PRELIMINARIES

Preface to the Fourth Edition

    When Kevin Abrams and I published the first edition of this book in 1995, we knew that it would cause controversy, contradicting as it does the common portrayal of homosexuals as exclusively victims of the Nazi regime. For this reason we were scrupulous in our documentation of homosexuals as the true inventors of Nazism and the guiding force behind many Nazi atrocities.  We purposefully drew heavily upon homosexual writers and historians for our source material and used direct quotations from their writings whenever possible. The remainder of our sources are primarily mainstream historians of the Nazi era. We chose to place our citations in the text rather than in endnotes to emphasize the reliability of our sources.
    Few contemporary historians, however, have weighed in, either pro or con, on the claims of this book. With some notable exceptions, the voices have instead come from ideologues on either side of the “gay rights” issue. Homosexuals and their allies (including some academics) denounce The Pink Swastika as baseless and hateful. Pro-family advocates praise it as authoritative and enlightened. We dare say that a majority of leaders on both sides of the “culture war” are familiar with this book. Yet we believe that the issues we have raised deserve broader public scrutiny and debate, especially in academia.
    This fourth edition represents a renewed effort to put these issues up for debate before the American public. This edition is a dramatically expanded and strengthened volume. We have invested hundreds of additional hours in research and writing that is reflected in two new chapters and hundreds of additional citations that have been woven throughout the existing text. We have also added many helpful photographs and graphics. Our critics will note that we have considered their arguments and refined our own where appropriate.
    What remains is the struggle to persuade academics and cultural leaders to address this subject, which begs the question of why have they not yet done so.
    One reason, perhaps, is that The Pink Swastika addresses an aspect of Nazi history unfamiliar to most people, historians included. Indeed, no one could have written The Pink Swastika who was not a student of both history and of the so-called “gay” movement. The compilation of references to homosexuality from mainstream sources, while extensive, does not in and of itself provide a complete picture of the homosexuals’ role in the rise and rule of Nazism. Only when that picture is overlaid with the work of “gay” scholars does the essential relationship between Nazism and the German “gay” movement become clear.
     Ironically, a better explanation for why The Pink Swastika has been neglected is the dominance of “political correctness” in the academic realm; ironic because today’s “PC” code suppresses intellectual dissent to a degree not seen since the Third Reich. Only today, the verboten subject-matter is anything that reflects negatively on the “gay” movement.  
    This trend is not new. In fact, one of the most remarkable facts we uncovered in our research is the near complete dearth of references to homosexuality in the Nazi Party in books published in the United States since the end of the 1960s. Nearly all of our mainstream U.S. sources (by American writers) pre-date the 1970s, when the “gay” movement became a powerful political force in this country.  However, other resources, mostly German works translated into English, have continued to enlarge our knowledge of the homosexual/Nazi connection. One important contributor is, of course, German academic Lothar Machtan, whose Hidden Hitler (2001), argues persuasively that Hitler’s secret “gay” life defined his career.
    In the 1960s, Nazi homosexuality was so widely acknowledged in America (at least among the “social elites”) that the portrayal of Nazi thugs as homosexual was a frequent occurrence in Hollywood movies. One of the best examples is in Exodus (United Artists, 1960), the film adaptation of the Leon Uris novel about the creation of the State of Israel after World War II. In the film, actor Sal Mineo, playing a young man attempting to join the Irgun (the Jewish underground movement), fails to convince Irgun leaders that he is a genuine Nazi concentration camp survivor. Finally they are convinced — only when he breaks down and confesses that the Nazi guards “used me as a woman.” To the Irgun, this was definitive proof that he had been a Nazi prisoner.  
        Allen Ginsberg, the homosexual “beat” poet was asked by a Justice of the Supreme Court in 1966 (during an obscenity trial related to the book Naked Lunch, by William Borroughs)  whether at “some time in the future there will be a political party, for instance, made up of homosexuals.”  Ginsberg replied, saying “this has already happened in a sense -- or of sex perverts -- and we can point to Hitler, Germany under Hitler” (The New York Times, August 10, 1997).
    These are but two examples which reveal the extent to which homosexuality was openly associated with Nazism in the past. There are many other examples in this book. Yet today, the record has been almost entirely purged regarding the homosexual/Nazi connection. This would be alarming enough if it were simply a trend in the popular culture and academia, but a similar whitewashing is also taking place in institutions responsible for keeping the record of the Holocaust.
    Dr. Nathaniel Lehrman is a retired psychiatrist who read The Pink Swastika and was inspired to recommend it as a resource to the U.S. Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C.. No political conservative, Dr. Lehrman has for many years contributed articles and editorials to liberal and humanist publications. After a great deal of effort, including an exchange of correspondence in which he challenged the museum to at least research the claims of this book, he was rebuffed. In a May 5th, 2000 editorial in the Intermountain Jewish News, Dr. Lehrman took issue with one of the frequent pro-homosexual events at the museum

[F]or the conference to present a complete picture of gays in the Holocaust, it should also have included the key roles of Nazi homosexuals among its perpetrators. By failing to do so, the Museum fostered the myth of a “Gay Holocaust”....Why is the Holocaust Memorial Museum distorting the history of the Holocaust?

