Friday, May 30, 2008

The New Anti-Semitism

Actually the new anti-Semitism isn't that "new" (as will be shown below), but it does reflect a change in the direction of anti-Jewish paranoia over the last twenty-five years.

In the decades just after World War II, animosity towards Jews was typically confined to racialist neo-Nazi organizations. Amongst neo-fascists, of the Italian variety, anti-Semitism was less pronounced or simply non-existent. After all, Mussolini's original Fascist Party allowed Jewish members and had no racial program until 1938, when it came under the ideological pressure of its new ally Nazi Germany. Even then, anti-Jewish measures were relatively lenient (when compared to Hitler's program). Part of this was because Jews were a small and highly assimilated minority in Italian society.

But a new synthesis of radical nationalism emerged in the 1980s. Anti-Semitism took a slightly different turn. It became less markedly "racialist," but it was also more widespread. One reason for this change was that anti-Semitism was sold as "anti-Zionism" and opposition to Israel in conjunction with attacks on "capitalism" and America (which was seen as a multi-cultural cesspool as dangerous as, or more so, than Soviet Russia).

Contemporary hostility towards Jews can therefore be seen as part of a broader "anti-liberal" (anti-Western) crusade with roots in a gnostic "traditionalism". This anti-Jewish view is less the product of social Darwinian theories than it is of an apocalyptic political mentality. Jew-haters can be found across the racial spectrum. Even among white anti-Semites and Hitler-admirers there are people who are not your typical racialists. In the Holocaust revisionist camp, Ted O'Keefe—who writes admiring studies of the Nazi Waffen SS—is (or was) in a long-standing relationship with a Japanese woman. Bradley Smith, organizer of the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH), has a Mexican wife. John Sharpe (leader of the Legion of St. Louis) is married to a Lebanese woman.

While these attitudes might seem less malevolent than "Aryan" race worship, it is in some ways more insidious. For one thing it allows people like John Sharpe or E. Michael Jones to deflect criticism by saying that they aren't "anti-Semitic," as if racial standards were the only determining factor. An excellent response to this rhetorical sidestepping is found on Christopher Blosser's Against the Grain entry for January 19, 2007. The relevant point is made in his comments about the religious anti-Semitism of Fr. Dennis Fahey

A common strategy of those who intellectually flirt with (or worse, embrace) the ideological right is to confine the definition of anti-semitism to a purely racial hatred of the Jewish people, so as to excuse or explain away any other form of animosity toward the Jewish people.... Unfortunately, Fahey's restricted definition of anti-semitism didn't prohibit him from indulging in fantasies of Judeo-Masonic conspiracies so off the wall that Hillaire Belloc was moved to say "The thing is nonsense on the face of it."

Yet another way of understanding the apparent contradictions of anti-Semitism and neo-Nazism is to recall that even Hitler's Germany was far from consistent in its race policies. Berlin was not only allied with the Asians of Japan, but it allowed the recruitment of Crimean Tatars (also Asians) into its armed forced in the war in Russia. Even its anti-Slavism was selective. German Nazis persecuted Poles and Russians, but allied themselves with Slovaks, Croatians and Ukrainians. Ultimately, claims about racial purity are belied by animosities which are driven more by political and cultural factors than purely biological ones. This was certainly the case in Hitler's support for Muslim and Arab nationalists, which has come to light since the publication of Der Mufti von Jerusalem und die Nationalsozialisten ("The Mufti and the Holocaust") by Klaus Gensicke (see book review in Policy Review). When the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin Al-Husseini, was first received by Hitler in Berlin (where he would take up residence for the remainder of the war), the Nazi leader assured him that "the sole German aim will be the destruction of the Jews living in the Arab space under the protection of British power." Arabs were racially as Semitic as Jews but their cultural and political position was totally different.

Nazi racial views boiled down to an irrational prejudice rather than a "scientific" worldview. Of course, Hitler looked with disdain on non-white Arabs, but during the war he was willing to modify his bigotry to suit wartime ambitions. Likewise we see that since the first Gulf War of 1991, anti-Semites and Hitlerites sought alliances with the Muslim world. They praised the late Saddam Hussein and now support Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (for his anti-Israeli diatribes and promotion of Holocaust revisionism).

This is not to say that racism isn't a problem. The hatred of any racial or ethnic group is an attempt to "simplify" some deep-seated social problem. And plenty of racially-motivated anti-Semites are still around. In fact a lot of them are to be found at events attended by people like Jones and Sharpe who, even as they publicly disavow racism, are nevertheless willing to join with old-fashioned bigots in "common cause" against the perceived global threat of the Jews.

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

More on Fiore: Partying with Nazis

As noted in our last post, the "traditional Catholic" paper The Remnant has come out endorsing groups involved with Roberto Fiore, who is a major figure in the far-right, not only participating in violent Italian political gangs but in Europe-wide neo-fascism. Some solid proof of this is from a report by an Italian site that describes a 2006 Nazi rock-fest in Italy, attended by Fiore, which featured openly pro-Hitler displays.

During that event, called "Campo d'Azione 2006", souvenir stands sold badges showing the face of Hitler to be sewn onto sweaters as well as books denying the existence of the Holocaust, like the one written by Carlo Mattogno and entitled "Auschwitz: fine di una leggenda" (Auschwitz, the end of a legend). Until very late at night, in the large hangar that during the day was animated by speeches and discussions, we assisted to a very disquieting show featuring several rock bands frantically acclaimed by a crowd performing the nazi-fascist stiff-arm salute and sporting a huge banner, printed for the occasion and stating in large capital letters: "MORE NAZISM FOR US ALL".

But this is nothing new, since Fiore's political beliefs have been an open book for years. Fringe Watch has discussed his activities on a number of occasions:

Awareness of Mr. Fiore as an outspoken fascist is important since he has been trying to inject extremism into Catholic circles since the early 1980s.

The Remnant-Fiore Connection?

In late 2006 the leftist Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) issued "The Dirty Dozen," its expose of alleged political extremism in Catholic circles. As noted previously on this blog, "the Southern Poverty Law Center—being inexperienced in the doctrinal nuances of Catholicism... really does more harm than good in addressing these matters, in that they tar 'traditionalist Catholics' with a wide brush."

Still, there is a sad irony in that some of the SPLC's charges are sticking. One example is Michael Matt's Remnant newspaper, which is nothing if not idiosyncratic. The Remnant has seen fit to maintain neo-fascist and anti-Semitic connections despite growing criticism. And the odd thing is that just a few years ago Michael Matt was denouncing these same trends. What changed his mind? He'll have to answer that himself.

