by Carr, Firpo
...had his Jewish mother remove his racial stigma by claiming that he was not her biological son but his late Aryan father’s out-of-wedlock child.[195]
“Kay,” the Black Holocaust survivor mentioned earlier, theorized that some of these “Aryanized Jews” were rather proud of being personally anointed by Hitler to be of pure, 100% Aryan blood.
These recipients probably got real full of themselves. After all, the “King” Himself had personally knighted them, and they had in their possession written proof of such an act. From these ranks sprang most, if not all of Hitler’s top officials.[196]
There were plenty of other “Aryanized Jews.” Blacks, of course, could never become “Aryanized Blacks.” Even if there were a few who, out of sheer desperation and survival, desired such a designation, aspiring to such was never even remotely an option.
The Nazis considered every Black person a member of an inherently “inferior” race. But, as we have seen, such was not the case with the love/hate relationship Hitler and his Nazi hordes had with the Jews.
As noted in Chapter Two, Hitler admired the rather famous Jew, Karl Marx, author of the Communist Manifesto. What is utterly ironic about this admiration is that Hitler loathed both Jews and communists. Marx was obviously both.
Such paradoxical and enigmatic sentiments as expressed by Hitler towards Jews spread throughout the Nazi regime.
Exposure to the thoughts and feelings of high-ranking members of the Nazi party would doubtlessly convince one of the veracity of the statement that alleges that the Jews, amidst all of the death, destruction, and heartache, had options opened to them that Blacks could only dream of.
On June 20, 1939, months before the start of World War II, Fischer indicated something about Nazi racial attitudes when he stated, “I do not categorize every Jew as inferior, as [I do] Negroes, and I do not underestimate the greatest enemy [Jews] with whom we have to fight.”[197]
No, Jews were not considered “inferior” as were Blacks. In fact, in an odd sort of way, Jews were labeled “the greatest.” They simultaneously elicited loathing, fear, and respect of the Nazis.
Yes, a few Jews became Nazis, as unbelievable as that may seem.[§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§] But there is yet another alliance that stuns the senses also. An alliance that is closer to home in that it is a much more recent event. It is truly a shocker when one reads about…
An African American
Who Became a Neo-Nazi
Just when we thought that bedfellows could not get any stranger, up pops a Black man who hates Black people so much so that he joined the neo-Nazi skinheads and proceeded to attack his own.
Like President Barack Obama, Leo Felton is considered Black although in reality he is biracial. His father is Black and his mother is White. Felton belonged to the White supremacist group called the “White Order of Thule.”
He was very serious about hating his own people, yes, Black people. He even served prison time for attempting to murder a Black taxi driver.
How did he come to be accepted by this White supremacist group? Well, the answer is a simple one. Felton holds his parents responsible for “contaminating” him with Black blood, a circumstance over which he had no control. Apparently, the White supremacists bought into this line of convoluted reasoning and concluded that good old Leo should not be held culpable.
Other details of the mind-boggling scenario unfold in Boston where some rather strange events took place.
Under the heading, “Prison for Bomb Plot Supremacist,” and the accompanying subheading, “Of mixed race, he was accused of conspiring to blow up black and Jewish landmarks,” the Los Angeles Times reports:
BOSTON–[December 12, 2002] A mixed-race white supremacist was sentenced to almost 22 years in prison Wednesday for plotting to blow up black and Jewish landmarks in Boston and Washington. Prosecutors accused Leo Felton, 31, and his girlfriend, Erica Chase, 22, of trying “to ignite a racial holy war ... that would promote chaos among the races.”
Felton, son of a black father and white mother, has said he blames his parents for “contaminating” him with black blood. “I’ve committed crimes here, I’m not trying to say I’m a good person or a nice guy,” Felton said before sentencing. “But not everything that has been attributed to me in these cases are understandable by these simplistic formulas.”
Felton and Chase were convicted in July of charges including conspiring to make a bomb, conspiring to make counterfeit bills and obstruction of justice. He was sentenced to 21 years and 10 months in prison. Chase’s sentencing is scheduled for Jan. 31.
The couple was arrested in April 2001 when an off-duty police officer spotted Chase passing a counterfeit $20 bill. Investigators said Felton was making the phony money to help fund their plan and had already gathered most of the materials to make a bomb, including a 50-pound bag of ammonium nitrate, the fertilizer used in the Oklahoma City bombing.
Defense lawyers maintained they were being prosecuted for their beliefs and never planned to carry out violent acts. Felton was a member of the White Order of Thule, and Chase belonged to the World Church of the Creator. They met after Chase corresponded with Felton while he was in prison for the attempted murder of a black taxi driver.[198]
What unsavory liaisons and strange surprises the future may hold for Felton and Chase remains to be seen.
The Nazis and the Boy
Scouts of America?
Few people would ever suspect the dubious origin of that saintly group, yes, an American institution in and of itself that rivals apple pie and baseball. Of whom do we speak?
The Boys Scouts of America, which is part of an international organization simply called Boy Scouts.
