Saturday, 8 November 2014

The Nine

"Nine He gave to Mortal Men, 
proud and great, 
and so ensnared them. 

Long ago they fell under the domination of the One... 
Shadows under His great Shadow, 
His most terrible servants."

"Apparently Parsons...or somebody is producing a Moonchild. I get fairly frantic when I contemplate the idiocy of these louts." 

- Alistair Crowley, 1947.

"The [Babalon] Working began in 1945-46, a few months before Crowley's death in 1947, and just prior to the wave of unexplained aerial phenomena now recalled as the 'Great Flying Saucer Flap'... Parsons opened a door and something flew in. 




"A Gateway for the Great Old Ones has already been established -- and opened -- by members of the O.T.O. who are en rapport with this entity [Lam, an extra- terrestrial being whom Crowley supposedly contacted while in America in 1919]." 

-Kenneth GrantO.T.O.


Henry Jackson
Georgia Jackson
Alice Bouverie
Marcella Du Pont
Carl Betz
Vonnie Beck
Arthur Young
Ruth Young 

and Andrija Puharich. 





  • Arthur Young, who invented the Bell helicopter. However at the end of WWII he abandoned military aviation to concentrate full-time on the paranormal.

  • Arthur’s wife, Ruth… previously of the Forbes dynasty. Her son, Michael, would get a job at Bell Aerospace through her and Arthur’s influence. (Michael’s wife got Lee Harvey Oswald his job at the book depository. She was learning Russian from Oswald’s wife who was living with her in Irving, Texas. Oh, and her father worked for a CIA front called the Agency for International Development. Lee Harvey Oswald left the coffee company in New Orleans, saying to his co-workers he was “going to work for NASA.” After the assassination, two other coffee company employees get jobs at NASA. Just saying.)

  • Mary Bancroft; of the Bancroft dynasty who would much later sell the Dow Jones and Wall Street Journal to Murdoch. She also happened to be the mistress of the then-CIA chief. (The one JFK fired after the Bay Of Pigs after saying he was also going to break up the CIA… who conveniently went on to investigate JFK’s death. Just saying.)

  • Marcella Du Pont of the Du Pont family.

  • Alice Bouverie who was born into the Astor dynasty. (Her father died on the Titanic and her first husband was a Czarist prince who would work for the OSS during WWII.)

  • http://runesoup.com/2012/05/the-seance-that-changed-america/





    "...Ruth Paine admitted that at one point Lee Harvey Oswald was considering going to Philadelphia. As soon as she mentions Philadelphia, Allen Dulles chimes in and opined that it was presumably to find work, to which Ruth replied in the affirmative. 

    This is what is known as 'leading the witness.' 

    Philadelphia, of course, is where Arthur and Ruth Young lived, and Ruth had a habit of going up there every year in the summer... as she did in the summer of 1963. Did Arthur Young invite the young Marine defector to his wooded estate in Paoli?" 

    Peter Levenda, 
    Sinister Forces, pg. 268


    "Ira Einhorn, Puharich's close associate in the 1970s, told us recently that, although Puharich had worked for the CIA during the 1950s, he was no longer doing so twenty years later. 

    However, the evidence points very much in the other direction. Puharich's relationship with intelligence agencies almost certainly did not end in the 1950s. 

    Uri Geller told us at a meeting in his home near Reading in England in 1998 that: 'The CIA brought Puharich in to come and get me out of Israel.' 

    Jack Sarfatti goes further, claiming: 'Puharich was Geller's case officer in America with money provided by Sir John Whitmore.' 

    And according to James Hurtak, via his Academy For Further Sciences, Puharich 'worked with the US intelligence community.' 

    By implication this was during the early 1970s when he, Hurtak, was also working with him."

    The Stargate Conspiracy, pg. 206




    From Deep Space to the Nine

    How Gene Roddenberry was hired to prepare Earth for an alien invasion






    What would you do if you were asked to write a movie preparing mankind for the arrival of a race of godlike alien beings? David Sutton examines on of the strangest episodes in the life of Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry.


    By 1975, no one could deny that Gene Roddenberry – B17 pilot during WWII, commercial aviator, Los Angeles cop, television writer and creator of Star Trek – had enjoyed a varied career, but in May of that year it took a turn for the strange when he was approached with an unusual proposition by a wealthy Englishman called Sir John Whitmore.


    Whitmore explained that he had sought out Roddenberry on behalf of an organisation calling itself Lab Nine. His proposal was that the TV producer and writer should pen a film screenplay based on the group’s research into the paranormal and its belief that Earth was soon to be visited by extraterrestrial beings traveling in spacecraft; Roddenberry, in other words, was to prepare the ground for the aliens’ arrival by writing a movie script that would prime the human race for first contact.


    Lab Nine was, in fact, the direct descendent of the Round Table Foundation, an organisation set up in Glen Cove, Maine, in 1948 by MD, inventor, and paranormal researcher Dr Andrija Puharich (with, some claim, backing from the US military and/or intelligence agencies) to study telepathy, ESP and related phenomena;


    the celebrated psychics Peter Hurkos and Eileen Garrett, for instance, passed through the Foundation’s doors, as did an Indian medium by the name of Dr Vinod, who promptly went into a trance and began to channel messages from mysterious entities calling themselves ‘The Nine Principles and Forces’.

    Vinod had no memory of the messages, and soon returned to India, but Puharich continued to receive communications from ‘The Nine’, initially via flying saucer cultists Charles and Lillian Laughead, [1] and later from none other than Uri Geller, who Puharich had met in 1971 and helped catapult to international fame.


    According to Puharich, in his bizarre biography Geller, he began hypnotising his young Israeli protégé only to discover that he was channeling an extraterrestrial intelligence called Spectra, a hawk-headed super computer entity aboard a spacecraft. Puharich suspected a connection to The Nine, which Spectra confirmed, claiming that it was they who had ‘programmed’ Geller with his remarkable powers when he was a three-year-old child. Puharich, by now convinced that Geller was himself an ET, planned to use the Israeli’s psychic powers to help bring The Nine’s message to the world and prepare humanity for the imminent arrival of their spacecraft. [2]


    When Geller, presumably sensing that things were about to get a little too strange, backed off, Puharich wasted no time in finding others who could get in touch with the
    space entities, eventually lighting on the unlikely team of former racing driver and business coach Sir John Whitmore, Florida healer and psychic Phyllis Schlemmer and the pseudonymous ‘Bobby Horne’, a cook from Daytona who became the new channeller of the extra terrestrial communications. ‘Horne’ burnt out quickly; he became suicidal and fled after suspecting that he had become the victim of cosmic jokers. From this point on, Schlemmer became the group’s official channeller and the ‘voice’ of The Nine.


    By now the circle had a home – Lab Nine, a 15-acre estate in Ossining, New York, where prominent visitors from the worlds of science, politics and business were greeted in some style; those spending time there included, allegedly, various Stanford Research Institute scientists, Supernature author Lyall Watson, [3] quantum physicist Jack Sarfatti and counterculture icon (and soon to be wanted murderer) Ira Einhorn (see FT166:24–25).


    Gene Roddenberry’s name was added to this heady mix when the residents of Lab Nine decided that they needed some PR in advance of the landings, now scheduled for 1976 (like most such deadlines, it would become something of a moveable feast). Roddenberry, though, was perhaps a misguided choice – an avowed humanist with a deep mistrust of all organised religions as well as a hard-line sceptic when it came to tales of UFOs and alien visitors. He did, though, have an interest in altered states of consciousness. [4] Psi phenomena in particular fascinated him, although in a 1968 letter to SF legend John W Campbell, who’d alerted Roddenberry to some particularly outrageous claims of something that sounds remarkably like an experiment in deadly remote viewing, Roddenberry wrote:


    “I do believe we have something loosely and incorrectly tagged a ‘sixth sense’ and I do believe there exist such things as clairvoyance and psychokinesis. But as for a guy killing Japanese beetles from 500 miles away just by looking at a picture of the field, in fact doing it so selectively he can kill them off one leaf and leave them alive on another, my life experience adds up to a belief that this is impossible. In other words, I’ve read and seen enough examples and read enough documented reports concerning instances of telepathy, clairvoyance and psychokinesis to indicate that we do indeed have latent abilities in these areas which we do not yet understand or really know how to use. Those instances which do happen are largely haphazard or the ‘power’ ebbs and flows to a point where it is rarely controllable enough to produce any long-term or meaningful results on a scientifically controlled test.” [5]


    IN ADVANCE OF THE LANDINGS
    What Lab Nine presumably saw in Roddenberry was a man who had already, through the growing popularity of the then defunct Star Trek, opened a vast number of minds to the possible existence of extra terrestrial life, superior non-human beings and a future for mankind among the stars. Star Trek’s Federation, after all, represented a dream of space brotherhood beyond even the wildest dreams of the contactee movement and the emergent channellers of the New Age. What the Lab Nine crowd seem rather to have missed is that one of Star Trek’s major themes is that humankind would rather stand alone and on its own two feet than be guided by anyone (or anything) describing itself as a God – the theme of more Star Trek stories than one cares to count.


    UFO religions have often floated the idea – from the Aetherians’ belief in an alien Jesus to the Raelians’ reinterpretation of the Biblical Elohim – that the entities mankind once believed to be Gods or prophets were in fact alien races who visited us long ago and steered humanity’s destiny – a concept subsequently popularised by the books of Erich von Däniken (and an army of imitators) with their ancient astronauts
    mistaken for deities.


    Of course, anyone who’d bothered watching a Star Trek episode such as Who Mourns for Adonais? (in which an ancient Greek ‘god’ expecting human worship is sent packing by an indignant Captain Kirk) would quickly have realised that Roddenberry’s response to any returning alien ‘God’ would most likely be a “Thanks, but no thanks – we’re managing quite well without you”. [6]


    Another, often connected, strand in many UFO cults – and one dating back to the first era of contactees – is that the space brothers have been keeping a watchful eye on us, waiting for the right moment to announce their presence and usher in a wider interstellar community in which all Earth’s problems – war, poverty, bigotry and environmental degradation – will be solved by superior alien technologies and an evolved spirituality. While Star Trek had presented a 23rd-century future in which this was indeed the case on Earth, it was presented as the achievement of a species that had finally ‘grown up’ and solved those problems for itself, with no help from beyond the stars (although later incarnations of Trek would explore the impact of ‘first contact’ with the Vulcans).


    Roddenberry, then, was a strange choice for an alien ambassador; but necessity makes strange bedfellows. Despite Paramount finally giving serious thought to reviving Star Trek – Roddenberry was developing ideas for what would eventually become Star Trek: The Motion Picture – he was in need of funds.


    He accepted Whitmore’s proposal – and a ,000 contract for a first draft screenplay to be based on his experiences with the Lab Nine circle and their otherworldly masters.


    WELCOME TO LAB NINE
    Despite his philosophical and temperamental unsuitability for the job, Roddenberry revealed a surprisingly open-minded approach to the question of non-human entities like The Nine in his early correspondence with Whitmore:
    “I do not reject the possibility that other forms of intelligence can be in contact with humanity or with certain humans. Nor do I reject the possibility that another life form or forms might even live among us. It would seem to me rather extra ordinary if this were the only place in the Universe in which intelligent life happened to occur. Neither do we know the real nature of time and whether it and space are always linear and constant.
    “On the other hand, I’ve never seen any proof, or at least anything I recognise as proof, that other intelligent life forms exist, or are or have been in contact with us. Nor have I ever seen anything I recognise as proof that other laws of physics exist.” [7]


    ‘Proof’ was clearly what was required to penetrate Roddenberry’s sceptical defences,
    and get him on-message, so Whitmore arranged an expenses-paid tour of a number of parapsychology departments and research facilities across the country to observe scientific investigation of the paranormal at first hand. And Roddenberry was invited to spend time both at Whitmore’s home in England and at Lab Nine itself while he spent the autumn of 1975 working on the draft screenplay.