Certain points made about The Remnant by the SPLC are impossible to explain away, like articles which endorse Holocaust revisionism or indulge in paranoid Jewish conspiracy theories (see bottom of this page of the SPLC site). Now, if it had been a one-off thing, a mere journalistic eccentricity, it could be overlooked. But there's a real trend here which has only hardened in recent weeks with Michael Matt's endorsement of a website called Tradizione, Cattolicesimo & Politica, which is in league with the neo-fascist Forza Nuova of Roberto Fiore. For more details, see the May 24 report by The Chambers Initiative.

As much as one might dislike leftists rummaging in the dirty laundry of fellow Catholics, until we see fit to clean it ourselves, we can expect outsiders to complain about the mess. Nor should the SPLC reportage become a red herring. After all, how can Michael Matt's paper treat the SPLC reports as paranoia but do nothing to distance itself from the political lunatics?

To sum up, it was Fringe Watch and other Catholic commentators (conservative and traditional) who warned about this problem long before the professional purveyors of leftwing "tolerance" got hold of it. But people didn't listen. Perhaps they thought it was a nuisance that would just go away. Maybe... but at the offices of The Remnant it hasn't.

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

Robert Sungenis vs. Bishop Rhoades: a Chronology


  • July 2007 After an extended period of controversy and public argument with former supporters and volunteers to his website, "Catholic Apologetics International", about his derogatory views concerning the Jews, Sungenis was given two weeks by his bishop -- Reverend Kevin C. Rhoades -- to "desist from commenting on the Jewish people and Judaism both online and in all other publications" or his bishop would denounce him publicly.

    Sungenis claimed that after a subsequent meeting with representatives from his diocese and the USCCB, he was allowed to “continue publishing and speaking on those matters of Catholic doctrine which pertain to the Jewish covenant and the role of Israel in salvation history, provided that you take an approach quite different in tone and content from the one pursued in the past.”

  • August 2007 Sungenis published a letter on his website acknowledging that his bishop and the executive director for ecumenical and inter-religious affairs of the USCCB indicated that “I have crossed the line into inappropriate language and accusations” and Sungenis eventually acceded to their assessment of his work, acknowledging that his writings had "caused confusion regarding what is and is not the authentic position of the Catholic Church towards the Jewish people." He also conveyed a willingness to obey their directives by removing his objectionable articles, at least until such time as they can be rewritten with “a human and Christian spirit,” as per the requirements of Catholic canon law (c. 822, 2-3). However, he expressed doubt as to whether he would ever have sufficient time to accomplish that task. Sungenis further declared that his bishop and vicar are "the shepherds God has placed as overseers of my life and work" and that it is "a privilege to obey them." At the end of this letter, Sungenis opted to list seven “theological positions about the Jews” to serve as a “permanent fixture on the website of CAI [now BTF] so that everyone will know where we stand from here on out.”

  • October 2007 - Sungenis publishes a new article claiming that as the bishop did not agree with his viewpoints, he changed his mind and ordered Sungenis to “remove the recently posted letter and that you refrain from publishing on all topics directly or tangentially related to Judaism or the Jewish people.” The letter was eventually removed from his website. However, Sungenis purportedly wrote to the bishop stating that he is not required to obey him if he issues orders that are in conflict with the faith and morals of the Catholic Church, and that Sungenis would only comply under the aegis of a canonical trial. Additionally, Sungenis indicated that he would be "quite happy to expose" to the Vatican the errors he claimed Bishop Rhoades adheres to. According to Sungenis, the bishop did not respond to his proposal.

  • February 7, 2008 Sungenis' bishop replied in writing to a letter from Sungenis' former vice president, Michael Forrest. In the letter, the bishop confirmed that he had been in contact with Sungenis about his Jewish writings and that he had "hoped for a more positive outcome." However, while Sungenis has indicated that his bishop "ordered me to stop writing about the Jews and Judaism altogether", the bishop himself made no mention of whether or not Sungenis was currently under any formal command.

    The primary thrust of Bishop Rhoades' letter was a clarification of his doctrinal beliefs in regard to certain covenantal issues involving the Jewish people. The bishop also judged the statements Sungenis made about him and his beliefs as "slanderous and erroneous." (See: "Bishop Rhoades, Sungenis, and the Jews", by Leon Suprenant Catholics United for the Faith February 23, 2008).

  • January 2008 Sungenis responded with an article entitled My Reply to Bishop Rhoades, claiming that the questions posed to Bishop Rhoades may have been designed "specifically to side-step the most crucial issue at hand" (ibid, p.3) and that the bishop must affirm three statements composed by Sungenis in order to establish his orthodoxy (ibid, p. 12).

  • April 2008 Catholics United for the Faith and 10 individuals (many former colleagues of Sungenis' Catholic Apologetics International) published a lengthy rebuttal entitled "By Sungenis Alone". The authors of the rebuttal claim that Sungenis has been more than satisfactorily answered by his bishop and that the reasons for the bishop's cease and desist order are unrelated to any covenantal issues involving the Jewish people.

    * * *


    Sungenis’ bishop also purportedly threatened to “deprive him of his right to use the word ‘Catholic’ on his website and written material" in the summer of 2007.

    In early fall, 2007 the "Catholic" moniker was removed from the title of Sungenis' organization, which now operates under the name Bellarmine Theological Forum.


Historical summary provided by Wikipedia; a reading of "By Sungenis Alone" is recommended, as it provides detailed documentation on the conflict with his bishop.

Thursday, April 03, 2008

Summary of Derek Holland Interview

The following is a response by Matt Anger, creator of Fringe Watch. Mr. Anger is a former acquaintance of Derek Holland, the European nationalist writer and intellectual, who has just been interviewed on the subject of the Middle East by Judith Sharpe of the "In the Spirit of Chartres" (ISOC) committee (see previous post).

Judith Sharpe speaks of "allegations" about Derek Holland. Well, there are the facts, which aren't alleging anything. Derek Holland was Chairman of the National Front (NF) and later a leader of the International Third Position (ITP). He still associates himself with the Political Soldier book, published originally by the NF and recently reprinted by Mr. Holland's associates in the European neo-fascist movement. A new Swedish version has been released with his approval.

The only part where "allegations" come in, perhaps, is where we refer to these activities as extremist. Let's leave off that label for a moment. It is safe to say that the ITP—as well as its predecessor and successor movements—publicly identifies itself with fascism, national socialism (Nazism), and similar ideologies. They are frequently sympathetic to Marxism as well. This is obvious in the case of Final Conflict (with the interesting domain name of politicalsoldier.net), a belligerent skinhead fanzine set up by the ITP in the early 90s. The Third Position movement endorses political revolution, youth cults/cultural subversion, and racialist policies. I think it's safe to say that most people (not just "a few," as is claimed) draw the proper inferences.

