Christopher Jon Bjerknes
Unable to refute the facts and reasoned arguments presented in my book The Jewish Genocide of Armenian Christians, but nevertheless determined to attack me and my work, Dr. Steven Leonard Jacobs has set about to defame me with falsehoods and innuendo and has found an outlet for his hateful venom in The Armenian Weekly; which published Jacobs' invective and error ridden attack without ever having spoken to me, and apparently did so without checking Jacobs' claims against the facts. Evidently, no form of name calling is too base, too childish, nor inappropriate, in Jacobs' mind.
Jacobs' carelessness as a scholar, or more correctly, as a smearmonger, is evident even in the title of his ad hominem attack, where he misspells my name as if "Bjerkness" [sic], a practice he continues throughout his article. Jacobs then adds insult to injury and shamelessly and childishly attacks my Norwegian heritage by stating that he deliberately mispronounces my name to insult me and my heritage,
"One such site—www.jewishracism.com— is that run by Christopher Jon Bjerkness [sic should be "Bjerknes"] (b. 1967) [sic should be "1965"] ('B'yerk-ness,' though I personally prefer to pronounce it with a 'j')"
Such is the nature of Jacobs' personal attack: childish, riddled with obvious errors of fact, and obnoxious.
Not content merely to insult my Norwegian name, Jacobs feels obliged to attack my Jewish heritage, as well, when Jacobs writes,
"Bjerkness, [sic] who claims pride in his Norwegian and Jewish heritage attempts to legitimate himself somewhat in the eyes of his readers by arguing that he has a 'Jewish connection' because his maternal grandfather, a famous Norwegian [sic] musician, was Jewish. Having such a relative, however, does not do so either in the eyes of the organized Jewish community or among the network of haters."
Note Jacobs' phrase "organized Jewish community". So, such a thing does exist!
Jacobs again erred when he incorrectly stated,
"Additionally, again without attribution, [Bjerknes] references, for example, 'well-intentioned people' (pg. 14), 'many people' [sic] (ibid.), 'many persons' (pg. 15). He also employs such rhetorical devices 'it is a well-known fact that' (pg. 16), 'it appears unquestionable that' (pg. 17) without any source citation whatsoever. "
It is clear in my book that my statement "well intentioned people", on page 14 of my book, refers to the London Times articles found below it in my book. Likewise, it is clear in my book that my statement "many persons" on page 15 refers to the London Times articles which appear directly below the reference. Jacobs' many errors are gross and obvious. Yet, he cannot legitimately point to a single error in my long treatise.
The statements "it is a well-known fact that", on page 16 of my book, and, "it appears unquestionable that", on page 17 of my book, which Jacobs falsely attributes to me, were not made by me; but rather, as is crystal clear from the text, are quotations from the Vienna Correspondent of the London Times. Jacobs makes an ass of himself with his many blatant errors and horrendous misrepresentations. Will Jacobs and The Armenian Weekly retract Jacobs' falsehoods, and in as prominent a fashion as they are made? I doubt it. The truth does not appear to be a priority for them.
Jacobs' failures as a scholar and as a human being are also evident in his lengthy citations from the thoroughly discredited smearmonger Eric Hufschmid's dishonest personal attacks against me. Jacobs dubs Hufschmid a "hater" and "conspiracist", and then eventually agrees with him.
The body of Jacobs' article contains approximately 4,500 words, of which almost 900 words are quotations from Eric Hufschmid and Henry Makow, neither of whom represents my views, nor speaks for me. Jacobs offers up his, Jacobs', conspiracy theories, which he states agree with those of Eric Hufschmid, whom Jacobs calls a "hater" and "conspiracist", when Jacobs states,
"For someone interested in the preposterousness of his claims, one can only assume that his intent is to inform his readers of his vast erudition and his intellectual and analytical prowess, especially those far less informed. Perhaps his fellow conspiracist Eric Hufschmid is correct after all, 'I suspect that he is exposing Einstein and the Armenian genocide only to lure you over to his site and put himself into the position of 'Einstein expert' and 'Armenian genocide expert.'' And other than Henry Makow’s reference to his Norwegian [sic] Jewish maternal grandfather, it is almost impossible to fine [sic] solid biographic data about him other than his Chicago (unlisted) residence. He appears in neither the databases of the Anti-Defamation League nor the American Jewish Committee. Who is he and why does he do what he does remain open-ended questions. Additionally, his website has no counter of 'hits,' nor do either of his two downloadable PDF books. Thus, we have no way of knowing how many may have read all or part of these texts. Nor do we know in what circles he travels."