    On his visits to the Ossining compound,the still sceptical writer witnessed spoonbending (still a popular pastime, despite Geller’s defection), saw Puharich receiving cryptic Hebrew messages through his wrist watch and finally, on numerous occasions, made contact with The Nine through channel Phyllis Schlemmer.
    As with most such pronouncements, those that came through Schlemmer – speaking as The Nine’s usual spokesperson ‘Tom’ – were marked by what Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince have described as “all the usual New Age ingredients… grandiose statements, shaky grammar and unprovable predictions”. [8]


    In response to Roddenberry’s surprisingly tactful questioning [9] ‘Tom’ revealed that a mass landing of the “Twenty-Four civilizations” would happen in due course but that great pains would be taken to avoid creating panic (“This is of great importance, for if there were panic, humans may then attempt to end their own life, and also the lives of their families and neighbors, which would not serve any purpose”.) [10]


    There were hints that Earth governments know of the alien presence but have hidden this knowledge from the people who now needed to be informed (“We do not come to control, we do not come to hold in bondage, we will come with love and patience and understanding – but since there is the denial of our existence, how can those of Planet Earth accept that the civilizations of Altea, Hoova, Ashan, and the rest of the Twenty-Four mean well?”).


    Roddenberry was worried that, no matter how peaceful their intentions, the aliens’ arrival would be greeted in many quarters as a threat. Fortunately, the aliens had clearly seen The Day the Earth Stood Stilland had developed non-lethal methods to deal with such a scenario. (“If an Altean were to appear at an entrance of his vehicle, and were stepping onto Planet Earth, and if there were a group that attempted to destroy that Altean, he has only to hold out his hand in an upright manner, and not in great extension, to bring calmness, and also to render them into a state in which they would not have the desire to harm, and would put down their weapons. Hoovids would operate in a different manner: if they were in the same situation, and they came out and raised their arms, those humans with weapons would become totally
    stationary for a period of time.”)


    Perhaps with half an eye on Star Trek’s future revival, Roddenberry showed a good deal of curiosity about the alien space craft, their methods of propulsion and their physical (or not) nature. Tom wouldn’t be pinned down on this one, though, merely talking about the space equivalents of aircraft carriers, V-shaped space ships and craft that not only look like spinning tops but are propelled by a method that “resembles the reversal of a spinning top”, a splendidly naïve notion that Roddenberry accepted with seemingly good grace.


    One of Roddenberry’s most awkward questions – and an entirely understandable one after sitting through hours of this sort of stuff – went as follows: “I do have some difficulties in understanding why, if you are in the minds of humans at times, and your representatives have visited Earth, and you have a knowledge of human affairs… I find it difficult to understand how you have difficulty speaking with us, and understanding our basic colloquial English? Could you help me with that?” The answer, predictably enough, is that pure telepaths like The Nine tend to struggle a bit when reduced to the impoverished and bludgeon-like medium of the English language.


    As well as these revelations of future plans, Tom on occasion ventured backwards through time – quite possibly to butter up The Nine’s chosen PR man – and produced tales of Roddenberry’s previous incarnations, which included the grandson of Moses, the father of St Peter and – if one is navigating correctly through the syntactical maze of these alien pronouncements – possibly even the god Jupiter. Roddenberry, as he’d often suspected himself, was a special person: “We are aware and we know that you know that you in truth are of a special one. And we say this to you with all of the love and all of the know ledge that you have of great love for this of the planet Earth, and of understanding. You know within that of your heart, that you have been of a benefit, and that you have been inspired. Yes.”


    Even in the face of such cosmic flattery – no doubt intended to appeal to a man who was well on the way to creating his own legend – Roddenberry still had problems. As he told ‘Tom’, while he was attracted to the Lab Nine circle he was aware that: “I must not be pulled in too far until my story is written, because I must still retain some perspective.”


    SECOND GENESIS
    Roddenberry’s completed draft screenplay was dated 29 December 1979. It has never been published, but based on the account given in Joel Engel’s biography, it appears to have been a fascinating, bizarrely autobiographical work, mixing Roddenberry’s experiences at Lab Nine with his compulsive womanising, escalating marital problems and his worries over the ever-growing success enjoyed by the defunct Star Trek, a success that had eluded him ever since.


    The protagonist is one Jim MacNorth, the creator of a cancelled but still popular SF show called ‘Time Zone’ who now lives off convention appearance fees and the adulation of fans whose worship he knows he doesn’t deserve. With the studio showing interest in reviving the property as a movie, MacNorth is approached by a mysterious Englishman representing a group called Second Genesis and hired to write a screenplay about the group’s paranormal research.


    After travelling the country to observe research into telepathy, auras, faith healing and theoretical physics, MacNorth – whose own awakening powers reveal to him that his wife is planning a divorce – ends up at the Second Genesis headquarters in Pennsylvania, where not only does he make contact with The Nine through a channeller, learning that human kind was one of their early, failed, experiments – but his erectile dysfunction is cured by an aura healer.


    He learns that the screenplay he is to write will help prepare humanity for the ‘landings’ of The Nine’s representatives, which will take place one year from the release of the film.


    In the end, MacNorth is reconciled with his wife and writes the screenplay; he remains sceptical about the reality of paranormal phenomena, but says that his life has never the less been transformed by these “lovely crazies at a Pennsylvania commune. What they made me believe is far larger and far lovelier. I believe I know that all life is One, that we’re all part of a wondrous, eternal miracle that we’ve yet to fully comprehend.”


    THE GOD THING
    Whether Roddenberry, like MacNorth, was transformed by his experiences with Puharich, Schlemmer and company, we’ll never know – although some of his later pronouncements on religious matters do diverge from his earlier sceptical humanism towards more mystical “I am God” type statements that might have derived in part from his time in Ossining. [11]


    The immediate upshot, though, was the Lab Nine group’s rejection of the screenplay. They asked for a rewrite, which Roddenberry was contractually obliged to deliver, and gave him another ,000. This time, clearly having had more than enough of The Nine, he farmed the work out to his assist ant Jon Povill, who produced a script in which the sceptical MacNorth/Roddenberry character becomes overwhelmed with fears that he is in fact setting up human kind for an impending alien invasion, has a nervous break down and enters his own ‘Time Zone’ (read Star Trek) universe – which, he discovers, was not so much his own creation as an inspiration emanating from the ‘real’ extra terrestrials. [12]


    Perhaps unsurprisingly, this wasn’t quite what Lab Nine were looking for either, and by some point in 1976 the project seems to have been dead in the water – although there are a couple of curious postscripts to the entire strange episode. The first script Roddenberry wrote in 1975 for the proposed Star Trek motion picture was entitled The God Thing and concerned an enormously powerful, but malfunctioning, machine entity travelling toward Earth to ‘save’ humanity. Actor William Shatner recalled the climax of the script as follows:


    “As the drama builds and we finally approach the craft, the alien presence manifests itself on board the Enterprise in the form of a humanoid probe, which quickly begins shape-shifting while preaching about having traveled to Earth many times, always in a noble effort to lay down the law of the Cosmos. Its final image is that of Jesus Christ. ‘You must help me!’ the probe repeats, now bleeding from hands, feet and forehead. Kirk refuses, at which point the probe begins exhausting the last of its energy in
    a last-ditch violent rampage, commanding the Enterprise crew to provide the assistance it needs in order to survive.”
    [13]


    It’s hard to say whether this vision of God as a malfunctioning spacecraft emerged from Roddenberry’s hostility to Christianity and delight in baiting the studios, from his anxieties about The Nine, or both (especially as some accounts suggest the script was written before Roddenberry even met Whitmore), but the vast organic/mechanical entity which is more Great Deceiver than Messiah seems to bear more than a passing resemblance to Puharich’s Spectra, and its promises of saving human kind from its own excesses are certainly close to those being channelled through Lab Nine. [14]


    When, in 1979, the franchise finally did indeed return – in the form of the massively over-budget behemoth that was Star Trek: The Motion Picture – there was perhaps still a reflection of Roddenberry’s real thoughts on his Ossining odyssey in its epic tale (a kind of inversion ofThe God Thing derived from an Alan Dean Foster story originally entitled In Thy Image) of a vast and mysterious entity possessed of God-like powers and on a direct course for Earth. V’ger – as the being calls itself – turns out to be a long-lost (and alien-modified) Voyagerspace probe returning to Earth after centuries to seek its ‘Creator’… only to find that there is no God here, just us humans.


    Roddenberry’s adventures with Lab Nine, then, were translated into a series of bizarre spiritual autobiographies, a hall of mirrors in which art imitated life imitating art, and in which the (Star Trek) Creator’s ambivalent relationship to his Creation – not to mention his followers – became increasingly problematic. There was, for Roddenberry, to be no saviour from beyond the stars.


    He died in 1991, having seen the triumphant return of Star Trek to TV screens with the hugely popular The Next Generation series and, despite all that is now known of the man’s many and glaring imperfections, will no doubt continue to be revered as ‘The Great Bird of the Galaxy’. To add to his legend, a small sample of his ashes was launched into space to orbit the Earth for six years before burning up on re-entry.


    Puharich followed in 1995, possibly attaining the next level but leaving a controversial legacy for conspiracy buffs, psychonauts and paranormal researchers to argue about for years to come. Sir John Westmore is still a sought-after business coach, working with high profile companies and writing books such as Coaching for Performance: Growing People, Performance and Purpose.


    Phyllis Schlemmer continues to work with The Nine, having publishedThe Only Planet of Choice: Essential Briefings from Deep Space in 1993. Her website claims that Roddenberry’s contact with The Nine was part of his research for Star Trek!


    And out there in the infinite loneliness of cyber space, like a long-lost probe waiting for a signal to return home, is a web page containing these words:


    “This page is a seed.
    It will, sometime soon, grow into the home
    for all information pertaining to
    THE NINE
    A Major Motion Picture from a screenplay by
    Gene Roddenberry and Jon Povill.”


    NOTES

    1 The Laugheads’ story is a fascinating one in its own right. This pair of outwardly respectable saucer cultists (Charles was a Michigan doctor, he and his wife both former missionaries) were involved with both George Adamski and Dorothy Martin, the Chicago prophet whose failed predictions of the world’s end in 1954 formed the basis for the 1956 book sociological study When Prophecy Fails. Jerome Clark tells some of the story in “When Prophecy Failed”, FT117:47.

    2 Uri Geller & Guy Lyon Playfair, The Geller Effect, Jonathan Cape, 1986, pp269-270. Guy Lyon Playfair thinks the best explanation for Geller’s apparent channelling of The Nine is ‘doctrinal compliance’, “an important feature of the symbiotic relationship […] whereby patients produce what they believe the doctor, analyst or hypnotist expects”. In the Puharich/Geller relationship, the young Israeli’s interests and fantasies concerning space travel and other civilizations interacted with the researcher’s developing beliefs about The Nine to produce (through the fertile medium of the hypnotic trance) the bizarre account given in Puharich’s 1974 book Geller.

