so bigoted Southerners whom we are frequently led to believe would lynch a Negro simply for looking at a white girl, much less for murdering one. (11)

In those days lynchings were not uncommon, including of whites (mostly for rape); to this day Leo Frank remains the only Jew ever to have been lynched in America, and indeed he was the first white man to be brought to trial in the Deep South on a capital charge solely on the word of a Negro. (12)

The police appeared sincerely to have believed Frank guilty, and uncharacteristically they didn’t manufacture evidence of his guilt as their contemporaries often do today. (13) With regard to the testimony of Jim Conley, one newspaper questioned whether “[could] this illiterate Negro have conceived and fitted together such a set of detailed circumstances without some foundation in fact?” (14)

Commenting fifty years after the case, McLellan Smith, who covered the story as a cub reporter, wrote that a man of Conley’s mental capacity could have been broken if he was lying; he certainly impressed on the witness stand. (15) As Conley spent a total of sixteen hours undergoing an intense cross-examination, this was no mean feat, (16) either he was an accomplished liar par excellence or he was indeed telling the gospel truth. Dinnerstein himself cites a letter held by the University of Chicago in the Julius Rosenwald Papers in which an unnamed author gives cogent reasons for his belief in Frank’s guilt. (17)

Another newspaperman pointed out paradoxically that “There was a considerable body of evidence for and against Frank.” (18) The campaign to clear Frank’s name – and by implication to clear the name of the Jew – was eventually successful, although one can’t help but think it was accomplished by sleight-of-hand.

In 1982, sixty-seven years after Frank was lynched, a supposed eyewitness came forward. At the time of the murder, Alonzo Mann was 14 years old. Mann, who was white, claimed to have seen Conley disposing of Mary Phagan’s body but kept quiet at the time – and for more than half a century afterwards – out of fear. “If you ever mention this, I’ll kill you”, Conley is supposed to have said, according to Mann when recounting his story to a Nashville newspaper. (19) There is no doubt that Mann was there, he attended the trial, but just how much credibility can be placed on his belated Nashville confession?

One might also ask the rather obvious question “Cui bono?” The ADL and other Jews continued their agitation, and in March 1986 Frank was pardoned. (20) Whatever, the claims – echoed by the ADL and its fellow travellers to this very day – that the trial of Leo Frank was a calculated exercise in racial bigotry, contains not a grain of truth, but this is hardly surprising, because the ADL’s prestigious reputation has been manufactured largely by the ADL itself.

For many years the ADL’s remit has stretched way beyond combating “anti-Semitism”, which in any meaningful sense has long since ceased to exist in contemporary America, and has ended up poking its unwanted proboscis into the activities of bona fide political and campaigning organizations for the overt purpose of political and racial gerrymandering.

One method of perpetuating the phoney struggle against anti-Semitism is to smear all and sundry as “anti-Semitic”. A 1964 ADL hatchet job, Danger on the right, written by two of its staffers, attempted to smear “Extreme Conservatives” as anti-Semites. One fifth of the American population! A 1992 ADL survey echoed these sentiments; 1 in 5 Americans were said to “hold strong prejudicial attitudes against Jews”. (21) Of the earlier comment Weyl writes “The Anti-Defamation League supposedly exists to refute slanders against the Jewish people and promote tolerance amongst the non-Jewish majority. It is difficult to believe that the best way of bringing this about is for the national chairman of the ADL to slander some twenty per cent of the American people as associates of ‘kooks,’ ‘bigots’ and ‘yahoos.'” (22)

This sentiment is echoed by Rabbi Alan Miller who in an essay on black anti-Semitism wrote: “Jews, who resent generalized collective slander, should be hypercautious about making generalized collective slander where other ethnic groups are concerned.” (23)

In May 1993 the ADL was caught with its hand in the till when a former San Francisco police officer named Tom Gerard was arrested in that city and charged with eight counts of theft of government documents, burglary, conspiracy and computer theft. Gerard was an ADL spy, which was reported to have spied on no less that 950 political organizations and to hold files on 12,000 individuals!

Many organizations, political and non-political, hold files both on numerous individuals and other organizations for all manner of reasons, so the mere fact that the ADL does too is not necessarily sinister. But the ADL’s files included reports on organisations such as Action for Animals, Peace Now and Greenpeace! (24) The anti-Zionist Jew Dr Alfred Lilienthal refers to the ADL as a Jewish Gestapo, (25) an appellation which could be equally well appended to many other Jewish political organisations.