    Another reader, Mr. Zan Overall, donated a copy of The Pink Swastika to the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles, the leading Holocaust museum on the West Coast. He was later told by a staff member that the book had not been placed in the regular collection but in a “special collection” available only upon request by a patron. He writes

Wondering how a library patron might become aware of the existence of The Pink Swastika, ensconced in “the special collection,” I asked if it were listed in the computer along with other books on the same general subject....She read off quite a number of titles listed there...and reported The Pink Swastika is not listed there (Overall: private letter).

    Knowing how thoroughly these institutions have been infiltrated by “gay” political activists, we were not surprised that they have suppressed the evidence linking Nazism to homosexuality (see my article “How American ‘Gays’ are Stealing the Holocaust,” in The Poisoned Stream, Founders Publishing Corporation, 1997). We are concerned that the same whitewash may be taking place at the Shoah Foundation as it collects the video histories of the last remaining Holocaust survivors. Its founder Steven Spielberg is the business partner of billionaire homosexual activist David Geffin. Unfortunately, the public perceives these institutions as the final authority on anything having to do with the Nazi era.
    As we prepare to publish this fourth edition of The Pink Swastika, therefore, we are especially mindful that our small work represents perhaps the only significant attempt to counter a highly successful “gay”-sponsored revisionist campaign. We have thus endeavored to produce the most thorough and accurate document of which we are capable.  
    This document is by no means the first, but is by far the most complete, resource ever prepared on the thesis that homosexuals invented and ran the Nazi Party. This is a thesis that has been frequently restated since the 1930s. It is a thesis with profound implications for our society, given the growing power of the “gay” movement. Yet most people in this country have probably never even heard it mentioned.
    Our goal is not to replace one form of political correctness with another. We do not want our view to be imposed on anyone, nor the homosexualist view to be silenced. Our goal is to put these questions before the public and let the evidence speak for itself.

Scott Lively, December 14, 2001

Frame9

                                             B'' H

Foreword

Kevin Abrams

    I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse; therefore choose life, that you may live, you and your children.
Deuteronomy\Devarim: 30:19