    3 Watson was apparently offered the chance to become both joint channeller and the group’s official biographer; like Geller before him he probably saw this as a bad career move and turned it down. In 1975, Puharich and Whitmore instead commissioned British writer Stuart Holroyd to write Prelude to the Landing on Planet Earth (1977); along with the commission of the Roddenberry screen play it clearly represents part of a PR blitz on behalf of Lab Nine’s ET chums. See Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince, The Stargate Conspiracy, Little, Brown and Company, 1999, pp176- 178 and “Plan Nine from Outer Space”, FT126:34-39.

    4 Roddenberry’s interest, according to his secretary Susan Sackett, dated to a childhood ‘out of body’ experience. See Joel Engel, Gene Roddenberry, The Myth and the Man Behind Star Trek, Virgin Books, 1995, p167.

    5 Letter to John W Campbell, 3 December 1968, quoted in David Alexander, Star Trek Creator, Boxtree Books, 1994, p 345.

    6 Also the theme of Robert Silverberg’s 1957 story ‘Godling, Go Home!’.

    7 Letter to John Whitmore, 2 April 1975, quoted in Alexander, p 416.

    8 Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince, ‘Plan Nine from Outer Space’, FT126:34.

    9 “…his questions indicated that he was at least agnostic on the possibility on their existence; either that or he was respectful of his hosts’ and employers’ uncommon beliefs and practices. In the communications, which were taped for posterity, his tone of voice is unfailingly polite and engaged. If he was in fact feigning interest just to pick up some quick money, he demonstrated enviable skills as an actor.” Engel, p162.

    10 Of course, those waiting for the saucers have sometimes chosen to end their own lives not from fear but a desire to leave behind their human bodies and actually enter the alien spacecraft en route for pastures new; strangely, one of the participants in the Heaven’s Gate mass suicide of 26 March 1997 (FT99:4, 32; 100:4, 35–41) was 58-year-old Thomas Nichols, brother of Star Trek actress Nichelle Nichols (Lt Uhura). The group’s bricolage-like belief system drew on everything from Christianity to contactee lore and, according to many reports, a belief in the reality of the (surely incompatible) fictional worlds of Star Trek and The X-Files.

    11 Yvonne Fern’s Inside the Mind of Gene Roddenberry (Harper-Collins, 1995), based on a series of conversations toward the end of Roddenberry’s life, reveals a curious, deeply flawed, guru-like figure whose constantly repeated mantra was “I am Star Trek” – a man as identified with, and possibly trapped by, his creation as MacNorth is by ‘Time Zone’; as hostile to organized religion as ever but increasingly certain that his own belief in the future in his head could lead humanity to the next level.

    Susan Sackett stated that Roddenberry’s “spiritual beliefs were extant, although they were revised frequently. When I first discussed this with him, he believed in what he called the ‘All’, the life force of the Universe. Occasionally he referred to this concept as ‘God’, although it was clear that his was not the Judæo-Christian god concept in any shape or form.” Susan Sackett, Inside Trek: My Secret Life With Star Trek Creator Gene Roddenberry, Hawk Publishing, 2002, p38.

    12 Povill put it this way: “Ultimately, the story became ‘what if Rod Serling wakes up one day and finds himself in The Twilight Zone for real?’ This is, ‘What if Gene Roddenberry wakes up one day and finds himself in touch with extraterrestrials, and he can’t deal with it?’” Quoted in Engel, p166. Povill went on to work on the projected but never made Star Trek Phase II series and to act as associate producer on Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

    13 William Shatner (With Chris Kreski), Star Trek Movie Memories, Harper-Collins, p37. The script impressed Shatner but he “couldn’t imagine Paramount or any other studio agreeing to make such a controversial, perhaps even blasphemous film… for the first time in history God was gonna be the bad guy.”


    14 See www.well.com/~sjroby/godthing.html for more on the mysterious fate of The God Thing, which Roddenberry spent years desultorily turning into a still unpublished novel.



    Plan Nine From Outer Space 


    One New Age channelling cult, above all the rest, has had a huge - very disturbing influence on hundreds of thousands of devotees worldwide. Known as 'The Nine', its disciples include cutting edge scientists, multi-millionaire industrialists and leading politicians. 


    This exclusive extract based on The Startgate Conspiracy by Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince looks at the sinister origins of The Nine -



    "I am the beginning. I am the end. I am the emissary. But the original time I was on the Planet Earth was 34,000 of your years ago. I am the balance. And when I say "I" - I mean because I am an emissary for The Nine. It is not I , but it is the group…We are nine principles of the Universe, yet together we are one."


    The declaration above is typical of the channelled pronouncements of the Council of Nine – or just ‘The Nine’. They contain all the usual New Age ingredients of grandiose statements, shaky grammar and unprovable predictions. But unlike all the other channelling cults, that of The Nine has serious clout. Perhaps the reason for this is that they claim to be the Ennead, or the nine major gods of ancient Egypt (see panel). Or could there be another reason, one that owes more to The X-Files than the Pyramid Texts?

    Although The Nine may appear to be quintessentially a modern phenomenon, our research uncovered its truly astonishing pedigree. In fact, the story begins nearly 50 years ago, in a private research laboratory in Glen Cove, Maine, called the Round Table Foundation, run by a medical doctor named Andrija Puharich (also known as Henry K Puharich).Set up in 1948 to research the paranormal, among the noted psychics studied at the Foundation were the famous Irish medium Eileen Garrett and the Dutch clairvoyant Peter Hurkos (Pieter van de Hirk).Prominent members included the influential philosopher and inventor Arthur M Young and the socialite Alice Bouverie (née Astor).

    In December 1952, Puharich brought into his laboratory an Indian mystic named Dr D G Vinod, who began to channel The Nine or ‘the Nine Principles’. In the months before Vinod returned to India, a group met regularly to hear The Nine’s channelled wisdom. Never known for their modesty, The Nine proclaimed themselves to be God, stating "God is nobody else than we together, the Nine Principles of God."


    Three years later, there appeared to be independent confirmation of their existence. In Mexico, Puharich and Young met Charles and Lillian Laughead, former Christian missionaries who were by then prominent in the burgeoning UFO contactee movement. (For a description of their involvement in the Dorothy Martin circle, see Jerome Clark’s ‘When Prophecy Failed’ in FT117.) Back in the States a few weeks later, Puharich received a letter from the Laugheads containing messages received by their group’s channeller. This message also claimed to come from the Nine Principles, even – amazingly – including references to the earlier communications transmitted through Dr Vinod. Could The Nine possibly be for real?

    Perhaps the answer is embedded in the career of Puharich himself. After disbanding the Round Table Foundation in 1958, he worked for 10 years as an inventor of medical devices and achieved international recognition as a parapsychologist, most famously studying the Brazilian psychic surgeon, Arigo (José Pedro de Freitas). But all that was to pale into insignificance because, in 1971, Puharich discovered Uri Geller.

    At their first meetings in Tel Aviv in 1971, Puharich hypnotised Geller in an attempt to find out where his abilities came from. As a result, the young Israeli started to channel ‘Spectra’ – an entity which claimed to be a conscious super-computer aboard a spaceship. However, Puharich suggested to him that there might be a connection with the Nine Principles, and Spectra readily agreed that there was. The Nine claimed that they had programmed Geller with his powers as a young child.

    Through Geller, The Nine alerted Puharich to his life’s mission, which was to use Geller’s talents to alert the world to an imminent mass landing of spaceships that would bring representatives of The Nine. However, Geller – by now an international psychic superstar – bowed out in 1973 and has resolutely turned his back on The Nine ever since. Puharich had to find other channels.

    He joined up with aristocratic former racing driver Sir John Whitmore and Florida-based psychic and healer Phyllis Schlemmer. They found a new channeller – a Daytona cook known to history only by the pseudonym ‘Bobby Horne’ – who lived to regret his dealings with The Nine. Driven to the brink of suicide by their constant demands, he too dropped out of the scene – his despair being dismissed by Whitmore as "signs of instability". After this, Phyllis Schlemmer was appointed the authorised spokesperson for the entity – known simply as ‘Tom’ – who represented The Nine

    Puharich, Whitmore and Schlemmer then set up Lab Nine at Puharich’s estate in Ossining, New York. The Nine’s disciples included multi-millionaire businessmen (many hiding behind pseudonyms and including members of Canada’s richest family, the Bronfmans), European nobility, scientists from the Stamford Research Institute and at least one prominent political figure who was a personal friend of President Gerald Ford.

    We also know that Lyall Watson (then the darling of the alternative scene because of his seminal 1973 book Supernature) was involved, as was the influential counter-culture guru Ira Einhorn – and Gene Roddenberry, creator of Star Trek.



    The key to predicting eclipses is noticing that they occur in cycles, or at more or less regular intervals. The Sun goes round the sky once a year; the Moon once a month. This means that, every month, the Moon ‘overtakes’ the sun. This happens at the New Moon, and this is when solar eclipses occur. But, of course, we don’t get an eclipse every New Moon. This is because the Moon has an elliptical orbit: sometimes it passes above the Sun when it overtakes it, sometimes below. But the Moon’s elliptical orbit has its own cycle: it returns to the same place it started from every 18 years or so. Thus – if seen from the same place on Earth – an eclipse will be followed by another one just over 18 years later.

    Roddenberry was part of that circle in 1974 and 1975, and even produced the screenplay for a movie about The Nine. How much he was influenced by them is unknown, although it is said that some of their concepts found their way into the early Star Trek movies, and The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine (what a giveaway!) series.

    (There is a character named ‘Vinod’ in one Deep Space Nine episode.) Another key player in Lab Nine was Dr James J Hurtak, who was appointed Puharich’s second-in-command by The Nine. In fact, Hurtak had been independently channelling The Nine since 1973.

    Puharich and Whitmore commissioned British writer Stuart Holroyd to write an account of their adventures, which appeared in 1977 as Prelude to the Landing on Planet Earth (retitled Briefings for the Landing on Planet Earth in paperback)


    In this extraordinary book the true identity of the Nine – and of Tom – was finally revealed. Far from being the chummy character that his rather avuncular name suggests, Tom is actually Atum, the creator-god of the ancient Egyptian religion of Heliopolis, and Uncle Tom with his eight mates are none other than the Great Ennead of Heliopolis,

    But even with such impressive contacts, all was not well with Puharich. Lab Nine broke up in 1978 after a series of mysterious events that culminated in an arson attack on the Ossining estate, and he fled to Mexico, claiming that he was being persecuted by the CIA. He returned to the USA two years later, and appears to have played no further part in The Nine story. He died in 1995 after falling down the stairs in his South Carolina home.

    However, The Nine continued. Not only did Schlemmer and Whitmore continue their mission, but Dr Hurtak has also moved on. He has become a major player in the unfolding millennial drama currently being played out at Giza, but perhaps more importantly he has established himself as a New Age guru par excellence, travelling the world giving workshops on his book of channelled revelations from The Nine, The Keys of Enoch. Written and laid out in classic Biblical style, its darkly apocalyptic vision has huge numbers of influential devotees.This we find very worrying.

    Another Nine channel – an Englishwoman named Jenny O’Connor – was introduced to the avant garde Esalen Institute in San Francisco by Sir John Whitmore. She and The Nine became so influential there that they held seminars and – unbelievably – were actually listed on the Institute’s staff, even successfully ordering the sacking of its chief finance officer and the reorganisation of its entire management structure..


