Starting with first principles and the scientific method
America First Books
Featuring ebooks that find a truer path in uncertain times

Kevin Alfred Strom Archive


The Censorious Race

American Dissident Voices broadcast
April 24, 2004
by Kevin Alfred Strom


Today, the first day this broadcast is on the air, April 24, 2004, there will be an important historical revisionist conference in Sacramento, California. Quite a few National Alliance members will be there and participating. A tremendous last-minute effort has been made to save the conference -- which was almost cancelled, in fact had been cancelled before the rescue effort began, due to Jewish censorship.
[ ]
The conference will run from 2:00pm to 9:30pm on Saturday, and some participants plan private activities on the next day, Sunday. The conference is being sponsored by the Institute for Historical Review, whose director, Mark Weber, has been a guest many times on this program. You may reach the IHR at or by telephone at 949-631- 1490.
There's an interesting story behind the conference. It was -- and is -- a gathering of revisionist historians and free speech advocates from around the world with an interest in correcting the historical record from Zionist/Jewish distortions and propaganda, and with an additional interest in studying the pathologies and dangers of Jewish power today.
The original organizer of the conference felt compelled to abruptly cancel the conference just five days before it was to begin -- because the hall which had been rented, Sacramento's German-American Turn Verein, succumbed to Jewish pressure and reneged on their contract with the revisionists. It seems that the hall owners had 'heard from' Jewish pressure groups, members of which had registered for the conference under false names in order to get the venue information. But local activists and revisionists took a 'never say die' and 'can-do' attitude to the fight against censorship -- and refused to give up. A reconstituted conference was immediately organized.
Though the original organizer refused to use his list of conference ticket holders to spread the word, the IHR, Stormfront, National Vanguard, the National Alliance, attorney Edgar Steele, and the Freedomsite all worked to get the word out quickly and a good turnout is expected.
The Institute for Historical Review picked up the ball and scheduled a meeting which included many of the original speakers at the Turn Verein event -- and they didn't make the mistake of publicizing the venue many days before the meeting. Now it may seem strange to you that a public conference discussing -- of all things -- mainly historical issues has to conceal its location until the last minute. But that's the way it is when you challenge the Jewish establishment. You can hold openly racialist conferences scheduled months in advance -- and don't get me wrong, I'm glad that you can -- without anything near the danger of heavy pressure being brought on the hall as you have when you question the central myths that prop up Jewish power. Most non-Whites are racialist themselves, and their opposition to White racialism is spotty at best and weak in general, except when whipped to a fever pitch by Jewish media, money, and organization. But when you directly challenge the architects of multiracialism and Zionism, as this conference -- and revisionist conferences before it -- did, you get a very focused and very determined Jewish opposition, totally dedicated to censoring you, shutting you up, and closing you down by any means necessary, fair or foul.
Now, the exact natures of the threats made by Jews to get the Turn Verein to abrogate its contract are not known -- but the story put out by the hall, that they 'didn't know' that their clients were White people who occasionally doubted that what Jews say is always true, must be false. The hall was openly rented in the name of a European-American cultural group
and the conference was openly announced to the Turn Verein -- and the world, for that matter -- as a revisionist event. So the Turn Verein's recent claim that the conference 'misrepresented itself' must be a cover story for the real pressure tactics that cannot be named in fear of further reprisals. Jewish pressure is often economic -- if the Turn Verein depends on business from the general public to stay afloat, they might be very vulnerable to negative stories in the Jewish media, a sudden 'food poisoning' story on page one, or the like. And one Jewish group, the JDL -- which happily admits it was involved in the pressure campaign -- has been directly linked to terror bombings. In fact, the recent former leader of the JDL, Irv Rubin, was awaiting trial for planning a series of bomb attacks when he allegedly committed suicide before being able to testify about others involved in the plot. Rubin's successor crowed about his part in threatening the Turn Verein to back out of their agreement:
