text:
|Strategy and Tactics Promoting White Rights through local organization.
|Thread Tools
|Search this Thread
|Display Modes
Offline -EOF
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,656
Re: So, what's wrong with the Jews?
Is It All An Accident?
by Kevin Alfred Strom
American Dissident Voices Program of 30th October, 1993
One of the very few phrases that passed the lips of Franklin Roosevelt that was not a lie was this: "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If something happens, you may be sure that someone planned it that way."
Possibly he let slip that phrase in an unguarded moment or while impaired by painkillers: we shall probably never know. Certainly his administration, if judged by the standard of causation he implied, would have had to answer to a great many things in those terrible years of 1933 to 1945. But what I am concerned with today on this program is far bigger than just a single president or a single administration. I am concerned about the future of America. I am concerned about the future of the little children who are the descendants of the valiant men and women who founded and built this country, and whose future looks increasingly dim as America becomes more and more like a Third World nation. I am concerned about our heritage of Liberty, which is being increasingly abandoned as our "leaders" move aggressively toward their goal of an all-powerful world government which they call the "New World Order."
The reason I quoted the late and unlamented FDR was to point out the absurdity of the view held by a majority of White Americans today, a view which is essentially the opposite of Roosevelt's, and which paralyzes our will to resist the changes which are being imposed upon our beloved country.
The view that political and social effects are, in the main, the direct result of plans carried into action by individuals and groups is the only logical view. So I will term this view the "Logical" theory of history. This Logical theory is sometimes disparagingly called the "conspiratorial" theory of history.
The opposite view, held by most of us, might be termed the "accidental" theory: The idea that political and social changes are primarily wrought, not by organized and motivated groups of men and women acting in concert, but rather by impersonal so-called "forces" which no man or woman has ever seen or ever will see; by pure happenstance; and by the errors of well-meaning leaders who purely by mistake - by accident - lead us into tragedy and evil.
Nearly every major city in the United States has undergone a horrifying transformation in the last few decades. Where once, women young and old went shopping alone and unafraid, where happy children frolicked in the shadows of great buildings and monuments to our culture, and where the glad and confident sons of the pioneers came to live and to commerce; now blows an evil wind that smells of AIDS and dirty needles, of minority gangs and drive-by shootings, of stinking porno clubs and pervert bathhouses, of a thousand dark and sullen faces staring at you with hate in their eyes from behind the barbed wire and the jagged outlines of what used to be our grand hotels, theatres, and shops. This evil wind blows continually outward, and the destruction spreads, as traditional Americans move to ever more remote suburbs. Those of us who are old enough to remember when America was still America will be forgiven if we shed a tear for our country which now exists only in our memories - and our hopes.
The "accidental" theory of history tells us that this tragic destruction was an unintended result of the policies of well-meaning idealists who really believed that integrated schools and liberal welfare handouts could turn the ghettoes into Everytown, U.S.A.; who really believed that opening the borders to unlimited Third World immigration would lead to harmony and peace and understanding. Well, it is certainly true that a lot of gullible airheads believed those things because they were fashionable things to believe. But those who are behind the push to remake America in a Third World, non-European mold cannot be called gullible airheads, nor can they be truly called "Liberal," although they assume that guise much of the time. They never believed that the Black underclass would be lifted up by their programs. They never believed that the millions of Third Worlders who have come here since the borders were opened in 1965 would really "become Americans" as they claimed. And although they tell us again and again through their controlled newspapers, magazines, and television programs, that "Diversity is good for America," they never believed that either.
What they do believe in is power. Power for themselves. Worldwide power. The concentration of power into a center so great that no nation could oppose them has been the unwavering goal of America's enemies for the last one hundred years.
