Chapter Seven

American Nazis

History never repeats itself, man always does.

Voltaire (In Cecil Genese, The Holocaust: Who Are The Guilty?)

One of the symbols with which homosexuals in the United States have chosen to represent their movement is the Phoenix, a mythical bird that was said to burn itself on a funeral pyre every five hundred years and then rise from the ashes more majestic than before (Alyson Almanac:56). A more apt symbol for the historic cycle of homo-fascism and resulting social chaos would be hard to find. From the ashes of Nazi Germany, the homo-fascist Phoenix has arisen again -- this time in the United States.

The most famous incident in the history of the modern American Nazi Party resulted from its 1977 demand to stage a march through the largely Jewish neighborhood of Skokie, Illinois, a Chicago suburb and the home of many Holocaust survivors. This plan was devised by Frank Collin, who often appeared with his followers ``in full Nazi regalia: brown shirts, black boots, and armbands with swastikas'' and who ``advocated that all African-Americans, Jews and Latinos be forcibly deported'' (Johansson:129). Civil authorities effectively blocked the march at first, but the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) rose to Collin's aid. The Nazis won the ``right'' to march but a settlement was reached in which the City of Chicago and not Skokie became the site. The subsequent event drew international media attention. Homosexualists Johansson and Percy, in Outing: Shattering the Conspiracy of Silence, have finally revealed, more than fifteen years later, that Collin was a homosexual pederast. In 1979 Collin was arrested ``for taking indecent liberties with boys between ages 10 and 14'' and was sentenced to seven years in prison (Johansson and Percy:130).

Another branch of the American Nazi movement, the National Socialist League, is openly homosexual:

Founded in 1974 by defecting members of the National Socialist White People's Party, this San Diego-based NSL is unique in restricting its members to homosexual Nazis. Led by veteran anti-Semite Russell Veh, the group distributes membership applications declaring NSL's ``determination to seek sexual, social and political freedom'' (Newton:46).

While normally low-profile, the NSL stirred a controversy in 1983 when it attempted to market an infamous 1930's Nazi hate film that had been pirated by the group. An article in the Los Angeles-based Heritage and S.W. Jewish Press, titled ```Gay nazis' peddling vile `Jud Suss' film,'' named Veh and the National Socialist League. ``We are most familiar with Mr. Veh (which is an alias, incidentally) and his notorious operations,'' said legitimate film distributor, David Calbert Smith III (Heritage and S.W. Jewish Press, September 16, 1983). Veh solicited members for his group through a publication called ``The N.S. Mobilizer'' and through personal ads in homosexual publications, including the leading national ``gay'' magazine, The Advocate (Reisman, 1994:57).

A simple perusal of The Advocate reveals that Nazi themes are common in the homosexual community. Reisman, who studied personal advertisements in The Advocate in issues from 1972 to 1991 found that the content of the ads reflected a fascist mentality. She writes,

Overall, 72% of THE ADVOCATE data socialized a set of core values--glorified nazi dress, language and ``blonde'' Aryan male beauty and brutality; contempt for ``fems, fats,'' and blacks; threats toward ``politically incorrect'' homosexuals, churches and others -- Romanticizing ``fascist'' culture to a ``younger generation.'' Nazi costumes/fascist concepts are a common component of THE ADVOCATE and thus largely condoned by prevailing ``gay'' cultural values (Reisman:1992, 57).

Other elements of ``gay'' culture demonstrate a similar ideal. One popular film, by Finnish ``gay rights'' advocate Iippio Pohjala, is titled Daddy and the Muscle Academy (1992). Tom, the hero in the film, is a homosexual fascist and a pornographer. The film, combining themes of pederasty and Nazi glorification, was shown in San Francisco on June 26, 1992, at the Castro Theatre. It was part of the 16th Annual Gay and Lesbian Film Festival. A reviewer for the San Francisco Examiner provided the following description of the film:

Daddy and the Muscle Academy candidly acknowledges Tom's infatuation with body types encouraged by the National Socialists. His fantasies...[involve] sex between clean-cut Finnish boys and storm troopers, the swastika flying behind them (Bonetti: San Francisco Examiner, June 26, 1992).

A review of a stage production of ``Cabaret'' in The Washington Blade (September 1, 1996) reveals a similar infatuation with Nazism.

[The director]...obviously aims to disquiet...the Emcee... sings the final line -- in a tight spotlight -- of the anthem to the Fatherland, ``Tomorrow Belongs to Me''; and in a shocking move during the finale, he visually allies himself with Nazism. Clearly, the Emcee connects decadence, queerness, and Nazism...He raises frightening questions of queerness, fascism and doom in two periods: World War II and the end of the twentieth century.

The attraction of American ``gays'' to Nazism is not the exclusive domain of male homosexuals, however. Gertrude Stein, who, because of her relationship with Alice B. Toklas, is described by The Alyson Almanac as half of ``history's best known lesbian couple'' (149), was a great fan of Adolf Hitler. Toland reports in Adolf Hitler that in 1937 ``Gertrude Stein thought Hitler should get the Nobel Peace Prize'' (Toland:409). (George Bernard Shaw, a Fabian socialist and outspoken defender of homosexuality, also ``defended magazine and newspaper articles'' -- ibid.:409).

In the 1960s, Nazi homosexuality was so widely known that the portrayal of Nazi thugs as homosexual was a frequent occurence 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, 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 in by a Justice of the Supreme Court in 1966 (in 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).

Where homosexuals live in the highest concentrations, some seem to feel more comfortable acting out their Nazi fantasies. In Against Sadomasochism: A Radical Feminist Analysis, Susan Leigh Star, a Jewish sociologist, describes her experience in San Francisco:

For four years I have lived in the Castro section of San Francisco, the gay (predominantly male) district. When I walk down the street in my neighborhood, I often see people dressed in black leather, wearing chains and sometimes carrying whips. In the magazine stores there are many sadomasochist publications. Often these include pictures of people wearing replicas of Nazi Germany uniforms. Iron crosses, storm trooper outfits, military boots. And swastikas. Once and a while someone on the street is dressed in full Nazi regalia (Star:132).

Meanwhile, back in Germany, the alarming increase of neo-Nazi skinheads is also linked to homosexuality. Elmay Kraushaar, a journalist for Der Spiegel, the German equivalent to Time Magazine, is quoted in The Advocate:

There is a gay skinhead movement in Berlin. They go to cruising areas with leaflets that say, ``We don't want foreigners.'' A major leader of the neo-Nazis in Germany, Michael Kuhnen, was an openly gay man who died of AIDS two years ago. He wrote a paper on the links between homosexuality and fascism, saying fascism is based on the love of comrades, that having sex with your comrades strengthens this bond (Anderson:54).

Kuhnen's ``comrade'' and successor, Christian Worch, was jailed in 1994 in connection with crimes of violence and racial hatred (Neighborhood Queen Internet Posting, Dec. 1, 1994).

We include a final anecdote about the ongoing association between Nazi themes and homosexuality. The Arizona Republic ran a headline story on April 12, 1996 about a sting operation that netted 30 Aryan Brotherhood members who had allegedly smuggled guns and drugs into prisons. One of us (Lively) spoke to a detective (who wishes to remain anonymous) who had firsthand knowledge of the case. The detective confirmed that he had observed a high incidence of homosexuality in this white supremacist organization.

The Fascist Roots of the American ``Gay'' Movement

The first ``gay rights'' organization in the United States was an American chapter of the German-based Society for Human Rights. The German SHR, formed in 1919 by Thule Society member, Hans Kahnert, was a militant organization led by ``Butch'' homosexuals. Many of the early Nazis, including SA leader Ernst Roehm, were also SHR members. The American SHR was formed on December 10, 1924, in Chicago, by a German-American named Henry Gerber (J. Katz:388). Gerber had served with the U.S. occupation forces in Germany from 1920 to 1923 and had been involved with the German organization. Together with a small group of fellow ``revolutionaries,'' Gerber legally chartered the group without revealing its purpose and began publishing a pro-homosexual journal called Friendship and Freedom (ibid.:389), patterned after the German chapter's publication of the same name (ibid.:632n.).

In 1925, however, the organization collapsed when Gerber, Vice President Al Menninger and another member were arrested on charges of sexual abuse of a boy, having been turned in by Menninger's wife. The Chicago Examiner ran a story titled ``Strange Sex Cult Exposed,'' and spoke of ``strange doings'' in Menninger's apartment. Menninger confessed, but Gerber claimed the incident was a set-up, saying that their arrests were ``shades of the Holy Inquisition.'' Rather than take his chances in court, however, Gerber hired a lawyer who ``knew how to fix the State Attorney and judges'' and the case was dismissed (ibid.:392). After going underground for a time, writing under the pen-name ``Parisex,'' Gerber reemerged in 1934 on the staff of a pro-homosexual literary magazine called Chanticleer (ibid.:394). He also retained his ties to the German SHR and published several articles in their publications (ibid.:633n.).

In Chanticleer, Gerber revealed himself as a militant socialist who regarded capitalism and Christianity as the twin pillars of ignorance and repression of ``sexual freedom'' (ibid.:394). In response to the news of the Roehm Purge in the American press, he admitted that the Nazis were led by homosexuals and praised ``Roehm and his valiant men'' (ibid.:396). Gerber is quoted at length in Katz's Gay American History regarding the Nazi regime. He writes,

A short time ago an American journalist pointed out in the liberal ``Nation'' that the whole Hitler movement was based on the homosexual Greek attachments of men for each other, and the same Jewish author stated that it was another of the Hitler contradictions that the ``Leader'' should have acquiesced in the burning of the books of Dr. Magnus Hirschfeld...Thus we get a glimpse of the insanity of the whole movement: A Jewish doctor working for the interests of homosexuals is persecuted by a heterosexual mob, led by homosexuals (Gerber in J. Katz:395).

It is interesting to note that the homosexual inclinations of the Nazis were a matter of at least limited public knowledge in the United States at this time, as well as their Greek origins. We can also infer from this passage that Gerber himself was not an overt fascist, though he clearly identified with the Brownshirts in Germany. Open fascism in the homosexual movement would come later, but Gerber and his pederastic friends had established its foundation. By 1972, when he died at the age of 80, Gerber had witnessed the emergence of homo-fascism as a permanent theme in the movement.

Harry Hay and the Mattachine Society

In the words of Jonathan Katz, ``a link of a kind peculiar to Gay male history connects the abortive Chicago Society for Human Rights (1924-25) and Henry Hay, the founder of the Mattachine Society'' (J. Katz:407). This ``peculiar link'' is the fact that the man who recruited Hay into homosexuality (at age seventeen), Champ Simmons, was himself seduced by a former member of the SHR. In a perverse sort of way, then, it seems appropriate that Hay would become known as the ``founder of the modern gay movement'' (Timmons:cover). (In another account, Hay claims his earliest homosexual experience was a molestation at age fourteen by a twenty-five year old man) (ibid.:36).

