Fred Reed is a sharp critic of multiculturalism, and a clever and funny writer to boot, and I post his essays from time to time on my Daily Reads page. But Fred, like so many other 'blight wingers', is scared shitless of the Jews, which is a bad way to be if you are going to criticize the multicult -- it's a lot like trying to win a footrace with your leg cut off. But then Fred writes in defense of American freedom while living in Mexico, and there is a certain natural awkwardness in that, too.
In any event, awhile back Fred wrote a piece posted on Lew Rockwell's website entitled "Don't Write Me About the Jews" (http://www.lewrockwell.com/reed/reed42.html; durable link here), in which he attempted to prove to his critics that he was perfectly justified in treading lightly around the Foreskinners. It was a well-written piece, as most of Fred's pieces are, but in terms of the bottom line, it didn't cut the mustard or even muss the custard. Here is what I wrote to Fred in response to his piece:
Date: 8/27/04 10:43 AM
From: John Bryant
Subject: Da Jooz - Don't miss this one, Fred
I'm a member of the high-IQ organization Mensa, have written 40 books, and am listed in Who's Who In the World.
Now that I've got your attention, let me tell you the Good News and the Bad News. And then the REALLY BAD news.
The Good News is that my personal experience with Jews is -- like yours -- both lengthy and positive. If you wanted to you could say that I am -- or was -- prejudiced FOR Jews.
The bad news is that my POST-judice is AGAINST Jews. By which I do not mean personal -- I still like most of them, find them fun, intelligent people. More precisely, my post-judice is against ORGANIZED JEWRY. Which is not about what this or that Jewish individual does, but rather what JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS AND JEWISH LEADERS DO.
Now the REALLY BAD news is this: I did not reach this conclusion on 'gut feeling' or intuition or what my parents or my guru told me. I reached it on the basis of WHAT I HAVE BEEN READING AND RESEARCHING FOR YEARS, THE BEST ITEMS OF WHICH I HAVE RECORDED IN DOZENS UPON DOZENS OF FILES IN MY POPULAR WEBSITE, THEBIRDMAN.ORG. More bluntly, I have a HUGE collection of stuff that -- IMHO -- simply leaves no doubt that the Jews are a BIG BIG PROBLEM FOR GENTILES AND WESTERN CIVILIZATION.
But there's more, Fred. First of all, I have organized this material into sections and subsections and subsubsections that will make it easy for you (or anyone) to just go to my website and click the Articles of Others section, and immerse yourself for as long as you want on the subject.
And that's not all, Fred. I have written several lengthy articles intended especially for novices such as yourself to lay out the facts in simple, easy-to-digest form. Two of the best of those are the following:
(!) The Case Against the Jews: A Documented Critique of Contemporary and Recent Historical Jewish Behavior - The Birdman's hardest-hitting, best-documented and longest essay on the Jews. If you are serious about knowing the facts, read this tightly-written piece. This is a much-improved version of an essay sent to 3500 people on the Mensa email list, which resulted in more than a hundred yelping and snarling responses -- which might not be so bad considering that there were 3400 people who didn't complain.
This article can be found at found at: http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Jews/Jews-CaseJews.html
(2) Updating the List of Jewish Crimes - Jews continue their assault on the white race and Western civilization by laying the foundations for World War Three; for it is Jews who are almost certainly primarily responsible for 911 and the bogus 'War on Terrorism', the later of which has so far brought us two real wars (Afghanistan and Iraq) and a further shredding of our Constitution. (Don't believe it? The proof is RIGHT HERE.) This was the Birdman's 2003 letter to Mensans, and, as usual, the Uno Hooze and their shabby goy gofers promptly got Birdman's ISP account canceled. Why is it that 'Jews' always seems associated with such things as 'cowardice', 'hypocrisy', 'underhandedness', 'suppression', 'censorship' and 'lies up the tush'?