Are we suggesting here that the Nazis started the Boys Scouts, and by extension, the Boy Scouts of America? In a word, no—at least, not directly. The Nazis were, however, indirectly involved in influencing the founder of the Boys Scouts.
Who was the founder? The World Book Encyclopedia identifies him as Robert Baden-Powell. It states:
Robert Baden-Powell of Great Britain started the Boy Scout movement in 1907, when he organized a camp for 20 boys. In 1908, he published the first Boy Scout manual. The Boy Scout movement spread to the United States as the result of a good turn performed for William D. Boyce, an American businessman, in 1909. A British Boy Scout helped Boyce find his way in a London fog. Boyce and others founded the Boy Scouts of America in 1910.[199]
So innocuous. So innocent. Or, so it would seem at first glance. Powell innocently started the Boy Scout organization to help people. A Boy Scout helps Boyce, and Boyce, in turn, benevolently starts the Boy Scouts of America. Now, let us dig deeper.
Upon doing so, we will find that, according to one highly reputable source, Powell was a brutal, cruel British officer who was influenced by Hitler’s hatred for Blacks.
Powell was part of the British force that occupied a part of Africa where the Ashanti ethnic group called home. As part of European expansionism, the British invaded the Ashanti territory and brutally maimed, raped, and murdered the indigenous people.
Outgunned and outmatched, the Ashanti, who had fought courageously for their homeland, faced what they perceived as the inevitable, and gave up before being annihilated.
Unfortunately the British missed out on their splendid game [the Ashanti]. Their opponents learned all too quickly that it was pointless to fight against modern weapons. They gave up before the British had the pleasure of wiping them out.[200]
This all transpired during the first Ashanti War (1874-76), which, as far as they were concerned, was Ashanti World War I since where they lived in Africa was their world. But, yet another war was to ravage their precious homeland.
And it was during this second Ashanti World War II of 1896 that Commander Robert Baden-Powell played a major role. Commander Powell was denied what Lord Garnet Wolsley, who commanded the British troops during the first Ashanti war, called…
the rapture-giving delight which attack upon an
enemy [referring in this case to the Ashanti] affords….All other sensations are but as the tinkling of a doorbell in comparison with the throbbing of Big Ben.[201]
No, before Powell could take advantage of the glorious opportunity to eradicate the African continent of the pesky Ashanti—as was almost the case in the infamous Ashanti World War I—the Ashanti surrendered again in Ashanti World War II.
The second Ashanti war in 1896 provided no opportunity for experiences of [“the rapture-giving delight”]. Two days’ march away from the capital, Kumasi, Robert Baden-Powell, the commander of the advance troop, later to found the Boy Scouts, received an envoy offering unconventional surrender.[202]
A missed opportunity! A bitter disappointment! Powell was virtually distraught over the fact that those damned Ashanti surrendered—even having the audacity of doing so unconditionally—before the British could even fire a shot.
This time the British found no use for their weapons. They returned sadly to the coast. “I thoroughly enjoyed the outing,” Baden-Powell writes to his mother, “except for the want of a fight, which I fear will preclude our getting any medals or decoration.”
To add insult to injury, Powell complains to his mother that the non-engagement precludes receiving accolades.
“But,” one may counter, “What does this have to do with Hitler and National Socialism? Powell was British, not German. Besides, he was much older than Hitler was. How could he have borrowed any ideologies from Hitler?”
True, Powell was British and did whatever dastardly deeds he did in Africa while Hitler was a young child. (Hitler was born April 20, 1889, and died April 29, 1945. The second Ashanti war was in 1896 when Hitler was about 7 years old.)
But, what may have escaped the notice of some historians is that the attitude that gave birth to Powell’s and Britain’s adventurism and expansionism into Africa, as well as the attitude behind the invasion and exploitation of Africa by the French and the Americans, fueled Hitler’s Nazism too!
In plain English, the thought that Africa was home to “inferior races” gave license to European—and American—powers to extinguish these “inferior races,” yes, kill them off en masse, thereby putting them out of their misery.
And Germany represented the “face,” as it were, of all Europe, at least according to one source. After all, says this observer, “the center of Europe is Germany.”[203]
The fact of the matter is, even though European powers would be at each other’s throats during the time of European colonialism, they would pause, yes, stop their fighting and join forces in a struggle against any Black African nation.
Proof of this is what happened in the Rhineland when French African troops occupied and ruled the area with a “courteous” hand. (Which, incidentally, White French officers would have none of. Apparently, the French viewed the Germans with contempt. They treated them as, well, like the former enemies they were.[****************])
But how, in fact, did the British respond to “black rule”? What does history reveal in this regard?
Well, history reveals that the British loathed “black rule.” They could not stand to see Black men ordering White men around, even if it were their German “enemies.” So, what would the British do about it?
They would stoke the fires of propaganda when it came to falsely accusing the African soldiers of rapping White German women. Why? So that White supremacy would march on apace.[††††††††††††††††] (See Chapter One.)