Today, eighty-five and more years after its inception, the ADL’s anti-black roots have grown branches. While still posing as a “civil rights” organisation and the friend of the “oppressed”, including blacks, it continues its spy and smear operations against all and sundry. In October 1996 the ADL’s National Director published a polemic against the charismatic – if at times misguided – Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan in which he referred to Farrakhan as “a master of manipulation” who preaches a “message of hate”. (26) Farrakhan is accused of racism, “anti-Semitism” and all manner of other bigotry. Such allegations are routinely thrown at white nationalists. Farrakhan has it is true said some unfortunate things about both Jews and whites in general, but the odd “anti-Semitic” or anti-white remark does not make any man a bigot.

In recent years Farrakhan’s organisation has been highly critical of other blacks, and his famous Million Man March on Washington – which didn’t quite live up to expectations – was a praiseworthy effort to direct a positive message towards American blacks, in particular to hammer home the message that black men should stop killing each other (27) and should behave decently towards their womenfolk. (28)

Farrakhan is said to have a “thing” about Jews, one component of which is “the usual exaggerated belief in Jewish power”. (29) Jewish power – and mendacity – is a reality, and the ADL’s National Director would do well to remove the plank from his own eye before attempting to remove the mote from Farrakhan’s.

Farrakhan’s real “crimes” are to recognise Jewish power and to speak out against it when he believes it is inimical to the interests of blacks, with particular regard to the ADL’s and Organised Jewry’s war on race. Strange isn’t it that all advocates of racial separatism are smeared routinely as anti-Semitic? Advocates of all racial separatisms bar one, that is.

Notes And References

(1) CONSPIRACY: HOW THE PARANOID STYLE FLOURISHES AND WHERE IT COMES FROM, by Daniel Pipes, published by The Free Press, London, (1997), page 201.

(2) The Universal Jewish Encyclopediasays the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith was founded in Chicago in 1913 and that it campaigns against anti-Jewish libels and “to establish the falsity of the charges contained in scurrilous propaganda”.

(3) The Leo Frank Case, by Leonard Dinnerstein, published by Columbia University Press, New York and London, (1968), page vii.

(4) THE LYNCHING OF LEO FRANK, by Harry Golden, published by Cassell, London, (1966), page 181.

(5) Golden, The Lynching Of Leo Frank, pages 182-3, (ibid).

(6) The Jew In American Politics, by Nathaniel Weyl, published by Arlington House, New Rochelle, (1968), pages 89-90.

(7) ESAU’S TEARS Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews, by Albert S. Lindemann, published by Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, (1997), pages 381-2.

(8) Photographs of Frank bear this out.

(9) Dinnerstein, The Leo Frank Case, pages 116-7, (op cit).

(10) Dinnerstein, The Leo Frank Case, page 99, (ibid).

(11) According to Dinnerstein, [page 158, (ibid)], Jim Conley died in 1962 after a life of crime.

(12) A plate between pages 176 and 177 of Golden’s book shows part of Conley’s affidavit; it is captioned “For the first time in the South, a Negro’s affidavit brought a white man to trial on a capital charge.”

(13) As I know from personal experience.

(14) Dinnerstein, Leonard, The Leo Frank Case, page 45, (op cit).

(15) Dinnerstein, Leonard, The Leo Frank Case, page 46, (ibid).

(16) Dinnerstein, Leonard, The Leo Frank Case, page 57, (ibid).

(17) Dinnerstein, Leonard, The Leo Frank Case, pages 172-7, (ibid).

(18) Final Witness, published in the New York Times, (LATE CITY EDITION), March 12, 1982, page A28.

(19) See for example After 69 Years of Silence, Lynching Victim Is Cleared, by Wendell Rawls Jr, published in the New York Times, (LATE CITY EDITION), March 8, 1982, page A12 and Final Witness, (ibid).

(20) Encyclopedia of Southern Culture, Edited by Charles Reagan Wilson & William Ferris, published by University of North Carolina Press, London, (1989), page 823.

(21) This story was widely reported but see for example 1 in 5 Americans Anti-Semitic, Survey Finds, published in the Tulsa World, November 17, 1992, page 12, SECTION A.

(22) Weyl, The Jew In American Politics, page 143, (op cit).

(23) From the essay BLACK ANTI-SEMITISM AND JEWISH RACISM in the book of the same name, published by Schocken Books, New York, (1972), page 105.