    This should concern us, because many influential people attended The Nine’s Esalen seminars, including Russians who were part of the Institute’s Soviet Exchange programme. Some of these later rose to prominence in the Gorbachev regime and were instrumental in the downfall of Communism. (The Esalen Institute now runs the US branch of the Gorbachev Foundation.)


    The Nine are very much still with us. One of their recent channels, who is also in contact with Tom, is the American writer David M Myers. He is co-author with Britain’s David S Percy of that extraordinary tome Two-Thirds, a history of the galaxy and the human race according to Myer’s otherwordly contacts (who clearly have no sense of the absurd). Percy – best known as a champion of the ‘Face on Mars’ and the ‘hoaxing’ of the Apollo moon landings – was at one time part of the Schlemmer circle.


    Among the other major proponents of the ‘monuments’ of Mars and their alleged connection with ancient Egypt is none other than Dr James Hurtak – The Nine’s great prophet – who has promoted this idea since as long ago as 1973. Richard C Hoagland – familiar to FT readers as another unrepentant ‘Mars Face’ enthusiast – is also clearly under The Nine’s spell. David Myers and David Percy were, respectively, American and European Director of Operations for Hoagland’s Mars Mission. In fact, his interpretation of the ‘monuments’ of Mars comes directly from The Nine. Flake though he may appear (increasingly in these hallowed pages), but his influence over huge swathes of the hungrier mystery seekers is undeniable. This is the man who addresses rapt audiences at the United Nations.


    But it is in the New Age channelling circuit that The Nine have truly come into their own. In any other circles their true agenda would no doubt have been rumbled long ago, but this is the New Age. Anything The Nine say must be sweetness and light, right? But an objective reading of their divine pronouncements reveal the first stirrings of something very nasty in Paradise.


    Their words appeared in 1992 as the book The Only Planet of Choice, credited to ‘transceiver’ Schlemmer and edited by Mary Bennett (a one-time member of the Schlemmer circle who also edited Myers and Percy’s Two-Thirds). This has had an unprecedented influence over the New Age. According to Palden Jenkins (editor of an earlier edition of Only Planet) more and more New Age channelling groups are ‘realising’ that the real source of their wisdom is The Nine. 


    In fact, we have discerned what amounts to a campaign by The Nine – or their adherents – to ‘take over’ the New Age. It would be a mistake to underestimate the economic or even political potential of this vast subculture – rich pickings indeed.

    But The Nine’s influence does not extend merely to New Age channelling circles. Andrija Puharich, James Hurtak and Richard Hoagland have all lectured at the United Nations in New York. And individuals connected with The Nine are also known to have influence with Vice-President Al Gore.


    Of course, if The Nine really are the ancient gods of Egypt, then surely there could be fewer more significant events than their return. One may be justified in thinking that the more leading politicians who fall under their influence the better; but are they really the ancient Ennead of Egypt? Can it be that they have actually returned to sort us all out, scattering love and enlightenment from their high moral ground?


    Tom, in The Only Planet of Choice, chooses his words carefully as he explains that all the races of the Earth were seeded from space-gods – except one, the "indigenous race", the blacks. He is very careful to urge us not to make an issue out of this. After all, it’s not the black race’s fault that they have no divine spark like the rest of us.

    But The Nine’s influence does not extend merely to New Age channelling circles. Andrija Puharich, James Hurtak and Richard Hoagland have all lectured at the United Nations in New York. And individuals connected with The Nine are also known to have influence with Vice-President Al Gore.

    Of course, if The Nine really are the ancient gods of Egypt, then surely there could be fewer more significant events than their return. One may be justified in thinking that the more leading politicians who fall under their influence the better; but are they really the ancient Ennead of Egypt? Can it be that they have actually returned to sort us all out, scattering love and enlightenment from their high moral ground?

    Tom, in The Only Planet of Choice, chooses his words carefully as he explains that all the races of the Earth were seeded from space-gods – except one, the "indigenous race", the blacks. He is very careful to urge us not to make an issue out of this. After all, it’s not the black race’s fault that they have no divine spark like the rest of us.


    Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the history of The Nine is its relationship to the career of Andrija Puharich. 


    Recent research has revealed Puharich to have a distinctly sinister side. As an Army doctor in the 1950s, he was deeply involved with the CIA’s notorious MKULTRA mind control project (see panel). He – together with the infamous Dr Sidney Gottlieb – experimented with a variety of techniques to change or induce actual thought processes… even to creating the impression of voices in the head. These techniques included the use of drugs, hypnosis and beaming radio signals directly into the subject’s brain. And, significantly, he was engaged in this work at exactly the same time that The Nine made their first appearance at the Round Table Foundation. 

    The Foundation itself is now known to have been largely funded by the Pentagon as a front for its medical and parapsychological research. Puharich was still working for the CIA in the early 1970s, when he brought Uri Geller out of Israel.

    Puharich’s use of hypnosis is particularly interesting in The Nine circle. In the case of Uri Geller and Bobby Horne, he first hypnotised them and then suggested that they were in touch with The Nine – and lo, they were! Ira Einhorn – a close associate of Puharich’s during the 1970s – confirmed to us that he believed that Puharich was "humanly directing" The Nine communications.


    The evidence we have gathered strongly suggests that Tom and his fellow gods originated, not in the stars, but behind closed doors as part of a CIA mind control experiment. And what happened to that experiment? Now with hundreds of thousands of devotees, some in very high places, can The Nine be deemed a success? Of course, that depends very much on what the CIA had in mind. With their subtle racist propaganda, perhaps the flaky New Age Nine should worry the hell out of us.


    A fully annotated version of this article appears in Fortean Times 126
    ©John Brown Publishing / Fortean Times 99

    Before the Six-Day War - by Alexandre Solzhenitsyn

    "Elie Wiesel is such a ridiculous character. In private Elie Wiesel is the subject of much ridicule. The expression “There’s no business like Shoah-business” is literally coined for him. So it’s not as if I’m the first one to call the emperor naked, but in public — yes.

    He’s turned it into a business, where he casts himself as a person who’s doing all this from anguish and pain and personal sacrifice, while he has made a fortune out of it."

    Norman Finkelstein

    "Sir Martin Gilbert is Winston Churchill's of ficial biographer, and a leading historian of the modern world.

    In 1990, Gilbert was made a Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE). In 1995, he was awarded a Knighthood "for services to British history and international relations". In 1995, he retired as a Fellow of Merton College, but was made an Honorary Fellow. In 1999 he was awarded a Doctorate by Oxford University, "for the totality of his published work".

    His book The Holocaust: The Jewish Tragedy (published in the United States as The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe During the Second World War) is a classic work on the subject.

    Gilbert's portrayal of Churchill's supportive attitudes to Jews (in his book Churchill and the Jews) has been criticised, for example by Piers Brendon.

    Also, Tom Segev writes that, although Gilbert's book The Story of Israel is written with "encyclopedic clarity," it suffers by the absence of figures from Arab sources."


    "We must allow all the federations to continue just as they are, with their systems, their central authorities and their diverse modes of correspondence between high grades of the same rite, organized as they are at the present, but we must create a super rite, which will remain unknown, to which we will call those Masons of high degree whom we shall select. 

    With regard to our brothers in Masonry, these men must be pledges to the strictest secrecy. Through this supreme rite, we will govern all Freemasonry which will become the one international center, the more powerful because its direction will be unknown." 

    - Albert Pike, purported letter to Mazzini

    Chapter 23. Before the Six-Day War

    On the next day after Stalin’s death, on March 6, the MGB (Ministry of State Security) “ceased to exist”, albeit only formally, as Beria had incorporated it into his own Ministry of Interior Affairs (MVD). This move allowed him “to disclose the abuses” by the MGB, including those of the still publicly unanounced MGB Minister, Ignatiev (who secretly replaced Abakumov). It seems that after 1952 Beria was losing Stalin’s trust and had been gradually pushed out by Ignatiev-Ryumin during the `Doctors’ Plot´. Thus, by force of circumstances, Beria became a magnet for the new anti-Stalin opposition. And now, on April 4, just a month after Stalin’s death, he enjoyed enough power to dismiss the “Doctors’ Plot” and accuse Ryumin of its fabrication. Then three months later the diplomatic relations with Israel were restored.

    All this reinvigorated hope among the Soviet Jews, as the rise of Beria could be very promising for them. However, Beria was soon ousted.

    Yet because of the usual Soviet inertia, “with the death of Stalin … many previously fired Jews were reinstalled in their former positions”; “during the period called the “thaw”, many old Zionists … were released from the camps”; “during the post-Stalin period, the first Zionist groups started to emerge - initially at local levels.”[1]

    Yet once again the things began to turn unfavorably for the Jews. In March 1954, the Soviet Union vetoed the UN Security Council attempt to open the Suez Canal to Israeli ships. At the end of 1955, Khrushchev declared a pro-Arab, anti-Israel turn of Soviet foreign policy. In February 1956, in his famous report at the 20th Party Congress, Khrushchev, while speaking profusely about the massacres of 1937-1938, did not point any attention to the fact that there were so many Jews among the victims; he did not name Jewish leaders executed in 1952; and when speaking of the “Doctors’ Plot,” he did not stress that it was specifically directed against the Jews. “It is easy to imagine the bitter feelings this aroused among the Jews,” they “swept the Jewish communist circles abroad and even the leadership of those Communist parties, where Jews constituted a significant percentage of members (such as in the Canadian and US Communist parties).”[2] In April 1956 in Warsaw, under the communist regime (though with heavy Jewish influence), the Jewish newspaper Volksstimme published a sensational article, listing the names of Jewish cultural and social celebrities who perished from 1937-1938 and from 1948-1952. Yet at the same time the article also condemned the “capitalist enemies”, “Beria’s period” and welcomed the return of “Leninist national policy.” “The article in Volksstimme had unleashed a storm.”[3]