    The Pink Swastika is not a work of fiction.  Ironically, the authors have discovered that truth is often stranger than fiction.  The Pink Swastika is a response to the “gay political agenda” and its strategy of portraying homosexuals as victims of societal and Nazi persecution.  Although some homosexuals, and many of those who were framed with trumped-up charges of homosexuality suffered and died at the hands of the Nazis, for gay apologists to portray themselves as historical victims of Nazi persecution, on par with the Jewish people, is a gross distortion of history, perhaps equal to denying the Holocaust itself.  The Pink Swastika will show that there was far more brutality, rape, torture and murder committed against innocent people by Nazi deviants and homosexuals than there ever was against homosexuals.
    Today in the West, a new and aggressive homosexualism is making its bid for power.  The media, psychiatry, science and academia have all been corrupted and pressed into the service of establishing homosexuality as a normal and acceptable variant of human sexuality.  Those who are unwilling to bend to the new dispensation are bludgeoned into submission with slanderous accusations of intolerance and “homophobia.”  Our efforts will certainly fail to corroborate the politically correct propaganda offered by much of today’s media, academia, psychiatry, various federal agencies, the courts and human rights organizations which are now driven by the new sexual ideology rather than by honest debate and inquiry.  Coming in the wake of a successful public campaign conducted over decades, our book will also fly in the face of much of today’s popular opinion.  This having been said, we believe that The Pink Swastika will show clearly how the world the Nazis attempted to create is a world, not of the past, but of the possible future.  It will show that, given its present course and left unchallenged, America could easily become the Nazi Germany of 50 years ago.
    It is often said that the lessons of history leave us with a guide for the future.  If this be so, then the lessons of the collapse of the democratic Weimar Republic and the social ideologies that preceded its defeat by the Nazis should provide us with insights into America’s future.  As a practicing member of the Jewish faith, I remain wholly unconvinced that by solely remembering the Holocaust we will prevent another.  The ominous parallels between the Weimar Republic of pre-Nazi Germany and today’s American republic are simply too pronounced to overlook.
    This year, 1995, is the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II.  It is also the 50th anniversary of Samuel Igra’s book, Germany’s National Vice, which we quote extensively.  Largely purged from public view, Igra’s book documents the homoerotic foundations of German militarism.  Other books, like Dusty Sklar’s 1977 The Nazis and the Occult, document the black occult roots of Nazi ideology.  What The Pink Swastika does is to synthesize both the homoerotic and occult foundations of the Nazi regime.
     It must be clarified — the Nazis were not Right-Wing Conservative Creationists; they were Left-Wing Darwinian Evolutionary Socialists.  As a principle, an increase in pederasty and homosexualism parallels a militaristic Hellenic revival.  History discloses that the most warlike nations are those whose male leaders were the most addicted to sexual relations with young boys.
    The political agenda which has as its focus a plan to legalize and coerce a bewildered and unsuspecting public into accepting or regarding sodomy as normal or dignified, is based on falsehood, self-deception and skewed scientific research.  In light of the medical record, history and the fact that sodomy represents a corruption of the natural and moral orders of creation, any positive affirmation of homosexuality is totally without merit.  Human sexuality is never merely a physical concern, nor is it a purely private matter.  It always has social implications.  What goes on between partners influences society as a whole.  In sexual matters, the issue is “what is advocated and what is practiced publicly” far more than what happens privately.
    In a letter to the editor of the Toronto Globe and Mail newspaper, February 26, 1992, Dr. Joseph Berger, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, writes, “in my 20 years of psychiatry I have never come across anyone with innate homosexuality.  That notion has been a long proclaimed gay-activist political position, intended to promote the acceptance of homosexuality as a healthy, fully equal alternative expression of human sexuality.  It has zero scientific foundation, though its promoters latch on to even the flimsiest shreds of atrocious research in their attempts to justify the notion.”
    As they were during the Weimar period, 1918-1933, psychiatry and academia have been hijacked and pressed into the service of establishing homosexualism as the basis of a new Kultur.  Professor Hans Blueher, a practicing physician whose specialty was psychiatry, was accepted by the Nazis as the apostle and higher authority of a new social order.  Blueher’s school held that male homosexual lovemaking is in itself a good thing and spiritually energizing.  Blueher’s teaching became popular in Nazi circles during the period between the two World Wars and promoted the idea that a well-regulated ritual of homosexualism was a unique force capable of creating the State and assuring its leadership.  The resulting creed relegated women to a purely biological function and eliminated the family as a constituent cell in the community.
    In 1973, the American Pyschiatric Association was also hijacked by American “gay” activists.  Basing its decision largely on the skewed evidence of the 1948 Kinsey report Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, the APA removed homosexuality from its Diagnostic and Statistics Manual and declared it a normal variant of human sexuality.  Homosexuals, sensing that the burden of change had been lifted from them and shifted onto society, were able to present themselves as innocent victims of what they referred to as society’s bigoted and “homophobic” attitude towards them as persons.
    Columnist Charles Krauthammer, in “Defining Deviancy Up,” an essay published in the November 22, 1993 edition of The New Republic (pages 20ff), in describing the real effect of the APA decision, stated that a majority of society was made deviant while homosexuality was elevated to the status of normal.  Krauthammer writes, “as part of the vast social project of moral leveling, it is not enough for the deviant to be normalized.  The normal must be found to be deviant.”  In fact, the greatest single victory of the “gay” agenda over the past decade has been to shift the debate from behavior to identity, thus forcing opponents into a position where they are seen as attacking the civil rights of homosexual citizens rather than attacking specific antisocial behavior.
    In an interesting and informative study, a critical analysis titled “Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: the Issue of Homosexuality,” by Dr. Charles Socarides (published in the Winter 1992 edition of The Journal of Psychohistory, Vol. 10, No. 3:317), Socarides quotes the warning of Abram Kardiner, psychoanalyst, former Professor of Psychiatry at Columbia University, 1966 recipient of the Humanities Prize of The New York Times:

There is an epidemic form of homosexuality, which is more than the usual incidence, which generally occurs in social crises or in declining cultures when license and boundless permissiveness dulls the pain of ceaseless anxiety, universal hostility and divisiveness...Supporting the claims of homosexuals and regarding homosexuality as a normal variant of sexual activity is to deny the social significance of homosexuality...Above all it militates against the family and destroys the function of the latter as the last place in our society where affectivity can be cultivated...Homosexuality operates against the cohesive elements in society in the name of fictitious freedom.  It drives the opposite sex in a similar direction.  And no society can long endure when either the child is neglected or when the sexes war upon each other.