On August 10, 1948, at the tail-end of an eighteen-year stint as a Communist Party leader, Hay began to organize a group that would become the Mattachine Society (ibid:132). Not until the spring of 1951 did it receive its name, but from the beginning it was seen as a vehicle to destroy social restraints against homosexuality in American culture (J. Katz:412f). The name Mattachine was taken from ``medieval Renaissance French...secret fraternities of unmarried townsmen'' (ibid.:412). The organization's stated agenda was to preserve the ``right to privacy.'' Like the SHR, the Mattachine Society became controversial upon the arrest of a prominent member. Dale Jennings, one of the founders of the organization was arrested for soliciting an undercover police officer to commit a homosexual act in a public restroom (ibid.:414).

Hay was also not an overt fascist, but he was a neo-pagan. He participated in occultic rituals at ``the Los Angeles lodge of the Order of the Eastern Temple, O.T.O., Aleister Crowley's notorious anti-Christian spiritual group'' (Timmons:76). Hay provided musical accompaniment to ceremonies performed by the lesbian ``high priestess.'' Later in life he founded a New Age group called Radical Faeries, which met in an asram in the high desert of Arizona to offer invocations to pagan spirits (ibid.:265).

In some ways, Hay can be compared to Karl Heinrich Ulrichs, the ``grandfather'' of the gay rights movement. Hay is his American counterpart in the sense that both men launched enduring social movements in their respective cultures. The avowed purpose of each was to undermine the Judeo-Christian moral consensus in respect to homosexual relations. And both had been molested as boys (though some suggest that this is the rule rather than the exception among homosexual men). But unlike Ulrichs, Hay became increasingly militant over the course of his life until, in the 1980s, he participated in California's notoriously violent ACT-UP demonstrations (ibid.:292). ACT-UP, the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power, was one of the earliest manifestations of homo-fascism in the ``gay rights'' movement. Though Hay was in his 70s, and is not directly linked to any of the property destruction, his presence validated the terrorist tactics of the group. Hay also openly endorsed pederasty as an essential part of the ``gay rights'' movement (ibid.:296).

Harry Hay and the Mattachine Society spawned large-scale political and social activism among homosexuals that soon outgrew their expectations and their control. These highly motivated activists operated in groups designed like communist cells, each a ``secret fraternity'' bound by the common vice. As Hay stated in a later interview, ``[we wanted to] keep them underground and separated so that no one group could ever know who all the other members were'' (J. Katz:410). Slowly at first, from innumerable obscure sources, came theories, public statements and actions in support of the social acceptance of homosexuality. And as the power of the homosexualist political lobby grew, so did the ugliness of its demands and its methods.

The Stonewall Riot and ``Gay'' Militancy

``Two, four, six, eight -- Smash the family, smash the state''

(Popular slogan of 1970s ``gay'' activists --Oosterhuis and Steakley:2)

By 1969, the development of a growing homosexual subculture in America had spawned an open homosexual presence in major cities. So-called ``gay bars'' sprang up in Los Angeles and New York, hosting a bizarre mix of ``street queens,'' drug addicts and boy prostitutes (Marotta:71). In New York, homosexuals regularly engaged in public sex acts with anonymous partners ``in the backs of trucks parked near the West Village piers'' (ibid.:93) and in the public restrooms. Homosexual activity occurred so frequently in the bushes of one public park that the authorities were forced to cut down the trees to stop it (Adam:85). In response to police efforts to discourage this increasingly offensive behavior, homosexuals began to organize to demand the ``right'' to public deviancy. Emboldened by their numbers, they began picketing businesses such as Macy's Department Store, which had cracked down on homosexual behavior in their restrooms (ibid.:85).

On the evening of June 27, 1969 the ``gay rights'' movement officially adopted terrorism as a means to achieve power when a surly mob of ``drag queens, dykes, street peole, and bar boys'' physically attacked police officers conducting a ``raid'' on the Stonewall Bar on Christopher Street in New York. Stonewall was ``one of the best known of the Mafia controlled bars'' (Marotta:75) which was being closed for selling alcohol without a license. It was also a haven for sexual deviants. As police began to take some bar patrons in for questioning, a mob of homosexuals gathered across the street. Homosexualist Toby Marotta's The Politics of Homosexuality includes an eyewitness report by a writer for the Village Voice:

[A]lmost by signal the crowd erupted into cobblestone and bottle heaving...The trashcan I was standing on was nearly yanked out from under me as a kid tried to grab it for use in the windowsmashing melee. From nowhere came an uprooted parking meter--used as a battering ram on the Stonewall door. I heard several cries of ``Let's get some gas,'' but the blaze of flame which soon appeared in the window of the Stonewall [where the police officers were trapped] was still a shock (ibid.:72).

By morning, the Stonewall bar was a burned-out wreck, and homosexual leaders had declared the violence a success. Interestingly, the anniversary of this event is known today as ``Gay Pride Day'' and features parades and other events most notable for their public sex and nudity (ibid.:158). It is ironic that the very activists who emerged from this new militant environment developed (in 1970) the strategy of claiming victim status through the use of the pink triangle and commemoration of the homosexuals who were persecuted by the Nazis (Adam:86).

Following the Stonewall riot the Mattachine Action Committee of the Mattachine Society's New York chapter clamored for ``organized resistance'' (ibid.:81), but control of the movement was taken out of their hands by a still more radical group of activists. These men quickly formed the Gay Liberation Front, so titled ``because it had the same ring as National Liberation Front, the alliance formed by the Viet Cong'' (ibid.:91). At the heart of this new circle of power was Herbert Marcuse (ibid.:88), a long time Socialist who had learned his politics, and practiced his homosexuality, in pre-Nazi Germany. Homosexualist historian Barry D. Adam writes,

Herbert Marcuse, who had been a youthful participant in the 1918 German revolution and had been steeped in the thinking of the life-reform movements of the Weimar Republic, caught the attention of many gay liberationists. His Eros and Civilization, published in the ideological wasteland of 1955, bridged the prewar and postwar gay movements with its implicit vision of homosexuality as a protest ``against the repressive order of procreative sexuality'' (ibid.:84).

The Stonewall riot became the new symbol of the ``gay rights'' movement. In its wake, Gay Liberation Fronts sprang up across the country, using methods of intimidation and coercion to achieve political gains. Immediately they targeted the medical community, whose increasing effectiveness in treating homosexual disorders threatened the logical premise of the movement (Rueda:101ff). ``Gay Liberation Fronts,'' writes Adam, ``stormed San Francisco, Los Angeles and Chicago conventions of psychiatry, medicine and behavior modification,'' shouting down speakers and terrorizing audience members (Adam:87f). As extreme as it had itself become, the Mattachine Society predicted the GLF's ``violent tactics'' would fail to inspire the movement (Marotta:136), but they were wrong. Though the GLF collapsed in 1972, in part because of a conflict between ``drag queens and machos'' [``Femmes'' and ``Butches''], their philosophy prevailed (Adam:90).

On December 15, 1973 the board of trustees of the American Psychiatric Association capitulated to the demands of the radicals. The homosexuals had begun to speak of unyielding psychiatrists as ``war criminals'' (ibid.:88), with obvious implications. Possibly in fear for their safety, and certainly wearied by constant harassment, they declared that homosexuality was no longer an illness. The resulting referendum, demanded by outraged members of the association, was conducted by mail and was partially controlled by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (Rueda:1982). The homosexualists won the vote and the new official definition of homosexuality as a disorder was changed to include only those who were ``unhappy with their sexual orientation'' (Adam:88). Historian Enrique Rueda writes,

This vote was not the result of scientific analysis after years of painstaking research. Neither was it a purely objective choice following the accumulation of incontrovertible data. The very fact that the vote was taken reveals the nature of the process involved, since the existence of an orthodoxy in itself contradicts the essence of science (Rueda:106).

The Pederasts

As we will see, the victory of politics over scientific objectivity was to have far-reaching consequences. After the fall of the APA's medical standard against the ``normalization'' of homosexuality, ``gay rights'' activists made tremendous gains in public acceptance of, or at least tolerance for, open homosexuality. This fact is especially alarming when we consider that the APA has now taken action which some construe as ``normalization'' of pedophilia as well. The September, 1994 issue of ``Regeneration News,'' the newsletter of a homosexual recovery group in Baltimore, features an article about this change. Regeneration Director, Alan Medinger compares the new set of criteria for diagnosing pedophilia with the prior standard:

In the earlier DSM-III-R [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Psychiatrists], pedophilia was diagnosed as a disorder if ``[t]he person has acted out on these urges or is markedly distressed by them...but the new standard defines pedophilia as a disorder only if the fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning'' (Medinger, reprinted in Stop Promoting Homosexuality Hawaii Newsletter, November, 1994. Emphasis ours).

The APA has taken a step which can be interpreted to imply that adult sex with children is normal as long as the perpetrators are not ``unhappy with their sexual orientation.'' The APA has taken exception to this interpretation.

Although many contemporary homosexual activists, especially lesbians, attempt to distance themselves from their pederastic comrades, the fact remains that pederasts (as was true in Germany) have always been at the forefront of the movement, albeit often ``in the closet.'' And the ``right'' of adults to have sex with children has always been a basic goal of the movement. In February of 1972, for example, a national coalition of homosexual groups met in Chicago to draw up a list of priorities for the movement. Prominent on the list was the demand for ``a repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent'' (Rueda:201ff). Already in Canada the age of consent has been lowered to age 14 (Mulshine:10).

The organizations dedicated specifically to ``pedophile rights'' or ``pederast-rights'' in the United States are made up of homosexual men (Rueda:173ff), and in major cities with an active homosexual community ``gay'' bookstores carry numerous titles which endorse man/boy sex (Grant, 1993:22). Tom Reeves, a self-admitted pederast who was part of the early ``gay rights'' movement is one of a number of writers in an anthology called Varieties of Man/Boy Love. He explains the role of pederasts in homosexualist activism:

Almost every one of the early openly homosexual writers was a pederast. Pederasty was a constant theme of early gay literature, art, and pornography. The Stonewall riots were precipitated by an incident involving an underage drag queen, yet that detail was not viewed as significant. Curtis Price, a fourteen-year-old, self-described ``radical hustler,'' formed the first gay liberation organization in Baltimore. Many of the leaders of early gay liberation and the founders of the major gay groups in the U.S. were boy-lovers (Reeves in Pascal:47).