    International communist organizations and Jewish social circles loudly began to demand an explanation from the Soviet leaders. “Throughout 1956, foreign visitors to the Soviet Union openly asked about Jewish situation there, and particularly why the Soviet government has not yet abandoned the dark legacy of Stalinism on the Jewish question?”[4] It became a recurrent theme for the foreign correspondents and visiting delegations of “fraternal communist parties”. (Actually, that could be the reason for the loud denouncement in the Soviet press of the “betrayal” of Communism by Howard Fast, an American writer and former enthusiastic champion of Communism. Meanwhile, “hundreds of Soviet Jews from different cities in one form or another participated in meetings of resurgent Zionist groups and coteries”; “old Zionists with connections to relatives or friends in Israel were active in those groups.”[5]
    In May 1956, a delegation from the French Socialist Party arrived in Moscow. “Particular attention was paid to the situation of Jews in the Soviet Union.”[6] Khrushchev found himself in a hot corner – now he could not afford to ignore the questions, yet he knew, especially after experiencing postwar Ukraine, that the Jews are not likely to be returned to their [high] social standing like in 1920s and 1930s. He replied: “In the beginning of the revolution, we had many Jews in executive bodies of party and government …. After that, we have developed new cadres …. If Jews wanted to occupy positions of leadership in our republics today, it would obviously cause discontent among the local people …. If a Jew, appointed to a high office, surrounds himself with Jewish colleagues, it naturally provokes envy and hostility toward all Jews.” (The French publication Socialist Herald calls “strange” and “false” the Khrushchev’s point about “surrounding himself with Jewish colleagues”.) In the same discussion, when Jewish culture and schools were addressed, Khrushchev explained that “if Jewish schools were established, there probably would not be many prospective students. The Jews are scattered all over the country …. If the Jews were required to attend a Jewish school, it certainly would cause outrage. It would be understood as a kind of a ghetto.”[7]
    Three months later, in August 1956, a delegation of the Canadian Communist Party visited the USSR – and it stated outright that it had “a special mission to achieve clarity on the Jewish question”. Thus, in the postwar years, the Jewish question was becoming a central concern of the western communists. “Khrushchev rejected all accusations of anti-Semitism as a slander against him and the party.” He named a number of Soviet Jews to important posts, “he even mentioned his Jewish daughter-in-law,” but then he “quite suddenly … switched to the issue of “good and bad features of each nation” and pointed out “several negative features of Jews”, among which he mentioned “their political unreliability.” Yet he neither mentioned any of their positive traits, nor did he talk about other nations.[8]
    In the same conversation, Khrushchev expressed his agreement with Stalin’s decision against establishing a Crimean Jewish Republic, stating that such [Jewish] colonization of the Crimea would be a strategic military risk for the Soviet Union. This statement was particularly hurtful to the Jewish community. The Canadian delegation insisted on publication of a specific statement by the Central Committee of Communist Party of the Soviet Union about the sufferings of Jews, “but it was met with firm refusal” as “other nations and republics, which also suffered from Beria’s crimes against their culture and intelligentsia, would ask with astonishment why this statement covers only Jews?” (S. Schwartz dismissively comments: “The pettiness of this argumentation is striking.”[9])
    Yet it did not end at that. “Secretly, influential foreign Jewish communists tried” to obtain “explanations about the fate of the Jewish cultural elite”, and in October of the same year, twenty-six Western “progressive Jewish leaders and writers” appealed publicly to Prime-Minister Bulganin and “President” Voroshilov, asking them to issue “a public statement about injustices committed [against Jews] and the measures the goverment had designed to restore the Jewish cultural institutions.”[10]
    Yet during both the “interregnum” of 1953-1957 and then in Khrushchev’s period, the Soviet policies toward Jews were inconsistent, wary, circumspect and ambivalent, thus sending signals in all directions.
    In particular, the summer of 1956, which was filled with all kinds of social expectations in general, had also became the apogee of Jewish hopes. One Surkov, the head of the Union of Writers, in a conversation with a communist publisher from New York City mentioned plans to establish a new Jewish publishing house, theater, newspaper and quarterly literary magazine; there were also plans to organize a countrywide conference of Jewish writers and cultural celebrities. It also noted that a commission for reviving the Jewish literature in Yiddish had been already established. In 1956, “many Jewish writers and journalists gathered in Moscow again.”[11] The Jewish activists later recalled that “the optimism inspired in all of us by the events of 1956 did not quickly fade away.”[12]
    Yet the Soviet government continued with its meaningless and aimless policies, discouraging any development of an independent Jewish culture. It is likely that Khrushchev himself was strongly opposed to it.
    And then came new developments - the Suez Crisis, where Israel, Britain and France allied in attacking Egypt (“Israel is heading to suicide,” formidably warned the Soviet press), and the Hungarian Uprising, with its anti-Jewish streak, nearly completely concealed by history,[13](resulting, perhaps, from the overrepresentation of Jews in the Hungarian KGB). (Could this be also one of the reasons, even if a minor one, for the complete absence of Western support for the rebellion? Of course, at this time the West was preoccupied with the Suez Crisis. And yet wasn’t it a signal to the Soviets suggesting that it would be better if the Jewish theme be kept hushed?)
    Then, a year later, Khrushchev finally overpowered his highly placed enemies within the party and, among others, Kaganovitch was cast down.
    Could it really be such a big deal? The latter was not the only one ousted and even then, he was not the principal figure among the dethroned; and he was definitely not thrown out because of his Jewishness. Yet “from the Jewish point of view, his departure symbolized the end of an era”. Some looked around and counted – “the Jews disappeared not only from the ruling sections of the party, but also from the leading governmental circles.”[14]
    It was time to pause and ponder thoroughly – what did the Jews really think about such new authorities?
    David Burg, who emigrated from the USSR in 1956, came upon a formula on how the Jews should treat the Soviet rule. (It proved quite useful for the authorities): “To some, the danger of anti-Semitism `from below´ seems greater than the danger of anti-Semitism `from above´”; “though the government oppresses us, it nevertherless allows us to exist. If, however, a revolutionary change comes, then during the inevitable anarchy of the transition period we will simply be exterminated. Therefore, let’s hold on to the government no matter how bad it is.”[15]
    We repeatedly encountered similar concerns in the 1930s - that the Jews should support the Bolshevik power in the USSR because without it their fate would be even worse. And now, even though the Soviet power had further deteriorated, the Jews had no other choice but hold on to it as before.
    The Western world and particularly the United States always heeded such recommendations, even during the most strained years of the Cold War. In addition, socialist Israel was still full of communist sympathizers and could forgive the Soviet Union a lot for its role in the defeat of Hitler. Yet how then could Soviet anti-Semitism be interpreted? In this aspect, the recommendation of D. Burg stood up to the acute “social demand” – to move emphasis from the anti-Semitism of the Soviet government to the “anti-Semitism of the Russian people” – that ever-present curse.
    So now some Jews have even fondly recalled the long-disbanded YevSek [the "Jewish Section" of the Central Committee, dismantled in 1930 when Dimanshtein and its other leaders were shot]. Even though back in the 1920s it seemed overly pro-Communist, the YevSek was “to certain extent a guardian of Jewish national interests … an organ that produced some positive work as well.”[16]
    In the meantime, Khrushchev’s policy remained equivocal; it is reasonable to assume that though Khrushchev himself did not like Jews, he did not want to fight against them, realizing the international political counter-productivity of such an effort. In 1957-1958, Jewish musical performances and public literary clubs were authorized and appeared in many cities countrywide. (For example, “in 1961, Jewish literary soirees and Jewish song performances were attended by about 300,000 people.”[17]) Yet at the same time, the circulation of Warsaw’s Volksstimmewas discontinued in the Soviet Union, thus cutting the Soviet Jews off from an outside source of Jewish information.[18] In 1954, after a long break, Sholom Aleichem’s The Adventures of Mottel was again published in Russian, followed by several editions of his other books and their translations into other languages; in 1959 a large edition of his collected works was produced as well. In 1961 in Moscow, the Yiddish magazineSovetish Heymland was established (though it strictly followed the official policy line). Publications of books by Jewish authors, who were executed in Stalin’s times, were resumed in Yiddish and Russian, and one even could hear Jewish tunes on the broadcasts of the All-Soviet Union radio.[19] By 1966, “about one hundred Jewish authors were writing in Yiddish in the Soviet Union,” and “almost all of the named authors simultaneously worked as Russian language journalists and translators,” and “many of them worked as teachers in the Russian schools.”[20] However, the Jewish theater did not re-open until 1966. In 1966, S. Schwartz defined the Jewish situation [in the USSR] as “cultural orphanhood.”[21] Yet another author bitterly remarks: “The general lack of enthusiasm and interest … from the wider Jewish population … toward those cultural undertakings … cannot be explained solely by official policies ….” “With rare exceptions, during those years the Jewish actors performed in half-empty halls. Books of Jewish writers were not selling well.”[22]
    Similarly ambivalent, but more hostile policies of the Soviet authorities in Khrushchev’s period were implemented against the Jewish religion. It was a part of Khrushchev’s general anti-religious assault; it is well known how devastating it was for the Russian Orthodox Church. Since the 1930s, not a single theological school functioned in the USSR. In 1957 a yeshiva – a school for training rabbis – opened in Moscow. It accommodated only 35 students, and even those were being consistently pushed out under various pretexts such as withdrawal of residence registration in Moscow. Printing of prayer books and manufacturing of religious accessories was hindered. Up to 1956, before the Jewish Passover matzah was baked by state-owned bakeries and then sold in stores. Beginning in 1957, however, baking of matzah was obstructed and since 1961 it was banned outright almost everywhere. One day, the authorities would not interfere with receiving parcels with matzah from abroad, another day, they stopped the parcels at the customs, and even demanded recipients to express in the press their outrage against the senders.[23] In many places, synagogues were closed down. “In 1966, only 62 synagogues were functioning in the entire Soviet Union.”[24]Yet the authorities did not dare to shut down the synagogues in Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev and in the capitals of the republics. In the 1960s, there used to be extensive worship services on holidays with large crowds of 10,000 to 15,000 on the streets around synagogues.[25] C. Schwartz notes that in the 1960s Jewish religious life was in severe decline, yet he large-mindedly reminds us that it was the result of the long process of secularization that began in Russian Jewry in the late 19th Century. (The process, which, he adds, has also succeeded in extremely non-communist Poland between the First and Second World Wars.[26]) Judaism in the Soviet Union lacked a united control center; yet when the Soviet authorities wanted to squeeze out a political show from the leading rabbis for foreign policy purposes, be it about the well-being of Judaism in the USSR or outrage against the nuclear war, the government was perfectly able to stage it.[27] “The Soviet authorities had repeatedly used Jewish religious leaders for foreign policy goals.” For example, “in November 1956 a group of rabbis issued a protest against” the actions of Israel during the Suez War.28
    Another factor, which aggravated the status of Judaism in the USSR after the Suez War, was the growing fashionability of what was termed the “struggle against Zionism.” Zionism, being, strictly speaking, a form of socialism, should naturally had been seen as a true brother to the party of Marx and Lenin. Yet after the mid-1950s, the decision to secure the friendship of the Arabs drove the Soviet leaders toward persecution of Zionism. However, for the Soviet masses Zionism was a distant, unfamiliar and abstract phenomenon. Therefore, to flesh out this struggle, to give it a distinct embodiment, the Soviet government presented Zionism as a caricature composed of the characteristic and eternal Jewish images. The books and pamphlets allegedly aimed against Zionism also contained explicit anti-Judaic and anti-Jewish messages. If in the Soviet Union of 1920-1930s Judaism was not as brutally persecuted as the Russian Orthodox Christianity, then in 1957 a foreign socialist commentator noted how that year signified “a decisive intensification of the struggle against Judaism,” the “turning point in the struggle against the Jewish religion,” and that “the character of struggle betrays that it is directed not only against Judaism, but against the Jews in general.”[29] There was one stirring episode: in 1963 in Kiev, the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences published 12,000 copies of a brochure Unadorned Judaism in Ukrainian, yet it was filled with such blatant anti-Jewish caricatures that it provoked a large-scale international outcry, joined even by the communist “friends” (who were financially supported by Moscow), such as the leaders of the American and British communist parties, newspapers L’Humanite,L’Unita, as well as a pro-Chinese communist newspaper from Brussels, and many others. The UN Human Rights Commission demanded an explanation from its Ukrainian representative. The World Jewish Cultural Association called for the prosecution of the author and the cartoonist. The Soviet side held on for awhile, insisting that except for the drawings, “the book deserves a generally positive assessment.”[30] Finally, evenPravda had to admit that it was indeed “an ill-prepared … brochure” with “erroneous statements … and illustrations that may offend feelings of religious people or be interpreted as anti-Semitic,” a phenomenon that, “as is universally known, does not and cannot exist in our country.”[31]Yet at the same time Izvestia stated that although there were certain drawbacks to the brochure, “its main idea … is no doubt right.”[32]