So we see that it is Jacobs, not I, who has a common understanding and purpose with "hater" and "conspiracist" Eric Hufschmid. But Jacobs' blatant hypocrisy and gross distortions of fact do not end with his love of, and reliance upon, the deceitful smearmongering of Eric Hufschmid, nor do his errors of fact end with his misstatements of the spelling of my name, the date of my birth, the national origins of my maternal grandfather, or the statements found in my book which Jacobs falsely attributes to me in order to criticize them and me.
Jacobs falsely claims that John Wilkes Booth was not Jewish, when Jacobs writes,
"However, Bjerkness' true goal in this lengthy third chapter is to show his readers the overwhelming power of the Rothschild banking family, their 'desire to divide America up between Britain and France' (pg. 241), their employment of a 'Jewish actor (not true!) named John Wilkes Booth' to assassinate President Abraham Lincoln (14 April 1865) because of Lincoln’s opposition to their plans (pg. 242), their ownership of both 'the Pope and Rome' (pg. 257), and other such calumnies."
Jacobs hypocritically fails to cite any source for his false claim that Booth was not Jewish, while elsewhere falsely claiming that I have failed to provide evidence in support of my contentions when I have in fact provided voluminous proof of The Jewish Genocide of Armenian Christians. In point of fact, John Wilkes Booth was a Jewish actor. As but one source of countless to be had, I will quote a contemporary biographical account of the man found in The Life, Crime and Capture of John Wilkes Booth by George Alfred Townsend, at page 21, where John Wilkes Booth's father is described,
"The elder Booth in every land was a sojourner, as all his fathers were. Of Hebrew descent, and by a line of actors, he united in himself that strong Jewish physiognomy which, in its nobler phases, makes all that is dark and beautiful, and the combined vagrancy of all men of genius and all men of stage."
Jacobs falsely claims that I do not cite Jewish interpretations of the Hebrew Bible, when citing the Old Testament itself. Jacobs writes,
"Throughout this volume, there are many places where Bjerkness [sic] piles on passages from both the Hebrew Bible and New Testament as supposed supportive evidence for his claims. In doing so, however, he shows nothing of their historical contexts, nor how such material was understood either historically or contemporarily by their religious communities."
Contrary to Jacobs' misrepresentations, I do cite the Talmud and several other Jewish commentaries on the Old Testament. Taking as but one example of the failure of Jacobs' scholarship on this point, he falsely claims that I have provided no evidence to support my contention that Jews viewed the Armenians as Amalekites at the time of the Armenian Genocide and that the Jews are compelled by the Jewish God to exterminate the Amalekites. Jacobs writes,
"Without evidence, [Bjerknes] argues that there were six reasons why the Jews of Turkey were 'motivated' to murder Assyrians:1. Jews consider the Armenians to be the Amalekites of the Hebrew Bible, and in Jewish mythology, the Jewish God (sic) commands the Jews to utterly exterminate the Amalekites down to the last man, woman and child."
In fact, and contrary to Jacobs' falsehoods, in my book and elsewhere, I have cited numerous Jewish commentaries on the racist Jewish Old Testament doctrine that the Jews are duty bound to commit genocide against the Amalekites, and the fact that contemporary Jews, as well as their predecessors, believed that the Armenians were the Amalekites. For example, I quote the following Jewish sources in my book The Jewish Genocide of Armenian Christians, from pages 169-179, as well as discussing such Jewish rites as the holiday of Purim:
"In its article entitled 'ARMENIA', The Encyclopedia Judaica, Volume 3, The Macmillan Company, Jerusalem, (1971), cols. 472-476, at 473; states,'Armenia is also sometimes called Amalek in some sources, and Jews often referred to Armenians as Amalekites. This is the Byzantine term for the Armenians.'