… Propaganda, moreover, which was endorsed by the British in the interests of white solidarity. Many commentators in England were concerned lest the ‘unnatural’ position of ‘Blacks’ ordering ‘Whites’ about at gun point should set precedents for them outside Europe.[204]
One may think to himself: “The French were European Whites and yet they did not mistreat their colonial soldiers. After all, they even sent Africans into Germany in the first place! What would you say about that?”
Interestingly, this is a case where the answer is contained in the question. That is to say, the fact that the French even had colonial troops indicates a subjugation of the entire African country.
And now, that country’s valiant young men have the “privilege” and “honor” to serve yet another European power. Yes, the reality of the situation is, in this instance, the French were the least of European sovereign evils on a certain level.
Many historians, commentators, researchers, and others attest to the fact that all European powers perpetrated evils.
Notice the connection made between these evils in the quote below from the book, Exterminate All Brutes, wherein the German, French, British, and American[‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡] governments all shared the sentiment that Africans were of an inferior race, hence were naturally deserving of genocide.
But in this debate no one mentions the German extermination of the Herero people in southwest Africa during Hitler’s childhood. No one mentions the corresponding genocide by the French, the British, or the Americans. No one points out that during Hitler’s childhood, a major element in the European view of mankind was the conviction that “inferior races” were by nature condemned to extinction: the true compassion of the superior races consisted in helping them on the way.[205] [Emphasis supplied.]
So, yes, the same genesis or seedling that gave birth to the Boy Scouts also gave birth to the Hitler Youth. Both sprang from the same seminal idea.
And if one were to examine both closely and honestly, one would probably see the similarities between the two. They do indeed constitute strange bedfellows, and qualify to be categorized in this chapter.
Our discussion now takes on a different twist.
Instead of critiquing organizations, or individuals belonging to these organizations in an effort to determine if they have been sleeping together, as it were, we will consider, under our antepenultimate subheading, two organizations that have not been, but should be placed in the same category.
A Jewish Hate Group and A Black Hate
Group—The Same but Only Different?
The State of California requires that the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), as well as other state law enforcement agencies, sends its personnel to visit (or, in the case of agencies far away, send a representative to) the Simon Wiesenthal Center and its Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles, California. The following can be found on the Center’s Web site:
The Simon Wiesenthal Center is an international Jewish human rights organization dedicated to preserving the memory of the Holocaust by fostering tolerance and understanding through community involvement, educational outreach and social action. The Center confronts important contemporary issues including racism, antisemitism, terrorism and genocide and is accredited as an NGO both at the United Nations and UNESCO. With a membership of over 400,000 families, the Center is headquartered in Los Angeles and maintains offices in New York, Toronto, Miami, Jerusalem, Paris and Buenos Aires.
Established in 1977, the Center closely interacts on an ongoing basis with a variety of public and private agencies, meeting with elected officials, the U.S. and foreign governments, diplomats and heads of state. Other issues that the Center deals with include: the prosecution of Nazi war criminals; Holocaust and tolerance education; Middle East Affairs; and extremist groups, neo-Nazism, and hate on the Internet.[206]
In the process of touring the Museum of Tolerance, LAPD employees, as well as all other tourists, must stop and consider a section that deals with hate groups.
In this section, one is introduced to various White supremacists groups like the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nation, and neo-Nazi. What was particularly surprising to some African American police employees, both sworn and civilian, were two things:
(1) The inclusion of the late Khallid Abdul Muhammad, former spokesman for the Nation of Islam and founder of the New Black Panther Party; and (2) the absence of the late Irv Rubin, leader of the Jewish Defense League (JDL)[§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§]. Muhammad
is African American and Rubin is Jewish.
Many Blacks who are familiar with Muhammad are taken aback at seeing film of him alongside film of White supremacists together under the neat umbrella of “Hate Groups.” (We will discuss further whether this is a fair assessment of Muhammad below.)
The very first question that some think should be asked is: What, to the Simon Wiesenthal Center, constitutes a hate group? Other questions are: Is its definition of “hate group” honest and objective? Or is it subjective and perhaps even biased?
Some think the latter and seriously question the decision or appropriateness of classifying Muhammad with the likes of the neo-Nazis.
While one would be hard pressed to come up with a dictionary definition of a “hate group,” there is some hope. The dictionary does give us the definition of “hate crime.” So, what is a “hate crime”?
Any of various crimes (as assault or defacement of property) when motivated by hostility to the victim as a member of a group (as one based on color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation).[207]
This is perhaps as close as we will get to defining a “hate group.” Although the connection may be obvious to some, more commentary may be needed in order to add clarity to the relationship between hate groups and hate crimes.
It stands to reason that at least some hate groups commit hate crimes. If one finds this concept difficult to grasp, one needs only to consult law enforcement records to test the veracity of this allegation.
Are we suggesting here that only individuals belonging to hate groups commit hate crimes? Absolutely not.
What we are suggesting is that a possible definition for “hate group” is “a group or organization whose credo encompasses hating or harboring hostility toward a member of a group (as one based on color, culture, creed, gender; political, religious, or social ideology; race, or sexual orientation).”