    Victim-plunder ideology is at the core of “gay” political strategy.  Homosexualists exploit the public status of homosexuals to impose their new definition of human sexuality upon society.  “Victim ideology” and “reductionist” thinking is destroying America from within.  Today’s new victims see no reason to modify their own behavior.  Victim psychology and philosophies undermine the legitimate workings of government and the justice, health and social systems.  Like their Nazi predecessors, today’s homosexualists lack any scruples.  Homosexuality is primarily a predatory addiction striving to take the weak and unsuspecting down with it.  The “gay” agenda is a colossal fraud; a gigantic robbery of the mind.  Homosexuals of the type described in this book have no true idea of how to act in the best interests of their country and fellow man.  Their intention is to serve none but themselves.
    The Pink Swastika documents a hidden aspect of German history.  The authors contend that homosexualism, elevated to a popular ideology  and combined with black occult forces, not only gave birth to Nazi imperialism but also led to the Holocaust itself.  The militarists in Germany were happy with Hitler.  His teachings on “total war” and of a secret Jewish conspiracy against Germany provided a good screen for their own veiled preparations.  From its very inception, it was the goal of the Nazi Party, working as a front for the German military industrial complex, to overthrow the Weimar Republic by whatever means necessary.  The Pink Swastika documents how, from their beginning, the National Socialist revolution and the Nazi Party were animated and dominated by militaristic homosexuals, pederasts, pornographers and sado-masochists.
    As Igra explains in Germany’s National Vice, “the criminals who wreaked such astounding horrors on innocent civilian populations were not acting as soldiers drunk with the fury of battle, nor as patriotic fanatics, but as chosen instruments of a satanic religion to the service of which they had been dedicated by the systematic teaching and practice of unnatural vice” (Igra:94).
    The Pink Swastika documents how the Society for Human Rights, founded by members of the Nazi Party, became the largest homosexual rights organization in Germany and, further, how this movement gave birth to the American homosexual rights movement.  Its influence has grown.  The President of the United States now receives official homosexual delegations at the White House who expect the President to repay them for helping him into office.  They expected him to “normalize” homosexuality in the American military.  As for the comparison made between homoeroticism and skin color, General Colin Powell, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had this to say in a letter to Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-Colorado), “Skin color is a benign, non-behavioral characteristic.  Sexual orientation is perhaps the most profound of all human behavioral characteristics.  Comparison of the two is a convenient but invalid argument” (Salem, Ore.) Statesman Journal, June 6, 1992).
    American civilization rests on the basic principles of Christian morality, which have their origin in the Hebrew Scriptures.  The reason why the Nazis first attacked the Jewish people and swore to exterminate them physically and spiritually is because the teachings of the Bible, both the Torah and the New Testament, represent the foundations on which the whole system of Christian ethics rests.  Remove the Bible as the constellation that guides the American Ship of State and the whole edifice of American civilization collapses.  For my Jewish brethren searching for a Biblical basis for the legitimization of homosexuality, I refer to the words of Rabbis Marc Angel, Hillel Goldberg and Pinchas Stopler and their joint article in the Winter, 1992-93 edition of Jewish Action Magazine:

There is not a single source in all of the disciplines of Jewish sacred literature — halachah, aggadah, philosophy, muscar, mysticism — that tolerates homosexual acts or a homosexual ‘orientation.’  Jews who sanction homosexuality must do so wholly without reference to Jewish sacred literature, in which case their justification has no Jewish standing; or without reference to Jewish sources, in which case they act with ignorance or intellectual dishonesty.  The idea, set forth by some of the non-Orthodox leadership, that the Torah prohibited only coercive and non-loving same-sex relationships, thus allowing for a contemporary, voluntary and loving same-sex relationship, is wholly without basis in a single piece of Jewish sacred literature written in the last 3,000 years.

    Dennis Prager, a respected Jewish radio talk show host, commented, “There were two kinds of Jews in Auschwitz -- those who knew why they were there and those who thought it was just bad luck.”  Today Jews have assimilated ideas foreign to the Jewish perspective and many liberal, secular American Jews, in adopting a tolerance for everything, stand for nothing.  As the living, we owe a moral debt to that generation of Jews who were subjected to such inhumane and sadistic torture and extermination.  The underlying causes of Nazi militarism are documented in The Pink Swastika.  The Holocaust must be remembered for what it was, a war against the Jewish people and Western civilization.