Another of the early leaders of the ``gay rights'' movement was David Thorstad, also a self-identified pederast. Thorstad was president of the Gay Activist Alliance (Stop Promoting Homosexuality Hawaii Newsletter, November, 1994:6), one of the largest of the groups which formed in New York in the wake of the Stonewall riot. The GAA invented ``the strategy of `zapping' politicians,'' writes Marotta, ``that would later become [its] trademark...[they] had learned that homosexuals could infiltrate political gatherings and make themselves heard through sheer brashness'' (Marotta:137). The GAA also developed the strategy of using these ``carefully staged confrontations'' to force politicians to enact ``anti-discrimination'' policies (ibid.:150). The GAA reorganized early in 1974 as the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (Adam:88).

Thorstad, along with Reeves and others, later went on to form the North American Man/Boy Love Association in Boston in 1978 (NAMBLA Bulletin, September, 1992:2). NAMBLA, which is the largest ``pederast rights'' organization in the country, cloaks its agenda in rhetoric about concern for the rights of children to have ``sexual freedom.'' (Pascal:49). In recent years NAMBLA has come under attack by some elements of the ``gay rights'' alliance, who have tried to exclude the group from some of the higher profile media events. But this has evoked a violent response from its defenders. When NAMBLA was denied a role in the 1986 Los Angeles ``Gay Pride Parade,'' marcher Harry Hay donned a sweatshirt printed with the legend, ``NAMBLA Walks With Me.'' Timmons writes that Hay, ``could not contain his outrage'' that NAMBLA was excluded (Timmons:296). More recently, as reported in the NAMBLA Bulletin, Hay was a featured speaker at NAMBLA's annual membership conference, June 24-25, 1994:

[He] gave an inspiring talk about reclaiming for the 1990's the spirit of homoerotic sharing and love from various ancient Greek traditions of pederasty. A remarkably balanced and sensitive account of the conference appeared in the August 23 Advocate from a writer who was invited to attend (NAMBLA Bulletin, September, 1994:3).

Other homosexualist-run ``children's-rights'' organizations include the Rene Guyon Society, which was formed in 1962 ``to make it possible for adults to provide sexual stimulation for virtually all children'' (Rueda:177), and a group called Project Truth (NAMBLA Bulletin, September, 1994). (While we're discussing homosexual splinter groups we should mention the Eulenspiegel Society, formed in 1971 to promote ``Sado-masochist-rights'' for homosexuals whose ``special concern is freedom for sexual minorities and particularly those whose sexuality embraces S/M'' -- Rueda:175).

Membership of groups such as these in the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA) caused it to be expelled from the United Nations Economic and Social Council in September of 1993. Attempting to forestall their expulsion ILGA tried to separate itself from pederast groups but quickly learned that support for the ``boy-lovers'' was too deeply entrenched in the association. ILGA's ouster of ten-year member NAMBLA and a couple of other high-profile groups caused European pederast member-organizations to step forward in protest. Division within ILGA continues (NAMBLA Bulletin, September 1994:3).

Another apologist for pederasty is Larry Kramer, founder of ACT-UP. In Report from the Holocaust: The Making of an AIDS Activist, Kramer had this to say about adult/child sex: ``In those instances where children do have sex with their homosexual elders, be they teachers or anyone else, I submit that often, very often, the child desires the activity, and perhaps even solicits it'' (Kramer:234). According to Reeves, ``Queer Nation and Act-Up'' were home to ``both boys and men'' who wanted ``additional cultural activity beyond...their illegal relationships'' (Reeves in Pascal:73).

Pedophilia and its promotion is not limited to male homosexuals. Virginia Uribe, a lesbian teacher in Los Angeles, has been at the forefront of a movement to ``affirm gay teenagers,'' through school-based pro-homosexual ``counseling'' (Homosexuality, the Classroom and Your Children, 1992) Her own program, called Project 10 (named for the oft quoted ``statistic'' of 10% homosexuality in the U.S. population, a figure demonstrated in several recent studies to be nearer 2%), included a book for young people called One Teenager in Ten. This ``resource'' for troubled teens features lurid pornographic stories, including a graphic lesbian sex scene between a twelve-year-old girl and her twenty-three-year-old dance teacher. The apparent goal is to activate children's sexuality at increasingly younger ages. At a conference promoting Project 10 to public school teachers in Oregon, University of Washington sociologist Pepper Schwartz admits targeting prepubescent children for ``affirmation,'' saying, ``At this point, getting the majority to say `gay' is good' at nine or ten years old is going to be difficult, but just because it is difficult doesn't mean it's not the right thing'' (Homosexuality, the Classroom and Your Children, 1992).

The beneficiaries of ``sexual freedom'' for children and teens are often predatory adult homosexuals. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force is on record that ``gay teens should be supported in coming out'' (Mulshine:10), but writer Paul Mulshine notes that ``the guidance, and the sex, tends to come from adult gays who bring the teens out...A study published in the Journal of Pediatrics showed that of a sample of gay teenagers who had steady sexual partners, the mean age of the partners was 25 years'' (ibid.:10). He cites a ``1985 study of arrests in 12 U.S. jurisdictions [for child sex abuse, which] showed...on average, about 40 percent of arrests for pederastic homosexuals'' (ibid.:11).

Though some deny that the ``right'' of adults to have sex with children remains a fundamental component of the ``gay rights'' movement, the evidence suggests otherwise. Alyson Publications, the leading publisher of ``gay'' titles, markets books aimed at pre-schoolers, such as Daddy's Roommate and Heather Has Two Mommies, right alongside Gay Sex: A Manual for Men Who Love Men. The latter contains detailed instructions for pedophiles and pederasts on successfully avoiding discovery and arrest. ``Avoid situations,'' advises author Jack Hart, ``where a number of men have sex with the same boy, or group of boys, over a period of time'' (Hart:123). No doubt these guidelines are gratefully received by pederasts in the community, a constituency that is larger than most people realize. For example, Reeves claimed in a 1979 speech that he personally had met ``over 500 men'' who ``were struggling with their attraction to boys.'' ``Almost to a man,'' said Reeves, ``they are teachers and boy scout leaders and boys club leaders'' (Rueda:97).

The Boy Scouts

Fortunately, America's version of the Wandervoegel, the Boy Scouts of America, has largely been spared the problems associated with its German cousin. This can be attributed to its commitment to Judeo-Christian ideals as represented in its pledge to be ``reverent toward God'' (Hillcourt:10). Still, the number of homosexuals that have infiltrated the organization is alarming. From 1973 to 1993 over 1,416 scout leaders were expelled for sexually abusing boys (The Washington Times, June 15, 1993).

Beginning in 1991 and continuing to the present time, the Boy Scouts have been targeted by ``gay rights'' militants for their policy against allowing homosexuals to be scout leaders. An ostensibly ``spontaneous'' outcry against the Boy Scouts arose across the country, led by the once-venerable United Way agency, which pulled its funding from the Scouts in various cities. United Way's funding withdrawal was quickly followed by other homosexual-controlled or co-opted entities including Levi Strauss, Wells Fargo, Seafirst Bank and Bank of America (which later reversed itself) (Oregonian, July 11, 1992). Self-admitted lesbian, Roberta Achtenberg, then serving on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, led a campaign to coerce the Bank of America into support for the homosexuals' demands. Shortly thereafter, Achtenberg was appointed Assistant Secretary for the Department of Housing and Urban Development (Los Angeles Times, January 29, 1993), one of more than two dozen homosexuals appointed to high-level posts in the Clinton Administration (Grant, 1993:107).

In the streets, the Boy Scouts was mocked by ``Queer Scouts, a focus group of Queer Nation'' (Bay Area Reporter, August 1, 1991), while homosexualists at the highest levels of government attempted to intimidate the organization into submission. Recently deposed Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders used her post to castigate Scout officials (U.S.A. Today, June 2, 1994) and Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt signed an order prohibiting Boy Scouts from volunteering in national parks (The Washington Times, May 28, 1993). In San Francisco and San Diego the Boy Scouts were barred from operating day programs in the public schools (San Francisco Chronicle, September 14, 1991) and in San Diego, city officials launched an investigation of the Scouts under its legal powers to prevent ``discrimination'' against homosexuals (San Francisco Chronicle, October 18, 1992).

So far the Boy Scouts have withstood the onslaught, but late in 1992 the organization received a letter from NAMBLA predicting that it will eventually succumb to homosexual demands. The letter is addressed to Ben Love, Chief Scout Executive, Boy Scouts of America, and was published in the NAMBLA Bulletin, November, 1992:

Dear Mr. Love,

At its 16th membership conference, held in Chicago, August 7-9-1992, the North American Man/Boy Love Association unanimously adopted the following resolution:

``NAMBLA calls on the Boy Scouts of America to cease its discrimination against openly gay or lesbian persons in the appointment of its scout masters. This will permit scouts to be exposed to a variety of lifestyles and will permit more of those individuals who genuinely wish to serve boys to do so.''

I feel especially honored to have been asked to alert you of this resolution...I have also been a scout and a scout leader and share with so many in NAMBLA affection for the movement.

We recognize, of course, that the action for which we call is inevitable. What a great added contribution your organization will make possible to all the boys and girls who participate in it when you take this step. May it be taken in the near future.

We share a common mission -- to bring greater understanding and light and purpose to the young as they grow. We invite you to join with us in cherishing individual integrity, and in seeking the opportunity for every boy and girl in our country to find their own truth. We encourage you to help every person associated with your organization to be able to express those values from themselves which to them represent for themselves the Good, the True, and the Beautiful. As we work together toward these ends Light will guide our way.

We express these sentiments most respectfully,

Very Cordially,

Leland Stevenson

Co-Recording Secretary, NAMBLA (NAMBLA Bulletin, November 1992. Emphasis ours).

Stevenson's letter is reminiscent of the one Wilhelm Jansen sent to Wandervoegel parents in which he told them, ``you will have to accustom yourselves to the presence of so-called homosexuals in your ranks'' (Mills:167). As we see, however, Stevenson's ideological allies have far greater political power in the United States today than Jansen's had in Germany in 1912.

Unfortunately, the moral courage of the Boy Scouts of America is not shared by all youth organizations. The Girl Scouts allows lesbian leaders in its organization and has expelled at least one heterosexual leader who refused to keep this policy secret from parents. Brenda Mailand, a Girl Scout employee in Lansing Michigan was fired after she refused to sign the following pledge:

As an employee of the Michigan Capitol Girl Scout Council, you may not proactively inform members, parents of members, prospective members or parents of prospective members, or members of the general public (including media) of the Council's and GSUSA's position on sexual orientation (Private letter, February 9, 1993).