The enemies of America do not have a warm concern for minorities or the "downtrodden," as they claim. They use humanitarianism and "brotherhood" as a front, they use all racial and ethnic groups as patsies in their game. It works like this:
Put yourself in the place of America's enemies. Assume your goal is world government, world control. What would be the biggest obstacle in your path? Would it be the existing governments of the various nations? Well, they might in some cases prove to be an obstacle, but governments, particularly ones run as mass democracies, are easily corrupted by your money and intimidated by the power of the controlled mass media. What would really throw a monkey wrench into your plans would not be a government as such - but a government under the control of patriots with a strong sense of nationhood. Such a government wouldn't let you buy into their mass media, nor would they allow you to come in and start buying property and influence with your money. They wouldn't want any part of your scheme. You would be obliged to oppose such governments, using more compliant nations as tools to subdue them. Thus we have the spectacle of UN and US military action against the fiercely independent and nationalist Arab states; and the shameful international sanctions against the equally independent Afrikaners in South Africa, who are now being forced to accept a Communist ANC dictatorship.
To reach your goal of world government, you would also have to work everywhere possible to undermine patriotism, nationalism, and racial pride - because when people are proud of their racial and cultural heritage, proud of their nation, and when they possess a strong sense of identity as a people, they will very likely be strong opponents of your plan. And what better way to undermine national and racial identity than to engage in a massive program of population transfer? Those of widely differing culture and race should be encouraged or compelled to come here. Bring them by the millions. Don't ever give the people a chance to vote on your population transfer - they might vote against it. Make it illegal to resist the population transfer - call such resistance "discrimination." Create the impression in people's minds that those who want to preserve the traditional makeup of their nation are evil "racists." Make it illegal to even express opposition to your population transfers, calling such expressions of opposition "hate crimes." In a few generations, all the differing peoples and nations will have forgotten their heritage and their traditional ways. They won't even think of themselves as a people anymore - they will have utterly lost their sense of national and racial identity - they will just be a mass of disconnected and powerless individuals. Without the natural cohesion that comes from being of similar genetic and cultural background, they will no longer be able to offer any resistance to your world government plans.
The enemy that America faces today is not some malevolent foreign nation ready to strike at our cities with missiles and bombs. Our enemy is an enemy already within our gates, who has been and is now working steadily to change our nation into a province of a one-world government. I know that what I am telling you runs counter to everything that you have been taught in school, to everything you have read in the newspapers or seen on television. If you are skeptical (and I don't blame you for being skeptical) I ask you to do this: For the next month, indulge me, and pay close attention to every news article in your newspaper and every news item on television, bearing my world-government hypothesis always in mind. Notice the code words which are constantly being used, such as "international cooperation," "community of nations," "multinational forces," "global economy," etc. All of these concepts, and the actions taken in their names, tend in the same direction: the weakening of our national sovereignty and freedom and an increase in the power of faceless international entities like the United Nations. Notice Clinton's plan to put our military under the command of the UN. Notice the operation in Somalia, where the excuse of "humanitarian aid" has worn rather thin, and the real goal of installing a government more to the liking of the internationalists is becoming increasingly obvious. Ladies and gentlemen, what do you call it when foreign troops come into a country without the permission of the people in that country? It's a three syllable word and it starts with "i." Notice how the United States never makes a military move without the approval of the UN; and notice how American forces are never used where American interests demand their use, such as in the closure of our southern border to illegal immigration - no, our boys have to die to enforce the dictates and power of the internationalists around the world, while the controlled media dance like dervishes in an effort to convince us that it's our patriotic duty to send our sons to die in the jungle or the sand. Korea, Vietnam, Libya, Panama, Iraq, Somalia - the story is tragically familiar. Since World War II the United States has not declared war, because our current rulers do not believe that we have the right to declare war on an independent basis. We have the high privilege of being policemen for the New World Order, but that's all.
So study the news with my theory in mind, then write me and tell me what you think.
And to those of you who still believe that this program of national suicide has been imposed upon us by chance or by mistake, you have my sincere sympathy and I wish you good luck. You'll need it. The future of America belongs to those with awareness of what is happening, and the will to do something about it.