If there are any allegations, they come from Mr. Holland. He derides opponents as "cowardly" for being anonymous. This is an interesting attitude. Third Positionists often write under pseudonyms. Mr. Holland has authored some major works of radical nationalist literature under the name of Liam Connolly. I also recall that it was standard practice in the ITP never, or very rarely, to disclose names. Anyone going back through their old publications will be struck by the lack of bylines or the use of fake names.

But why don't we address the topic of the Middle East? Actually, it's Mrs. Sharpes' fault. She does Holland a disservice by mentioning the political controversy up-front, and so one finds it odd that they spend so much time defending Holland's right to discuss foreign policy views before they even tell us what they are.

Should we listen to the message, rather than the messenger, as Holland asks us to? The problem is that Holland and John Sharpe, and their comrades, have never been particularly candid about their other activities. Yet neither will they disavow them. There is the Legion of St. Louis, set up by John Sharpe, promoting its anti-Semitic views (see related commentary). The site is now anonymous. Perhaps Holland will complain to his friend about this.

Mrs. Sharpe and Derek Holland lament the current controversy, saying there is no need for it. But controversy doesn't "just happen." People go looking for it. As for the stated foreign policy and economic positions of John Sharpe and Holland, we're not really interested in them. After all, there are plenty of other non-controversial anti-war commentators and proponents of Distributism we have never bothered to criticize. We we do criticize is the attempted marriage of Catholic faith and oddball political hobbies. If Sharpe, et. al should decide to drop the pretense of advocating Catholic Social Teaching, then we will, quite simply, drop the subject.

Sunday, March 16, 2008

Upcoming Derek Holland interview with the "Spirit of Chartres Committee"

The "In the Spirit of Chartres" Commmittee announces on their website an upcoming interview (April 1, 2008) with "Derek Holland/D.L. O'huallachain", on "The Middle East Tragedy from a Catholic, Political, and Historical Perspective: Understanding the Reasoning Behind Mass Murder."

The "In the Spirit of Chartres Committee" (SPCC) was founded by John Sharpe’s parents, John, Sr. and Judith, in 1998. The committee sponsors two annual events in Phoenix, AZ: a “Spirit of Chartres” Pilgrimage modelled on the annual SSPX event in France and a Catholic Restoration Conference.

Among the books promoted by the SoCC: Andrew Hitchcock's The Synagogue of Satan, which "provides a chronological account of the invisible world government operating from within the worldwise Jewish community" (Excerpts from the book can be found here), Michael Hoffmann's Judaism's Strange Gods, Msgr. Jouin's The Holy See and the Jews, the notorious forgery The Protocol of Zion, along with the usual roster of books by Fr. Denis Fahey.

John Sharpe to speak at the 2008 Saint Benedict Center Conference

John Sharpe will be speaking at the twelfth annual Saint Benedict Center Conference, billed as the "the largest gathering of Catholic traditionalists in the United States" held in Richmond, New Hampshire.

For more information on the 'Saint Benedict Center', see Russ Provost's SBCWatch.blogspot.com. In a response to an inquiry last year, Edward J Arsenault, Moderator of the Curia, Manchester NH responded:

The Saint Benedict Center has no permission or authority to exercise any Ministry on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church in New Hampshire. Bishop McCormack has and will continue to do all that he can to encourage people to refrain from participating in any of the spiritual exercises at the Saint Benedict Center.

For my part, I will continue to make it clear that Saint Benedict Center has no affiliation with the Roman Catholic Church in any way.

Saturday, March 15, 2008

Anti-Semitism on the Rise in Germany?

Far-Right Attacks Reached New Record in Germany in 2007:
A record number of far-right attacks were perpetrated in Germany last year, according to a former government spokesman turned campaigner. Uwe-Karsten Heye, the founder of pressure group Gesicht Zeigen! (Show your Faces), said about 600 people were attacked by neo-Nazis last year.

Speaking in Berlin Monday, Heye warned about a rise in right-wing extremism, particularly in eastern Germany. According to Heye, there were 11 attacks on businesses run by immigrants in the eastern state of Brandenburg in 2007. "Behind the attacks is a strategy by neo-Nazis to destroy livelihoods and drive out immigrants," he said.

U.S. State Dept. releases report on "Contemporary Global Anti-Semitism"

Report: Anti-Semitism on the rise globally CNN. March 14, 2008:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A report from the U.S. State Department details "an upsurge" across the world of anti-Semitism -- hostility and discrimination toward Jewish people.

"Today, more than 60 years after the Holocaust, anti-Semitism is not just a fact of history, it is a current event," the report says.

The report -- called Contemporary Global Anti-Semitism and given to Congress on Thursday -- is dedicated to the memory of the late U.S. Rep. Tom Lantos, a survivor of the Holocaust, the extermination of 6 million Jews during World War II.

The report details physical acts of anti-Semitism, such as attacks, property damage, and cemetery desecration. It also lists manifestations such as conspiracy theories concerning Jews, Holocaust denial, anti-Zionism and the demonization of Israel.

"Over much of the past decade, U.S. embassies worldwide have noted an increase in anti-Semitic incidents, such as attacks on Jewish people, property, community institutions, and religious facilities," the report says.

The report also deals with efforts to combat the bigotry, described by Gregg J. Rickman, the department's special envoy to monitor and combat anti-Semitism, as "one of the oldest forms of malicious intolerance."

The report says violent acts and desecration of Jewish property happen whether there are a lot of Jews or only a few living in the region. Bigoted rhetoric, conspiracy theories regarding Jews, and anti-Semitic propaganda are transmitted over the airwaves and on the Internet.

It says that although Nazism and fascism are rejected by the West "and beyond," blatant forms of anti-Semitism are "embraced and employed by the extreme fringe."

"Traditional forms of anti-Semitism persist and can be found across the globe. Classic anti-Semitic screeds, such as 'The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion' and 'Mein Kampf' remain commonplace.

"Jews continue to be accused of blood libel, dual loyalty, and undue influence on government policy and the media, and the symbols and images associated with age-old forms of anti-Semitism endure."

New forms of anti-Semitism are reflected in rhetoric that compares Israel to the Nazis and attributes "Israel's perceived faults to its Jewish character."


Monday, February 18, 2008

James Hitchcock on "Abortion and the Catholic Right"

"Abortion and the Catholic Right" by James Hitchcock. Human Life Review Spring 2007 -- a study of how the Catholic (re: "traditionalist") Right -- as represented by Joseph Sobran, Paul Likoudis and contributors to The Wanderer & The Remnant -- have been obsessed with their opposition to democratic-capitalism, "neoconservatives" and the Bush administration, to such an immense degree that they now hold the aformentioned issues as being "more pressing" than abortion -- even to the point of, in the case of The Wanderer, celebrating the defeat of Republican candidates.

