by Kevin Alfred Strom
THE 1913 MURDER of child laborer Mary Phagan by her Jewish boss Leo Frank (pictured), which I detailed for you on last week’s program, was clearly established by the evidence and confirmed by every court and every jury which had jurisdiction over the case, including multiple appeals that ultimately ended up — twice — at the Supreme Court of the United States.
In every instance, the evidence was found to be sufficient to convict Leo Frank of Mary Phagan’s murder beyond any reasonable doubt. In every review, the procedure of the trial was found to be proper. In every appeal, no violation of the rights of the accused was found.
Yet the media — the daily press, books, film, and television — speak with one voice: Leo Frank, they say, was an innocent victim of Southern “anti-Semitism.” Hatred of Jews was responsible for his prosecution and conviction. An inflamed, bigoted mob intimidated the judge and jury. That is the “received narrative.” That is what the massive media power of the Jewish establishment have made “common knowledge” by incessant, one-sided repetition. But it’s utter nonsense.
Let’s look at what Abe Foxman, boss of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League, or ADL, has to say about the case. Leo Frank was president of Atlanta’s B’nai B’rith and it was in response to Frank’s conviction that the ADL was founded as a part of the B’nai B’rith in 1913. Foxman says:
“The murder of Mary Phagan was the catalyst for one of the most virulent anti-Semitic episodes in American history.” Really — one of the most virulent anti-Semitic episodes in American history! True, Leo Frank was lynched — after his death sentence was commuted by an outgoing governor who was a partner in the law firm that defended Frank. But there’s no evidence that the prosecution or conviction of Frank had anything to do with the fact that Frank was a Jew.
Foxman adds: “His trial was a spectacle; threats, intimidation, and a boisterous crowd outside chanting ‘kill the Jew’ and ‘hang the Jew’ could easily be heard through the courtroom’s open windows.” These alleged “anti-Semitic” mobs intimidating the jury never existed, and were reported by no newspapers, not even pro-Frank papers, at the time. The jurors specifically stated they heard no mobs, no threats, and were not intimidated in any way. Frank’s lawyers made no complaints or even mention of these supposed Jew-hating crowds during the trial — even a single instance of which would have been grounds for an immediate mistrial. The first intimation of these alleged mobs was many months after the trial when Frank’s legal team and Jewish advocacy groups were straining to find some pretext for yet another appeal.
Even the governor who commuted Frank’s sentence said there was no significant anti-Jewish feeling in the state. And the lynchers themselves made no statement whatever on that point — it was the governor who needed armed guards and who fled the state, not local Jews. The man who prosecuted Leo Frank, Hugh Dorsey, himself had a law partner who was a Jew — Frank’s legal defense team did not. Even Abraham Foxman admits that “Leo Frank remains the only Jewish person ever to be lynched in the United States.” If this is “one of the most virulent anti-Semitic episodes in American history,” then one is forced to conclude that “anti-Semitism” in the United States has been a total and utter non-starter, almost non-existent.
Foxman goes on to say: “Frank, a northern Jew, was arrested, indicted and tried for Phagan’s murder without evidence.”
Without evidence! What about the evidence establishing that Mary Phagan was killed almost immediately after she entered Leo Frank’s office? What about the fact that no one saw Mary Phagan alive after she went to see Frank? What about the evidence establishing that the murder was committed on the second floor of the National Pencil Company offices — and that no one except Mary Phagan and Leo Frank were on that floor? What about the testimony of Jim Conley admitting that he helped Leo Frank conceal Mary Phagan’s body and that he regularly helped Frank as a lookout while Frank had secret liaisons with young girls and women? What about the testimony of the female workers who said that Frank was lascivious toward the girls in his employ and that he had specifically arranged to be alone with Mary that Saturday? What about the fact that Leo Frank was missing from his office at the same time the murder was being committed? What about the evidence that Leo Frank lied about being in his office at that time? What about Frank’s absurd claim that he didn’t know Mary by name — even though he somehow knew her well enough to tell the police that James Gantt was “intimate” with her — even though he worked with her daily, was seen talking to her and calling her by name, and filled out her pay stub every week with her initials for an entire year? And there’s much, much more. If you want to read the mountain of evidence adduced that shows Frank to be the murderer of Mary Phagan, it’s all available to you by reading the documents provided at the end of the text version of this broadcast.