(24) This scandal was widely reported but see in particular the American (anti-Semitic) newspaper The Truth At Last, issue 365 (undated), which contains a lengthy article documenting the ADL’s spying activities, and reports in the British newspaper the Guardian, May 8, 1993, page 15 and May 10, 1993, page 7.

(25) THE ZIONIST CONNECTION: What Price Peace?, by Alfred M. Lilienthal, published by Dodd, Mead, New York, (1978), page 406.

(26) Why Jews Shouldn’t Meet With Farrakhan, by Abraham H. Foxman, National Director, Anti-Defamation League, was downloaded from the ADL’s website in August 1999; it was said to have appeared on MSNBC’s website, (10/96).

(27) For all the media hype about the evils of racism the most appalling crime rate in the United States is the murder of young black men by other young black men, and as I write these words a series of such motiveless killings has spread to London.

(28) Farrakhan has made two big mistakes in recent years: his fawning over (now convicted) rapist Mike Tyson and his even more bizarre endorsement of acquitted double murderer (and miscegenist) O.J. Simpson. A man like Tyson who lures a six stone black girl to his hotel room and then rapes her, and a lowlife like Simpson, are hardly the sort of role models a Black Separatist organisation should seek to defend, much less promote.

(29) Foxman, Why Jews Shouldn’t Meet With Farrakhan, (op cit).

African American Perspective on the Leo Frank Case:

From About the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith

Lessons of the Leo Frank Case Still Relevant

By Abraham H. Foxman

Abraham H. Foxman is National Director of the Anti-Defamation League and Author of Never Again?: The Threat of The New Anti-Semitism (HarperSanFrancisco) [sic]

Posted: August 18, 2005

August 17, 2005 marked the 90th anniversary of the lynching of Leo Frank by an anti-Semitic mob in Marietta, Georgia. In 1913 Frank was arrested, tried and convicted of murder, but the results of the trial, and subsequent lynching remain tangible reminders of what America was like in the not too long ago. A New York native, Leo Frank was a manager for the National Pencil Company of Atlanta, Georgia when he was falsely accused of murdering a 14-year-old employee, Mary Phagan.

The murder of Mary Phagan was the catalyst for one of the most virulent anti-Semitic episodes in American history. Frank, a northern Jew, was arrested, indicted and tried for Phagan’s murder without evidence. His trial was a spectacle; threats, intimidation, and a boisterous crowd outside chanting “kill the Jew” and “hang the Jew” could easily be heard through the courtroom’s open windows. When all was said and done, Leo Frank was condemned to death by hanging.

After the Georgia appellate courts and the U.S. Supreme Court rejected numerous appeals, the Governor of Georgia commuted Frank’s sentence to life imprisonment, sparking riots in Atlanta. The “Jeffersonian”, a racist weekly newspaper, urged that Frank not be allowed to escape “justice”. That same month, Frank’s throat was slashed by a fellow inmate.

Less then a month after he survived the assassination attempt, Leo Frank was abducted from prison by a group of 30 men, calling themselves the Knights of Mary Phagan. The mob drove Frank to Marietta, Georgia, Mary Phagan’s hometown, and lynched him from an oak tree. Leo Frank remains the only Jewish person ever to be lynched in the United States.

The lessons of the Frank case are as clear today as they were 90 years ago; the diversity that makes America unique is too often used as a scapegoat in difficult times. The violence and intimidation against minorities that was responsible for Frank’s murder is still a modern concern as we were reminded with the horrific racist murder of James Byrd Jr. in Texas, the homophobic murder of Matthew Shepard in Wyoming, the bias-motivated murder of Yankel Rosenbaum in Crown Heights, and after the September 11th, 2001 terror attacks against the U.S., with a series of violent attacks against people of Muslim, Arab and Sikh backgrounds. Leo Frank’s story is a cry for acceptance. Too often people are quick to blame the “outsider” and violent hate crimes are too often the result.

It was through ADL’s campaign to exonerate Frank that The Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles officially pardoned him on March 11, 1986, 73 years after his conviction.

Leo Frank was buried in Mount Carmel Cemetery, Ridgewood, New York. ADL unveiled a memorial to Leo Frank in tribute to the 90th anniversary of his trial on October 20, 2003.

The Anti-Defamation League, founded in 1913, is the world’s leading organization fighting anti-Semitism through programs and services that counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry.

ADL on Anti-Semitism, Source:

The ADL Founding: “Hang the Jew, Hang the Jew.”

Trial of Leo Frank, 1913.