This article is located at:
But remember, Fred, this is only a beginning. There's lots more in the Jewish Question section of my webpage if you care to educate yourself. But of course if you stick with Little Lew-Lew and his sidekicks, you won't find out a thing, because these people are some of the biggest hypocrites and liars around, to say nothing of being frosty-frizzy-cataleptic afraid to touch the Jewish Question with a ten-foot pole. And if you have any question about the intellectual sleaziness of the Rockwellites, just check the Rockwell Files in the Net Losses section of my website.
It's all there, Fred. I've spent years putting it together. But I am sure that you, like so many others who -- in the words of Peter Finley Dunne -- know so much that ain't so, will have absolutely no trouble in ignoring it.
After penning (keyboarding?) the above piece, someone alerted me to a piece by Jewish Prof Paul Gottfried which he wrote in defense of Fred. I found Gottfried's work almost as irritating as Fred's, so I sent him a copy of my Fred letter for his comments. This set off some relatively meaningless comments from Gottfried in a couple of email exchanges, so finally I wrote him the following letter:
Dear Prof Gottfried:
Let me go back to the beginning, so to speak, and get things properly straightened out.
In your article 'Fred Reed and Me' (I know you are trying to echo something in that title, but I can't quite think what it is -- certainly not 'The Egghead and I'), posted at
[Durable link here]
"Fred Reed and I have what seems to be a shared problem, receiving hallucinatory notes from anti-Semitic readers who insist, "the Jews are behind everything." Perhaps I should feel honored that despite my familys flight from the Nazis, I have been taken into the confidence of non-Jews who have the same grip on reality as the authors of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Like Reed, I also feel impelled to let my correspondents know that they have their heads screwed on the wrong way. How can Jews, who account for less than two percent of the American population and for less than that in Europe, explain the Western worlds descent into multicultural lunacy, including the advocacy of open borders, the glorification of the Muslims as a peaceful and enriching presence, and the treatment of homosexual relations as a privileged human association? " [END]
When I sent you a copy of my letter to Fred, what I was doing, to put it in simplest terms, was to lay down a challenge to both you and Fred on your basic thesis -- expressed in the paragraph above -- that it is nonsense to say Jews exert significant control over America and the world, and that, by means of this control, they are significantly responsible for what we all hate, namely, the decline of Western civilization via multiculturalism and similar liberal policies.
Fred is not going to take this challenge. In spite of his leather jackets, cigars and ability to eat tequila worms, he is a pussycat on the Jewish Question. In fact, he is laying low in all probability because -- to coin a phrase -- in his heart he knows I'm right.
But you are different. You are a scholar, and hold an academic position. And you have reflected on this subject in several books, as I understand it. So it is right up your alley, scholastically speaking.
Now you can accept my challenge, or you can ignore it. (As I often say, you can lead a horse's ass to 'oughter' but you can't make him think.) I expect the latter, because the material I have is simply too devastating to your position. But maybe I'm wrong -- maybe you have the guts to accept it. That doesn't mean you will come to agree with me (or say you agree, even if you secretly do), of course, but at least you will have grappled with my material, and there is something good in that.
Now having laid out my challenge to you, let me comment on several items.
You protest about all the 'delusional antisemites' who are always saying that da Jooz are responsible for 'everything'. Very crudely speaking, and without all the qualifiers, modifiers, ifs, ands, buts, adverbs, adjectives and gerunds, that's what I'm saying too. But you have a problem in dismissing me as a 'delusional antismite', because (among other things) you reviewed -- very briefly -- my book on Jews and had a favorable word to say on it, even if nothing that amounted to a Great Panegyric. So on that basis alone, you have created your own reason for looking at what I have to say.
But I think you are wrong to dismiss the people who write you as 'delusional antisemites'. On the contrary, they are people who see you as maybe -- just maybe -- a Jew who is openminded enuf to hear them out, and someone who will give their concerns a reasonable hearing. Or to put it another way, they are saying two things: First, they are complimenting you, and second, they are not petitioning some Aryan war council to 'gas all Jews now', but are rather coming to a Jew and asking for an explanation. They are saying, Surely, as a reasonable person, you can see how the Jews are abusing us, so why not support us? If that's delusional, maybe you're speaking a different language. (He-Brew?)