The Big Brothers/Big Sisters organization actively promotes ``gay rights'' through its organization. In 1991 Big Brother/Big Sisters' Board of Directors lobbied the Boy Scouts to change its policy against homosexual leaders, saying ``the use of `non-traditional' volunteers in the service delivery to youth can serve the best interest of children'' (Private letter, August 9, 1991). Homosexual ``big brothers'' and ``big sisters'' are actively recruited in some cities (Just Out, March 1, 1993).

Weimar in America

Under the Weimar government, established after Kaiser Wilhelm II's abdication in 1918, many traditional attitudes were questioned, including those about sexuality. As America does today, Weimar Germany faced tremendous conflict as these policies clashed with traditional Judeo-Christian values. ``Feelings on the `sexual question' ran high. There were disputes about the roles of the sexes and about attitudes toward marriage, the family and child rearing, and these disputes were bound up with arguments about social policy and demographic trends'' (Peukert: 101).

In this climate the homosexualists made significant gains. Almost immediately, major German cities became havens for every form of sexual expression. William Manchester writes of ``transvestite balls, [where] `hundreds of men costumed as women and hundreds of women costumed as men danced under the benevolent eye of the police,'' and of ``mothers in their thirties, teamed with their daughters to offer Mutter-und-Tochter sex'' (Manchester:57). Plant writes of ``luxurious lesbian bars and nightclubs [that] never feared a police raid'' (Plant:27). Steakley records that ``[o]fficial tolerance was the unhindered consumption of narcotics in some homosexual bars, and transvestites were issued police certificates permitting them to crossdress in public'' (Steakley:81). And historian-biographer Charles Bracelen Flood speaks of ``sad alleys patrolled by prostitutes of all ages and both sexes, including rouged little boys and girls'' (Flood:196). ``Berlin's specialized establishments included a bathhouse featuring black male prostitutes'' that was frequented by Ernst Roehm, writes Flood, and ``there was a sedate nightclub for lesbians, the Silhouette, where most of the women, sitting on hard benches along the walls, wore men's clothes with collar and tie, but the young girls with them wore dresses with accented femininity'' (ibid.:197). Germany's version of Madonna was a woman named Anita Berber, ``the role model for thousands of German girls...[Berber] danced naked...and made love to men and women sprawled atop bars, bathed in spotlights, while voyeurs stared and fondled one another'' (Manchester:57). Rector describes the Weimar scene as a ``sexual Mardi Gras'' (Rector:15):

There were about as many -- if not more -- homosexual periodicals and gay bars in Berlin in the 1920's as there are now in New York City, and Berlin of the time was abuzz with the feasibility of forming a national homosexual political party. The sexual revolution, with its free-and-easy attitudes, including wife swapping and group sex as a moral precept, was a German ``invention'' of the Twenties...abortions were shrugged off and condoms were on sale in open display in grocery stores and almost every other public mart [Quoting from T.L. Jarman, Rector continues]...Freedom degenerated into license...Bars for homosexuals, cafes where men danced with men,...pornographic literature in the corner kiosks--all these things were accepted as part of the new life (ibid.:13).

Today, all of these things are manifest in American society as well. The lid to Pandora's Box that had been cracked open by Kinsey, Harry Hay and the Mattachines is now flung wide. Rueda writes,

...there are no fewer than 2,000 [homosexual bars in America]...They range from small ``sleazy'' places in dark and dangerous alleys to plush establishments...Some bars cater to a conventional-looking clientele. Others specialize in sadomasochists or transvestites. There are bars which purposefully attract young people, prostitutes who serve to attract older homosexuals who in turn purchase drinks for the youngsters while sexual deals are arranged. Printed guides for traveling homosexuals...[specify] the availability of prostitutes or ``rough trade'' (i.e., homosexuals who enjoy appearing violent or who actually behave violently) (Rueda:33).

American cities also host ``bathhouses,'' which are not actual baths but meeting places for anonymous homosexual encounters. ``People walk in there and have sex with multiple partners and have no idea who they're having sex with,'' reports former homosexual John Paulk. ``I know this first hand and from the many many people I was associated with in the gay lifestyle'' (``The Gay Agenda'' Video). Paulk reports that these ``bathhouses'' remain open despite the AIDS epidemic. He also describes the activity called ``cruising'' in which homosexuals meet for anonymous sex in public restrooms and other public locations. While this has apparently always been common behavior in the homosexual community, Paulk implies that it is far more widespread today than ever before. This is substantiated by other observers of the ``gay rights'' movement (Grant, 1993:36f).

A great deal more could be written about the varieties of homosexual perversion that have proliferated in America's cities and towns today. Indeed, the authors feel that the behavior of homosexuality needs to be exposed to a public whose attention is systematically drawn away to ``cover'' issues (e.g. ``victim'' status, ``rights,'' etc.). But it is our intention here to focus on the social, political and spiritual ramifications of this behavior.

The Kinsey Connection

The American counterpart to the Sex Research Institute of Berlin is the Kinsey Institute. And like its German predecessor, this organization is dedicated to the legitimization of homosexuality. In 1948, sex researcher Alfred Kinsey released his culture-shattering book, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. The first major sex study of its kind, the Kinsey Report purported to show that Americans were far more promiscuous and sexually deviant than they said they were (Reisman and Eichel, 1992:2). For over forty years, Kinsey's data went more-or-less unchallenged and the conclusions that he drew continue to serve as the ``scientific'' justification for the so-called sexual revolution. His theory of sex as a mere ``outlet'' released human behavior from what Marcuse called ``the repressive order of procreative sexuality.'' All forms of sexual expression were equalized in the Kinsey model.

Recently, several studies have shown that America is not the hotbed of promiscuity and deviancy that Kinsey's study made it appear to be, even after forty-six years of influence by that study, which was loudly trumpeted as ``fact'' by the media and much of academia. U.S. News and World Report said of one such recent study, conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, that it showed that ``[f]idelity reigns. Fully 83 percent of Americans had sex with one person or had no sex partners in the past year, and half of Americans have had only one partner in the past five years'' (U.S. News and World Report, October, 1994:75).

Kinsey's study seemed tailor-made for the homosexual/pederast community. Indeed, just weeks after its release, Harry Hay began formal efforts at organizing the movement. Kinsey's vastly inflated figure of the number of homosexuals in America is the basis of the enduring myth that at least 10% of the population is homosexual and his seven-point Kinsey Scale, ``in which bisexuality occupied a middle `balanced' position between heterosexuality (0) and homosexuality (6)'' (ibid.:10), attempted to establish homosexuality as a norm by definition. He further declared adult/child sex harmless. This ``finding'' was based on data gathered by pedophiles on hundreds of children as young as two months old (ibid.:36).

In Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, Reisman and Eichel said that Kinsey ``purported to prove that children were sexual beings, even from infancy and that they could, and should, have pleasurable and beneficial sexual interaction with adult `partners''' (ibid.:3). Reisman and Eichel go on to suggest that Kinsey deliberately overlooked criminal sexual child abuse and purposefully falsified data to further his personal sexual and political agenda. They cite former Kinsey coworker Gershon Legman who said that ``Kinsey's not-very-secret intention was to `respectablize' homosexuality and certain sexual perversions'' (ibid.:34). They also reference sociologists Albert Hobbs and Richard Lambert who observed ``that the Kinsey authors seemed purposefully to ignore the limitations of their own samples in order `to compound any possible errors in almost any way which will increase the apparent incidence of [homosexuality]''' (ibid.:24).

Was Kinsey a homosexual or a pedophile? One historian proposed that Kinsey ``may have discovered in himself the homosexual tendencies he would later ascribe to a large proportion of the population'' (Robinson in Reisman and Eichel, 1992:204). But Reisman and Eichel suggest he manifested more of the behaviors of a pedophile. ``In addition to his interest in sex experiments with children,'' they write, ``Kinsey was an avid collector of pornography (and maker of sex films) -- an elemental feature of the pedophile syndrome'' (Reisman and Eichel, 1992:205).

There is no question, however, that Kinsey fits the profile of a homosexual activist. Like the militant homosexuals who benefited from his work, Kinsey was ``indignant about the effect of Judeo-Christian tradition on society,'' write Reisman and Eichel. ``It is clear that he shared [co-researcher Wardell] Pomeroy's view that Christians inherited an almost paranoid approach to sexual behavior from the Jews'' (ibid.:6). For his part, Pomeroy served on the advisory board of the Mattachine Society (Marotta:80), perhaps indicating a deeper relationship between the two organizations. Pomeroy, incidentally, is known for his support of adult/child sex. In a 1992 article on pedophilia, author Michael Ebert quotes Pomeroy as saying, ``People seem to think that any [sexual] contact between children and adults has a bad effect on the child. I say this can be a loving and thoughtful, responsible sexual activity'' (Ebert:6f).

The Cauldron Begins to Boil

``I shall torture you during the daytime, and will keep you from a peaceful sleep at night.''

Larry Kramer, Founder of ACT-UP (Leo:18).

ACT-UP was founded by Larry Kramer and approximately 300 other activists in March, 1987, in New York City; it soon spread across the nation (Alyson Almanac:42). Within a few months its members had gained national attention for their aggressive actions against those whom they considered enemies. ACT-UP groups invaded Catholic churches in New York during religious services, screaming obscenities and ``stomping on communion wafers'' (Miller:460). Catholic churches were also targeted in Washington, Los Angeles and Puerto Rico. Newspaper boxes were smashed in Sacramento to punish an editor for his views (Grant, 1993:104). One militant who later regretted his involvement was Washington, D.C. ACT-UP founder, Eric Pollard. The following is an excerpt from his 1992 letter to the Washington Blade titled, ``Time to give up fascist tactics'':

This is very hard for me to write. It forces me to squarely confront my past actions and to accept responsibility for the damage I have had a part in causing. I sincerely apologize for my involvement in and my founding of the AIDS activist organization, ACT-UP D.C.. I have helped to create a truly fascist organization...The average Gay man or woman could not immediately relate to our subversive tactics, drawn largely from the voluminous Mein Kampf, which some of us studied as a working model (Washington Blade, January, 1992).

Within a few years of its founding, ACT-UP spawned the more radical Queer Nation. Miller writes that Queer Nation's ``in your face'' tactics antagonized some in the ``gay'' community. Randy Shilts [a prominent homosexual writer] called Queer Nationals ``brownshirts'' and ``lavender fascists'' (Miller:460). Queer Nation adopted highly militant rhetoric and openly threatened violence. Grant describes their tactics during an Oregon election campaign (see Introduction) in which voters considered a law to ban minority status based on homosexuality:

...flyers appeared on telephone poles warning people to vote against it. One showed the Christian ichthus fish being roasted on a stick over a fire. It read, YOU BURN US, WE BURN YOU...another said CIVIL RIGHTS or CIVIL WAR. Your choice for a limited time only...It also clarified what it meant by ``civil war'' by listing ``QUEER KNIVES, QUEER GUNS, QUEER BULLETS, QUEER MISSLES, QUEER TANKS, QUEER TRENCHES, QUEER FIRE, QUEER WARFARE, QUEER PATRIOTS (Grant, 1993:104f).