    There were even several arrests of religious Jews from Moscow and Leningrad – accused of “espionage [conversations during personal meetings in synagogues] for a capitalistic state [Israel]” with synagogues allegedly used as “fronts for various criminal activities”[33] – to scare others more effectively.
    ***
    Although there were already no longer any Jews in the most prominent positions, many still occupied influential and important second-tier posts (though there were exceptions: for example, Veniamin Dymshits smoothly ran Gosplan (the State Planning Committee) from 1962, while being at the same time the Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers of USSR and a member of Central Committee from 1961 to 1986[34]). Why, at one time the Jews were joining “NKVD and the MVD … in such numbers that even now, after all purges of the very Jewish spirit, a few individuals miraculously remained, such as the famous Captain Joffe in a camp in Mordovia.”[35]
    According to the USSR Census of 1959, 2,268,000 Jews lived in the Soviet Union. (Yet there were caveats regarding this figure: “Everybody knows … that there are more Jews in the Soviet Union than the Census showed,” as on the Census day, a Jew states his nationality not according to his passport, but any nationality he wishes.[36]) Of those, 2,162,000 Jews lived in the cities, i.e., 95,3% of total population – much more than 82% in 1926 or 87% in 1939.[37] And if we glance forward into the 1970 Census, the observed “increase in the number of Jews in Moscow and Leningrad is apparently caused not by natural growth but by migration from other cities (in spite of all the residential restrictions).” Over these 11 years, “at least several thousand Jews relocated to Kiev. The concentration of Jews in the large cities had been increasing for many decades.”[38]
    These figures are very telling for those who know about the differences in living standards between the urban and the rural populations in the Soviet Union. G. Rosenblum, the editor of the prominent Israeli newspaper, Yedioth Ahronoth, recalls an almost anecdotal story by Israeli Ambassador to Moscow Dr. Harel about his tour of the USSR in the mid-1960s. In a large kolkhoz near Kishinev he was told that “the Jews who work here want to meet [him]. [The Israeli] was very happy that there were Jews in the kolkhoz” (love of agriculture - a good sign for Israel). He recounts: “Three Jews came to meet me … one was a cashier, another – editor of the kolkhoz’s wall newspaper and the third one was a kind of economic manager. I couldn’t find any other. So, what the Jews used to do [i.e. before], they are still doing.” G. Rosenblum confirms this: “Indeed, the Soviet Jews in their masses did not take to the physical work.”[39] L. Shapiro concludes, “Conversion of Jews to agriculture ended in failure despite all the efforts … of public Jewish organizations and … the assistance of the state.”[40]
    In Moscow, Leningrad and Kiev – the cities enjoying the highest living and cultural standards in the country, the Jews, according to the 1959 Census, constituted 3.9%, 5.8%, and 13.9 % of the population, respectively, which is quite a lot, considering that they accounted only for 1.1% of the entire population of the USSR.[41]
    So it was that this extremely high concentration of Jews in urban areas – 95% of all Soviet Jews lived in the cities – that made “the system of prohibitions and restrictions” particularly painful for them. (As we mentioned in the previous chapter, this system was outlined back in the early 1940s.) And “although the restrictive rules have never been officially acknowledged and officials stoutly denied their existence, these rules and restrictions very effectively barred the Jews from many spheres of action, professions and positions.”[42]
    Some recall a disturbing rumor circulating then among the Jews: allegedly, Khrushchev said in one of his unpublished speeches that “as many Jews will be accepted into the institutions of higher education as work in the coal mines.”[43] Perhaps, he really just blurted it out in his usual manner, because such “balancing” was never carried out. Yet by the beginning of 1960s, while the absolute number of Jewish students increased, their relative share decreased substantially when compared to the pre-war period: if in 1936 the share of Jews among students was 7.5 times higher than that in the total population[44], then by 1960s it was only 2.7 times higher. These new data on the distribution of students in higher and secondary education by nationality were published for the first time (in the post-war period) in 1963 in the statistical annual report,The National Economy of the USSR,[45] and a similar table was annually produced up to 1972. In terms of the absolute number of students in institutions of higher education and technical schools in the 1962-1963 academic year, Jews were fourth after the three Slavic nations (Russians, Ukrainians, Byelorussians), with 79,300 Jewish students in institutions of higher education out of a total 2,943,700 students (2.69%). In the next academic year 1963-1964, the number of Jewish students increased to 82,600, while the total number of students in the USSR reached 3,260,700 (2.53%). This share remained almost constant until the 1969-1970 academic year; 101,000 Jewish students out of total 4,549,900. Then the Jewish share began to decline and in 1972-1973 it was 1.91%: 88,500 Jewish students out of total 4,630,246. (This decline coincided with the beginning of the Jewish immigration to Israel.)
    The relative number of Jewish scientists also declined in 1960s, from 9.5% in 1960 to 6.1% in 1973.[47] During those same years, “there were tens of thousands Jewish names in the Soviet art and literature,”[48] including 8.5% of writers and journalists, 7.7% of actors and artists, more than 10% of judges and attorneys, and about 15% doctors.[49] Traditionally, there were always many Jews in medicine, yet consider the accursed “Soviet psychiatry,” which in those years began locking up healthy people in mental institutions. And who were those psychiatrists? Listing the “Jewish occupations,” M.I. Heifets writes: “`Psychiatry is a Jewish monopoly,´ a friend, a Jewish psychiatrist, told me, just before [my] arrest; `we began to get Russians only recently and even then as the result of an order´” [translator's note: admission into medical residency training was regulated at local and central levels; here author indicates that admission of ethnically Russian doctors into advanced psychiatry training was mandated from the higher levels]. He provides examples: the Head Psychiatrist of Leningrad, Professor Averbukh, provides his expertise for the KGB in the “Big House”; in Moscow there was famous Luntz; in the Kaluga Hospital there was Lifshitz and “his Jewish gang.” When Heifetz was arrested, and his wife began looking for a lawyer with a “clearance,” that is, with a permission from the KGB to work on political cases, she “did not find a single Russian” among them as all such lawyers were Jews[50]).
    In 1956, Furtseva, then the First Secretary of Moscow Gorkom (the City’s Party Committee), complained that in some offices Jews constitute more than half of the staff.[51] (I have to note for balance that in those years the presence of Jews in the Soviet apparatus was not detrimental. The Soviet legal machinery was in its essence stubbornly and hardheartedly anti-human, skewed against any man in need, be it a petitioner or just a visitor. So it often happened that the Russian officials in Soviet offices, petrified by their power, looked for any excuse to triumphantly turn away a visitor; in contrast, one could find much more understanding in a Jewish official and resolve an issue in a more humane way). L. Shapiro provides examples of complaints that in the national republics, the Jews were pushed out and displaced from the bureaucratic apparatus by native intelligentsia[52] – yet it was a common and officially-mandated system of preferences in the ethnic republics [to affirm the local cadres], and Russians were displaced just as well.
    This reminds me of an example from contemporary American life. In 1965, the New York Division of the American Jewish Committee had conducted a four-months-long unofficial interview of more than a thousand top officials in New York City banks. Based on its results, the American Jewish Committee mounted a protest because less than 3% of those surveyed were Jews, though they constituted one quarter of the population of – that is, the Committee demanded proportional representation. Then the chairman of the Association of Banks of New York responded that banks, according to law, do not hire on the basis of “race, creed, color or national origin” and do not keep records of such categories (that would be our accursed “fifth article” [the requirement in the Soviet internal passport - "nationality"]!). (Interestingly, the same American Jewish Committee had conducted a similar study about the ethnic composition of management of the fifty largest U.S. public utility services two years before, and in 1964 it in similar vein it studied industrial enterprises in the Philadelphia region.)[53]
    Yet let us return to the Soviet Jews. Many Jewish emigrants loudly advertised their former activity in the periodical-publishing and film-making industries back in the USSR. In particular, we learn from a Jewish author that “it was due to his [Syrokomskiy's] support that all top positions inLiteraturnaya Gazeta became occupied by Jews.”[54]
    Yet twenty years later we read a different assessment of the time: “The new anti-Semitism grew stronger … and by the second half of the 1960s it already amounted to a developed system of discreditation, humiliation and isolation of the entire people.”[55]
    So how can we reconcile such conflicting views? How can we reach a calm and balanced assessment?
    Then from the high spheres inhabited by economic barons there came alarming signals, signals that made the Jews nervous. “To a certain extent, Jewish activity in the Soviet Union concentrated in the specific fields of economy along a characteristic pattern, well-known to Jewish sociologists.”[56] By then, at the end of 1950s, Nikita [Khrushchev] suddenly realized that the key spheres of the Soviet economy are plagued by rampant theft and fraud.
    “In 1961, an explicitly anti-Semitic campaign was initiated against the ?theft of socialist property.”[57] Beginning in 1961, a number of punitive decrees of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR were passed. The first one dealt with “foreign currency speculations,” another – with bribes, and still another later introduced capital punishment for the aforementioned crimes, at the same time lawlessly applying the death penalty retroactively, for the crimes committed before those decrees were issued (as, for example, the case of J. Rokotov and B. Faybishenko). Executions started in the very first year. During the first nine trials, eleven individuals were sentenced to death – among them were “perhaps, six Jews.”[58] The Jewish Encyclopedia states it more specifically, “In 1961-1964, thirty-nine Jews were executed for economic crimes in the RSFSR and seventy-nine – in Ukraine,” and forty-three Jews in other republics.[59] In these trials, “the vast majority of defendants were Jews.” (The publicity was such that the court reports indicated the names and patronymics of the defendants, which was the normal order of pleadings, yet it was getting “absolutely clear from that that they were Jews.”[60])
    Next, in a large court trial in Frunze in 1962, nineteen out of forty-six defendants were apparently Jewish. “There is no reason to think that this new policy was conceived as a system of anti-Jewish measures. Yet immediately upon enforcement, the new laws acquired distinct anti-Jewish flavor,” - the author of the quote obviously points out to the publication of the full names of defendants, including Jewish ones; other than that, neither the courts, nor the government, nor the media made any generalizations or direct accusations against the Jews. And even whenSovetskaya Kyrgizia wrote that “they occupied different posts, but they were closely linked to each other,” it never clarified the begged question “how were they linked?” The newspaper treated this issue with silence, thus pushing the reader to the thought that the nucleus of the criminal organization was composed of the “closely linked” individuals. Yet “closely linked by” what? By their Jewishness. So the newspaper “emphasized the Jews in this case.”[61] … Yet people can be “closely linked” by any illegal transaction, greed, swindling or fraud. And, amazingly, nobody argued that those individuals could be innocent (though they could have been innocent). Yet to name them was equal to Jew-baiting.
    Next, in January 1962, came the Vilnius case of speculators in foreign currency. All eight defendants were Jews (during the trial, non-Jewish members of the political establishment involved in the case escaped public naming – a usual Soviet trick). This time, there was an explicit anti-Jewish sentiment from the prosecution: “The deals were struck in a synagogue, and the arguments were settled with the help of wine.”[62]
    S. Schwartz is absolutely convinced that this legal and economic harassment was nothing else but rampant anti-Semitism, yet he completely disregards “the tendency of Jews to concentrate their activity in the specific spheres of economy.” Similarly, the entire Western media interpreted this as a brutal campaign against Jews, the humiliation and isolation of the entire people; Bertrand Russell sent a letter of protest to Khrushchev and got a personal response from the Soviet leader.[63] However, after that, the Soviet authorities apparently had second thoughts when they handled the Jews.
    In the West, the official Soviet anti-Semitism began to be referred to as “the most pressing issue” in the USSR (ignoring any more acute issues) and “the most proscribed subject.” (Though there were numerous other proscribed issues such as forced collectivization or the surrender of three million Red Army soldiers in the year of 1941 alone, or the murderous nuclear “experimentation” on our own Soviet troops on the Totskoye range in 1954.) Of course, after Stalin’s death, the Communist Party avoided explicit anti-Jewish statements. Perhaps, they practiced incendiary “invitation-only meetings” and “briefings” – that would have been very much in the Soviet style. Solomon Schwartz rightly concludes: “Soviet anti-Jewish policy does not have any sound or rational foundation,” the strangulation of the Jewish cultural life “appears puzzling. How can such bizarre policy be explained?”[64]