Now if you wish to talk about delusion, let's mention something that is not a delusion: The Jewish Question is forbidden to be discussed EVERYWHERE THAT IS 'RESPECTABLE'. Only in the 'disreputable' places like my website is such discussion allowed. And the only reason YOU are able to 'discuss' this question is because YOU TAKE THE POLITICALLY CORRECT SIDE. Which of course is not discussion at all -- just MONOscussion. Lew Rockwell wants to be 'respectable', hence he has turned his website into yet another engine of Political Correctness which does not allow honest discussion on what I and a great many others consider the MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION OF THE DAY. Does it not give you pause to realize that the platform from which you speak will not allow discussion of the most important question of the day? If you were really honest, it seems you would not give Rockwell your imprimatur, because in contributing to a website that supposedly enshrines 'freedom', you become a silent partner in the hypocrisy.
If you want my opinion (and you probably don't), I think you are the one who is delusional, because you are being deluded by your own logic. That is, you argue in your first paragraph, How can the Jews possibly control America/the world -- there are so few of them! It is a clever argument, and readily invites assent. There is only one problem -- in Huxley's words (or was it Mencken's?), it is a beautiful theory that has been slain by the ugly facts. I have already set out those facts in great detail and at length, and will not try to summarize them in 25 words or less. It is up to you to read, mark, learn and inwardly digest them -- if you have the stomach.
If there is any weakness in my thesis, it is most probably to be found in the matter of identifying 'cause'. As a philosopher, you are undoubtedly familiar with the literature on cause, and the fact that cause -- contrary to common misconception -- can only be analyzed as 'invariable connection', and not as 'agency'. What this means -- briefly, and without proper qualifications -- is that we can say that A causes B only because B is invariably preceded by A, and not because we can divine some 'deep' connection between the presence of A and the subsequent occurrence of B.
The relevance of the cause question to my thesis is that one can argue that Jews are not the 'cause' of the decline of the West, but rather there are numerous 'causes', from the discovery that God is dead to the invention of contraception and venereal prophylaxis. There is not exactly anything 'wrong' with this approach, and to some extent an analysis of the cause of the decline of the West because of the decline of religion, etc as opposed to Jewish influence is dependent on one's purposes and one's view of what is important. There is, however, a scientific criterion that sanctions the analysis in terms of Jews -- economy and elegance -- and a utilitarian one, practicality. By economy and elegance I am of course referring to Occam's Razor, or the Law of Parsimony, which decrees that the simplest explanation which fits all the facts is to be preferred to others; and by practicality, I mean that there is nothing we can do about the demise of God, etc, but a few things we can do about Jews. Thus the cause argument becomes a matter of deciding whether the Theory Of Everything Jewish is best because it fits all the facts, or whether we must adopt something more messy because it doesn't.
While we are on the subject of cause, let us consider your statement
"As my recent books try to make clear, there is something gravely wrong with majority cultures that ostentatiously despise their inherited identity and there is no reason to assume that it would not be there if Jews or blacks disappeared."
Here you could say that whites are responsible for (ie, a cause, or THE cause, of) their own downfall, and there is some merit in that statement. HOWEVER, one may also look at the situation as one produced by the Jewsmedia which have infected whites with the virus of self-hatred; and in such a case we can wonder who really deserves the blame. (My own rule of thumb is, Don't blame others if you can blame yourself. tho this may be a tough sell when we consider that a person could always have taken SOME precaution that would have stopped whatever incident is under consideration, from which we must conclude from my rule that we must ALWAYS blame ourselves.)
Thank you for hearing me out. I will be eagerly awaiting your reply.