One of us (Lively) was active in that campaign and personally witnessed stencils painted on sidewalks in the City of Portland which threatened ``Queers Bash Back.'' In the City of Eugene businesses that had supported the Oregon Citizens Alliance (which had sponsored the ballot initiative) had bricks, wrapped in swastika-embellished flyers, thrown through their windows. A Queer Nation spokesman in Eugene denied responsibility but defended the violence as justified. A separate organization which called itself ``Bigot Busters'' specialized in harassing and threatening petitioners seeking signatures to put the measure on the ballot. Petitions were ripped from circulators hands or doused with paint, activists blockaded petition tables, and several circulators were physically assaulted. Hundreds of false signatures were put on petitions in an effort to invalidate them. In every case ``Bigot Busters'' denied responsibility.

In classic Nazi style, the Oregon homosexual activists cast themselves as victims during this campaign of violence. A series of phony late-night cross-burnings were staged in the front yard of Azalea Cooley, a black, apparently wheelchair-bound lesbian in Portland. This highly publicized charade continued for six months and was blamed on a ``climate of hate'' created by OCA. On the eve of the election, however, police caught Cooley herself on video walking out her own front door with a wooden cross and materials to burn it. She later confessed to all of the crimes (Oregonian, December 10, 1992).

As we have seen with Roehm's Brownshirts, the wrath of militant homosexuals can be fierce. On September 29, 1991, following Governor Pete Wilson's veto of Assembly Bill 101 (which would have extended minority status to homosexuals) thousands of homosexuals rioted in San Francisco, setting fire to a government building and clashing with police. This fury is often turned against individuals and families as well. Chuck and Donna McIlhenny experienced this phenomenon after the San Francisco Presbyterian church, where Chuck is the pastor, fired a homosexual organist, sparking a wave of terrorism against their family and their church. They describe the campaign of hatred that was waged against them in When the Wicked Seize a City:

The harassment started. Rocks, beer bottles, beer cans were thrown through the church windows on many occations. Swastikas were carved in the church doors and drawn on our house. A window in our car was smashed out. Graffiti was spray-painted all over the church, house, and sidewalk. Anti-Christian, pro-homosexual leaflets were scattered around the neighborhood calling us Nazis, bigots, anti-gay, etc. Demonstrators would come into our Sunday services and disrupt the worship...One time a man came pounding and spitting on our front door in the middle of the night, screaming, ``We're going to get you McIlhenny--we're going to kill you politically!'' We were verbally threatened outside the house on the way to the car. There were daily -- 24-hours-per-day -- telephone calls. They began with screaming and obscenities. They graduated into phone calls describing our children--by name, appearance, where they attended school, when they got out of school, and what sexually deviant behavior was to be practiced on the children before killing them...Then on 31 May 1983 at 12:30 a.m., someone actually attempted to follow through with their threats to kill us [by firebombing the house while the children were asleep inside] (McIlhenny and York:109f). (The McIlhenny'' survived these and other efforts against them and continue to serve the membership of their church in San Francisco).

On April 12, 1996, a near-riot by 400 homosexual militants in Madison, Wisconsin delayed a scheduled speech on The Pink Swastika by one author (Lively). Shouting obscenities and slogans, activists invaded and occupied the tiny Trinity Evangelical Fellowship church for nearly an hour while hundreds of others banged on the outer walls and windows with rocks and trash-can lids. Chants of ``Crush the Christians!'' and ``Bring back the lions!'' could be heard through the windows. Police refused to clear the church but later agreed to remove individual protestors who refused to be civil. Eventually, the meeting was allowed to continue, though not before some of the protesters went into the church basement and urinated and defecated on the floor.

Meetings in Janesville and Stevens Point, Wisconsin were similarly disrupted. For those who attended, however, the homo-fascism of the Wisconsin ``gay'' community provided a living testimony to the validity of claims made in this book.

Attacks like these are not isolated incidents, but part of the strategy for increasing the political power of homosexuals in American society. Dr. Brian Clowes, in Debating the Gay Rights Issue, has compiled the following incidents of the use of terrorism and violence by ``gay'' fascists:

If [AIDS] research money is not forthcoming at a certain level by a certain date, all gay males should give blood. Whatever action is required to get national attention is valid. If that includes blood terrorism, so be it. (Robert Schwab in Kirk Kidwell, ``Homosexuals Flex Muscles in Washington.'' American Family Association Journal, January, 1988, pages 6 - 8).

We should have shut down the subway and burned down city hall. I think rioting is a valid tactic and should be tried...If someone took out [killed] Jesse Helms or William Dannemeyer of California, I would be the first to stand up and applaud. (ACT-UP member Michael Petrelis, quoted in Michael Wilrich. ``Uncivil Disobedience.'' Mother Jones. December, 1990, page 16).

It's hard to refrain from taking this man [Pat Buchanan] by the throat and squeezing as hard as you can while you look at his ugly, disgusting face and watch the eyeballs burst and pop out of their sockets. Or maybe you feel like stepping on his face and squishing his demented brain until the rot oozes out of it and onto the pavement. I have no problem imagining violence against this wacko... (Michelangelo Signorile, editor-at-large of the homosexual magazine Outweek, quoted in National Review, June 24, 1991. (Clowes:78f)


Fortunately, America has not experienced the wide-scale atrocities perpetrated by the Nazis in Germany, but the actions of certain male homosexuals in recent history are reminiscent of the worst SS butchers. As noted in a January 21, 1984 editorial in The New York Times, ``Many of the most violent multiple murders have been commited by homosexual males.'' Clowes cites some alarming statistics showing that eight of the top ten serial killers in the United States were homosexuals (below) and that homosexuals were responsible for 68 percent of all mass murders (Clowes:97). The following is a list of nine leading homosexual serial killers, eight of which were among the top ten most prolific killers as of 1992. Clowes' sources are listed in the text and are reprinted from Debating the ``Gay Rights'' Issue:

Donald Garvey: 37 Murders...[a] nurse's aide [who] was convicted of 37 murders in Kentucky and Ohio. Psychologists testified that ``Harvey said he was a homosexual.'' The New York Times, August 20, and August 17th, 1991.

John Wayne Gacy: 33 Murders...[a] professed homosexual ...who killed 33 young men and boys and buried them in his basement. The New York Times, February 22, 1980.

Patrick Wayne Kearney: 32 Murders...The New York Times described him as ``an acknowledged homosexual'' and ``...perpetrator of the `homosexual trash bag murders.''' The New York Times, July 27, 1977.

Bruce Davis: 28 murders...killed 28 young men and boys after having sex with them. The New York Times, January 21, 1984.

Corll, Henry and Owen: 32 Murders. Dean Corll, Elmer Wayne Henley, and David Owen Brooks were the members of a Texas homosexual torture/murder ring that captured and mutilated 27 young men. The New York Times, July 27, 1974.

Juan Corona: 25 admitted homosexual, killed 25 male migrant workers. The New York Times, October 4, 1972.

Jeffrey Dahmer: 17 Murders...a convicted child molester and practicing and admitted homosexual, lured 17 young men and boys to his apartment, had sex with them, then killed them and dismembered them. He ate parts of his victims bodies...Dahmer was active in ``gay rights'' organizations and had participated in ``gay pride'' parades. Michael C. Buelow. ``Police Believe Suspect Killed 17.'' The Oregonian, July 26, 1991, pages A1 and A24. Also: ``Relative in Dahmer Case Sues.'' USA Today, August 6, 1991, page 3A. Also October 1991 Focus on the Family Letter.

Stephen Kraft: 16 Murders...killed at least 16 young men after drugging, sodomizing and torturing them. Robert L. Mauro. ``The Nation's Leading Serial Killers.'' The Wanderer, October 31, 1991.

William Bonin: 14 Murders...tortured and killed 14 young men...had sex with his victims before and after they died. Robert L. Mauro. ``The Nation's Leading Serial Killers.'' The Wanderer, October 31, 1991. (Clowes:96)

William Bonin was executed by lethal injection at California's San Quentin prison on February 23, 1996. As reported in the Orange County Register, February 22, 1996, Bonin, the so-called ``Freeway Killer,'' killed at least 21 boys and young men and dumped their bodies along California freeways (our original source mentioned only 14). After having been jailed in the early 1970s for raping boys, Bonin had vowed that in the future ``there will be no witnesses.''

Although various stories reported that Bonin had raped men at gunpoint in the army and had been engaged in sex with a man at the time of his final arrest, the media failed to identify Bonin as ``gay.'' Standard ``gay'' rhetoric denies that male on male child molestation qualifies as homosexual conduct. Here, the perpetrator clearly was homosexual in his adult sexual relations as well, but the ``gay'' label was scrupulously avoided.

Thomas Hamilton of Dunblane, Scotland, is Britain's worst mass-murderer in modern history. Hamilton killed 16 children at an elementary school on March 13, 1996. According to The New York Times, Hamilton was obsessed with boys. Ousted from the Boy Scouts in 1974 for ``complaints about unstable and possibly improper behavior following a Scout camp,'' Hamilton later formed his own boys' club. Once again, children complained that ``he was overly familiar, made them take their shirts off and was obsessed with photographing them.'' Upset that he had been branded a ``pervert,'' Hamilton apparently took his revenge against the town of Dunblane by killing their children.

In a spree of ``gay-on-gay'' violence not seen since Nazi Germany, one homosexual man, Gaetan Dugas, was directly responsible for killing over a thousand homosexual men by deliberately infecting them with the AIDS virus. Indirectly he may be responsible for tens of thousands, eventually perhaps hundreds of thousands of AIDS deaths. One of the first known AIDS carriers, Dugas was known as ``Patient Zero'' because he caused so many of the earliest infections (Clowes:97). Even after his diagnosis Dugas ``justified his continued sodomy with the excuse that he was free to do what he wanted with his own body. Even when he was in the final stages of AIDS he would have anonymous sex with men in homosexual bathhouses, and then show his sexual partners his purple Kaposi's Sarcoma blotches, saying, `Gay cancer. Maybe you'll get it''' (``The Columbus of AIDS.'' National Review, November 6, 1987:19).

As reported in the Marin Independent Journal, February 5, 1996, the first known murder connected to the Internet resulted from a homosexual encounter between two men in East Windsor, New Jersey. After meeting ``through an online chat room, an electronic gathering place for gay men'' they decided to get together. ``But their offline meeting Jan. 4 turned deadly, police say, when George Hemenway shot Jesse Unger in the head, as a 15-year-old boy looked on.'' According to the story, the last homicide in this Trenton suburb of 22,000 was 10 years ago and also ``stemmed from a homosexual `street encounter,' police say.''