MAY GOD BLESS AMERICA
Kevin E. Abrams, Jerusalem, Israel
June 5, 1995

Introduction

Scott Lively

    I came to be interested in this compelling and sobering topic by a route familiar to many in our society today — that of the “victim.”  I did not seek this status, nor did I exploit or claim it, yet for many months I and others experienced what it was like to be on the receiving end of a full-scale, no-holds-barred “seek-and-destroy” campaign, orchestrated by “gay” political activists in the State of Oregon.  The occasion of the uproar was a series of initiative campaigns aimed at preventing local and state-level legislation granting “minority status” based on homosexuality.  The details of the initiatives and about the Oregon Citizens Alliance, the grassroots organization which sponsored them, would fill at least one book by themselves.  But the long and the short of what led me to this book and its topic was the astonishing tone of the rhetoric which is routinely leveled by the defenders of “gay rights” at people who publicly oppose homosexuality.  Amidst this rhetoric, the favorite names and metaphors were nearly all drawn from Hitler’s Germany.  Leaders and even petition-carriers on our campaign were characterized as every kind of Nazi, fascist, racist, hate-monger and Aryan supremacist.  Bricks wrapped in swastika-emblazoned paper were hurled through the windows of businesses who had contributed to our campaign.  Always, the Nazi rhetoric was loudest and most extreme among the homosexual activists and their closest political allies (Governor Barbara Roberts, a long-time homosexualist, characterized the ballot measure as “almost like Nazi Germany” (The Oregonian, August 26, 1992:A14)).
    Some of the worst abuse came from homosexualists in the media.  During the 1992 election cycle, I was contacted by an assistant producer for the CBS news-magazine show “48 Hours,” who wanted permission to feature OCA in a segment about “how mainstream Americans were responding to extremism in the gay-rights movement.”  Being familiar with media bias on the issue of homosexuality, I was very suspicious and insisted on personal assurance from the producer that this was indeed the focus of the program.  Due to the tone of rhetoric in the local media I specifically demanded and received a promise that OCA would not be characterized as a hate group.  Only after repeated assurances over a two or three week period of telephone negotiations did I seek and obtain permission for this project from OCA’s chairman, Lon Mabon.  I then devoted nearly two weeks of my time assisting the “48 Hours” film crew, facilitating dozens of hours of interviews and arranging camera locations for filming campaign activities.
    The program aired on February 26, 1992.  In the late afternoon I received a call from a friend in Massachusetts, where the program had just aired three hours ahead of our West Coast television programming schedule.  “Watch out,” she said, “they stabbed you in the back.”  Sure enough, the program was called “48 Hours on Hate Street” and featured a rogue’s gallery of hate groups, including neo-Nazis and violent white supremacists.  The segment on OCA was sandwiched between two such groups.  In the local news program following “48 Hours,” KOIN, the CBS affiliate in Portland, juxtaposed a report about OCA and a piece which included classic Nazi file footage and anti-Nazi polemics.  Approximately two weeks later another television station in Eugene, KEZI-TV, included Nazi file footage in a news story about OCA (they later apologized).  Newspapers across the state frequently editorialized against OCA, using the terms “Nazi,” “KKK,” “bigot,” and “hate” liberally.
    I had known for a long time that it is axiomatic that when name-calling (as opposed to reasonable debate) happens, the names one calls others usually reflect the things one dislikes about oneself.  I think it occurred to me that there was something awfully overstated about the Nazi-labeling campaign, even before I received a set of carefully-documented notes on prominent homosexuals in the Nazi Party, sent by a person who had followed the firestorm of rhetoric brought on by our campaign.
    In the years since I began augmenting and refining this first set of data, the nation has seen the trivialization of such extreme rhetoric.  It is commonplace days to hear someone being called, directly or by inference, a “Nazi.”  Some people have attributed this to the impoverishment of our national discourse, the depletion of our language and powers of intellect, and I would agree. We are certainly losing our literacy, and much of our dignity along with it.  Yet there remains the old and valid notion that those who repeatedly, loudly and unreasonably call others a name are often, consciously or not, describing themselves.
    Though this book is limited to the examination of connections between the Nazi movement and the homosexual and occultist movements, I think that a larger and more chilling theme can be read in its pages.  Can it be that the fascination with calling people Nazis is, for the modern “gay” movement and others in our society, an outgrowth of a deeper fascination with what the Nazis got away with in their own state?  What are the attitudes that underlie the phenomena of the “nanny state,” “political correctness,” the cynical political promotion of racial and class strife, “dumbing down” the public, the attenuation of parental rights, sterilizing the public environment of Judeo-Christian religious references, and the increasing homogeneity of opinion and of news “slant” in the press?  In a way, I think that American homosexual activists present an almost refreshingly honest view into the nature of these attitudes, compared to the sanctimonious presentations we hear daily from the press and certain special interest groups and political leaders.
    Let us look for a moment at one of the more bald-faced revelations of the homosexualist’s view of, and goals for, American society.  In a point-by-point public relations strategy called “The Overhauling of Straight America,” (Guide Magazine, November, 1987) homosexuals Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill explain their modern makeover of Hitler’s “Big Lie.”  This remarkable piece is a control freak’s fantasy, a veritable binge of manipulative, coercive and deceptive words and tactics.  It begins:

The first order of business is desensitization of the American public concerning gays...To desensitize the public is to help it view homosexuality with indifference instead of with keen emotion.  Ideally, we would have straights register differences in sexual preference the way they register different tastes for ice cream... (Kirk and Pill:7).

