Back to Bollyn's main page

Prosecution Influenced by ADL

Is Christopher Bollyn being 
prosecuted because of his writings?

How the Anti-Defamation League has
prejudiced the prosecution in the Bollyn trial

by Christopher Bollyn
22 May 2007

Members and front organizations must continually embarrass, discredit and degrade our critics.... 

When obstructionists become too irritating, label them as fascist or Nazi or anti-Semitic.... 

Constantly associate those who oppose us with those names that already have a bad smell. The association will, after enough repetition, become "fact" in the public mind.

-- Communist Party Directive of 1943 (1956 Report of the House Committee on Un-American Activities) 

The American police departments are foolishly allowing the ADL to train officers to accuse us of anti-Semitism. They are using our police as attack dogs to silence critics of Zionism. For more info:
HOFFMAN ESTATES, Illinois - Comments from attorneys working for the Cook County State's Attorney's office at the Rolling Meadows courthouse indicate that the Anti-Defamation League's (ADL) 5-year campaign of libel and defamation against me for my writings about 9/11 has prejudiced attorneys in the prosecutor's office. This raises extremely important First Amendment issues in my case.


I have been working as a journalist since June 2000 and during the past 7 years I have written about a broad range of subjects. During this time I have investigated many subjects that seemed to be murky and concealed. This personal endeavor began in 1994 when I realized that the truth about the sinking of the Baltic ferry Estonia, in which more than 850 innocent lives were lost, was being kept from the public.

Since 2000, I have investigated and written about other mass disasters, such as TWA 800 and 9/11, political assassinations, the dangers of depleted uranium, electronic voting machines, and other important subjects that are suppressed or ignored by the mainstream media.

My articles are in the public domain and many have been taken, translated, and published on websites around the world. My work is an open book. I have no control over how these articles are presented or in what context they appear. Such is the nature of the Internet.

Some of these websites are hostile and engage in disinformation campaigns to discredit or defame me.

For the record, there is only one website over which I have any control


I am saying this because as I prepare to go to trial to defend myself against two trumped-up misdemeanor charges on May 31, 2007, I have learned that the chief prosecutor of the state's attorney office has indicated that he holds my journalism against me, claiming that I am "anti-Israel" or anti-Semitic.

These allegations of "anti-Semitism" clearly originate with the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, a private Zionist (pro-Israel) organization that uses libel to defame critics of Israeli policies or actions. Since November 2001, the ADL, which is a foreign-interest group that advocates for Israel, has continuously sought to defame me for my research and writing about the events of 9/11.


Now I see that the ADL's campaign of libel and defamation has tainted and brought an unfair prejudice into the office of the prosecution that will be involved in my trial on May 31, 2007.

This is, of course, a very serious matter because it indicates that the ADL, which has vast and improper influence among law enforcement agencies across the nation, has created a racial or ethnic animus in the prosecutor's office against me simply because of my journalism. This raises obvious First Amendment concerns. The ADL's influence is noxious and extremely harmful to American liberties and constitutional freedoms.

In mid-April, shortly before my April 23 trial date, I was first told by a source close to the Cook County State's Attorney's office that I was to receive special treatment in my trial because of my writings, which are perceived by some in the prosecutor's office as "anti-Israel."

Although my charges are misdemeanor offenses of aggravated assault and resisting arrest, I was told that two Jewish prosecutors wanted to prosecute my case because of my writings as a journalist and reporter.

Is this fair? Is this just? Don't they teach the First Amendment in law school anymore?

Why would an assistant state's attorney even say such things? Is this an attempt to intimidate me and my defense counsel? Is it an announcement that the prosecution plans to retaliate against me for my journalism, a vocation which is protected by the First Amendment?

My attorney thought these threats and intimidation by the prosecution was meant as a joke but I find nothing funny about it at all. There is nothing to laugh at this is extremely serious and has to be challenged.

I was profoundly shocked and dismayed to hear this report because it indicated that there was malice against me among the prosecutors working for the Cook County State's Attorney's office in Rolling Meadows simply because of my work as a journalist.

It is obviously not from reading my articles that the attorneys have come to this opinion, because I have never written anything that could be called anti-Semitic. It is rather because they have been told or have read the ADL's smear sheets and libelous defamation that I am anti-Semitic.

The most recent ADL smear sheets came out on 7 September 2006, three weeks after I was brutally assaulted by three undercover police:


My trial, scheduled to begin on May 31 in the Rolling Meadows courthouse of the Cook County Circuit Court, is supposed to be about the facts of what happened when three unidentified armed men assaulted me at my house during the evening of August 15 not the lynching of an independent journalist.

Does freedom of speech and thought still exist in America? If I am being prosecuted because of my writing, why don't they charge me with a thought crime instead of disguising their malice behind fabricated charges of my having assaulted (and resisted arrest by) three heavily-armed men wearing body armor who were trespassing on my property last August 15?