One of the main ways that America's enemies and those who serve them have gained support is by buying our votes and our acquiescence with our own money. They promise us economic security without effort, they promise us universal health care, they promise us "world peace," they promise us anything - and then follow through by paying us back or buying a service with a little bit of the money they've already taxed away from us, after deducting a substantial commission for themselves. As one of Franklin Roosevelt's lieutenants once admitted, their formula for gaining and increasing their power is "tax and tax, spend and spend, elect and elect...." Their now empirically validated theory is that a nation of dependents is unlikely to bite the hand that feeds it. As the great patriotic writer and researcher Garet Garett put it his book Ex America:
"By a long lure of planned grass a society of bison may be decoyed to captivity in the Valley of Security. In moments of uneasiness its bulls may be soothed by the voices of the herders saying: 'You are free at any time to back to the plains. Remember the grass there? It was poor and many of you were hungry.' [But] there is no going back because, first, these gentle herders are rough with the few who try to start a stampede, and secondly, tame grass is sweet poison. From the eating of the way of life on the plains is soon forgotten. To many whose stomachs were never so full before, even the memory of it is harrowing. If one asks, 'But will the herders always be good to us?' another answers, 'Nature was sometimes cruel.'"
What these schemers who are trying to ruin our country and take it away from us haven't figured on is that there are still millions of independent-minded Americans who aren't fooled by the lies of the corrupt politicians and the controlled media. There are still millions of decent Americans who don't like the direction in which America has been going, but who are searching for the facts as to just how their birthright has been stolen, and by whom. There are still millions of patriotic Americans who will rally to the cause when they are presented with the truth. If I didn't believe that, I certainly wouldn't be taking the risk and spending the time and money to speak to you over the radio right now. You know, if all we had was the controlled media as a source of facts, we'd all have the impression that the American people are asleep, and that there is really no significant opposition to the New World Order conspirators except for a few irresponsible cranks. But we know better. If you could see the stacks of mail that cross my desk, with letters from all across North America and beyond, letters from men and women of all walks of life, letters thanking us for standing up for our nation and civilization, letters comparing this broadcast to Radio Free Europe during the days of the Iron Curtain, letters from young people reaching out to us to discover the truth about the great heritage of American and Western Civilization, knowledge of which it is now Politically Incorrect to teach in the public schools. If you could see the mailbags leaving our shipping desk, stuffed full of books and tapes and videos, going out around the nation and the world with our message of hope to our people, if you could experience the happy feeling of getting so many orders and information requests that you have to stay up all night trying to get them taken care of - then you would know what we know here. You would know that the Real America is not yet dead. You would know that once our message is heard by our people that millions upon millions of them will join hands with us to save their nation, for they will know in their hearts that we are right.
This is Kevin Alfred Strom reminding you that we are able to come to you every week at this time and station only because of your voluntary support. Please join your fellow patriots in keeping American Dissident Voices on the air, and keep on thinking free.
Last edited by Dave Cooper; 02-08-2006 at 05:52 PM.
Offline -EOF
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,656
Re: So, what's wrong with the Jews?
Lessons From Nature:
The "Liberal Social Scientist" Returns
By Kevin Alfred Strom
American Dissident Voices Broadcast for the 11th September, 1993
Now I'm sure all of you who were listening to our program entitled "Liberalism vs. Nationalism" a few weeks ago remember our old "friend" the "Liberal Social Scientist." He's the guy who tried to convince you to jump into a swimming pool filled with piranhas because to characterize piranhas as vicious and bloodthirsty was a wicked stereotype. Well, he's back and he's got another scheme for us.
Now it seems Mr. Social Scientist has become a bird lover. He's still smarting from the last time you kicked him downstairs, but just to show you that there's no hard feelings, he has decided to invite you to a meeting of an organization he's working with called the "Bird Benevolent Society." Since you've always been a bird watcher and animal lover, and since you foolishly believe that the Liberal Social Scientist has learned a lesson, you agree that you'll go.
On the appointed day you show up at the meeting hall, and find several hundred other people, some drawn from the dregs of society by their appearance, but also along with a strong contingent of the empty-headed wealthy, whom you've seen at various charitable and "world-improving" functions in town. There's the usual collection of "homeless advocates," pervert agitators, "Feed the Africans" charity types, and a motley collection of minority activists and "Rainbow Coalition" idiots.