    This behavior-modification mentality, combined with isolation of “straights” and others as groups or classes who assume the status of de-humanized targets of one sort or another, continues:

the masses [emphasis ours] should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself...the imagery of sex should be downplayed...(ibid.:8).

...open up a gateway into the private world of straights, through which a Trojan horse might be passed (ibid.:8).

...gays must be cast as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to assume the role of protector (ibid.:8).

...make use of symbols which reduce the mainstream’s sense of threat, which lower its guard...(ibid.:8).

...replace the mainstream’s self-righteous pride about its homophobia with shame and guilt (ibid.:10).

    Not so many years ago, all of these statements would have been unbelievably offensive to most Americans, even if they contained no reference to homosexuality, precisely because they all advocate coercive tampering with people’s most private domain, their thoughts, opinions and beliefs (Kirk and Pill call it “transforming the social values of straight America” — ibid.:14).  Such attempts were thought to be the province of diabolical masterminds in sci-fi novels, or of Maoists or the dictators of banana republics.  But we have arrived at a time in America in which Kirk and Pill simply add their voices (and the tone of their voices) to the many advocating the forcible or manipulative control of people’s ideas (for example, “speech codes” on college campuses and in newspaper classified advertising policy).  
    The more of Nazi thinking I have researched, the more I have been reminded that our nation represents the first and greatest successful experiment in the opposite direction.  At our founding we were the only nation, among many autocratically-governed states, which truly offered and guaranteed freedom of thought and expression.  Our founding fathers attempted to write our inestimably precious freedoms in stone because they foresaw (indeed, it was going on even then) that there would be an incessant drift back to the power-in-the-hands-of-a-few school of thought.  How far have we drifted today, and what does this mean for the behavioral fringe groups of our society (just as the Nazis were a behavioral fringe group of theirs), who feel compelled to re-shape American hearts and minds to resemble their own?
    Let us return to Kirk and Pill to look at the mechanics of their strategy for “transforming” the society into what they feel would be a more acceptable form.  Here are some of their suggestions:

Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible...almost any behavior begins to look normal if you are exposed to enough of it...(Kirk and Pill:7).

Constant talk builds the impression that public opinion is at least divided on the subject (ibid.:8).

...the campaign should paint gays as superior pillars of society.  Yes, yes, we know - this trick is so old it creaks (ibid.:9).

...it will be time to get tough with remaining opponents.  To be blunt, they must be vilified (ibid.:10).

...we intend to make the anti-gays look so nasty that average Americans will want to dissociate themselves from such types (ibid.:10).

Each sign will tap patriotic sentiment, each message will drill a seemingly agreeable proposition into mainstream heads (ibid.:11).

The public should be shown images of ranting homophobes whose secondary traits and beliefs disgust middle America...the Ku Klux Klan demanding that gays be burned alive or castrated; bigoted southern [sic] ministers drooling with hysterical hatred to a degree that looks both comical and deranged; menacing punks, thugs and convicts...Nazi concentration camps...(ibid.:10).

These images should be combined with those of their gay victims by a method propagandists [emphasis ours] call the “bracket technique.” For example, for a few seconds an unctuous beady-eyed Southern preacher is seen, pounding the pulpit in rage about “those sick, abominable creatures.”  While his tirade continues over the soundtrack, the picture switches to pathetic photos of badly beaten persons, or to photos of gays who look decent, harmless, and likable; and then we cut back to the poisonous face of the preacher, and so forth...The effect is devastating (ibid.:13-14).

    A group called Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) used this technique in an advertising campaign in the fall of 1995 against Pat Robertson, Jesse Helms  and Jerry Falwell.  As reported in the San Francisco Examiner, Sunday, November 12, 1995, “...a new television ad campaign [portrays scenes of] a teenage girl contemplating suicide with a handgun, [and] a young man being beaten by a gang as his attackers shout slurs...interspersed with actual clips of the Rev. Pat Robertson and other conservatives deploring homosexuality.”  Most stations turned down the ads, but they ran in Tulsa and Washington D.C.  A print version of the ad (much less emotionally effective) was run in USA Today, November 21, 1995.
    Interestingly, Pat Robertson's comments quoted in the ad were directly related to the subject of this book:  “Homosexuality is an abomination.  Many of those people involved with Adolf Hitler were Satanists, many of them were homosexuals.  The two things seem to go together.”
    Without belaboring the point, these soi-disant propagandistic tactics, and even the verbiage in which they are couched, represent a twisted approach to the winning of American public opinion.  Again, I was struck by the similarity (in deceptive tactics and puppeteer-like attitude) to the creators of the Nazi propaganda machine.  Not only is there the classic Big Lie technique (say it “loudly and as often as possible”), but the homosexualists have elevated the old Nazi technique of vilification, used on the Jews by such adepts as pornographer Julius Streicher, to an art form.  And the familiar Hitlerian emotional component of hatred is certainly there, as Kirk and Pill salivate over the imagined discomfiture of their “most fervid enemies” (apparently, pastors who have the misfortune to live in the South!):

The shoe fits, and we should make them try it on for size, with all of America watching (ibid.:10).