    Still, when all living things in the country were being choked, could one really expect that such vigorous and agile people would escape a similar lot? To that, the Soviet foreign policy agendas of 1960s added their weight: the USSR was designing an anti-Israel campaign. Thus, they came up with a convenient, ambiguous and indefinite term of “anti-Zionism,” which became “a sword of Damocles hanging above the entire Jewish population of the country.”[65] Campaigning against “Zionism” in the press became a sort of impenetrable shield as its obvious anti-Semitic nature became unprovable. Moreover, it sounded menacing and dangerous – “Zionism is the instrument of the American imperialism.” So the “Jews had to prove their loyalty in one way or other, to somehow convince the people around them that they had no connection to their own Jewishness, especially to Zionism.”[66]
    The feelings of ordinary Jews in the Soviet Union became the feelings of the oppressed as vividly expressed by one of them: “Over the years of persecutions and vilifications, the Jews developed a certain psychological complex of suspicion to any contact coming from non-Jews. In everything they are ready to see implicit or explicit hints on their nationality …. The Jews can never publicly declare their Jewishness, and it is formally accepted that this should be kept silent, as if it was a vice, or a past crime.”[67]
    An incident in Malakhovka in October 1959 added substantially to that atmosphere. On the night of October 4, in Malakhovka, a settlement “half an hour from Moscow … with 30,000 inhabitants, about 10% of whom are Jews …, the roof of the synagogue caught fire along with … the house of the Jewish cemetery keeper … [and] the wife of the keeper died in the fire. On the same night, leaflets were scattered and posted across Malakhovka: `Away with the Jews in commerce! … We saved them from the Germans … yet they became arrogant so fast that the Russian people do not understand any longer… who’s living on whose land.´”[68]
    Growing depression drove some Jews to such an extreme state of mind as that described by D. Shturman: some “Jewish philistines developed a hatred toward Israel, believing it to be the generator of anti-Semitism in the Soviet politics. I remember the words of one succesful Jewish teacher: `One good bomb dropped on Israel would make our life much easier.´”[69]
    Yet that was an ugly exception indeed. In general, the rampant anti-Zionist campaign triggered a “consolidation of the sense of Jewishness in people and the growth of sympathy towards Israel as the outpost of the Jewish nation.”[70]
    There is yet another explanation of the social situation in those years: yes, under Khrushchev, “fears for their lives had become the things of the past for the Soviet Jews,” but “the foundations of new anti-Semitism had been laid,” as the young generation of political establishment fought for caste privileges, “seeking to occupy the leading positions in arts, science, commerce, finance, etc. There the new Soviet aristocracy encountered Jews, whose share in those fields was traditionally high.” The “social structure of the Jewish population, which was mainly concentrated in the major centers of the country, reminded the ruling elite of their own class structure.”[71]
    Doubtless, such encounter did take place; it was an epic “crew change” in the Soviet ruling establishment, switching from the Jewish elite to the Russian one. It had clearly resulted in antagonism and I remember those conversations among the Jews during Khrushchev’s era – they were full of not only ridicule, but also of bad insults with the ex-villagers, “muzhiks,” who have infiltrated the establishment.
    Yet altogether all the various social influences combined with the great prudence of the Soviet authorities led to dramatic alleviation of “prevalence and acuteness of modern Soviet anti-Semitism” by 1965, which became far inferior to what had been observed “during the war and the first post-war years,” and it appears that “a marked attenuation, maybe even a complete dying out of `the percentage quote´ is happening.”[72] Overall, in the 1960s the Jewish worldview was rather positive. This is what we consistently hear from different authors. (Contrast this to what we just read, that “the new anti-Semitism grew in strength in the 1960s.”) The same opinion was expressed again twenty years later – “Khrushchev’s era was one of the most peaceful periods of the Soviet history for the Jews.”[73]
    “In 1956-1957, many new Zionist societies sprang up in the USSR, bringing together young Jews who previously did not show much interest in Jewish national problems or Zionism. An important impetus for the awakening of national consciousness among Soviet Jews and for the development of a sense of solidarity with the State of Israel was the Suez Crisis [1956].” Later, “The International Youth Festival [Moscow, 1957] became a catalyst for the revival of the Zionist movement in the USSR among a certain portion of Soviet Jews … Between the festival and the Six-Day War [1967], Zionist activity in the Soviet Union was gradually expanding. Contacts of Soviet Jews with the Israeli Embassy became more frequent and less dangerous.” Also, “the importance of Jewish Samizdat increased dramatically.”[74]
    During the so-called Khrushchev’s “thaw” period (the end of 1950s to the beginning of the 1960s), Soviet Jews were spiritually re-energized; they shook off the fears and distress of the previous age of the “Doctors’ Plot” and the persecution of “cosmopolitan.” It “even became fashionable” in the metropolitan society “to be a Jew”; the Jewish motif entered Samizdat and poetic soirees then so popular among the young. Rimma Kazakova even ventured to declare her Jewish identity from the stage. Yevtushenko quickly caught the air and expressed it in 1961 in hisBabi Yar[75], proclaiming himself a Jew in spirit. His poem (and the courage of Literaturnaya Gazeta) was a literary trumpet call for all of Soviet and world Jewry. Yevtushenko recited his poem during a huge number of poetic soirees, always accompanied by a roar of applause. After a while, Shostakovich, who often ventured into Jewish themes, set Yevtushenko’s poem into his 13th Symphony. Yet its public performance was limited by the authorities. Babi Yar spread among Soviet and foreign Jewries as a reinvigorating and healing blast of air, a truly “revolutionary act … in the development of the social consciousness in the Soviet Union”; “it became the most significant event since the dismissal of the `Doctors’ Plot.´”[76]
    In 1964-65 Jewish themes returned into popular literature; take, for example, Summer in Sosnyaki by Anatoliy Rybakov or the diary of Masha Rolnik[77] (“written apparently under heavy influence of Diary of Anne Frank[78]).
    “After the ousting of Khrushchev from all his posts, the official policy towards Jews was softened somewhat. The struggle against Judaism abated and nearly all restrictions on baking matzah were abolished …. Gradually, the campaign against economic crimes faded away too ….” Yet “the Soviet press unleashed a propaganda campaign against Zionist activities among the Soviet Jews and their connections to the Israeli Embassy.”[79]
    All these political fluctuations and changes in the Jewish policies in the Soviet Union did not pass unnoticed but served to awaken the Jews.
    In the 1959 Census, only 21% Jews named Yiddish as their first language (in 1926 -72%).[80] Even in 1970s they used to say that “Russian Jewry, which was [in the past] the most Jewish Jewry in the world, became the least Jewish.”[81] “The current state of Soviet society is fraught with destruction of Jewish spiritual and intellectual potential.”[82] Or as another author put it: the Jews in the Soviet Union were neither “allowed to assimilate,” nor were they “allowed to be Jews.”[83]
    Yet Jewish identity was never subdued during the entire Soviet period.
    In 1966 the official mouthpiece Sovetish Heymland claimed that “even assimilated Russian-speaking Jews still retain their unique character, distinct from that of any other segment of population.”[84] Not to mention the Jews of Odessa, Kiev, and Kharkov, who “sometimes were even snooty about their Jewishness – to the extent that they did not want to befriend a goy.”[85]
    Scientist Leo Tumerman ( already in Israel in 1977) recalls the early Soviet period, when he used to “reject any nationalism.” Yet now, looking back at those years: “I am surprised to notice what I had overlooked then: despite what appeared to be my full assimilation into the Russian life, the entire circle of my close and intimate friends at that time was Jewish.”[86]
    The sincerity of his statement is certain – the picture is clear. Such things were widespread and I witnessed similar situations quite a few times, and Russians people did not mind such behavior at all.
    Another Jewish author notes: in the USSR “non-religious Jews of all walks of life hand in hand defended the principle of `racial purity.´” He adds: “Nothing could be more natural. People for whom the Jewishness is just an empty word are very rare, especially among the unassimilated [Jews].”[87]
    Natan Sharansky’s testimonial, given shortly after his immigration to Israel, is also typical: “Much of my Jewishness was instilled into me by my family. Although our family was an assimilated one, it nevertheless was Jewish.” “My father, an ordinary Soviet journalist, was so fascinated with the revolutionary ideas of `happiness for all´ and not just for the Jews, that he became an absolutely loyal Soviet citizen.” Yet in 1967 after the Six-Day War and later in 1968 after Czechoslovakia, “I suddenly realized an obvious difference between myself and non-Jews around me … a kind of a sense of the fundamental difference between my Jewish consciousness and the national consciousness of the Russians.”[88]
    And here is another very thoughtful testimonial (1975): “The efforts spent over the last hundred years by Jewish intellectuals to reincarnate themselves into the Russian national form were truly titanic. Yet it did not give them balance of mind; on the contrary, it rather made them to feel the bitterness of their bi-national existence more acutely.” And “they have an answer to the tragic question of Aleksandr Blok: `My Russia, my life, are we to drudge through life together?´ To that question, to which a Russian as a rule gives an unambiguous answer, a member of Russian-Jewish intelligentsia used to reply (sometimes after self-reflection): `No, not together. For the time being, yes, side by side, but not together´… A duty is no substitute for Motherland.” And so “the Jews felt free from obligations at all sharp turns of Russian history.”[89]
    Fair enough. One can only hope for all Russian Jews to get such clarity and acknowledge this dilemma.
    Yet usually the problem in its entirety is blamed on “anti-Semitism”: “Excluding us from everything genuinely Russian, their anti-Semitism simultaneously barred us from all things Jewish …. Anti-Semitism is terrible not because of what it does to the Jews (by imposing restrictions on them), but because of what it does with the Jews by turning them into neurotic, depressed, stressed, and defective human beings.”[90]
    Still, those Jews, who had fully woken up to their identity, were very quickly, completely, and reliably cured from such a morbid condition.
    Jewish identity in the Soviet Union grew stronger as they went through the historical ordeals predestined for Jewry by the 20th Century. First, it was the Jewish Catastrophe during the Second World War. (Through the efforts of official Soviet muffling and obscuring, Soviet Jewry only comprehended its full scope later.)
    Another push was given by the campaign against “cosmopolitans” in 1949-1950.
    Then there was a very serious threat of a massacre by Stalin, eliminated by his timely death.
    And with Khrushchev’s “thaw” and after it, later in the 1960s, Soviet Jewry quickly awoke spiritually, already sensing its unique identity.
    During the second half of the 1950s, “the growing sense of bitterness, spread over large segments of Soviet Jewry”, lead to “consolidation of the sense of national solidarity.”[91]
    But “only in the late 1960s did a very small but committed group of scientists (note, they were not humanitarians; the most colorful figure among them was Alexander Voronel) begin rebuilding of Jewish national consciousness in Russia.”[92]
    And then against the nascent national consciousness of Soviet Jews, the Six-Day War suddenly broke out and instantly ended in what might have seemed a miraculous victory. Israel has ascended in their minds and Soviet Jews awoke to their spiritual and consanguineous kinship [with Israel].
    But the Soviet authorities, furious at Nasser’s disgraceful defeat, immediately attacked Soviet Jews with the thundering campaign against the “Judeo-Zionist-Fascism,” insinuating that all the Jews were “Zionists” and claiming that the “global conspiracy” of Zionism “is the expected andinevitable product of the entirety of Jewish history, Jewish religion, and the resultant Jewish national character” and “because of the consistent pursuit of the ideology of racial supremacy and apartheid, Judaism turned out to be a very convenient religion for securing world dominance.”[93]
    The campaign on TV and in the press was accompanied by a dramatic break of diplomatic relations with Israel. The Soviet Jews had many reasons to fear: “It looked like it was going to come to calls for a pogrom.”[94]
    But underneath this scare a new and already unstoppable explosion of Jewish national consciousness was growing and developing.
    “Bitterness, resentment, anger, and the sense of social insecurity were accruing for a final break up which would lead to complete severing of all ties with [this] country and [this] society – to emigration.”[95]
    “The victory of the Israeli Army contributed to the awakening of national consciousness among the many thousands of almost completely assimilated Soviet Jews …. The process of national revival has began …. The activity of Zionist groups in cities all across the country surged …. In 1969, there were attempts to create a united Zionist Organization [in the USSR] …. An increasing number of Jews applied to emigrate to Israel.”[96]
    And the numerous refusals to grant exit visas led to the failed attempt to hijack an airplane on June 15, 1970. The following “Dymshits-Kuznetsov hijacking affair” can be considered a historic landmark in the fate of Soviet Jewry.