Some food for thought / discussion:
The opposition of these conservative Catholics to the Bush administration has also led some of them to reject important pro-life allies. In their fierce denunciations of "neo-conservatives," Sobran and Likoudis ignore the fact that neo-conservatives, especially in the pages of their leading publication, The Weekly Standard, are among the few secular people enrolled in the prolife cause. TWS regularly publishes strong and highly intelligent articles against abortion, fetal-stem-cell research, euthanasia, assisted suicide, and other life issues, as well as against radical feminism and the homosexual movement. It is a moral conservatism that is not accidental, since "neoconservatives" are usually defined as people who became disillusioned with traditional liberalism on a variety of issues.

Similarly, Likoudis's dismissal of Santorum as merely a puppet of the White House and of a neo-conservative conspiracy impugned the integrity of a man who had been regarded as one of the most principled and effective Senate champions of traditional moral causes, and it is not at all clear whether Santorum was opposed primarily for his lapse in supporting Specter or for his heresy on other issues. Since his opponent was also pro-life, opposition to Santorum could be justified, but some of his Catholic critics implied that he had to be turned out of office without regard for the life issues.

Economics appears to be the engine that is now driving The Wanderer's stand on public issues, and establishing its priorities. Neither liberals nor conservatives, as those terms are understood in the U.S. today, represent classical Catholic social teachings. But since the U.S. is a predominantly capitalist country, the teachings criticizing capitalism appear more pertinent to our condition than do the teachings against socialism; so, to the degree that the Republican Party champions the free market, some Catholics draw the conclusion that it is in effect immoral to support Republican candidates.

While this is usually considered a liberal idea, in the pages of The Wanderer it has a conservative counterpart that is in many ways almost indistinguishable from the liberal position. The paper stops short of advising readers precisely how to vote in order to achieve true social justice, but its economic ideas seem logically to lead to the conclusion that only strong state action can overcome the plutocratic exploitation of the people, something that has been the premise of left-wing American politics since the 1890s. . . .

* * *
. . . Many, perhaps most, committed pro-lifers are former Democrats who were rejected by their party and found themselves welcomed by the Republicans. Most of those converts are probably not conservatives in a principled ideological way, so that their presence in the Republican ranks has the effect of helping facilitate the "betrayal" of conservative principles that Sobran and others decry.

Hard-core conservatives tend now to hearken back nostalgically to the days of Barry Goldwater, ignoring the fact the Goldwater turned out to be fanatically pro-abortion, as well as very liberal on most other social issues, something that gives pro-lifers little reason to want to be "true" conservatives. Sobran's way of dealing with the life issues can then be seen as the conservative counterpart to the liberals' "seamless garment"-an attempt to persuade pro-lifers to transcend their "narrow" outlook and support a wider agenda.

The widely held, apparently self-evident, assumption that the pro-life movement is the creature of the "religious Right" has blinded even most informed observers to the unexpected and intriguing fact that, for some on the Catholic part of "the Right," the life issues are no longer paramount, if they ever were.



James Hitchcock is a professor of history at St. Louis University, is the author of The Supreme Court and Religion in American Life (Princeton University Press, 2004).

Thursday, February 14, 2008

E. Michael Jones / John Sharpe's appearance at Catholic U. opposed by SPLC

Catholic University nixes lectures, by Julia Duin. Washington Times February 13, 2008:
Catholic University abruptly canceled an 11-part lecture series, "Building Catholic Communities," on Monday, after the Southern Poverty Law Center complained that two of the scheduled lecturers are anti-Semites.

The university released a statement yesterday saying the lecturers "appear to espouse views that are contrary to the mission and values of Catholic University. In light of this development, the dean of the school decided to cancel the lecture series," referring to Randall Ott, dean of Catholic's school of architecture.

Mark Potok, director of the SPLC's Intelligence Project, called the school to complain about the participation of E. Michael Jones, editor of the South Bend, Ind.-based Culture Wars magazine, and John Sharpe, founder of the Norfolk-based IHS Press and the Legion of St. Louis, an Internet-based forum.

"We were surprised that Catholic University was allowing two raging anti-Semites on their campus," said Mr. Potok. "A simple Google search will show you the frightening ideology of these men."

"These are not the Latin Mass traditionalists," Mr. Potok said. "These are the people who reject Vatican II reforms. They are out of [actor Mel Gibson's father] Hutton Gibson's world, in saying that the Jews are destroying the world."


Some thoughts:


  • The prospect of "building Catholic communities" as a bulwark against secular culture (and presumably along with it the distributist theories of Chesterton and Belloc) seems innocuous enough. However, given John Sharpe's questionable ideological ties and views on the Jews (as one might gather from past online investigations), together with E. Michael Jones' own contributions, I agree that Catholic University of America is right to be cautious about the involvement of these men with any project.
  • That said, I also think the Southern Poverty Law Center -- being inexperienced in the doctrinal nuances of Catholicism and what constitutes "traditionalist Catholicism" -- really does more harm than good in addressing these matters, in that they tar 'traditionalist Catholics' with a wide brush. Not every "traditionalist Catholic" -- even those within the SSPX -- need be necessarily equated with its worst anti-semitic elements.
  • Many questions here: One being the question of academic freedom and whether a controversial figure with questionable views on the Jews ought to be permitted to speak on a topic other than that involving the Jews? To what lengths does "academic freedom" extend? (The same questions might pertain to Columbia University's invitation to Iranian president to address their university when he visited New York, with his own questionable background).
  • Another question: should Catholic University have done its homework on vetting those speakers at a conference before agreeing to be its host? Instead of cancelling at the last minute in such a manner as to appear to be "the lapdog to the SPLC"?
  • Another question: is it hypocritical of Catholic University to take this measure against figures deemed anti-semetic and not to do likewise with promoting (or hosting) other speakers/productions with anti-Catholic elements? (Georgetown Law School now funds student internships at abortion rights groups, and the controversial “Vagina Monologues” has been performed (or approved) on more than 100 Catholic campuses, including Notre Dame).
  • In his response to the fiasco (Anti-Semitism and Thought Control at Catholic University Culture Wars April 2008), E. Michael Jones remarks:
    When CUA president Daniel M. O’Connell meets with Notre Dame professors in private, he likes to brag about how orthodox and Catholic his university is in comparison to theirs. However, the recent cancellation of the Building Catholic Communities lecture series at CUA shows that there is no essential difference between these universities when it comes to compromising both academic freedom and the Catholic character of the university when subjected to pressure by groups like the SPLC. Father O’Connell, in fact, espouses what might be called the Jenkins doctrine of academic freedom: Vagina Monologues, Si! Oberammergau, No!