Other major news stories have had a homosexual element that assumes greater significance when viewed in the context of the homo-fascist connection. For example, just days after du Pont fortune heir John E. du Pont attracted national attention for his role in a shooting and a dramatic police standoff at his Pennsylvania mansion, details of his bizarre private life began to emerge. A single man who lived with his mother until her recent death, du Pont used his personal fortune to support his hobbies,which centered on traditionally ultra-masculine themes: collecting guns and military artifacts (such as an armored personnel carrier he drove around his estate) and collegiate-style Greco-Roman wrestling.

A Gannett News Service report published in the January 30 edition of the Marin Independent Journal contains allegations that du Pont was a homosexual who used his wealth to recruit others into the homosexual lifestyle. ```You really don't want to hear the whole truth. It would blow you away,' said Andre Metzger, a wrestling coach who sued du Pont for sexual harassment. Metzger said du Pont used the Foxcatcher training facility to gain access `to kids and adults' for homosexual relationships.''

Conclusion: The Danger of ``Gay Rights''

Scott Lively

I am writing this conclusion to the third edition on the same day that President Bill Clinton has called for ``hate crimes'' legislation based on ``sexual orientation'' (code words for homosexuality). A few days ago, in an act unprecedented in the history of the presidency, Mr. Clinton aligned himself with the homosexual cause at a fund-raiser for the Human Rights Campaign Fund, the ``gay'' movement's largest political action committee. Knowing what it cost this president in 1993 to endorse ``gays in the military,'' I am wondering what ``gay'' leaders might have promised the president in exchange for this new endorsement. Or can it be that public perception of the ``gay'' movement has changed so much that the Clinton administration (notorious for its reliance on polls and ``focus groups'') has decided that it is now safe for the president to identify himself and his office with the ``gay'' political agenda.

This question has personal significance for me, since I was one of the few people to publicly challenge then-candidate Clinton on his support for ``gay'' issues during his first run for presidential office. In response to my questions during a live Town Hall television program (simulcast from Seattle, Washington and Portland, Oregon), Mr. Clinton said he was against promoting homosexuality as a valid, alternative lifestyle to young people. At that time he also affirmed the right of the Boy Scouts to exclude ``gay'' scout leaders.

I raise this issue to contrast the benign public image of ``gays'' with the face of the ``gay'' movement that we have seen in these pages. Those whose perceptions of the ``gay'' movement have been shaped primarily by the popular media may find President Clinton's actions appropriate, even laudable. Such people have been persuaded that ``gays'' are society's victims in need of protection. But the ``gay'' movement I have seen and investigated is neither benign, nor are its members ``victims.'' It is vicious, deceptive and enormously powerful. Its philosophy is Machiavellian and its tactics are (literally) Hitlerian.

What explains the dichotomy of perspectives on the ``gay'' movement? If any of the facts in this book are true, then the image of the ``gay'' movement Bill Clinton would like you to accept cannot be true. Are typical heterosexual supporters of ``gay rights'' simply unconcerned about the association of homosexuality with personal and societal dysfunction and violence? Or have these presumably well-intentioned people been denied complete information?

I have always been cautious of the word conspiracy, yet this is the word which best describes how the ``gatekeepers'' of American popular culture have helped to shape public opinion on this issue. The truth about homosexuality and the Nazi Party (indeed most information that might reflect negatively on the ``gay'' movement) appears to have been deliberately suppressed. We know that so-called ``gay rights'' has become a virtual cause celebre among the self-styled cultural elites in government, academia and the news and entertainment media. Over fifty years ago Samuel Igra also observed that homosexualism ``had become a veritable cult among the ruling classes'' in Germany prior to the rise of Hitler. I have come to believe that America's cultural elitists, perceiving themselves to be the moral arbiters of our society and the protectors of ``gays,'' have used their power and their positions to protect and shield the ``gay'' movement from all unfavorable publicity. More than this, they have colluded to promote an image of ``gays'' as sterling citizens.

When I initially learned the truths contained in this book, I was first astonished and then angered. Why had this information never surfaced during the many months in which the Oregon campaign to stop the ``gay'' agenda was continually being compared (in the local and national media) to the Nazi regime? The information is certainly not hidden. Anyone with the most basic research skills could easily find many of the two hundred-odd sources we have cited in this book. Are we to believe that the hundreds of trained journalists, college professors and politicians who helped guide the debate on that campaign (and many similar events) failed to discover any of these sources? We must assume that at least some of these professionals knew of these facts but decided not to inform the public. At best this represents an appalling level of arrogance (allowing that they might have disregarded these facts as not credible -- denying ``common'' people the right to make up their own minds). The more plausible (and more frightening) conclusion is that the facts were withheld because of their likely negative impact on the ``gay'' movement.

``Gay'' political power derives in large part from the public perception that homosexuals are victims. As Kirk and Pill so baldly admitted in The Overhauling of Straight America, ``gays must be cast as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to assume the role of protector.'' What would happen to the protective instinct of Americans if they knew that many of the worst villians of the Third Reich were ``gay''? How closely would America scrutinize the ``gay'' agenda if ``homoeroticism'' were revealed as the very foundation of Nazism? (This is a movement which would not survive such scrutiny). The evidence points to a conspiracy of silence -- a nearly universal self-censorship by the same opinion-makers who mock conspiracy theories and decry any form of censorship.

If the facts in this book are true, and if it is also true that the ``gatekeepers'' of our public information are deliberately keeping these facts from us, can we hope to educate our fellow citizens before the ``gay agenda'' plunges this nation into social chaos? The outcome is uncertain. Surely, however, there have been times in the past when the inevitable repetitions of history were derailed by a few warning voices. It is our hope that the facts we have presented here will penetrate the ``fog'' of media-sponsored misinformation and ``political correctness.''

Have we exaggerated the urgency of our task? I think not. The future of America, indeed of civilization itself, depends upon the preservation of the natural family -- God's model for effective human society and the training ground for healthy human relationships. Yet the goal of the ``gay'' movement is the devaluation of the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic (monogamous heterosexual family-centered marriage) and its replacement with a ``gay'' affirming pagan alternative.

The ``gay'' movement in America (as contrasted with the German version) is different in style but not in substance. It remains characteristically selfish and hedonistic, but more importantly it continues to be defined by what it is against: Judeo-Christian family-based society. This ``gay'' vision for America is best defined in a widely circulated satirical essay written by a homosexualist under the pseudonym ``Michael Swift'' (probably to remind us of the political satire of Jonathan Swift). Although the writer intends to discredit this view of the homosexual agenda, its very eloquence (in the context of our study) belies this attempt. Echoing from the ancient Spartan culture, from the Teutons, from the Knights Templar, from the SA under Ernst Roehm, and now from the American ``gay rights'' movement comes this, our final glimpse into the fascist heart of homosexualism:

This essay is outre, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed dream of being the oppressor.

We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools [Project 10], in your dormitories [forced homosexual roommates], in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups [Wandervoegel , Boy Scouts], in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses [``gays in the military''], in your truck stops, in your all-male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons will become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.

Women, you cry for your freedom. You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy [radical feminism, lesbian separatist movement]. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will embrace them when they weep. Women, you say you wish to live with each other instead of men. Then go ahead and be with each other. We shall give your men pleasures they have never known because we are foremost men too and only one man knows how to truly please another man; only one man can understand with depth and feeling the mind and body of another man.

All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked [anti-discrimination ordinances, minority status based on homosexuality]. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men [graphic ``pro-gay'' sex and AIDS education, mandatory ``sensitivity training,''].

All homosexuals must stand together as brothers; we must be united artistically, philosophically, socially, politically and financially [the muli-faceted and powerful ``gay rights'' movement]. We will triumph only when we present a common face to the vicious heterosexual enemy [suppression of internecine conflicts and other negative information about homosexuals by the homosexualist dominated media].

If you dare to cry faggot, fairy, queer, at us, we will stab you in your cowardly hearts and defile your dead puny bodies [``hate crimes,'' speech codes, fines].

We shall write poems of the love between men; we shall stage plays in which man openly caresses man [the play Bent and a multitude of others; the lesbian counterpart in the television show, Ellen]; we will make films about the love between heroic men which will replace the cheap, superficial, sentimental, insipid, juvenile, heterosexual infatuations presently dominating your cinema screens [Hollywood promotion of homosexual ``love-making'' and of the ``gay rights'' agenda in movies and television]. We shall sculpt statues of beautiful young men, of bold athletes which will be placed in your parks, your squares, your plazas [public funding of homosexual pornography by the National Endowment for the Arts, National Public Broadcasting Service]. The museums of the world will be filled only with the paintings of graceful, naked lads.

Our writers will make love between men fashionable and de rigeur, and we will succeed because we are adept at setting styles [invention of ``gay-speak'' -- ``gay,'' ``homophobia,'' ``diversity,'' ``sexual orientation'']. We will eliminate heterosexual liaisons through usage of the devices of wit and ridicule which we are skilled in employing.

We will unmask the powerful homosexuals who masquerade as heterosexuals [outing]. You will be shocked and frightened when you learn that your presidents and their sons, your industrialists, your senators, your mayors, your generals, your athletes, your film stars, your television personalities, your civic leaders, your priests are not the safe, familiar bourgeois, heterosexual figures you assumed them to be. We are everywhere [a commonly used bumper-sticker]; we have infiltrated your ranks [strategic ``surprise'' announcements by ``conservative'' homosexuals, e.g. Mel White, former ghostwriter for Christian leaders]. Be careful when you speak of homosexuals because we are always among you; we may be sitting across the desk from you; we may be sleeping in the same bed with you.

There will be no compromises. We are not middle class weaklings. Highly intelligent, we are the natural aristocrats of the human race, and steely-minded aristocrats never settle for less [Brand/Friedlander, Fuehrer principle]. Those who oppose us will be exiled [the ``Femmes''].

We shall raise vast, private armies, as Mishima did, to defeat you [Rossbach and Roehm, Frederick the Great]. We shall conquer the world because warriors inspired by and banded together by homosexual love and honor are invincible as were the ancient Greek soldiers [Plato's Banquet ].

The family unit -- spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence -- will be abolished [homosexual ``marriage'' and adoption]. The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated [Plato's Republic]. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in communal setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants [Sparta].

All churches who condemn us will be closed [attacks on the McIlhennys, St. Patrick's Cathedral]. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and esthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar and banal will be annihilated [Kummerlings]. Since we are alienated from middle-class heterosexual conventions, we are free to live our lives according to the dictates of the pure imagination [Nietzsche, Hitler]. For us too much is not enough.