In its article entitled 'ARMENIA', by Isaak Markon, The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Volume 1, The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Inc., New York, (1939), pp. 482-483, at 483; states:'Since the Armenians are considered descendants of the Amalekites, they are called among the Jews of the Orient also Timheh ('Thou shalt blot out,' Deut. 25:19, referring to the Amalekites).'"
"The Jewish Talmud, in the book of Sanhedrin, folio 20b, states,'It has been taught: R. Jose12 said: Three commandments were given to Israel when they entered the land; [i] to appoint a king; [ii] to cut off the seed of Amalek; [iii] and to build themselves the chosen house [i.e. the Temple] and I do not know which of them has priority. But, when it is said: The hand upon the throne of the Lord, the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation,13 we must infer that they had first to set up a king, for 'throne' implies a king, as it is written, Then Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord as king.14 Yet I still do not know which [of the other two] comes first, the building of the chosen Temple or the cutting off of the seed of Amalek. Hence, when it is written, And when He giveth you rest from all your enemies round about etc., and then [Scripture proceeds], Then it shall come to pass that the place which the Lord your God shall choose,15 it is to be inferred that the extermination of Amalek is first. And so it is written of David, And it came to pass when the king dwelt in his house, and the Lord had given him rest from his enemies round about, and the passage continues; that the king said unto Nathan the Prophet: See now, I dwell in a house of cedars etc.'[ I. Epstein, Editor, Sanhedrin 20b, The Babylonian Talmud, Volume 27, The Soncino Press, London, (1935), pp. 107-111, at 109.]
The Jewish Cabalistic book the Zohar, Volume I, 25a-25b, states that peoples other than the Jews will be exterminated when the Jews form a state in Palestine,'But as 'tohu and bohu' gave place to light, so when God reveals Himself they will be wiped off the earth. But withal redemption will not be complete until Amalek will be exterminated, for against Amalek the oath was taken that 'the Lord will have war against Amalek from generation to generation' (Ex. xvii, 16).'[H. Sperling and M. Simon, The Zohar, Volume 1, The Soncino Press, New York, (1933), p. 100.]
The Jewish Zohar, Volume I, 28b-29a, states,'At that time the mixed multitude shall pass away from the world [***] The mixed multitude are the impurity which the serpent injected into Eve. From this impurity came forth Cain, who killed Abel. [***] for they are the seed of Amalek, of whom it is said, 'thou shalt blot out the memory of Amalek' [***] Various impurities are mingled in the composition of Israel, like animals among men. One kind is from the side of the serpent; another from the side of the Gentiles, who are compared to the beasts of the field; another from the mazikin (goblins), for the souls [29a] of the wicked are literally the mazikin (goblins) of the world; and there is an impurity from the side of the demons and evil spirits; and there is none so cursed among them as Amalek, who is the evil serpent, the 'strange god'. He is the cause of all unchastity and murder, and his twin-soul is the poison of idolatry, the two together being called Samael (lit. poison-god). There is more than one Samael, and they are not all equal, but this side of the serpent is accursed above all of them.'[H. Sperling and M. Simon, The Zohar, Volume 1, The Soncino Press, New York, (1933), pp. 108-110.]
Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki's (Rashi's) Commentary on the Pentateuch, Exodus 17:14-16, states,'14. Write this (for) a memorial that Amalek came to battle against Israel prior to all the (other) nations. And rehearse (it) in the ears of Joshua who will bring into the land, that he should command Israel to recompense him (Amalek) for his deed. Here it was hinted to Moses that Joshua would bring in Israel to the land. For I will utterly blot out Therefore I admonish you thus, for I desire to blot them out. 15. And he called the name of it (I. e.,) of the altar. Adonai-nissi (lit., the Lord is my banner (or miracle). The Holy One Blessed Be He wrought for us here a 'miracle'. It is not that the altar was called 'Lord' but (that) he who mentioned the name of the altar would recall the miracle which the Omnipresent wrought: 'The Lord He is our miracle.' 16. And he said (I. e.,) Moses, The hand upon the throne of the Lord The hand of the Holy One Blessed Be He was raised to swear by His throne that there would be for Him war and hatred against Amalek forever. And why is (it written) (throne) and not stated [***]? Is then the (Divine) Name also divided in half (i. e.: [***] instead of the full name)? The Holy One Blessed Be He swore that His name will not be whole (i. e., [***] instead of the full name) nor His throne whole (i. e. [***]) instead of [***] until there will be blotted out the name of Amalek utterly. And when his (Amalek's) name will be blotted out (then) will the (Divine) Name be whole, and it is stated (Ps. 9.7): 'O thou enemy, the waste places are come to an end forever' this refers to Amalek, regarding whom it is written Amos 1.11): 'And his anger he kept forever,' 'And the cities which thou didst uproot Their very memorial is perished' (Ps., ibid. 7). What does (Scripture) state after this? 'But the Lord is enthroned forever' (verse 8)—behold the (Divine) Name is whole (expressed in full); 'He hath established His throne for judgment' (ibid.)—behold his throne is whole [***].'[A. Ben Isaiah, et al., The Pentateuch and Rashi's Commentary: A Linear Translation into English, S. S. & R. Publishing Company, Brooklyn, New York, (1949), pp. 187-188.]
Jewish historian Louis Ginzberg stated in his The Legend of the Jews,
'Although Amalek had now received the merited punishment from the hands of Joshua, still his enterprise against Israel had not been entirely unavailing. The miraculous exodus of Israel out of Egypt, and especially the cleaving of the sea, had created such alarm among the heathens, that none among them had dared to approach Israel. But this fear vanished as soon as Amalek attempted to compete in battle with Israel. Although he was terribly beaten, still the fear of the inaccessibility of Israel was gone. It was with Amalek as with that foolhardy wight who plunged into a scalding-hot tub. He scalded himself terribly, yet the tub became a little cooled through his plunge into it. Hence God was not content with the punishment Amalek received in the time of Moses, but swore by His throne and by His right hand that He would never forget Amalek's misdeeds, that in this world as well as in the time of the Messiah He would visit punishment upon him, and would completely exterminate him in the future world. So long as the seed of Amalek exists, the face of God is, as it were, covered, and will only then come to view, when the seed of Amalek shall have been entirely exterminated.
God had at first left the war against Amalek in the hands of His people, therefore He bade Joshua, the future leader of the people, never to forget the war against Amalek; and if Moses had listened intently, he would have perceived from this command of God that Joshua was destined to lead the people into the promised land. But later, when Amalek took part in the destruction of Jerusalem, God Himself took up the war against Amalek, saying, 'By My throne I vow not to leave a single descendant of Amalek under the heavens, yea, no one shall even be able to say that this sheep or that wether belonged to an Amalekite.'
God bade Moses impress upon the Jews to repulse no heathen should he desire conversion, but never to accept an Amalekite as a proselyte. It was in consideration of this word of God that David slew the Amalekite, who announced to him the death of Saul and Jonathan; for he saw in him only a heathen, although he appeared in the guise of a Jew.
Part of the blame for the destruction of Amalek falls upon his father, Eliphaz. He used to say to Amalek: 'My son, dost thou indeed know who will possess this world and the future world?' Amalek paid no attention to this allusion to the future fortune of Israel, and his father urged it no more strongly upon him, although it would have been his duty to instruct his son clearly and fully. He should have said to him: 'My son, Israel will possess this world as well as the future world; dig wells then for their use and build roads for them, so that thou mayest be judged worthy to share in the future world.' But as Amalek had not been sufficiently instructed by his father, in his wantonness he undertook to destroy the whole world. God, who tries the reins and the heart, said to him: 'O thou fool, I created thee after all the seventy nations, but for thy sins thou shalt be the first to descend into hell.'