    The doctrine gets its name from the hapless president of Notre Dame University, Rev. John Jenkins, CSC, who as one of his first acts in office articulated a position on academic freedom which would allow the performance of the obscene Vagina Monologues but would ban a performance of the Oberammergau Passion Play. Which group thinks that obscenity is a protected form of expression but Passion Plays are not? If you’re answer to that question was the Jews, you have come a long way toward understanding how commissars like Mark Potok can impose Jewish forms of political correctness on Catholic institutions like CUA and Notre Dame. In his book, The Jewish Century, Yuri Slezkine opined that in becoming moderns we had all become Jewish. The same verdict applies a fortiori to Catholic academe in America. Combine the internalization of Jewish values that Slezkine mentioned, as manifested in the mind of John Jenkins, with the normal intellectual cowardice that one finds in Catholic academics and administrators, and you will find a situation where Catholics are eager to denounce other Catholics in a way that would make Stasi informers blush with shame.

    So, it would appear that according to E. Michael Jones (who insists "there is nothing anti-Semitic about anything I have ever said"), 'dem Jews are really to blame after all?
  • It does nothing to bolster Jones' case when forum posters, rushing to his defense, proclaim: ""Southern Poverty Law Center is a communist jew organization. That guy who runs it name Morris Deed is a Jew. Most likely this is another arm of the ADL" (and when the same forum thread -- predictably -- degenerates into a discussion of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion).

Thursday, March 22, 2007

Update on the Investigation of John Sharpe by U.S. Navy

Officer denies accusations of anti-Semitism, by Andrew Scutro - Staff writer. Navy Times March 20, 2007:
Sharpe acknowledges that he operates the Web sites [Legion of St. Louis and IHS Press], but denies the charge that he is anti-Semitic.

“I am just trying to be a good Catholic as I see it,” he said in an interview.

Kudos to the Navy Times for getting Sharpe to acknowledge his involvement / ownership of the Legion of St. Louis. When I had confronted him in February 2006, he would only maintain:
I write on behalf of IHS Press as the editor. You should contact the Legion of St. Louis for information on their status or activities. IHS Press is not connected to the Legion of St. Louis. [Sharpe to author, February 25, 2006]
The Navy Times continues:
Heidi Beirich, a law center investigator who has focused on Sharpe, said he is a “radical traditionalist Catholic” who believes that Jews, Masons and others have conspired to undermine the Roman Catholic Church for the past 300 years.

She called a 2005 speech she saw [sic] Sharpe give “quite the anti-Zionist screed,” and said she witnessed him selling books at a gathering of a group, known as “American Renaissance,” that welcomes activists to “help the cause of whites,” according to its Web site.

Sharpe admits to attending the gathering but claims little knowledge of the group, describing it as perhaps “the white man’s version of the NAACP.” He defended his selling books at the event, and added that he has sold books at a meeting of progressive Democrats.

Beirich scoffed at Sharpe’s apparent ignorance of American Renaissance.

“Literally next to him, in the next booth, was a guy selling ‘White Power’ T-shirts,” Beirich said. “You had to be an idiot not to know where you were.”

Count me among the skeptics as to Sharpe's feigned ignorance of the nature of the American Renaissance conference. For an inkling as to what it was about, see Searchlight's coverage of the 2006 event (BNP leader embraced by top US nazis", by David Williams. April 2006):
. . . Perhaps the largest stall belonged to Light in the Darkness (LID) Publications run by J. Forrest Sharpe. LID is an imprint of the IHS Press founded in September 2001 “to bring back into print the classics of last century on the Social Teachings of the Catholic Church”, many of which are distributed in Britain by the International Third Position organisation. Also present was “Patriotic Flags” based in Charleston, whose catalogue includes numerous Nazi standards and neo-Confederate flags dedicated to Nathan Bedford Forrest, first Grand Wizard of the KKK in 1867. The Canadian stall disseminated mountains of reprints of old racial science and eugenic tracts originally published in the 1960s . . .
See further coverage in the Washington Post: Promoting 'Preservation' Of Whites in Suit and Tie, by Michael Laris. February 26, 2006.

Now, in the interest of fairness, one should distinguish between ideological commmitments and motivations: the American Renaissance characterizes itself as "white preservationist" -- its founder, Jared Taylor, has adopted an "open tent" approach to all who have an interest in "preserving" the white race, going so far as to welcome Jewish-racists into the fold.

The topic of the 2006 conference attended by IHS Press was on "The Global Crisis", the speakers addressing such issues as non-white immigration and the threat of Islam to those of "white, European Christian" descent. Stormfront's forum carried a list of featured speakers / addresses -- including Andrew Fraser on “Reversing the Racial Revolution: Reinventing a Responsible Ruling Class"; Philip Claeys - “Crushing Democracy: The Struggle for Flemish Nationalism,” and Jared Taylor on "“The White Man’s Disease: The Fantasy of Egalitarianism." So anti-semitism was not exactly the central theme of this event.

In fact, the presence of David Duke himself causing something of a stir and distraction. The Forward reports on the curious dilemma of attendence by racist Jews AND the neo-nazi fringe, and the inevitable tension that developed (White Nationalist Conference Ponders Whether Jews and Nazis Can Get Along ):

The events Saturday, February 25, passed without major incident. But then, late Sunday morning, none other than former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke approached the microphone on the floor during the question-and-answer session for French writer Guillaume Faye. After congratulating Faye for stirring remarks that “touched my genes,” Duke asked if there weren’t an even more insidious threat to the West than Islam.

“There is a power in the world that dominates our media, influences our government and that has led to the internal destruction of our will and our spirit,” Duke said.

“Tell us, tell us,” came a call from the back of the room.

“I’m not going to say it,” Duke said to rising laughter.

But Michael Hart, a squat, balding Jewish astrophysicist from Maryland, was not amused. He rose from his seat, strode toward Duke (who loomed over him like an Aryan giant), spit out a curse — “You f…ing Nazi, you’ve disgraced this meeting” — and exited.

As it happens, only a few minutes earlier Hart, a mainstay of American Renaissance conferences, had been trying to reassure Herschel Elias, a first-time attendee from suburban Philadelphia, that he should not let his observation that the meeting was “infiltrated by Nazis and Holocaust deniers” ruin his impression of American Renaissance.

Now, I do not think Sharpe is motivated by white-racism nor racial anti-semitism. Nor do I consider many of the publications of IHS Press itself to be particularly objectionable. Sharpe's not the only Catholic who favors distributism as an economic model and possesses an appreciation for G.K. Chesterton and Hillaire Belloc. And a good many Catholics, myself included, are greatly concerned about the encroachmment of Islam on Europe and the threat posed to Western civilization.