"...We had been diligently working behind the scenes to facilitate just such an event [that is, the cancellation]. Today has been a very good day for the Jewish Community of Sacramento... and for the Jewish Defense League who can add another battle star to our banner."
So they admit it. In fact, Jewish censorship efforts are coming more and more out into the open. Even the lemmings are starting to notice just who it is that thinks they shouldn't see or hear or read certain points of view. I think that the aggressive efforts of the ADL and other Jewish groups to censor Mel Gibson's The Passion was the tipping point on this issue. Their censorship efforts were slightly successful -- Gibson didn't translate the most damning phrase from the Jewish high priest into English for the film's subtitles -- but the end result of it all was that millions of moviegoers went to the film knowing that there were certain parts that the Jews had forced out of the film and many others that they had wanted to censor. They saw The Passion with a much-heightened sense of the Jewish power structure of 2000 years ago and the even more dangerous Jewish power structure of today. So the public got two messages -- Jews are censorious, and Jews can lose. Yes, lose; Gibson stood firm on most of the Jewish demands, and even their tiny victory in the case of The Passion's subtitles was really more a case of them shooting themselves in the foot. This growing awareness of Jewish power -- and the Jewish agenda -- and Jewish weakness -- bodes well for the future of our civilization.
Prominent Jewish groups also admit their part in attempting to shut down Web sites that they don't like. The BBC recently dutifully republished a screed by the pro-censorship Jewish Simon Wiesenthal Center with the hilarious title "Internet driving hate site surge" -- I mean, by definition a 'site,' 'hate' or otherwise, is on the Internet and can only be on the Internet, so how could 'the Internet' somehow be driving a 'surge' in any kind of site? That's like saying 'Presence of roads drives increase in Volkswagens.' One used to expect at least literacy from the BBC -- but, then again, maybe the Wiesenthal hacks actually wrote the headline, too. [ ]
Several of the sites targeted by the Wiesenthal Center were forced off the server facility which hosted them last week -- at almost exactly the same time as the release of the Wiesenthal report. One was -- a site devoted to historical research and study of the man behind the myths. Another was our own Another was the largest pro-White discussion forum in the world -- and one of the largest discussion forums, bar none -- And another, whose high Google rankings angered the Jewish would-be elite, may have been the one which triggered the latest censor-fest:
Back on March 20th, National Vanguard reporter Jeff Hook told us that was in the sites of the censorious race:
Jews who have punched the word "Jew" into the Google search engine have finally discovered that the number one result is The site is ranked first in relevance of more than 1.72 million Web pages.
David Krane, communications director for the Web giant, stated that "Google has no plans to manually alter the results of their ranking system to knock Jew Watch from its top spot." But now, after a relentless badgering campaign, he has promised to "alert Google's engineers to further refine the search algorithm, which might alter the results for the word."...
When asked how the "hate site" can garner the number one position, Krane pointed to Google's ranking algorithm that bases rankings on site relevancy, which is determined by the number of forwarding links to the site. (Translation: It's very popular.)
Jews have registered to keep it safe from "haters," while launching frequent 'denial of service' (DOS) attacks against whereby they overload the site with requests to make access difficult or impossible.
[ ]
We continued to cover the story in a report I made on the 8th of this month:
National Alliance member and retired librarian Frank Weltner has operated 'Jew Watch' -- -- since 1995 as a watchdog
site and Internet resource for readers and scholars interested in researching Jewish issues. Through hard work and consistency, the site has managed to achieve a high ranking on the number one search engine, Google. In fact, merely entering the word 'Jew' into the Google search box returns Jew Watch pages as the top two entries.
Google's ranking algorithm, the method used to determine the most useful and therefore the highest-ranked sites, is not public -- the company fears that should its exact parameters become known, advertisers would exploit them to gain falsely inflated rankings for their worthless sites -- but it is believed to analyze the site's text for content relevant to the site's ostensible subject, click-throughs from Google itself, and links from other sites with relevant content on the same subject. By all those criteria, Jew Watch is the number one site in its specialized field.