To glorify the victory over Amalek, Moses built an altar, which God called 'My Miracle,' for the miracle God wrought against Amalek in the war of Israel was, as it were, a miracle for God. For so long as the Israelites dwell in sorrow, God feels with them, and a joy for Israel is a joy for God, hence, too, the miraculous victory over Israel's foe was a victory for God.'[L. Ginzberg, The Legend of the Jews, Volume 3, The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia, (1911/1954), pp. 61-63.]
The Judaic religious doctrine of the genocide of the seed of Amalek is alive today. Yehoshafat Harkabi wrote in his book Israel's Fateful Hour,
'Some nationalistic religious extremists frequently identify the Arabs with Amalek, whom the Jews are commanded to annihilate totally (Deuteronomy 25:17-19). As children, we were taught that this was a relic of a bygone and primitive era, a commandment that had lapsed because Sennacherib the Assyrian king had mixed up all the nations so it was no longer possible to know who comes of the seed of Amalek. Yet some rabbis insist on injecting a contemporary significance into the commandment to blot out Amalek.'[Y. Harkabi, Israel's Fateful Hour, Harper & Row, New York, (1988), p. 149.]"
"The Jewish hatred of the Armenian 'Amalekites' during the period of the Jewish genocide of Armenian Christians is well documented. Jews in general turned a blind eye to the slaughter of Armenians, which was conducted under the leadership of Dönmeh Jews, as the Hebrew language newspaper Hatzvi noted on 16 May 1909, while mocking Jewish prejudice,'A slight grimace on their lips, a short heartfelt sigh, and nothing more. The Armenians are not Jews, and according to folk tradition the Armenians are nothing more than Amaleks! Amaleks? We would give them help? To whom? To Amaleks? Heaven forbid!'[Quoted in English translation in Y. Auron, Zionism and the Armenian Genocide: The Banality of Indifference, Transaction Publishers, London, (2002), p. 126.]
In his book Reckless Rites: Purim and the Legacy of Jewish Violence, Elliott Horowitz wrote of the Jewish stigmatization of the Armenians as if 'Amalekites','In the nineteenth century the term 'Amalekite' was almost always used negatively with regard to Armenians, possibly as a result of the economic competition that often prevailed between them and the Jews, both of whom were known for their sly business practices. [***] In 1839, as mentioned in the introduction, the British missionary Joseph Wolff found it 'remarkable that the Armenians, who are detested by the Jews as the supposed descendants of the Amalekites, are the only Christian church who have interested themselves for the protection and conversion of the Jews.' Three years later, as also mentioned there, the Scottish missionaries Bonar and McCheyne suggested that 'the peculiar hatred which the Jews bear to the Armenians may arise from a charge often brought against them, namely that Haman was an Armenian, and that the Armenians are the Amalekites of the Bible.'58 Late in the nineteenth century Joseph Judah Chorny reported hearing from the Jews of Georgia, among whom he had traveled, of their ancestral tradition that the Armenians were descendants of the Amalekites, and another Jewish traveler reported a bizarre practice in eastern Galicia, whereby the Armenians who did business with the local Jews would mourn Haman’s death every Purim, and light candles in his memory.59 If there was any truth to the latter report, it is likely that Armenians were paid to do so by the local Jews, as a form of Purim entertainment, just as elsewhere in Eastern Europe Jews would often hire Christians to play the role of Haman in their Purimshpiel. During the final decade of the nineteenth century the Latvian-born scholar and polemicist Ephraim Deinard published a (privately printed) pamphlet against the use on the holiday of Sukkot of etrogim (citrons) from Greece, especially those grown on the island of Corfu, where, in 1891, a blood libel had caused most of the seven thousand local Jews to flee for their lives. The etrogim of Corfu had been a controversial subject throughout the nineteenth century, primarily because of problematic rabbinic supervision, and the controversy had been rekindled in 1875 after dealers raised their prices. Deinard's pamphlet, which carried the provocative title Milhama la-Shem be-'Amalek (God’s War with Amalek), was perhaps the most rabid contribution to the renewed debate. Among the reasons he gave for boycotting the etrogim of Greece was that its denizens were descendants of Amalek.60 His strange confidence in making this assertion would seem to have drawn on the tradition maintained for centuries that the Armenians (including members of their large Diaspora) were Amalekites. Both the Armenians and the Greeks were minorities within the world of Christendom with a prominence nonetheless in the holy city of Jerusalem. The venerable tradition of regarding the former as Amalekites evidently allowed Deinard to extend the category to the latter as well.'[E. Horowitz, Reckless Rites: Purim and the Legacy of Jewish Violence (Jews, Christians, and Muslims from the Ancient to the Modern World), Princeton University Press, (2006), pp. 124-125, see also 10-11, 122-123.]"