The exquisite society to emerge will be governed by an elite comprised of gay poets [Adolf Brand, Stefan George, Plato's ``philosopher-kings'']. One of the major requirements for a position of power in the new society will be indulgence in the Greek passion [pederasty]. Any man contaminated with heterosexual lust will be automatically barred from a position of influence [SA leadership]. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men.

We shall rewrite history [Holocaust revisionism, extravagant claims that historical figures (like Lincoln) were homosexual], history filled and debased with your heterosexual lies and distortions. We shall portray the homosexuality of great leaders and thinkers who have shaped the world. We will demonstrate that homosexuality and intelligence and imagination are inextricably linked, and that homosexuality is a requirement for true nobility, true beauty in a man [Hans Blueher].

We shall be victorious because we are filled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb, heterosexual shows throughout the ages [victim-plunder strategy]. We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution [ACT-UP, Queer Nation, blood terrorism].

Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.

(By Michael Swift, ``Gay Revolutionary.'' Reprinted from The Congressional Record . First printed in Gay Community News, February 15-21, 1987).

B'' H


Kevin E. Abrams

``The foundation of any `human' civilization is a moral and healthy sexual constitution, everything else is window-dressing.''

The Jerusalem Post, May 21, 1996

After we learn of the role ``gays'' played in the National Socialist movement, the Nazi attitude towards homosexuality may still seem contradictory and confusing, a riddle only partially solved. We may still wonder, if so many of the leading Nazis were ``gay,'' why they would target homosexuals for incarceration or extermination as today's ``gay'' activists claim. How can today's ``gays,'' who express so little regard for Biblical ethics, now portray themselves as joint victims with the very Jews who suffered persecution and virtual extermination at the hands of the largely ``gay'' Nazis? How do the official Nazi invectives against homosexuality reconcile with the fact that ``gays'' held key positions in the Nazi government throughout its despotic reign, inclusive of the Holocaust. Were the Nazis then victims of their own persecution?

And why are we so compellingly urged by the Left to sanction ``gay rights,'' when, as the wide spectrum of ``gay'' and non-``gay'' sources listed in this book's bibliography incontrovertibly show, Germany's militant ``gays'' were largely responsible for propelling Hitler into the Chancellor's office? And now, knowing the extent to which German ``gays'' contributed to the success of the Nazi movement, how should we interpret a looming ``gay'' swastika over America?

Spiritual Truth

Jewish scholar Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch who lived in the last century, is remembered for his most profound and extensive treatise on Torah philosophy. HOREB, meaning Sinai (the mountain where the original Torah was given by God and received by Moses), was written and published as a refutation to the Jewish pretensions of the German Reform Religion, which, today, is at the forefront of the movement to promote ``gay rights'' in America's Jewish community and within Israel. In opposition to both natural and Divine law, Reform has ordained lesbians as ``rabbis'' and sanctioned ``gay'' unions. ``Gay'' Jews have also imposed themselves on the Holocaust, cynically and pragmatically exploiting the deaths of six million Jewish men, women and children as a dramatic metaphor to portray themselves as victims, as if Hitler had targeted Jewish homosexuals primarily because they were ``gay.'' But what of the truth in history?

From an ethical monotheistic perspective, Rabbi Hirsch points out in the following excerpt from HOREB, how it is the primary concern and duty of each of us to guard the dignity of our fellow man:

God, who created man to be just, that is to say, to leave and give to all entities in all their relations that which is their due, has also endowed his mind with the faculty of mirroring the reality of things in their various relations so that man may be able to perceive the entities and their relations, and, on the strength of this knowledge, give to them what the teachings of justice lay down as their right.

This reproduction of reality in the mind is truth. Truth therefore, is a precondition of justice; for only according to the image of the things and their relations which appears in man's mind can man behave towards them; if this image be false, his behavior will be different from what is due to them: he becomes unjust. And thus, if nothing else, justice itself - which is our Divine calling - will guarantee that, as far as that calling of ours demands, we shall be able to perceive the reality of external things from their reflection within ourselves.

God has knitted together the community of man with the vital thread of love, and has ordained that man should rely on his brother for the spiritual good - namely, truth. But he who, instead of truthfully expressing in words what he has experienced to be real, communicates a false image of it to his brother, who accepts it and bases his behavior on it - either being unjust to his fellow-creatures or, having a wrong conception of their intentions towards him, being destroyed by them - that man turns into a curse that supreme blessing of the Creator; for he who denies truth to his brother, thus violating the highest duty towards him which God has imposed, calls down a curse - he who lies calls down a curse. And as material property is valuable only as a means for a life devoted to justice, and the liar steals the first condition of that justice - namely, truth, and gives falsehood in exchange, thus giving birth to injustice, the liar is even more dangerous than the thief.

The thief takes only the means of life as such, while the liar takes those of a just life, producing, in turn, injustice - and misery. For just as God links the supreme good, justice, to truth, so does He do the same with regard to the minor good, happiness. For to appreciate the nature of things you rely on your knowledge of them; and if somebody deceives you about their true nature, he robs you of a support or causes you to lean on a support that is insecure. And by stealing from another directly something precious - truth - and so indirectly the most precious thing - justice - the liar also kills himself spiritually; for he extinguishes in himself that Divine spark which alone makes of a him a human being created for the benefit of his fellow-men (Hirsch:248ff). [And what of ``gay rights?'' Never have so few taken so much from so many].

Who were the Nazis?

We must recognize who the Nazis were. Ideologically, the Nazis were pragmatic, technocratic, tribal pagan utilitarians. They viewed human life with a detached and cynical pragmatism. They exploited whomever and whatever they could to achieve their political and military goals. Typically, the Nazis approached such issues as euthanasia, homosexuality and abortion with a ruthless expedience. Sterilization and abortion were preferred for anyone classified inferior or defective (but never for healthy Aryans).

To the technocratic Nazi mind truth was dictated by the necessity of the moment (dealing thus in lies they brought a curse upon themselves and all they touched). ``Defectives'' were euthanized and inferiors sterilized, while it was a crime for Aryan maidens to have abortions. While privately tolerating and even promoting homosexuality, the Nazis denounced it frequently in public using trumped-up charges of homosexuality to arrest and remove those who disagreed with Hitler's military and political goals. Former neo-Nazi Ingo Hassellbach, in his revealing 1996 book, Fuhrer-Ex, confirms how the utilitarian Nazi double standard was applied in other areas: ``Opposition to abortion had been one of the consistent planks in the Nazi platform since the Movement's beginnings in the 1920s, and for a simple reason: abortion was race murder. While permissible, even desirable, among the colored women and Jews of the world, among Aryans it was the ultimate sin'' (Hasselbach:111).

The Nazi version of racial eugenics evolved into the key political and military platform of the Nazi Party, which enabled the Nazis to portray the Jewish people as a defective and inferior class, along with the physically deformed and other non-productive members of German society. In effect, however, the Nazis simply projected their own depravities upon the Jewish people, demonized and dehumanized them, and then used them as scapegoats as they themselves proceeded to plunder the world. Nazi racial theories served as a pretext to justify the elimination of a people whose deeper ``offense'' was its commitment to an unyielding moral standard.

As Professor Giora Shoham explains in his book, Valhalla, Calvary & Auschwitz, the Nazis, like today's ``gays,'' ``longed to shed the normative constraints of Judaeo-Christian law and morals and to return to the amoral irresponsibility of their paganism. They resented the Jews, who symbolized to them the imposition of restraints on their hedonistic paganism....When this sense of law and justice is rejected, the tribal chieftain, [and homoerotic warrior] reigns supreme. Thus, the separant power of Odin knew no limits; consequently, the omnipotence of Adolf Hitler, der Fuehrer, recognized no boundaries of law, morality or mercy'' (Shoham:27).

Increasingly, as they emerge from the closet, today's ``gays'' do bear a striking resemblance to yesterday's Nazis.

Left-Right Polarities

To understand the pagan mind in this context we must recognize the truth about left-right polarities in the political sphere. With minor discrepancies, all left-wing ideology can be identified as ``regressive,'' and right-wing ideology as ``progressive.'' Left-wing regressives incite mutual plunder, encourage dependency and pragmatically aspire to the lowest common denominator. Genuine right-wing progressive conservatives encourage creativity, inspire mutual affirmation, trust and human productivity. By nature, all socialism falls on the regressive side, in that ``socialism,'' is simply a political ideology which often lacks a true sense of social justice. Evil disguises itself as virtue (e.g., the goal of racial purity) because it has no life of its own (which is why sad bondage wishes to be known as ``gay liberation.'')

Generally, adherents of the Left fail to do what is necessary to guard the dignity of their fellow man. A left-leaning historian, for instance, would fatalistically argue that ``history'' repeats itself, while a conservative like Voltaire could observe correctly how it is instead ``man who always repeats himself.'' No wonder left-regressives cannot learn from history. If history just ``happens'' then little can be learned from it or done to prevent it from happening again. Basing one's decisions on a revised, corrupted or inverted version of history, however, is another matter. Some of man's worst follies are committed because of erroneous or falsified information.

In trying to understand the Nazi phenomenon we often ask ourselves how a gang of murdering thugs could have seized power in such a civilized nation? The truth is that Germany during the Weimar period was one of the most uncivilized nations in the world. Hitler himself referred to Berlin as the whore of Babylon.We consistently err in judging the advancement of human civilizations on the basis of art and technology. The Nazis loved classical music, and they were astute in the use of science and technology. The question we must ask about every society is, to what end is human culture is employed? For left-wing regressives, culture serves destruction and death. For right-wing progressives, culture focuses upon life.

A positive and utilitarian attitude toward homosexuality, euthanasia and abortion would therefore (then as now) be a left-wing regressive orientation, and a typical Nazi profile (with very specific contradictions and qualifications). It bears repeating that the Nazis were first and foremost technocratic, utilitarian pragmatists who believed in the survival of the fittest and the societal goals of physical beauty and racial perfection, Aryans being the ``fittest'' and most perfected, and Jews the least ``fit'' and least perfect. In truth, racial characteristics are irrelevant. Only the morality of a individuals and nations can determine whether they are civilized or barbarians -- builders or plunderers.

How do homosexuals fit into this picture? Although Nazi rhetoric listed homosexuals among the unfit, the Nazis never targeted homosexuals for destruction. To the contrary, unless the homosexual in question was Jewish, or a political enemy, the Nazi organization was often protective of homosexuals. Originally, the SS was founded for precisely the purpose of protecting Viennese homosexuals. The Nazis actually attempted to cure homosexuals at the Goering Institute, albeit in many ways which proved futile. (forcing a gender-weak frightened male to sleep with a female prostitute proved ineffective). ``Gay'' rights activists often take Nazi propaganda against homosexuals and regurgitate it as historical truth. Nazi and ``gay'' historical revisionism, with their inversion of history and civilized values, are one. In today's ``gay'' victim strategy, the perpetrator is posing as the victim.