    [1] Краткая Еврейская Энциклопедия (далее — КЕЭ). Иерусалим: Общество по исследованию еврейских общин, 1996. Т. 8, с. 256.
    [2] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе с начала Второй мировой войны (1939-1965). Нью-Йорк: Изд. Американского Еврейского Рабочего Комитета, 1966, с. 247.
    [3] Там же, с. 247-248.
    [4] Хрущёв и еврейский вопрос // Социалистический вестник, Нью-Йорк, 1961, № 1, с. 20.
    [5] КЕЭ, т. 8, с. 257.
    [6] Хрущёв и еврейский вопрос // Социалистический вестник, 1961, № 1, с. 20.
    [7] Слова Н.С. Хрущёва приведены в отчёте переводчика французской делегации Пьера Лошака: Realites, Paris, Mai 1957, p. 64-67, 101-104. — Мы цитируем их в обратном переводе «Социалистического вестника» (1961, № 1, с. 21).
    [8] J.B. Salsberg, Talks with Soviet Leaders on the Jewish Question // Jewish Life, Febr. 1957. — Цит. в переводе «Соц. вестника» (1961, № 1, с. 20).
    [9] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…*, с. 250.
    [10] Там же*, с. 249-251.
    [11] Там же, с. 241, 272.
    [12] Ю. Штерн. Ситуация неустойчива и потому опасна: [Интервью] // “22″: Общественно-политический и литературный журнал еврейской интеллигенции из СССР в Израиле. Тель-Авив, 1984, № 38, с. 132.
    [13] Andrew Handler. Where Familiarity with Jews Breeds Contempt // Red Star, Blue Star: The Lives and Times of Jewish Students in Communist Hungary (1948-1956). New-York: Columbia University Press, 1997, p. 36-37.
    [14] Л. Шапиро. Евреи в Советской России после Сталина // Книга о русском еврействе, 1917-1967 (далее — КРЕ-2). Нью-Йорк: Союз Русских Евреев, 1968, с. 360-361.
    [15] David Burg. Die Judenfrage in Der Sowjetunion // Der Anti-kommunist, Miinchen, Juli-August 1957, № 12, S.35.
    [16] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…*, с. 238.
    [17] Там же, с. 283-287; КЕЭ, т. 8, с. 258.
    [18] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 281.
    [19] ЭФинкелъштейн. Евреи в СССР: Путь в Двадцать первый век // Страна и мир: Обществ.-политический, экономический и культурно-философский журнал. Мюнхен, 1989, № 1, с. 65-66.
    [20] Л. Шапиро. Евреи в Советской России после Сталина // КРЕ-2, с. 379-380.
    [21]С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 280, 288.
    [22] ЭФинкелъштейн. Евреи в СССР: Путь в Двадцать первый век // Страна и мир, 1989, № 1, с. 66.
    [23] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 304-308.
    [24] КЕЭ, т. 8, с. 259.
    [25] Л. Шапиро. Евреи в Советской России после Сталина // КРЕ-2, с. 358.
    [26] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 290.
    [27] Там же, с. 294-296.
    [28] КЕЭ, т. 8, с. 258.
    [29] Антисемитский памфлет в Советском Союзе // Социалистический вестник, 1965, № 4, с. 67.
    [30] Антисемитский памфлет в Советском Союзе // Социалистический вестник*, 1965, № 4, с. 68-73.
    [31] В Идеологической комиссии при ЦК КПСС // Правда, 1964, 4 апреля, с. 4.
    [32] Об одной непонятной шумихе // Известия, 1964, 4 апреля, с. 4.
    [33] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 303.
    [34] Российская Еврейская Энциклопедия. 2-е изд., испр. и доп. М., 1994. Т. 1, с. 448.
    [35] Р. Рутман. Кольцо обид // Новый журнал, Нью-Йорк. 1974. № 117, с. 185.
    [36] И. Домальский. Технология ненависти // Время и мы (далее — ВМ): Международный журнал литературы и общественных проблем. Тель-Авив. 1978, № 26, с. 113-114.
    [37] КЕЭ, т. 8, с. 298, 300.
    [38] И. Ляст. Алия из СССР — демографические прогнозы // “22″, 1981, № 21, с. 112-113.
    [39] Г. Розенблюм, В. Перельман. Крушение Чуда: причины и следствия*: [Беседа] // ВМ, Тель-Авив, 1977, № 24, с. 120.
    [40] Л. Шапиро. Евреи в Советской России после Сталина // КРЕ-2, с. 346.
    [41] КЕЭ, т. 8, с. 300.
    [42] Э. Финкельштейн. Евреи в СССР… // Страна и мир, 1989, № 1, с. 65.
    [43] Н. Шапиро. Слово рядового советского еврея // Русский антисемитизм и евреи: Сборник. Лондон, 1968, с. 55.
    [44] КЕЭ, т. 8, с. 190.
    [45] Народное хозяйство СССР в 1963 году: Статистический ежегодник. М.: Статистика, 1965, с. 579.
    [46] Народное хозяйство СССР в 1969 году. М., 1970, с. 690; Народное хозяйство СССР в 1972 году. М., 1972, с. 651.
    [47] И. Домальский. Технология ненависти // ВМ, Тель-Авив, 1978, №25, с. 120.
    [48] ЭФинкелъштейн. Евреи в СССР… // Страна и мир, 1989, № 1, с. 66.
    [49] А. Нов, Жд. Ньют. Еврейское население СССР: демографическое развитие и профессиональная занятость // Евреи в Советской России (1917-1967). Израиль: Библиотека «Алия», 1975, с. 180.
    [50] Михаил Хейфец. Место и время (еврейские заметки)*. Париж: Третья волна, 1978, с. 63-65, 67, 70.
    [51] Л. Шапиро. Евреи в Советской России после Сталина // КРЕ-2, с. 363.
    [52] Там же.
    [53] New York Times, 1965, October 21, p. 47.
    [54] В. Перельман. О либералах в советских верхах // ВМ, Нью-Йорк, 1985, № 87, с. 147.
    [55] Э. Финкелъштейн. Евреи в СССР… // Страна и мир, 1989, № 1, с. 66.
    [56] Л. Шапиро. Евреи в Советской России после Сталина // КРЕ-2, с. 362.
    [57] КЕЭ, т. 8, с. 261.
    [58] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 326-327, 329.
    [59] КЕЭ, т. 8, с. 261.
    [60] Н. Шапиро. Слово рядового советского еврея // Русский антисемитизм и евреи, с. 55.
    [61] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 330-333.
    [62] Там же, с. 333-334.
    [63] Обмен письмами между Б. Расселом и Н.С. Хрущёвым // Правда, 1963, 1 марта, с. 1.
    [64] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 421-422.
    [65] Э. Финкельштейн. Евреи в СССР… // Страна и мир. 1989, № 1, с. 65.
    [66] Э. Финкельштейн. Евреи в СССР… // Страна и мир, 1989, № 1, с. 66-67.
    [67] Н. Шапиро. Слово рядового советского еврея // Русский антисемитизм и евреи, с. 48, 55.
    [68] Социалистический вестник, 1959, № 12, с. 240-241.
    [69] Д. Штурман. Советский антисемитизм — причины и прогнозы: [Семинар] // “22″, 1978, № 3, с. 180.
    [70] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 395.
    [71] ЭФинкелъштейн. Евреи в СССР… // Страна и мир, 1989, № 1, с. 64-65.
    [72] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 372, 409.
    [73] Михаил Хейфец. Новая «аристократия»? // Грани: Журнал литературы, искусства, науки и общ.-политической мысли. Франкфурт-на-Майне, 1987, № 146, с. 189.
    [74] КЕЭ, т. 8, с. 262-263.
    [75] R. Rutman // Soviet Jewish Affairs, London, 1974, Vol. 4, № 2, p. 11.
    [76] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 371.
    [77] Соответственно: Новый мир, 1964, № 12; Мария Рольникайте. Я должна рассказать // Звезда, 1965, № 2 и № 3.
    [78] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 373.
    [79] КЕЭ, т. 8, с. 262, 264.
    [80] Там же, с. 295, 302.
    [81] Г. Розенблюм. Крушение Чуда…: [Беседа с В. Перелъманом] // ВМ, Тель-Авив, 1977, №24, с. 120.
    [82] Л. Цигельман-Дымерская. Советский антисемитизм — причины и прогнозы: [Семинар] // “22″, 1978, №3, с. 175.
    [83] Ю. Штерн. Ситуация неустойчива…: [Интервью] // “22″, 1984, № 38, с. 135.
    [84] Л. Шапиро. Евреи в Советской России после Сталина // КРЕ-2, с. 379.
    [85] Ю. Штерн. Двойная ответственность: [Интервью] // “22″, 1981, № 21, с. 127.
    [86] “22″*, 1978, № 1, с. 204.
    [87] А. Этерман. Истина с близкого расстояния // “22″, 1987, № 52, с. 112.
    [88] А. Щаранский. [Интервью] // “22″, 1986, № 49. с. 111-112.
    [89] Б. Орлов. Не те вы учили алфавиты // ВМ, Тель-Авив, 1975, № 1, с. 129, 132-133.
    [90] В. Богуславский. Галуту — с надеждой // “22″, 1985, № 40, с. 133, 134.
    [91] С. Шварц. Евреи в Советском Союзе…, с. 415.
    [92] Г. Файн. В роли высокооплачиваемых швейцаров // ВМ, Тель-Авив. 1976, № 12. с. 133-134.
    [93] Р. Нудельман. Советский антисемитизм — причины и прогнозы: [Семинар] // “22″, 1978, № 3, с. 144.
    [94] ЭФинкельштейн. Евреи в СССР… // Страна и мир, 1989, № 1, с. 67.
    [95] Там же.
    [96] КЕЭ, т. 8. с. 267.