    Two of the first and major commitments of the Nazis in their rise to power were the effective control of the information sources in Germany, and the careful building of a propaganda machine.  This was the key to their power, and except for a strong military force, it is the most important enhancement to any autocratic power.  Over the last two decades we have witnessed an appalling willingness among the American news and entertainment media to align themselves with one element of political thought, to allow themselves to be channels for the dissemination of one side of an issue over another.  As new and contradictory voices (talk radio) have appeared on the media scene, they have actually been opposed by the existing media commentators.  And in much of the entertainment media’s program fare we find a not-so-subtle enactment of Kirk’s and Pill’s strategy (albeit on a number of issues, not just homosexuality).  Indeed, Kirk and Pill assert that “gay Hollywood has provided our best covert weapon in the battle to desensitize the mainstream” (Kirk and Pill:8).  
    These are some of the issues to be broached in a study of the relationship of homosexuals and their political movements to the Nazi Party.  The larger context of the study must be our own country, and the numerous groups who are now struggling to capture its soul and “transform” its society.  How are we similar, and dissimilar, to the Germans of the 1920s and 30s?  What lessons should we learn?
     As a final note, the other inspiration of this book has been the recent claim of homosexualists that homosexuals were major victims of the Holocaust (this seems to be part of the “victim” strategy in Kirk’s and Pill’s design).  The play Bent has been the springboard for a campaign, complete with homosexual add-ons to an Anne Frank exhibit which toured the U.S., to get the public to accept the idea that homosexuals were the most downtrodden and persecuted group in Nazi Germany.  In this play, a homosexual prisoner “trades up” his pink badge for a yellow Jewish star to improve his status in the camp (S. Katz:145).  This turn of events in the homosexualist propaganda campaign has been a sore affront to traditionalist Jews like my friend and co-author Kevin Abrams, who desires to protect the truth of history from the “Holocaust revisionists.”  It is to that truth, a signpost on the path of every free society, that we have dedicated this book.  

A Word to the Reader

    Two terms used frequently in this book, “homosexualist” and “pederast,” will be unfamiliar to many readers.  We use the term homosexualist to refer to any person, homosexual or not, who actively promotes homosexuality as morally and socially equivalent to heterosexuality as a basis for social policy.  In our view Harry Hay, founder of the American “gay-rights” movement, and President Bill Clinton, who attempted to force the U.S. military to accept open homosexuals, are both homosexualists.  Each has worked in his own way to legitimize homosexual behavior in America.  Many heterosexual people are homosexualists.  Many self-described homosexual people are not homosexualists.  A homosexualist is defined by his actions in a sociopolitical context.  This differs  from Samuel Igra’s use of the term in Germany’s National Vice, which we have quoted extensively.  Igra uses “homosexualist” to define sexual conduct only.
    A pederast is defined as a physically mature man who engages in or desires to engage in sex with boys around the age of puberty, as opposed to a pedophile, who targets both male and female prepubescent children and/or pubertal girls.  (Pederast derives from the Greek paed, meaning boy, and erastis, meaning lover).  Self-defined “boy-lovers” who have formed “children’s rights” organizations such as the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) in this country, and who formed the Gemeinschaft der Eigenen in Germany, generally seem to focus their sexual attention on boys roughly between the ages of 8 and 18 years, with an apparent preference for boys about 12 years old.  Some sources quoted in this study use the terms “pederast” and “pedophile” interchangeably.  We hope to reestablish the distinction between these terms (dubious as it may be) to facilitate a deeper understanding of homosexual ideology and the varieties of its expression.
    English translation of German words using the umlaut (two dots above the vowel) result in different spellings of words like Fuehrer and Roehm (Fuhrer and Rohm).  In this book we have chosen the form of spelling in which the vowel is followed by an “e.”  Spelling of German words varies among the authors we quote but we have taken the liberty of harmonizing the spelling in this book.