[As an aside, another writer, Richard Hartmann, responded to Gottfried's article with an inspired piece that deserves careful reading, and which I beiefly quote from in succeeding correspondence. Durable link here]
[Gottfried responded to me with the following short paragraph:]
"On 9/3/04 at 9:10 AM Paul Gottfried wrote:
Obviously we cannot reach agreement on this point because of the superhuman power you attribute to organized Jewry and the incorruptibility of Euro-American society. If gentiles were as gullible as you suggest and if Jews were as brilliant, it would be poetic justice for the Jews to dominate. PG
That's a cute point, Paul -- you are telling me that if the Jews really do have as much power as the 'bigots' say they do, then it is right for Jews to dominate. But then your logic would imply that, if the 'bigots' had the power, then it would be right for THEM to dominate -- and maybe run you and your fellow ethnics thru the 'gas chambers'. Which is of course to say that -- had the nazis had homicidal gas chambers in which they aerated Jews, then they, too, would have been perfectly justified in doing exactly that. Very good, Paul! A Jew that supports nazi homicide! We really must bruit this one about! And I shall surely do so!
But, just like in all our previous correspondence, you miss the point -- apparently deliberately. Because you have put on an image of a Jew willing to see Jewish faults, to criticize other Jews, you have had innumerable gentiles stretching out their hand to you in more-or-less friendship, asking you reasonable questions about the behavior of your fellow Jews. Asking why these Jews are trying to put white Western culture six feet under. Your response -- in the face of a mountainous assemblage of evidence -- is to airily dismiss the claim of Jewish dominance as absurd. So not only do you spurn gentile hands offered in friendship; not only do you insult these people by saying that the elephant in the livingroom is nonexistent; but you show yourself as totally intellectually dishonest, and functioning as yet another cog in the Jewish juggernaut that is rolling over the greatest civilization ever created, and one which has given Jews the greatest opportunity to survive and prosper that they have ever had.
Really, Paul, you have simply forced me -- a Jew-friendly gentile -- into the same corner where not-so-Jew-friendly Richard Hartmann found himself in analyzing your essay on 'Fred and Me', and I quote:
Fuck you, jew Gottfried, and fuck you, jew-tool Fred Reed.
When people find out what you've said, Paul, and the laughter and guffaws and the I-told-you-so's begin, you are going to start whining that 'dominance' doesn't necessarily mean 'genocide'. Well, maybe genocide isn't a logical consequence of dominance, but 'dominance' in this context clearly means that the fate of whites is in the hands of Jews, and what hope is there for whites in that case? You don't just have to look at the Jewish scriptures which refer to gentiles as 'cattle'; you don't just have to listen to rabbis saying that goyim are not worth a Jewish fingernail; you don't just have to see how Jewish-supported programs from feminism and minority rights to immigration and integration are destroying the white race; rather you have only to look at the real world example of how the Jews treat Palestinians, which is just like Jews fantasize that the nazis treated Jews. Which is to say that you can take your poetically-justified dominance and shove it right up where your head is.
But maybe you will claim that all you are advocating is the good old evolutionary struggle of 'survival of the fittest', which may confirm that nature's red in tooth and claw, but hardly that she should be condemned because of it. That move, however, transports our discussion out of the realm of morality, and in fact renders it moot by saying 'Que sera, sera' (Whatever will be will be). It is in effect an assertion that nature has no moral rules, so the Jews need not have them either. But then we are right back to where you positioned yourself -- if inadvertently -- on the 'gas chambers'; for if nature has no morality, and this implies that neither the Jews nor the nazis need it, then you are again forced to condone (supposed) nazi genocide, or indeed, anything whatsoever. Is that what a Professor of Philosophy is going to do?
A final note: One of the key concepts of cybernetics/systems theory is that large forces may be controlled by small ones. The classic case, of course is 'the button': If the President pushes it, he can destroy the world. In your case, you claim it is absurd to think that Jews can 'control the world' when there are so few of them; but in doing so, you reject the concept of cybernetics just stated. More particularly, when Jews are at the two great chokepoints of Western civilization -- the media and the money system -- there is little else that is not within their reach.