Since Jew Watch archives material from many sources -- Jewish and non-Jewish -- which express a critical attitude toward the power-seeking and power-exercising activities of the Jewish establishment, the site's top ranking at Google has angered Jewish groups, some of which have attempted to pressure the search giant to alter its automated ranking criteria to prevent 'anti-Semitic' sites like Jew Watch from receiving a high search page position. This is something that Google has so far refused to do.
Other Jews are spearheading a plan to spoof the Google algorithm by providing numerous links from their sites to the Wikipedia online encyclopedia entry for the word 'Jew' and then submitting the url of their newly-linked pages to Google, in an effort to move the Wikipedia page's Google position higher than the Jew Watch position.
As of this writing, the Wikipedia page is still number three, after two pages from Jew Watch. It's not really clear just what these Jewish spoofers would 'win' even if they were successful in hijacking the top spot: Jew Watch would still be number two, just as visible -- and, with all the controversy they've created over it, with a lot more traffic.
The Jewish efforts at pressuring and 'link bombing' Google (the latter is something which Google disapproves of, by the way) have generated quite a bit of press, with stories on ZDNet, the Los Angeles Times, the Jerusalem Post, the Charleston (South Carolina) Post and Courier, and many others.
The Post and Courier quoted National Alliance member Frank Weltner, who created and operates the site from his home in St. Louis, Missouri:
'Site operator Frank Weltner, a retired librarian who lives in St. Louis, defended the site Monday in a telephone interview. "They (the Jews) own the media; they own the banks," Weltner said. "This is a democracy, and in a democracy, minorities should not rule. But Jews don't feel that way; they feel that they should rule this country, and I object to that. I want my country back."'
'...Google's operators have said they are in no way against Jews but can't remove Jew Watch from its search engine. "The way that Google decides to rank and order Web pages is done completely automatically, using (computer) software," corporate spokesman David Krane said Monday. "This ranking criterion is essentially representative of popular opinion on the Internet." Even when people don't like the results, Google operators never interfere with the computer program, said Krane, who identified himself as a Jew who will be observing Passover. "That's the promise that Google has made to its users for more than six years," Krane said. "We guarantee an objective, tamper-free search experience."'
The Jerusalem Post piece describes one Jew's "call to arms" over Jew Watch and openly admits Jewish efforts to remove the site:
What is a Jew? Those hoping to find out from a Google search are in for an unpleasant surprise. The first of 1.75 million entries that appear when you type "Jew" into the search engine is an anti-Semitic site.
This discovery by a New York real-estate developer, among others, has sparked a cyberspace showdown, and a bid to alter the situation by a small band of Internet experts.
While surfing the Web from his New York home, real-estate investor Steven Weinstock was shocked to find Jew Watch...
"At first I felt surprised, and then those feelings turned to shock," he said.
What upset him most is not that hatemongers might be publishing such lies, but that any person looking to find out about Judaism would be offered choices such as the "Jewish Controlled Press," "Jewish World Conspiracies," "Jewish Media Lies," and "Jewish Banking and Financial Manipulations." Under one of the categories, titled "Revisionists - 6,000,000 Jews DID NOT DIE," there are dozens of links to articles dedicated to Holocaust revisionism.
..Jew Watch's description of itself is bland: "Archive of essays, articles, and on-line books about a perceived international Jewish conspiracy: Keeping a Close Watch on Jewish Communities & Organizations Worldwide." ...Perversely, the site also has links to Jewish community and civil rights organizations such as B'nai B'rith, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, but lists them as "Jewish Hate Groups."
"If it means hating extremists, racists, and anti-Semites, then this title is well deserved," said Dr. Efraim Zuroff, director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Jerusalem. "Not to fight against these groups increases their potential to poison the minds of millions."
Weinstock has been working to get rid of the site. Last Saturday, he launched his own Web site, called Remove Jew Watch, containing a petition which received more than 3,000 signatures in its first 48 hours - 1,500 on Monday alone. He also wrote an e-mail to Google, demanding that it remove the site.
There is an inherent danger when a hate site masquerades as an academic resource, said Brian Marcus of the civil-rights division of the Anti-Defamation League.
"One of our major concerns is that children unable to discern what is true will stumble onto these hate sites," he said. "There have been many cases where children unknowingly turn in school reports that contain anti-Semitic and racist remarks."