On the other hand, it boggles the mind how John Sharpe can protest that he's "just trying to be a good Catholic as I see it," -- and likewise maintain IHS Press' appearance as a "traditional Catholic publisher" -- and market his wares at political events of this nature. The 'American Renaissance' isn't a local gathering of a parish social justice committee or "liberal Democrats" or even MoveOn.org. (The latter being a radical anti-war group that, while objectionable to some, would nonetheless be a suitable vehicle for promotion of IHS Press' Neo-Conned series).

The 'American Renaissance', by contrast, is a gathering of "white preservationists" with an ideological agenda of a far more radical nature.

Moving on, the Navy Times' article finds Sharpe engaged in some rather incredible verbal gymnastics on the Jewish question:

The Legion of St. Louis site contains several essays Sharpe says he wrote. They include a series of commentaries about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and an article titled “Judaism and the Vatican: Part II,” in which he wrote: “On the socio-political front, do those leading the Church realize that to preach against anti-Semitism — on Jewish terms — is not to condemn irrational hatred based on race or creed?” The article concludes with the admonition from one of Sharpe’s intellectual heroes [Fr. Denis Fahey], who said that “every sane thinker should be an anti-Semite.”

About Sept. 11, he wrote: “Anti-terrorism would not be a question of a better luggage X-ray machine, but ... better still, how to declare war on Islam and wage at the same time a war of independence on behalf of the U.S. government and the world financial system against international Judeo-Masonry.”

“I had my own take on the whole World Trade Center thing,” he said. “It’s nothing I can say I am ashamed to have written. It’s all things I think. It’s very valid.”

In an interview, Sharpe disavowed any interest in the Holocaust.

“I’ve tried to avoid it like the plague because it’s an area of interest I don’t want to get into,” he said.

But in the same article referenced above, he wrote: “That event, dubbed The Holocaust, is the focal point for the Jews insofar as it can be used to ensure that Christian civilization will never rise again ... because of the unacceptable consequences of its previous existence.”

Yet while denying that he espouses anti-Semitic theories, Sharpe stands by his articles.

“All I can say is what I’ve written is what I believe,” he said.


Additional Coverage:

Monday, March 12, 2007

John Sharpe Investigated by United States Navy

From the Navy Times (Carrier PAO relieved pending investigation Sunday March 11, 2007):
NORFOLK, Va. — The public affairs officer for the aircraft carrier Carl Vinson has been temporarily relieved of duty following allegations that he was involved in supremacist activities.

Lt. Cmdr. John Sharpe was relieved of his duties Wednesday pending the outcome of an investigation, according to Jim Brantley, a spokesman for Fleet Forces Command.

Brantley said the Navy began a formal investigation after receiving an inquiry from Jenny O’Donnell of Port Folio Weekly, a Hampton Roads alternative newspaper, asking about Sharpe and “alleging his involvement in possible supremacist activities.”

Sharpe could not be reached for comment Friday afternoon.

“Evidently he’s affiliated with an anti-Semitic group, and that’s illegal in the U.S. Navy,” Brantley said. Brantley cited Navy Regulation 1167, which states, “No person in the Naval Service shall participate in any organization that espouses supremacist causes.”

Brantley said Sharpe reported aboard the Vinson in June 2006; he is on administrative leave during the investigation.

The Vinson is currently undergoing a refueling and complex overhaul at the Northrop Grumman Newport News shipyard.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks white supremacists and hate groups, Sharperuns two “radical traditionalist” Catholic organizations that espouse anti-Semitic views, the Legion of St. Louis and IHS Press.

Read what the Southern Poverty Law Center had to say about Sharpe.


See also:


  • Navy officer relieved of duty amid anti-Semitic accusations, by STEVEN G. VEGH, The Virginian-Pilot March 10, 2007:
    . . . "What do you mean, anti-Semitic? Have I advocated harming people because they're Jewish, hating people because they're Jewish, having any attitude to them because they're Jewish or any other religion? Absolutely not."

    He said IHS is principally a publisher of old titles by Catholic writers such as Hilaire Belloc and G.K. Chesterton.

    Sharpe said he founded the Legion seven years ago as a Web-based forum for discussion on how Catholicism related to contemporary social and economic issues. He said the site has been inactive since 2002.

    According to its Web site, the Legion's goals include "permeating society with the Faith" and combatting "the Judeo-Masonic tendencies of the modern social order."


  • Naval officer accused of activity in hate groups Richmond Times Dispatch March 11, 2007.

On IHS Press / Legion of St. Louis' political extremism

Possession of Belloc and Chesterton hardly counts as incriminating evidence. On the other hand, the Legion of St. Louis' distribution of Michael Hoffmann's Judaism's Strange Gods, Prainaitis' The Talmud Unmasked and Henry Ford's The International Jew is a tad more disconcerting.

Likewise, it is curious why a website that was, according to Sharpe, "inactive since 2002", would remain online and active in 2007. One would think if you're distancing yourself from politically extremist and compromising ties one might take it offline, rather than renew the domain name and pay for the hosting.

While IHS Press has sought to present itself as a "Catholic publisher", Sharpe certainly hasn't explained to anybody's satisfaction how his friend and co-founder of IHS Press Derek Holland was a featured speaker at a nationalist convention of the German NPD, or more recently, IHS Press' prominent booth at a white nationalist convention in 2006? Question: Why would a Catholic publisher even seek to peddle his wares to this crowd? Evangelization?!?

Is the U.S. Navy's Investigation Warranted?

Consider some excerpts from one of many articles recently published on Neoconned's website:

Iraq now is occupied and we feel that Iraqis have the legitimate right to resist the occupation. The Baath Party is the leader of the Resistance that will liberate it from the Anglo-Saxon Zionist occupation. We feel that the liberation of Iraq will be achieved very soon and a very progressive leadership will be born that will lead the Arabs to liberate historic Palestine. As a result Arab Unity will be closer to being realized.

Yes indeed we support Saddam Hussein because he is the legitimate President. He is a prisoner of war and those who are living in four square miles - the so-called “Green Zone” - are both traitors and illegitimate because they are the puppets and agents of the occupiers. In no way do they represent the people of Iraq or our ambitions...

Saddam Hussein represents the hope for freedom, unity and liberation. He is a firm believer in the liberation of Palestine, and, therefore, he deserves our support. [...] My opinion is very clear: the Resistance is legitimate and those who are part of the occupational political process are traitors and enemies of the Iraqi people. They should be treated as such.

Source: (An Interview with Ibrahim Ebeid Neo-Conned Blog. IHS Press. May 6, 2006.