No, Mr. Foxman’s “convicted …without evidence” claim is completely ridiculous, and the scholars, researchers, and publishers who have labored for years to bring the true evidence of this case to light are showing the world just how paper-thin the Jewish groups’ false version of events really is.
* * *
In all their endless propaganda books, plays, films, and articles on the Frank case, the Jewish media put forward only two basic arguments for Frank’s innocence: 1) Leo Frank was tried and convicted because he was a Jew and the motive was “anti-Semitism”; and 2) Alonzo Mann’s 1982 affidavit proves that Conley, and not Frank, was the real killer.
Let’s look at the accusation of widespread Southern “anti-Semitism.”
The South is a place where the vast majority of the population is deeply committed to Protestant, fundamentalist Christianity. The South, along with a few border states, is not called the “Bible Belt” for nothing. This was especially true in 1913.
The essence of fundamentalism is literalism — the belief that every word of the scriptures, the Hebrew scriptures I might add, was directly inspired by God and is literally true. The stories in the Bible are, in this view, absolutely inerrant, including God’s preference for the Jews as his “chosen,” holy people. The prophecies of the Hebrew scriptures are therefore infallible, including the central place held by Israel and the Jews in God’s plan. The law of Yahweh to bless and revere God’s Chosen is to be obeyed absolutely. The Old Testament is not minimized by fundamentalists, as it is by some mainstream Christians. It is to most Southerners God’s absolute truth, no less than the New Testament. And the Jewish God is to them the one and only God.
Most important of all, Jesus was born Jewish, spoke in the Jewish temples, and was in reality the prophesied Messiah of the Jews. Christ came from the Jews, and without the Jews Christ could never have existed.
The South is also the center of Christian Zionism. Many a ministry in the South has as its basis Genesis 12:3, in which God says of the Jews: “I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee.”
The Jewish writer Harry Golden stated in the American Jewish Committee’s magazine Commentary that, not too long after the establishment of the Jewish state, “Bonds for Israel” salesmen in the South would seek out Christians as donors, since they were almost all enthusiastic Zionists. This was — and is — the dominant Southern position. This was even more true during Leo Frank’s trial than it is today: The post-trial efforts of wealthy Jews to help Frank hurt the reputation of the Jews in the South, though as a whole it remains philo-Semitic.
In “Social Discrimination Against Jews 1830 – 1930” by John Higham, commissioned by the American Jewish Committee, the South was described as “historically the section least inclined to ostracize Jews.” The massive campaign during the Frank appeals to paint his prosecution and the South itself as “anti-Semitic” did stir up some feelings against the Jews, though. The revived 20th-century Ku Klux Klan, inspired in part by the resentment of Jewish intervention in Georgia affairs during the Frank case, was quite different from the original Klan in that it took an anti-Jewish position. The original Klan had numerous and notable Jewish members, including even Bernard Baruch’s father.
Law and tradition in the South — and in much of the North — forbade sexual interaction between the races, and violators were dealt with swiftly and harshly. But in the South of 1913, Jews were considered White. Even during his trial, the prosecutors and the defense and the newspapers all referred to Leo Frank as a “White man.” Marriage between Jews and Whites was not unknown. These are hardly the lineaments of hatred.
Even the man who commuted Leo Frank’s sentence to life in prison, Governor John Slaton, said of the “anti-Semitism” accusation:
“…[T]here never was any anti-Jewish feeling in Georgia until now… [T]here was another thing that roused bitterness against Frank, and it was outside interference. From all over the Union there came an attempt to govern Georgia’s action. Detectives were sent here, petitions circulated, resolutions passed, attacks made upon the State. Whether it should have aroused resentment may be a question, but that it did there is no question whatever.