Acknowledgments

    The process of creating a book involves, directly or indirectly, a great number of people who lend their inspiration.  It is with deep respect that we express our gratitude to the many great historians, men like Konrad Heiden, who wrote A History of National Socialism and Der Fuehrer; William Shirer, whose book, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, became one of the most respected and classic texts on Nazi history; and, of course, Samuel Igra, whose obscure but important 1945 work, Germany’s National Vice, reveals a hidden side of history seldom seen or acknowledged.  To these who were there and who honestly reported what they saw and experienced, we are indebted.  They are our guides to the future.
    We would especially like to thank Dr. Charles Socarides, President of NARTH, The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, for his support and encouragement.  Dr. Socarides is a Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York.  We would also like to express our gratitude to Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, Founder and Clinical Director of the Thomas Aquinas Psychological Clinic in California.  Dr. Nicolosi has published insightful works on reparative therapy and homosexuality which offer hope and the option of positive change for the homosexual.
    Other individuals with whom one or both of us have had the honor of working are Mr. Peter LaBarbera, editor and publisher of the Lambda Report on Homosexuality, a Washington, D.C.-based publication that monitors the homosexual agenda in American politics and culture; Steve Lequire and Terry O’Neil of The British Columbia Report Magazine; Rosebianca Starr, Vancouver, British Columbia; Lon Mabon, Chairman of Oregon Citizens Alliance (OCA) and Pat Smith of the OCA Research Department; Trevor Lautens, columnist for the Vancouver Sun: Paul Schratz, editor of The Province Newspaper, Vancouver, British Columbia; David, Avraham and Israel Feld, Maccabi Mossad, Israel; David Bedien, Director of Beit Agron Press Center, Jerusalem; Len Butcher, editor of the Canadian B’nai B’rith Covenant; Mrs. Irene Klass, Women’s Editor of The Jewish Press, Brooklyn New York; Professor William Woodruff, Campbell University, North Carolina; David Bar Illan, editor of the Jerusalem Post; Kevin Tebedo, Former Executive Director of Colorado for Family Values; Pastor Mary Rogers; Reverend Bernice Gerard of Sunday Line Radio and Television Ministries, Vancouver, British Columbia; Jan Willem van der Hoeven, Director for the International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem, and his wife Irene; Stan Goodenough, editor of the Middle East Intelligence Report; Rabbi Avraham Ravitz and Rabbi Schlomo Beneziri, Members of Knesset; Phil Chernovsky, Israel Centre; Rena Cohen, Sefat, Israel; Toby Klein Greenwald, columnist for Washington Jewish Week; Gershom Gale, editor of the International Edition of the Jerusalem Post; Aryeh Stav, editor of Nativ Journal of Politics and the Arts; Professor Mordechai Nisan; Ramon Bennet; Avi Asdauba, Yair Davidy, author of The Tribes; Shmuel Golding, publisher of Biblical Polemics; Aryeh Gallin, Director, Root and Branch Association; Christopher Barder, UK; John Hully, author of Comets, Jews and Christians; Rabbi Marvin Antelman, Chief Justice of the Supreme Rabinic Court of America; Gemma Blech; Dr. David Lewis; Dr. Mikha’el Snidecor; Maurits van Zuiden; Dr. Judith Reisman, author of  Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences; Avi Lipkin; Gary Cooperberg; Paul deParrie and Andrew Burnett of Life Advocate magazine; Herman Bauer; Robert Orr; Libby Durea; Dr. Nathaniel Lehrman, Clinical Director, retired, Kingsboro Psychiatric Center; Gary Butterfield; Joseph D’Alelio; Josiah (Doc) Goldberg; Landon G. Mustell and Pastor Larry Dill, Sheridan Assembly of God Church.
    Special thanks to Bill and Irene Bennett, Anne L., Kathy Bates and Charles Lowers for their editorial assistance, to D.E. and to Alan Abe for digging out countless familiar and obscure sources that document the truth of Nazi history, to Pat Gunnip for his generosity in underwriting research and other costs, and to Carol P. at OCA’s research department who got us started on this endeavor by introducing us. Tim Duskin of the National Archives was especially helpful in directing us to important resources. There are several other people who helped in various ways but who wish to remain anonymous. We are grateful for each one. 
    I (Kevin) wish to acknowledge my teachers, Rabbis Mendle Altien, Lippa Dubrawsky, David Bassous, Mordecai Feuerstein, Avraham Feiglestock, Yitchak Wineberg — to you I owe the most.
    Both of us extend a special thank you to our wives, Sharon Abrams and Anne Lively, who have struggled with us through this long and difficult process, offering their wholehearted support and many insightful suggestions.  This book is for our children: Miriam, Aaron and Odette Abrams and Noah and Samuel Lively.  

            If it were possible to form a state or an army exclusively of homosexuals, these men would direct all their emulations toward honors, and going into battle with such a spirit would, even if their numbers were small, conquer the world.

Plato, from Banquet (In Konrad Heiden’s Der Fuehrer, 1944:741)

It remains characteristic of the Germans, that they, outwardly the most brutally masculine of all European peoples, are the most homosexual nation on earth.

H.R. Knickerbocker, Is Tomorrow Hitler’s?, 1941:34