Now, there is a line between "principled religious opposition" to the war in Iraq -- of which one can point to many examples, even good Catholics who contributed to the Neo-Conned volumes themselves -- and another to publish and promote propaganda clearly advocating the murder of U.S. forces abroad and members of the Iraqi government. That this interview was published on a radical website run by Lieutenant Commander of the United States Navy -- who may very well be called into military service -- should give one pause.

While FringeWatch's original dispute centered on the extremist ties of the founders of IHS Press, it is my opinion that Sharpe's involvement in this project merits the concern of the U.S. Navy.

Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Bp. Williamson: Unabomber Theology Revisited

A previous installment of Fringe Watch discussed the apocalyptic views of Bishop Richard Williamson and his endorsement of political extremism. Although largely marginalized since his heyday as a US seminary rector in the '90s—and removal/demotion in the SSPX to a post in Argentina—Bp. Williamson is nevertheless an important case study. His career is illustrative, both in the sorts of ideas he espouses and the people he networks with. He has been an important catalyst in extreme traditionalist circles and lent clerical "authority" to those whose views dovetail with his own.

Apocalypse Soon?

An example of extremist cross-pollination is seen in the recent interview with Dr. David Allen White by Stephen Heiner (who is affiliated with the Angelus Press). Dr. White is known for his lectures on literature and culture. He is also a long-time associate of Bp. Williamson, and while he does not touch on some of bishop's more radical political views, he embraces his general outlook of doom and despair.

After a jejune criticism of the papacy of Benedict XVI, which seconds Bp. Williamsons' rejection of all negotiations with Rome, Dr. White muses upon the subjects of technology and culture
To my mind one of the great essays written in my lifetime is Solange Hertz's essay "Hell's Amazing Grace." In this essay she talks about electricity itself as a satanic invention that stands in opposition to God's true light....

But the invention of electricity has allowed us to turn night into day, winter into summer, and summer into winter, with air conditioning and heating. It has allowed us to feel as if we have the world at our fingertips. It's a brilliant essay. It occurred to me recently that we are now totally dependent upon power and electricity for every aspect of our lives. All that Satan needs to do is turn out the power, and then his false son can step forward to perform the great miracle of restoring the power to us if we fall down and worship him.

And I think even many good souls, perhaps even traditional Catholics might be tempted to worship him if it meant they could get their garage door opener back and have the fridge back, so the beer will be cold again, and have their TV and Internet back.
Anyone familiar with Hertz's long-running columns in The Remnant will remember her as one of the most bizarre writers in traditionalism, especially noted for attacks on technology and belief in geocentricism. It is perhaps no surprise that Dr. White should endorse Hertz as she has long been a favorite of Bp. Williamson's who promoted her writings during his long tenure as rector at St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary (along with the works of Holocaust Revisionists). Another quality which endeared Hertz to the bishop was her strident anti-American views, going far beyond political criticism, and generally identifying the United States with the Antichrist.

As an aside one should note that Dr. White (like Bp. Williamson) is supporter of publisher John Sharpe. What is very typical of Bp. Williamson's outlook is the technophobic apocalypse embraced by Dr. White. The evils of modern machinery were repeatedly detailed in the bishop's seminary newsletters. The theme is one of a millenarian collapse, not the restoration of society as promoted by St. Pius X. It is in line with the religious-political manias studied by Prof. Norman Cohn (The Pursuit of the Millennium). According to Cohn, some key themes of radical eschatology are: 1) the idea that "redemption" will come about in terrestrial terms; 2) that it is imminent (it will come soon and suddenly); and 3) that it is total.

Along these lines one is reminded of Pope Benedict XVI's description (in Truth and Tolerance) of Marxist inspired liberation theology. Sin is "institutional" and so this "state of affairs... can only be overcome by a radical change in the structures of the world, which are sinful structures, evil structures." Yet, as the Pope explains, it is wrong to think of redemption as an "experience" or a political event that operates like a deus ex machina—similar to the old Marxist view of the impending collapse of capitalism—that will conveniently and rapidly deliver us from evil, as opposed to the slow process of spiritual growth and sanctity.

The vision of doom espoused by Solange Hertz and Bp. Williamson focuses attention not only on something "exciting," it also focuses attention on themselves as harbingers of a message far more important than the run-of-the-mill Gospel preached in your average church, or even as understood by your average traditionalist, whom Dr. White seems to disparage. (The joy these people experience in predicting social ruin is quite palpable.)

Praise for Theodore Kaczynski

Having established the intellectual milieu of "Catholic" radicals, one can see how Bp. Williamson applied this grim philosophy to events happening around him. In 1996, not long after the publication of the manifesto by the Unabomber (Ted Kaczynski), Bishop Richard Williamson turned some heads when he stated that
principles are more important than personalities, and the message is, strictly, for good or ill, independent of the messenger. The author of the Unabomber's Manifesto might have since become a Saint without its contents being changed by one word (June 6, 1996 letter).
Such an assertion is staggering. It involves a divorce of intent and conduct which is impossible from the point of view of classic moral theology. It is on par with leftists who argue that the Stalinist Russia’s aims were noble even if it fell short of those in practice. Yet Williamson is no crude practitioner of agitprop. He attempts to disarm critics of his consciously shocking missives by reminding us that
the end can never justify the means. However important the Unabomber's message, nothing gave him the right to maim and kill innocent victims in order to get it before the public.
This does not prevent him from identifying with Kaczynski's alienation—in the same way that he sympathizes with the aggressive artistic protests of Oliver Stone and Pink Floyd (recurring themes in his newsletters). Thus “without accepting” their ultimate nihilistic manifestations, “one cannot help having a measure of understanding for their resorting to such desperate means.” What exactly does this mean? It appears disingenuous, a sort of vicarious thrill on a level with telling a man to watch blue movies but not to commit adultery. Williamson anticipates the protests of scandalized readers. He puts critics on the defensive, picturing himself as the shrewd cleric pitted against the clumsy lay person, and making it clear that anything short of his solution is an exercise in spiritual mediocrity.
[D]o you wish to save your rebellious teenagers’ souls? I am sure you are well aware that if you talk to them of St. Ignatius of Loyola or St. Theresa of Lisieux, you do not even get to first base. But just breathe the name of Pink Floyd, and see how their ears prick up! This is our world, and there is no other in which we have to save our souls! If only the honorable professors and respectable bishops were tackling the questions tackled by the Unabombers and the Oliver Stones, then your children might look up instead of down, but since nobody “decent” seems to address their concerns, who can be surprised if they feed from the gutter? Rock music is one long, unheard, scream for help!
For decades, radical trads like Bp. Williamson have pilloried hip ecclesiastics for their craven attempts at “relevance” and fawning emulation of pop culture and psychology. Yet they engage in the same tactics. The double-standard can only be explained in terms of an ideological rather than a theological worldview. The opposition are condemned because of their ends. But their means are praised when employed by one’s “own side,” no matter how ruthless (e.g., Communists condemn the atrocities of Nazis, and vice versa, without batting an eye).