“The Jews have always been our friends; we have here the best class of Jews. For a man to be known as a Jew was actually an asset to him in a business way. But among the thoughtless elements there has grown up – temporarily, I hope – a feeling that the Jews banded themselves together as a race or a religion to save a criminal, and out of that has grown a feeling of hostility.”
Even Leo Frank himself, in an interview with leftist Jewish editor Abraham Cahan in 1914, months after his conviction, denied that anti-Semitism played any role in his predicament, saying “Anti-Semitism is absolutely not the reason for this libel that has been framed against me. It isn’t the source nor the result of this sad story.”
* * *
The only remaining pillar supporting the Jewish claims that Leo Frank was innocent is the affidavit of Alonzo Mann, made by Mann in 1982. But Mann’s highly questionable statement, even if we accept it as true, proves nothing of significance. According to the researcher Bradford Huie:
In 1982 Alonzo Mann, who in 1913 at 13 years old had been the office boy for the National Pencil Company, made a sensation in the press by denying the sworn testimony he had made at the Leo Frank trial, and stating his belief that Jim Conley was the real killer of Mary Phagan. …Mann was poor, suffering with a heart condition, and facing considerable medical expenses when he “went public” with his claims.
In 1913, Mann had testified that he left the office on the day of the murder at 11:30 AM. In 1982, he changed the time and told a quite different story, as follows:
Mann said that he left the factory at noon, half an hour later than in his testimony. It was Confederate Memorial Day and a parade and other festivities were scheduled. Mann was to meet his mother, he says, but could not find her and “returned to work” shortly after noon. When he entered the building, he says, he saw Jim Conley carrying the limp body of a girl on the first floor: “He wheeled on me and in a voice that was low but threatening he said ‘If you ever mention this I’ll kill you.’”
Mann claims he then left the building and ran home, telling his mother what he’d seen. Mann says that his parents advised him to keep silent to avoid publicity. And he did keep silent for many, many years. (Jim Conley is reported to have died in 1957 — another report says 1962 — and presumably his death threat did not survive his demise.)
There are several problems with Mann’s story. First, if true, it proves only that at some point Conley was carrying Phagan’s body by himself, without Frank’s help. Conley already admits this — though he says that he found the body too heavy for himself alone while still on the second floor, and that the elevator brought them directly to the basement….
Why would a 13-year-old Alonzo Mann “return to work” on a holiday if he didn’t have to? And why “return to work” if he apparently wasn’t even scheduled to do so? Were office boys permitted to make their own hours in 1913? When other workers — such as Mary Phagan, for example — hadn’t sufficient supplies in their department, they were immediately laid off until the supplies came in. Surely such economy would dictate that office boys would only come in when authorized and asked to do so.
If Alonzo Mann had such a definite appointment to meet his mother in town — so definite as to cause him to return to work after just a few minutes when he failed to immediately find her — why, then, was she waiting at home just a few minutes after that?
Why would White parents, like Alonzo Mann’s, in the racially conscious and segregated Atlanta, Georgia of 1913, tell their White son not to tell the police about a guilty Black murderer, when the result of not telling the police would ultimately result in an innocent, clean cut, White man, Leo Frank — the man who gave their son a highly prized job — going to gallows as an innocent man?
And why would Alonzo Mann’s parents then allow their 13-year-old son to report to work at the huge and cavernous National Pencil Company factory on Monday morning, April 28, 1913 – two days after he was threatened with death by a murderer carrying a dead or dying White girl on his shoulder — knowing that the murderer would still be there, and knowing that there were many dark and secluded places in said factory where their son might come to harm? Jim Conley reported back to work that Monday, as did the approximately 170 other employees, who were naturally expected to be back at work after the holiday weekend. Jim Conley was not arrested until the first day of May….
If Jim Conley really attacked Mary Phagan at the foot of the stairs as Alonzo Mann suggests, why didn’t Leo Frank hear her screams or any sounds of a struggle? He was only 40 feet away.