This was the cry of the furious mob outside the Atlanta courthouse where Leo Frank, a Northern Jew, stood trial after his arrest in 1913 for a murder he did not commit. Anti-Semitism hung heavy in the courtroom as Frank was found guilty and sentenced to death. Though a courageous governor later commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment, Frank never did serve the term. In August 1915, the “Yankee Jew” was lynched by a mob calling themselves a “vigilance committee.”

The brutal murder of Leo Frank did not occur in a vacuum. As the 20th century dawned, anti-Semitism was rampant in an American society where resorts commonly advertised, “No dogs! No Jews!” and magazines featured “humorous” caricatures of Jewish people.

It was in this atmosphere that the Anti-Defamation League was established in 1913 by a lawyer and fearless visionary by the name of Sigmund Livingston. Starting with only two desks in Livingston’s Chicago office, $200 and the sponsorship of the Independent Order of B’nai B’rith, Livingston spelled out the League’s ambitious, compelling mission: “to stop, by appeals to reason and conscience, and if necessary, by appeals to law, the defamation of the Jewish people. . . to secure justice and fair treatment to all citizens alike. . . put an end forever to unjust and unfair discrimination against and ridicule of any sect or body of citizens.”

Early on, ADL took significant steps to eradicate the negative images of Jews in print and their stereotyping on stage and in the movies. The League was still in its infancy when Adolph S. Ochs, publisher of The New York Times and an ADL executive committee member, wrote a memo to newspaper editors nationwide discouraging the use of “objectionable and vulgar” references to Jews in the media. Within two years, Livingston reported “only 50 cases” of such objectionable references to Jews in the national press. By 1920, the practice had virtually stopped.

With the advent of the First World War, Jews were targeted by anti-Semites as “slackers” and “war-profiteers” responsible for many of the war-born ills in the country. A United States Army manual published for war recruits, for example, read, “The foreign born, and especially Jews, are more apt to malinger than the native-born.” When ADL representatives protested about this to President Woodrow Wilson, he promptly ordered the manual recalled. ADL also mounted a campaign to give Americans the facts about military and civilian contributions of Jews to the war effort.

With the Russian Revolution, cartoonists began portraying the Bolshevik as a bearded fellow with a Jewish countenance, hiding a bomb behind his back. The League traced certain journalistic distortions directly to the files of the Associated Press, and vehemently protested. The AP promised ADL to “endeavor in the future. . . not to bring racial or religious prejudice into our reports.”

Source ADL History 1913 to 1920:

Further Reading by the ADL Anti-Defamation League:

ADL Marks 90 Years Of Action and Advocacy:

Web Site For the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith:

ADL on Leo Frank:

ADL History From ADL Website:

ADL Welcomes Senate’s Apology for Failure to Enact Anti-Lynching Law:

Lessons on the Leo Frank case still relevant:

The REAL Truth About the ADL:

Learn everything there is to know about one of the most subversive Jewish espionage and spy agencies across the Western world. The ADL masquerades as a Jewish civil rights group, supporting the rogue, terrorist, and apartheid state of Israel (which harbors weapons of mass destruction and commits crimes against humanity), while at the same time, perfidiously working to undermine Western Civilization. As rare token gestures, the ADL will once in a blue moon criticize anti-Muslim terror committed by Israelis, while turning a blind eye to the other 99.9% of racist, bigoted, and prejudiced terror committed by the radical right wing Israeli government against occupied Palestine and her regional neighbors:

African American Perspective on the Leo Frank Case:

Learn about the anti-Black racist conspiracy surrounding the Leo Frank Case driving the Anti-Defamation League

Required Reading:

Read a selection of articles about the ADL, Anti-Defamation League:

U.S. Senator Jack Tenney on the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith:

The Solar General:

Series of articles about the ADL:

Webshells on the ADL

Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith involved in the Waco Massacre cover-up.

The Ugly Truth About the ADL by Lyndon LaRouche

Sources about the ADL that Jewish people have been trying to get deleted from the Internet

This is a video series about them that ADL keeps having deleted off of Youtube

A nice collection of articles about the ADL:

The Ugly Truth About the Anti-Defamation League

U.S. Senator Jack Tenney on the ADL:

The Anti-Defamation League and Its Use in the World Communist Offensive (1947) by Robert H. Williams

Zion’s Fifth Column by Jack Tenney

ADL likens the Leo Frank Case to Holocaust

The Anti-Defamation League by Jack Tenney

Last Updated: October 2015 (Page created October 20, 2011)