A concerned citizen met Steven Rosenblum, the head prosecutor in the State's Attorney's office in Rolling Meadows about 10 days ago. The citizen was asking Rosenblum about the case when the prosecutor allegedly said words to this effect:

"I have interviewed witnesses and read Mr. Bollyn's articles on the Internet regarding [hesitation] ...he doesn't like Jewish people and...I am convinced that this prosecution is justified."

Why would a well-educated American prosecutor like Mr. Rosenblum say such a thing to a member of the public? When I heard this, I tried to reach Mr. Rosenblum to find out if the report was true and accurate, but he did not return my calls.

On Friday afternoon, May 18, as I left the courthouse, Mr. Rosenblum happened to walk right past me; I heard my name and I looked up. He had recognized me and said something about not being able to return my calls.

I knew he had little time and was obviously prejudiced against me so I said what I thought he needed to hear: "Mr. Rosenblum, you should know that I am not anti-Semitic," I said.

He said that had not been the subject of the conversation he had with the citizen.


First of all, for the record, I need to state that I am not anti-Semitic and have never written anything that could be in any way considered to be anti-Semitic. This is simply a vicious and libelous charge that has been leveled against me by people like Daniel Pipes and political organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and CNN. Because this slanderous allegation spreads like a California wildfire, many people may have the opinion that I am anti-Semitic without ever having ever read one of my articles. That is precisely how defamation works.

When faced with this charge, I usually counter by asking my detractors to show me where I have written anything that could be called anti-Semitic. They have never been able to produce anything to substantiate this allegation because it is a baseless charge. The purpose of my writing has never been to instigate anti-Semitism.

The background to my interest in the Middle East comes from the fact that I have visited Israel and the Palestinian territories many times since 1975 and that my interest in the region led me to obtain a History degree from the University of California at Santa Cruz with an emphasis on the tragic and contentious history between these two national groups.

Between 1975 and 1992, I traveled extensively in the area, from Tehran to Tunisia. In the 1970s I spent several summers on an Israeli kibbutz where I learned about Zionism from the Jewish immigrants who built the state of Israel. I traveled by bicycle and learned about the problems in the region directly from the people.

I later studied the history. As a journalist, I have written a great deal about Zionism, Israel, and Israeli subjects, but certainly nothing which could be construed as anti-Semitic.

During the first Intifadah or Palestinian uprising, I visited the occupied Gaza Strip with the Rt. Rev. Edmund Browning, the former Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church in the United States. Browning told me to tell people in the United States about the oppression and misery the people of Gaza suffered under.

After the first Gulf War in 1991, I visited the West Bank as a photo-journalist and documented the occupation that was clearly becoming more oppressive.

Years later, at a conference of Anglican bishops at the National Cathedral, I asked George Carey, the Archbishop of Canterbury, what the church was doing to alleviate the suffering of the Palestinians living under occupation.

While I am critical of militant Zionism and the damage it has done to the people on both sides of the conflict, this position should not be misinterpreted as anti-Semitic. One should be able to criticize the policies and actions of the state of Israel without being smeared with this vicious slander.

Unfortunately, today in America, that is not the case. American Free Press (AFP) of Washington, DC, a newspaper which I used to write for, has repeatedly been called "anti-Semitic" by the ADL since November 2001. Because these allegations were without basis and seriously damaging to the new newspaper's reputation, I encouraged AFP to sue the ADL for libel and defamation. A couple in Denver had won $10 million in a similar suit against the ADL and I thought it would be in the best interests of AFP to vigorously defend itself against such malicious and harmful libel, but they never did.

Although my current legal case involves an unjustified assault on a journalist and First Amendment issues, I don't expect any support from the mainstream media or the ACLU, which have shown absolutely no interest in my plight for the past 8 months.

Why are prosecutors working for the state's attorney's office, clearly influenced by the ADL, bringing my writings up in a case where they don't belong? Is this a form of intimidation or a signal of something much worse? I would certainly like to know why my First Amendment rights mean nothing to the attorney's working for the Cook County State's Attorney's office.

Bollyn's jury trial is scheduled to begin on May 31st. He needs to raise $1,500 to cover additional expenses to pay for the people who are helping to prepare his defense.

How you can help:

People who are concerned that Bollyn receive a fair trial may contact:

Cook County State's Attorney's Office

Richard A. Devine
Cook County State's Attorney
500 Richard J. Daley Center
Chicago, IL 60602
Tel: (312) 603-3423

Rolling Meadows Headed by Asst. State's Attorney Steven Rosenblum
Third Municipal District
2121 Euclid Avenue
Tel: (847) 818-2326

Public Interest
69 W. Washington,
Suite 700
Chicago, IL60602
Tel: (312) 603-8600


Christopher Bollyn and his family are MIA

My response is here

Note: I don't know what happens if you donate money or order books from Bollyn! He was providing his articles for free and depending on sales of his ABC book for children, and on donations. His charming ABC book is  here.

Please pass links to his articles, and try to find more people to join us in our struggle to expose corruption. Don't let "them" get all of us! Show some concern!