No, Alonzo Mann’s story means nothing.
And it strains credulity beyond all reason to allege that Jim Conley — the only other possible suspect — was the real killer. Would Conley risk his own life for $1.20 — all that Mary Phagan had on her — as Frank’s defense team claimed? Would Conley, with no prior history of involvement with White women, attack a White teenager almost right at the entrance to the factory, where numerous people were passing all day long and had seen him sitting there? Would Conley — who could hear even footsteps on the floor above where his boss was sitting — dare to make an assault which might be clearly heard even if by chance not seen?
No, of the only two possible suspects, only one man is credibly charged with this horrible crime — and that man is Leo Max Frank.
In this series of two broadcasts, I have only been able to touch on the highlights of the Leo Frank case. I haven’t told you of the subornation of perjury by the Leo Frank defense team. I haven’t told you of the preposterous hoax of the alleged “bite marks” on Mary Phagan’s body, dreamt up decades later by Jewish “journalist” Pierre van Paasen and repeated as truth by the leading Jewish “scholar” on the case, Leonard Dinnerstein. I urge you to read the additional documentation I’ve linked to and provided at the end of the text version of this broadcast.
What I want you to take away from this amazing story is this: The network of lies that makes of Leo Frank a martyr and a saint, and that has outrageously defamed the White people of the South, is paper-thin. It will not stand up to examination. By dint of dedication and hard work, a group of fewer than 100 people has broken through the wall of censorship and made the truth known to the world. Anyone who searches for the truth on the Frank case can now find it, and it is prominent. The Dinnersteins and the Foxmans don’t have a monopoly on this subject anymore.
If we can do this on the Frank case, we can do it on other subjects as well: we can reach our people with the truth about race, about White genocide, about Jewish power, about eugenics, about history, and about self-determination for our people. Add your efforts to ours as we do exactly that.
* * *
You’ve been listening to American Dissident Voices, the radio program of the reconstituted National Alliance membership organization, founded by William Luther Pierce in 1970. This program is published every week at whitebiocentrism.com and nationalvanguard.org. Please write to us at National Alliance, Box 172, Laurel Bloomery, TN 37680 USA. We welcome your support, your inquiries, and your help in spreading our message of hope to our people. Once again, that address is Box 172, Laurel Bloomery, TN 37680 USA. Until next week, this is Kevin Alfred Strom reminding you to keep on thinking free.
Leo Frank case resources for further study:
The Murder of Little Mary Phagan by Mary Phagan Kean (Available on http://www.Archive.org) Written by Mary Phagan Kean, the great grand niece of Mary Phagan. A neutral account of the events surrounding the trial of Leo Frank.
American State Trials, volume X (1918) by John Lawson Tends to be biased in favor of Leo Frank and his legal defense team, this document provides an abridged version of the Brief of Evidence, leaving out some important things said and details when it republishes parts of the trial testimony. Be sure to read the closing arguments of Luther Zeigler Rosser, Reuben Rose Arnold, Frank Arthur Hooper and Hugh Manson Dorsey. For a more complete version of the Leo M. Frank trial testimony, read the 1913 Leo Frank Trial Brief of Evidence.
Argument of Hugh M. Dorsey in the Trial of Leo Frank Some but not all of the nine hours of arguments given to the Jury at the end of the Leo Frank trial. Only 18 Libraries in the world have copies of this book. This is an excellent book and required reading.
Atlanta Georgian newspaper covering the Leo Frank Case from April though August, 1913. http://archive.org/details/AtlantaGeorgianNewspaperAprilToAugust1913
Atlanta Journal Newspaper, April, 28, 1913, through till the end of August, 1913, pertaining to the Leo Frank Case: http://archive.org/details/AtlantaJournalApril281913toAugust311913
Notes on the Case of Leo M. Frank, By Tom W. Brown, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, 1982.
Leo Frank Trial and Appeals Georgia Supreme Court File (1,800 pages).
Tom Watson on the Leo Frank Case, The American Mercury, 2014