So, have you had your butt whipped enuf yet, Paul?
[Not to anyone's surprise in this neck of the woods, Gottfried did not reply.]
Followup - 3 years later:
To: Fred Reed
From: John 'Birdman' Bryant (www.thebirdman.org)
Date: 31 July 2007
In response to your 30 July 2007 column on 'The Crimes of Jews' at
I have just one basic thing to say: You are as DISHONEST AS HELL. While I have several reasons for saying that, the main one is just this: YOU REFUSE TO ACQUAINT YOURSELF WITH THE FACTS, EVEN THO THEY HAVE BEEN OFFERED TO YOU ON A SILVER PLATTER.
Let me explain. About 3 years ago, I wrote you the following letter which is permanently posted on my website at
http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/NetLoss/NetLoss-FredReed,PaulGottfried&Me.html [this file]
In that letter I offered you the facts about 'the crimes of Jews', as you so mockingly refer to them, in the form of several urls. Basically what I offered you were two things: First, a collection of my own essays on Jews which summarize and analyze the facts, and which are found in the Jewish Question section of my website at
and second, a HUGE collection of articles setting forth the facts upon which these essays are based, and which are so voluminous as to require being divided into the following TWENTY-SIX categories:
You can access this list of urls from the Articles of Others section, located at
Just scroll down to 'Jews'.
Let me say it again, Fred:
FIRST, there is a HUGE COLLECTION OF FACTS THAT PROVE 'THE CRIMES OF JEWS'
and SECOND, you are as DISHONEST AS HELL BECAUSE YOU REFUSE TO ACQUAINT YOURSELF WITH THEM WHILE SMEARING THOSE WHO SEEK TO INFORM YOU WITH GRATUITOUS INSULTS such as the one in your present article which reads:
"I get a steady rivulet of strange mail telling how horrible Jews are. Apparently there is no crime of which they are not guilty. I find myself wondering: How do they find the time to be so evil? Are they on amphetamines or something? A curious odiousness runs through it. I dont care whether you like Jews, but these birds need their heads examined."
No, Fred, we do not 'need our heads examined' -- rather YOU NEED TO EXAMINE THE FACTS. OK, maybe you don't think they are facts. Maybe they have been blown out of proportion. Or maybe they omit vital information. But so far, no serious questions as to their veracity have been put forward. One thing that HAS BEEN put forward, however, is the laws of numerous countries which make it illegal to state these facts. And why would that be, Fred? There can only be one answer: BECAUSE THESE FACTS REFUTE JEWISH LIES AND EXPOSE JEWISH COVERUPS.
So maybe it is YOU who needs your head examined for ignoring the elephant in your livingroom while smearing the people who point it out.
Got that, Fred?
Love and kisses,
PS: Speaking of honesty, Fred, I have a very special way of guaranteeing that I am honest. Anyone who has a serious criticism of me will get an answer, and if there is any major substance to the criticism, that criticism (and my answer) will be posted on my website. Then my readers can judge for themselves whether I am honest or dishonest, right or wrong, sane or crazy. As far as I know, I am the only website in the world that follows such a policy. So, based on the above policy, I am offering you a chance to embarrass me on my own website. Answer my letter, and I will post it, in however many exchanges of correspondence you want to have. Then we will let the readers decide whether it is you or whether it is I who is honest, or right, or sane. And you don't need to rely on just my readers -- bring your own by informing them of our correspondence. Or post it on your own site. But of course you won't, Fred. You won't because you are fundamentally dishonest. And ignorant. And planning to stay that way.
isn't free! To insure the
continuation of this website and the survival of its creator in
these financially-troubled times, please send donations directly to the Birdman at
PO Box 66683, St Pete Beach FL 33736-6683
"The smallest good deed is worth the grandest intention."
contribute today - buy our books - and spread the word to all
Remember: Your donation = our survival!
* * * Back to the Home Page of John "Birdman" Bryant, the World's Most Controversial Author * * *