But what makes Kaczynski’s desperate eschatology so compelling that we are bidden to overlook his bloody-minded methods? The answer is that he possesses some superior (gnostic) insights. Meanwhile the herd-like masses are deemed by Williamson to be "technophiliacs." A year later, the bishop would remind us that when “‘sane’ people are crazy (inhuman), it seems to take ‘crazy’ people to be sane (human).” And while the Unabomber does not have the solution, “he faces the problem.” For Kaczynski, and for Williamson, the looming threat to individual meaning is the “industrial-technological system” (or “IT”). He thus summarizes Kaczynski’s manifesto:
Nor can any minor adjustment or compromise reconcile IT with freedom, both because IT has to regulate human behavior closely in order to function at all, and because all parts of IT are interdependent....

...if IT survives, then the future looks grim: either, for the sake of efficiency, machines will be in total control and no man will be free....

...However, IT is not unstoppable. The positive alternative we need is WILD NATURE, free of men, or with wild men.... The means of IT's overthrow are a revolution not merely political, but economic, technological and world-wide, for IT cannot be overthrown piecemeal. Above all, let our revolutionaries have the one clear goal: IT must go! All means to achieve that goal can then be pragmatically adjusted. \
Karl Marx, in his Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy, offered the view that: “It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but, on the contrary, their social existence determines their consciousness.” If any one thought is axiomatic of “salvation politics,” it is this. The underlying assumption of millenarian ideologies is that function determines being. This is true not only of Marxists, but other utopians, like Fascists and National Socialists, for whom some form of pristine social or biological order will eradicate evil and the causes of evil.

Although it has been over a decade since Bp. Williamson set forth his Unambomber theology, the influence amongst a gnostic-minded set of survivalist "trads" remains as strong as ever, as seen in Dr. White's ill-considered musings on the state of the world.

Thursday, November 09, 2006

John Sharpe: Admits Nothing....Confirms Everything

In an interview earlier this year with The Distributist Review, John Sharpe (head of IHS Press and publisher of Neo-Conned) attempted to deflect criticism of his ties to extremist groups. But he inadvertantly acknowledged that people are taking notice and distancing themselves from his ideologically-laden "Catholicism." He begins by complaining that

...these “attacks” – as distinguished from the reasonable questions from people of good will, all of which I have answered in all cases – are a distraction.

Apparently the truth is distracting. Unfortunately, Sharpe is never candid in public (though he says much more when speaking privately). Still, amid his verbal wriggling he leaks enough details to confirm the main charges – that IHS Press has been tied to political extremists since the beginning. Speaking of his entrance into politics, Sharpe says

I was in Italy, stationed there in the late 90s... when I met an Irishman, who is now a good friend and partner in IHS Press, at the traditional Mass in Naples. Deric and I began a correspondence and friendship....

The "Deric" referred to is Derek Holland, a veteran British neo-fascist with ties to militant Arab and Muslim regimes who was active in the racist National Front as early as the 1970s. He is listed on IHS publications as Deric O'Huallachain (the Gaelic version of his name on his Irish passport). Mr. Holland is also one of IHS Press' corporate directors.

Sharpe admits to getting chummy with Holland/O'Huallachain in the 1990s when the latter was the acknowledged intellectual leader of radical nationalism (and co-founder of the International Third Position – ITP). This says a lot about his own philosophical formation. As it turns out, Holland was actively speaking at racist conferences in 2002, a year after IHS was set up. But that's not surprising, since IHS Press was an offshoot of Sharpe's own Legion of St. Louis, which was the American side of the ITP's St. George Educational Trust (SGET), a neo-fascist front group.

When asked about the ITP, Sharpe gives the predictable double-talk:

I have little to say about any "charges" in this area because IHS Press and the ITP have nothing to do with one another [in the way that Moscow had nothing to do with Alger Hiss - ed.], despite what our critics might say. But I will offer some general observations.

My co-founder, Deric, was involved with the ITP some years ago. Many people make an issue out of this [a curious admission - ed.]. I do not: firstly because IHS does not have to endorse Deric's entire life or all his actions... it has nothing to do with any of that, and only to do with doctrine [presumably Marxism and Nazism are just "doctrines," and we should ignore what their followers do - ed.]. Secondly, from a doctrinal standpoint there is nothing I'm aware of that Deric believed or did while he was associated with the ITP which was not acceptable in light of the Faith, at the very least according to his point of view at the time, if not in plainly objective terms.

Is the ITP bad and, if not, why do you mind being tied to it? And how could Mr. Holland's views be bad now but acceptable in the past? Or is that meant to imply that they were never really objectionable? As for Deric/Derek Holland, he has never repudiated views that he publicly advocated for thirty years, and apparently still advocates (albeit more subtly) via Sharpe's IHS Press.

From my memory the ITP never advocated violence or armed opposition to anything. If I’m wrong on that, then so be it – again I’m neither a partisan nor a “member” (if such things even exist), nor is IHS Press in any way whatsoever connected with whatever the ITP was or currently is – but we ought to operate in the realm of fact and not fiction.

Mr. Sharpe operates in the realm of surrealism. He should quit while he's behind. As for advocating violence, the ITP was tied to political violence in Italy and was a staunch advocate of anti-Israeli violence. Third Positionists like Derek Holland supported Ayatollah Khomeni's Iran and Gaddafi's Libya in the 1980s, and Iraq during the First Gulf War – all promoters of international terrorism. So John's memory is as faulty as it is non-committal. Yet he continues to lament:

I don't know what's wrong with these groups. To my knowledge all the St. George Trust ever did was reprint some books.... [tofu cookbooks? children's coloring books? -ed.] To my recollection, there has always been a traditional priest as a trustee and a number of other priests who have been involved in one way or another with the St. George Trust. None of them had any misconceptions about the political activities and beliefs of those in the Trust. Deric, as far as I know, was never a trustee or any other kind of official person with the group. I am aware that the St. George Trust and the Legion are said to be or have been in some way "front" groups for ITP, which, as I said, may or may not even exist at this point: I just don't know.

The Legion collaborates with St. George Educational Trust (SGET) in the sale of racist works like Henry Ford's International Jew, A. K. Chesterton's New Unhappy Lords, and Michael Hoffman's Judaism's Strange Gods. In closing, Mr. Sharpe is the sort of suspect who gives himself away by his insistent denials.