After providing these extensive post-Biblical sources on the Jewish belief that Armenians are Amalekites, I then provided several quotations from crypto-Jewish "Young Turks" demanding the annihilation of the Armenians, which mirror the Biblical commandment on the Jews to exterminate the Amalekites. Jacobs' misrepresentation of my book is grossly inaccurate. One need only read the first page of my book to encounter the many and varied sources I quote as proof of my arguments, not one of which has Jacobs refuted in any way other than by smear and innuendo.
Jacobs again errs and demonstrates the weakness of his scholarship when he falsely claims that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are a purported account of conversations of Rabbis in a graveyard. Jacobs confuses the Protocols with Hermann Goedsche's book Biarritz of 1868, which contained a chapter, "The Jewish Cemetery in Prague and the Council of Representatives of the Twelve Tribes of Israel". Jacobs incorrectly writes,
"This has been very much in evidence since the beginning of the 19th century with the publication of the notorious Russian forgery The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, a totally spurious and fraudulent document supposedly telling the story of a secret midnight cemetery meeting of a group of rabbis at which their leader spells out their plans in twenty-four 'protocols' for world take-over."
Jacobs seeks to attack me for pointing out the indisputable facts that, as I wrote in my book,
"In conformity with the Jewish plans revealed in The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion in 1905, Jewish leaders met in Masonic lodges in Salonika, Italy, Paris and Vienna, and plotted a coup d'état against the Sultan of Turkey Abdul Hamid II. Jews and crypto-Jewish Dönmeh of the Committee for Union and Progress took over complete control of the Turkish Empire in 1909. They had several goals. Their primary objective was to establish a segregated 'Jewish State' in Palestine. They also sought to instigate World War I, to slaughter entire Christian populations, and to destroy the Turkish Empire and supplant Islamic religion and culture with a soulless and cultureless society engineered by Jewish positivists in Vienna, Paris, Italy and Salonika."
Jacobs has not shown a single error of fact or logic in my statements, though he has himself grossly erred.
Contrary to Jacobs' false claims, I made clear in my book The Jewish Genocide of Armenian Christians, on page 227, that my arguments regarding Hitler's Zionism are presented in detail in my book The Manufacture and Sale of Saint Einstein, when I wrote,
"When the Jews discovered that emancipation led to assimilation, they imprisoned Napoleon. Napoleon served as the Messianic model for another Zionist dictator, the next pseudo-Messiah to attempt to 'restore the Jews to Palestine', Adolf Hitler. This is explained in detail in my book The Manufacture and Sale of Saint Einstein."
Jacobs falsely claimed that,
"Early on, he makes the following claim (without any supportive evidence) which appears throughout the text:Jewish leaders then placed Adolf Hitler in power in the hopes that he would chase the Jews of Europe into Palestine. (pg. 20)[xxiii]"
In addition to my book on Einstein, those interested in the subject of Hitler's Zionism are encouraged to listen to my interview of Jim Condit, Jr.:
Jim Condit, Jr.'s excellent lecture on the subject can be viewed on Google Video for free:
Jacobs' absurd and utterly false claims that my book does not provide any evidence that the Jews are responsible for the Armenian Genocide is best refuted by a reading of my book The Jewish Genocide of Armenian Christians.
To refute every error and falsehood in Jacobs' article would be a tiresome and unproductive chore, so many and so obvious are his blunders. What I have said will suffice for now. Let us see if he retracts his nonsense and apologizes for it. While he is at it, he should apologize to the Armenian dead for the crimes the Jews perpetrated against them.