Stopping hate sites has been difficult, said Zuroff....
What's really interesting about the Jerusalem Post story is the admission by Zuroff that the Jewish goal is censorship of their critics, and the assumption that Jewish groups can decide what is and what is not an "academic resource" based on its position regarding Jews. The article continues:
...Daniel Sieradski, editor of the Jew School, a site devoted to Jewish fringe culture, decided to take matters into his own hands. Using a method called Google bombing, which exploits a quirk in Google's algorithms, he hoped to raise another site to the No. 1 rank.
"I decided to issue a call to arms on my Web site," Sieradski said. "Within a week, my proposal caught the attention of other Jewish bloggers [keepers of Web-based diaries] in the US, Canada, and Israel."
Sieradski's efforts paid off. The Wikipedia encyclopedia listing for "Jew," which just a week ago held no rank on Google, rose to the fourth-highest entry. But Sieradski is still not satisfied.
"Our work is not yet done," he said....
[ ]
Indeed -- their work was not yet done. Jew Watch,,,, and several other sites immediately began to be attacked by hackers in what are called Denial of Service (DOS) and Synflood attacks, which are attempts by cyber-terrorists to send so many thousands of false requests for pages to the sites every second that the site's servers are so overloaded that the ordinary reader cannot access the site at all, effectively shutting it down. And the intense cyber-attacks were coupled with behind-the-scenes pressure on the server facility -- the ironically-named 'Everyone's Internet' ( ), formerly Rackshack -- which hosted the sites. 'Everyone's Internet' had hosted the servers for these and other racialist and Jew-critical sites for some time, and well knew that the content of the sites was clearly legal and did not violate the 'Terms of Service' of the company in any way. Yet within a few days of the publicity surrounding Jew Watch and our coverage of that story, and the launch of the cyber-attacks on the sites, came a terse statement from 'Everyone's Internet' that all of the sites mentioned were in violation of their 'Terms of Service' -- accompanied by a statement that 'Everyone's Internet' did not have to explain how the sites were supposedly in violation. On that basis they demaded that the sites be removed or they would shut them down. Clearly -- as in the case of the Turn Verein cancellation -- a cover-up of Jewish censorship efforts was being made.
Proof of this came in the email from 'Everyone's Internet' itself: one of the sites that they demanded be removed and claimed had violated their 'Terms of Service' was Here's the twist: was a url that had never been developed and had no content whatsoever.
And so and the other sites have been forced to find new servers and were down for a couple of days. Some of the sites, including are still in transition and are temporarily off line.
The name 'Jew Watch' contains an important concept. Jewish groups, working with corrupt politicians, have already made publishing certain opinions on history and politics illegal in many nations. They work feverishly to shut down anyone who exposes their agenda and reveals their crimes, and harm those who will not back down. Groups that would take away our freedom of speech should be watched, and watched very closely indeed.
The Wiesenthal censors sent out a few hundred copies of their 'report' on 'hate sites' on the Internet as a CD-ROM to police departments, governments, and other censorship-friendly groups. While their CD-ROM gathers dust or is used as a coffee coaster at police departments too overwhelmed with non-White crime to pay too much attention to it, the National Alliance and its Web sites have more than a third of a million readers every month and growing. The Jews have failed to shut down the latest revisionist meeting, they have failed to shut down and I believe they will fail to shut down, and their disinformation efforts have failed to stop the latest and best National Alliance Leadership Conference which was held last weekend. They may have more wealth than we do, and wealth can buy a lot of things, but we are armed with the most powerful weapons of all -- righteousness and truth. And we are growing in influence, capabilities, and confidence. Our race deserves to live in freedom, and no trickster, thug, or con man can stop us from achieving that goal. We are going to win.



For the latest contact, donation, and other update information regarding Kevin Alfred Strom, please visit his web page at Please also visit, and Prices, addresses, and availability information pertaining to materials cited in his works are subject to change.

Please also visit the America First Institute donation page.




Flag carried by the 3rd Maryland Regiment at the Battle of Cowpens, S. Carolina, 1781

© America First Books
America First Books offers many viewpoints that are not necessarily its own in order to provide additional perspectives.