Fifth Columns

In their quest for power, Nazi homosexuals were no different from today's ``gays.'' Then, as now, the strategy was one of deception, infiltration and subversion. Our study of ``gay'' history reveals how Nazi ``gays,'' both historically and today, act as subversive fifth columns in their host communities, preparing the way for ``gay'' Nazi power while overtly and covertly spreading anti-``gay'' propaganda in an attempt to veil their own goals. The Pink Swastika documents how top French and British Nazis were ``gays'' and that American Nazi Frank Collin, who led the 1977 march on Skokie Illinois, was a ``gay'' pederast. So what of so-called `liberty?'''

The idea of liberty held by modern liberals is quite new. According to them, liberty connotes a radical individualism that rejects all social norms and institutions which the individual has not agreed to. Subscribers to this idea defend the right of Nazis (who themselves despise the idea of rights) to march through Skokie, Illinois, but not the right of Skokians and their elected leaders to maintain order and defend the dignity of the principles and customs they hold most dear. Likewise, they support the right of homosexuals and atheists to invade and destroy the Boy Scouts.

In Nazi history, failed fifth column sedition activities in target nations are recorded in the October 12, 1937 The New York Times in bold headlines reading, ``Czech Nazi Official Is Seized by Police.'' The Prague dispatch quoted in the Times reports ``a major political sensation caused by the arrest, under the criminal code `dealing with homosexuality,' of Hans Rutha, a high official in the country's camouflaged Nazi Party.'' And from October 17, 1937, further headlines read, ``14 members of Czech Nazi Party Held for Morals Offences,'' identifying Rutha, as the ```right hand man' of the Nazi Party Chief,'' i.e., as ``gay'' Ernst Roehm was to Hitler. On December 3, headlines report, ``Members of Youth Organization Face Homosexual Charges.'' And on December 10, 1937, a Times story from Prague announces that ``fourteen Czechs, all the accused, had received `suspended sentences' after trial on homosexual charges'' (J. Katz:553f).

Despite such random clues, the world of that day was duped. Left-regressive, self-identified lesbian, Gertrude Stein, felt that Hitler should have received the Nobel Peace prize in 1937. Apparently, Britain's Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, also thought Hitler could be bribed to honor peace with the September 30, 1938 Munich agreement. His payment was Czechoslovakia, but ``peace in our time'' only cleared the way for Hitler's invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939. History shows that militant ``gay'' efforts often produce a result that is anything but peaceful. Further, while individual ``gays'' may ``come out of the closet'' for various reasons, their agenda and the truth about the depth of their infiltration of powerful institutions, remans hidden. We can also learn from the Nazis' victims that bribery never satisfies extortionists. They always come back for more, which is why (in our day) demands for ``rights'' have no end. Each capitulation of American society to ``gay'' demands draws increasing demands, which will continue until they destroy the institutions which support society, including the homosexuals themselves.

The age of AIDS has launched ``gay`` activism into full gear. As the liberal dogma would have it, no one is responsible for AIDS; it just happens. Taking its cue from no-fault divorce and no-fault insurance, the Left has also created the concept of no-fault utilitarian sex. British occultist and Satanist, Aleister Crowley sums it up: ``do what thou wilt, shall be the whole of the law.''But ``do what thou wilt'' is no law at all! Crowley's maxim is in reality a negation of all natural and spiritual law; it only promotes chaos and a left-wing regressive descent into oblivion and non-existence. His maxim reflects a complete lack of concern and respect for the dignity of his fellow man and a contempt for life.

``Gay'' Sedition

``Gay'' strategists choose to employ the biological model of homosexuality for the dual purpose of denying choice and escaping responsibility. In calling for research into a so-called ``gay`` gene, their purpose was never to cure or rectify, but to justify homoerotic conduct and the homosexual identity. ``Gays'' correctly reason that if sexual behavior is a choice, it carries with it both responsibility and accountability. Their insistence that homosexuality is ``not a choice'' functions to bring ever more recruits into the ``gay'' fold and keep them there by discouraging them from seeking change. For many of today's young men, their ability to choose has been hijacked by a sophisticated program of psychosexual sedition and manipulation, largely sustained by the social weaknesses of our time.

To limit the animating source for human behavior to the brain and animal instinct (as many of today's behavioral scientists do) is both reductionist and left-wing regressive. Human motives and actions are, to a significant extent, determined by the vastly greater non-physical aspects of human existence. Inclinations are non-physical, and behavior causes physical change. (Planting the seed of human life in the passage designed for the expulsion of waste not only causes disease, but also exerts a destructive force upon the individual soul and on the value of all human life).

''Gays'' have forgotten that responsibility for personal conduct goes hand-in-hand with our personal dignity and authority. Realistically, we can never dignify something which is profoundly undignified, no matter how hard we strive to. This brings us to another seditious element of ``gay'' culture, pornography. Dr. Judith Reisman, co-author of Kinsey Sex & Fraud and Founder of the Washington based Institute for Media Education, is an expert on the impact of pornography on society. During a lengthy private conversation, Dr. Reisman asserted that ``all pornography promotes homosexuality.'' I have pondered her comment many times since then, and have come to see its correctness. In her 1994 analysis, Kinsey, Hefner & Hay, The Indoctrination of Heterophobia in American Men & Women, Dr. Reisman explains;

Pragmatically, Playboy (that is, all pornography) manifests a blatant homosexual ethos. Its heterophobia is sustained by an utilitarian analysis of Playboy images and philosophy. It is not too much to say, that just as the imagery of stained glass windows and holy cards once initiated, instructed and indoctrinated potential adherents in a religious faith, the didactic images in ``soft'' and ``hard'' pornography similarly initiate, instruct and indoctrinate potential believers in the tenants of its religion, its homosexual morality. Hugh Hefner took great pains to write his own bible; he called it the ``Playboy Philosophy.'' And on this note, it is well accepted that ``Alfred Kinsey...gave Hefner the research base for the ``Playboy Philosophy.''...In fact Kinsey can properly be identified along with his supporters and co-workers, as the one most responsible for justifying the kind of behavior which led to AIDS, and more than Harry Hay, the real father of American's homoerotic revolution (Reisman, 1994:7f). [In reality, pornography expresses a vicious hatred and contempt for the dignity of all men in that it treats men as nothing more than an appendage to be manipulated by the twisting and exploitation of female sexuality.]

Sons of Oedipus

Clinical research concludes that the target of human sexual affections is not predetermined at birth, but conditioned by a combination of environmental and sociological factors. It would be helpful to turn back to the ``Oedipus complex,'' to present a psychosexual model for the roots of homoerotic attraction. [Oedipus was the legendary figure who killed his father and married his mother.]

Although ``gay'' research mocks and rejects the validity of this Freudian construct, the idea offers helpful insight into the complex structure and development of the homosexualities. The classic Oedipus complex may be defined as a lust-hate demeanor towards the mother and an irreconcilable combination of longing and contempt for the father. In the words of Dr. Joseph Nicolosi,

Homosexuality is a developmental problem that is almost always the result of problems in family relations, particularly between father and son. As a result of failure with father, the boy does not fully internalize male gender-identity, and develops homosexuality. This is the most commonly seen clinical model (Nicolosi, 1991:25).

Analyst Peter Loewenberg in The Nazi Revolution, Hitler's Dictatorship and the German Nation, writes, ``Boys who become homosexuals are often those who were left alone with their mothers and formed an intense attachment to them that was unmediated by the father's presence and protection.''

The regressive promotion of an androgynous culture advances an equality in which gender distinctions, roles and identity are blurred and inverted. This leads to a loss of healthy self-identity. Paradoxically, the freedom of choice being offered by liberal left-regressive social theorists to today's youth destroys a child's ability to choose. In a similar vein, radical feminism actually destroys femininity while emasculating males, and socialism destroys social justice. By robbing our children of their ability to conduct themselves morally, today's left-wing regressives are grooming a new generation of potential Nazis.

Today, while chronic homoerotic behavior is limited to a small percentage of the population, its roots (either deficiencies in psychic gender patterning, or deviance initiated by adult-child sexual abuse) may be more widespread. Clinical studies reveal that the sexualization of a search for masculinity is the genesis of homoerotic attraction. It follows that the current generation of fatherless youth may be prime candidates for homosexual recruitment. And the same amoral thinking which allows them to consider homosexuality as a ``normal'' option may also make them dangerously susceptible to the next Hitler. It is no accident that Hitler and his cronies came to power on the backs of emasculated German male youth.

Akhtar's Metaphor -- A New Beginning

A primary goal of any people striving to maintain a civilized human society must be to prepare our children to become reliable and loyal husbands and wives and competent fathers and mothers. There is nothing in the world a young man wishes to do more than to be able to love, admire and respect his father. This vision can only be fully realized in the context of a healthy natural family.

There are two primary obligations which the parent has toward his children: to instill in them a moral and healthy sexual constitution and to ensure they are equipped with an honest and productive way of providing for themselves and their families. These two personal assets enable any person to live life as a dignified human being. The parents' obligation, therefore, is to guard the dignity of their children. Conversely, the Biblical injunction contained within the principle of the family is for the children to guard the dignity of their parents. If we kept this in mind, many families could be reunited and divisions resolved. Our challenge is to repair America's soul before the body perishes.

Dr. Salman Akhtar's book, Broken Structures, offers a metaphor for healing the broken person which is also applicable to the mending of a nation. Teaching a course on character pathology to a class of clinical psychology interns, Dr. Akhtar was asked if a severely disturbed client could ever be so completely healed by psychotherapy that he would be indistinguishable from a person who had always been well-adjusted. From the book Broken Structures in which Dr. Akhtar tells ``The Parable of Two Flower Vases,'' I will conclude with his words:

I thought for a moment. Then, prompted by an inner voice, I spontaneously came up with the following answer. Well, let us suppose that there are two flower vases made of fine china. Both are intricately carved and of comparable value, elegance, and beauty. Then a wind blows and one of them falls from its stand, and is broken into pieces. An expert from a distant land is called. Painstakingly, step by step, the expert glues the pieces back together. Soon the broken vase is intact again, can hold water without leaking, is unblemished to all who see it. Yet this vase is now different from the other one. The lines along which it had broken, a subtle reminder of yesterday, will always remain discernible to an experienced eye. However, it will have a certain wisdom since it knows something that the vase that has never been broken does not: it knows what it is to break and what it is to come together .

Kevin E. Abrams

November 14, 1997