Archive/File: orgs/australian/adelaide-institute/statement-of-hoffman Last-Modified: 1998/04/12 [Page 1] Jeremy Jones and members of the Committee of Management of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry on Behalf of those members of the Jewish community of Australia who are members of organisations affiliated to the Executive Council of Australian Jewry Complainant and Fredrick Toben on Behalf of the Adelaide Institute Respondent Witness Statement: Mr. Michael A. Hoffman II, POBox 849, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83816, USA 31 October 1997 1. The Defense Witness 1.1 My name is Michael Anthony Hoffman II of PO Box 849, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83816, USA. I am an American citizen and a Christian. 1.2 I am the author of four books, including one on Talmud and Kabbalah published in both the U.S. and Japan, entitled, `Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare.' I am a former reporter for the Albany, New York bureau of the Associated Press. I am currently self-employed as a professional historian. I edit `Revisionist History' newsletter and operate the history website, "Campaign for Radical Truth in History" at http://www.hoffman-info.com. 3.5 The complainant quotes Adin Steinsaltz to the effect that the Jewish `Talmud' "cannot be cited as an authority for purposes of ruling." No page number is given for this citation. However, I found it on p. 4 of `The Essential Talmud.' The complete statement by Steinsaltz, without ellipsis, concerning the position of the Talmud within Judaism reads, "And although the Talmud is, to this day, the primary source of Jewish law, it cannot be cited as an authority for purposes of ruling." This paradox is quoted by the complainant perhaps intending to infer that the `Talmud' does not have a supreme position within Judaism. However, the `Talmud' is the "primary source of Jewish law" as Steinsaltz admits. The claim that it "cannot be cited as an authority for purposes of ruling" is a reference to procedure rather than any diminution of the supreme position of `Talmud' in Judaism. As Steinsaltz further states: "Even before the `Talmud' was completed, it was evident that this work was to become the basic text and primary source for Jewish law." (Ibid., p.64) [Page 2] The complainant himself admits the centrality of the `Talmud' in Judaism. "The `Talmud' is the source of the moral code followed by Observant Orthodox Jews..." Complainant states: "The charges concerning `Talmudic habits' and immorality condoned by the `Talmud' are "reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate Jewish Australians." The issue is the truth and not who the truth offends. Otherwise, how is it possible in Australia to propagate charges about Nazi German crimes and immorality, since the charges are bound to "offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate" German Australians? Presumably the response is that the Nazis did these things and Australians of German descent will have to learn to live with the truth about their past. By the same token then, in the question of the `Talmud,' the issue cannot be whether the truth about the `Talmud' offends or insults or intimidates Jewish Australians, but whether in fact the Adelaide Institute has written accurately and truthfully about the `Talmud.' If the Adelaide Institute has written truthfully on this subject, Jewish Australians, like German Australians must learn to live with the truth about their past. To do otherwise is to establish a special class of persons in Australia about whom the truth must not be articulated. Complainant states: "The claims repeated a number of times on the Web-site, alleges that Jews are guided by an evil, immoral and corrupting code of conduct. As individual Jews, of whom the Adelaide Institute has made no attempt to determine their religious beliefs, are indiscriminately accused of `Talmudic' immorality by the Adelaide Institute, there is no logical conclusion other than that the authors and the Adelaide Institute believe that all Jews should be regarded with suspicion and contempt." I do not see how the Adelaide Institute's allegation that Jews are guided by an "immoral and corrupting code" is grounds for legal proscription or punishment. It is a commonplace among certain atheists, agnostics, Muslims, Jews and others on university faculties, in books and newspapers, magazines and television programs in Australia to allege that Christians are guided by a "racist, hateful and corrupting book," i.e. the `Bible', or more specifically, the `New Testament.' It is logical and reasonable to infer that a Christian adheres to the Christian Scriptures as a code of conduct or guide. One does not interdict criticism of the `Bible' or the `New Testament' because the critic did not differentiate between Christians and apostate Christians. Criticism of the `Talmud' should not be interdicted on the grounds that the critic of a text failed to differentiate between Jews and apostate Jews. 3.6 The `Talmud' is indeed a law code and code of conduct which has the potential to motivate Jews to "act in unethical and immoral ways." This has been attested by Jews themselves and is an opinion having academic and scholarly merit. For example, Dr. Israel Shahak, professor emeritus at Hebrew University writes: "I had personally witnessed an ultra- religious Jew refuse to allow his phone to be used on the Sabbath in order to call an ambulance for a non-Jew who happened to have collapsed in his Jewish neighborhood. Instead of simply publishing the incident in the press, I asked for a meeting with the members of the Rabbinical Court of Jerusalem, which is composed of rabbis nominated by the State of Israel. I asked them whether such behavior was consistent with their interpretation of the Jewish religion. They answered that the Jew in question had behaved correctly, indeed piously, and backed their statement [Page 3] by referring me to a passage in an authoritative compendium of Talmudic laws..." (`Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years,' [London, England, Piuto Press, 1994], p. 1). Jewish author Evelyn Kaye, commenting on the attitudes of Jews toward non-Jews that is engendered by Talmudic literature, states: "The mark of a truly devout Hasidic or Orthodox Jew, as well as many other Jews, is unquestioned hatred of non-Jews....I felt that the bigotry they always blamed on those who said anything negative about Jews was equally visible on the other side of the fence. It seemed to me perfectly crazy to state that all Goyim were thieves, and then to put your money into a bank run entirely by them. It seemed to me ridiculous to state that all Goyim were liars....Anti-Goyism is a foundation of Orthodox and Hasidic philosophy and way of life. It's so deeply ingrained that even to say something nice about a non-Jew is suspect." (`The Hole in the Sheet,' [Seacaucus, New Jersey, Lyle Stuart Inc., 1987], pp. 112, 114-115). Undoubtedly these statements by Jews critical of conduct engendered by the `Talmud' are painful for pious religious and Zionist Jews to countenance. Every religion has its hallowed dogmas and many religions seek to uphold these dogmas through the power of the state. But for the state to silence intellectuals is to do no service to Jews or anyone else. The act of suppression creates a special protected class of citizens seemingly immune from criticism. Such immunity is itself a source of social friction and communal tension because it connotes that Australians are not all equal; that some Australians are shielded from sensitive probes into their dogmatic canons while others must bear the most searching and critical scrutiny into the crimes and foibles of their heritage and ancestry. One standard should be applied to all in the best tradition of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence. 3.9 The complainant has offered no evidence whatever to uphold his contention that the Adelaide Institute's "material relating to...the `Talmud' does not meet minimum standards of accuracy..." This writer is prepared to demonstrate from the authoritative `Talmudic' text themselves and from the words of the acknowledged Jewish authorities on those texts, such as Moses Maimonides, that the `Talmud' does indeed contain statements and teachings that are profoundly racist and immoral and that a candid exegesis of the `Talmud' most certainly does serve to make a "genuine contribution" to "academic" and "public interest." Michael A. Hoffman II
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and
to combat hatred.
Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.
As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may
include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and
provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist
and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012