All the conversations in the room stop when our learned humanitarian friend, the Liberal Social Scientist, strides past his international banker and tax-exempt foundation friends up to the podium to address the group.
He clears his throat and begins speaking:
"Welcome dear friends and friends of progress," he says, "to this meeting of the Bird Benevolent Society. I know that we are all united in our love for our feathered friends, the birds, and I know that we all yearn to bring them into the coming new millennium of progress and unity and global cooperation and peace. But the birds of this world are being held back by politically incorrect ideas and outmoded traditions that border on fascism. It will be the mission of the Bird Benevolent Society to enlighten the birds and help them to change their ways, assisted by you people of goodwill, and of course by government grants of taxpayer money and the behind-the-scenes help of my banker and foundation friends here beside me on the dais.
"We look at the world of the birds with dismay and sadness. Everywhere we find disunity, strife, misunderstanding, and conflict. We see the sparrows off in one corner among themselves, eating seeds and singing their songs; while off in another far corner are the eagles, fishing in the sea and singing an altogether different song. Every species and variety of bird seems to have its own place, its own territory, and this leads to conflict among birds. Every species of bird has its own habits and behavior and language and this leads to misunderstanding among our feathered friends. It leads to further and further separation and isolation among the different types of birds and we all must of course agree that this simply won't do in this modern age of global unity, peace, and understanding. I call all this separation and misunderstanding "bird racism."
"We must conquer these problems. What we will do is this: We will gather all the birds of the world together, and teach them a new way of living, all for their own good, of course. The eagle will nest with the sparrow, the chicken with the crows, and the cardinal with the chickadee. By close association, they will eventually come to love each other, aided by our extensive program of re-education which will replace the old bird-racist ways taught to the young birds by their parents. After a few generations of enforced togetherness, the birds will forget their evil old ways and will never know that they were separate species once upon a time. We will call this bird-paradise the "United Birds."
"And then, my friends," and here our Liberal Social Scientist's eyes begin to gleam, "we will begin the final phase of our plan, which is really the ultimate solution to all the problems of the birds. We will teach the birds that it is virtuous and desirable for them to choose mates who are not of their own species. Black birds will mate with white birds, and red with yellow, and so forth. Our educational programs will teach them that it is the worst kind of wickedness and evil to oppose this. Of course, we know that this goes against the instincts of the birds, and so we might have some trouble with it. But within the structure of the United Birds, we will have complete control over all education and information received by the birds. Even their recreational activities will be under our guidance. So we are confident that, in time, our efforts to encourage cross-species mating will be successful, and there will be a new kind of bird in the world - one kind of bird - a one-world bird - a true citizen of the United Birds, with its mind and behavior molded by our scientific guidance, totally free of the old ways of separation and conflict."
A huge wave of applause fills the meeting hall, and the wealthy members of the audience begin to pull out their checkbooks to make donations to the Bird Benevolent Society. But you've sat there politely listening to this nonsense long enough. You leap up onto the dais, grab the microphone, and begin speaking:
"You people are crazy to give money to this outfit! Bird Benevolent Society, indeed! This organization must be run by people who hate birds, not love them! Different species' different habits and ways are the result of thousands and thousands of years of natural selection. Each is particularly suited to its environment, both in its physical appearance and in its mental makeup and behavior. That's what makes a blue jay not only look different from a cardinal, but act different, too. The difference in external appearance is just a sign of the inner difference in genetic makeup, which determines how they act, what they eat, how they choose a mate and build a nest, raise their young and every other thing they do. If you force them to live together and to give up their different modes of living, you'll just end up causing conflict, violence, confusion and misery for them instead of the paradise you're promising! Their natural, inborn differences are what make our feathered friends what they are! Can't you see that? Can't you see that you'll be destroying all that by making them all mix together, that you'll literally be killing them? How dare you try to tear down all that nature has taken millennia to build up! How dare you claim you are doing this for the good of the birds! How dare you call yourselves bird lovers! And let me ask you this question, what the hell good does it do for you to set up this United Birds nonsense? Why can't you just leave the birds alone to live as they always have, just as nature intended?"
At this point, your old friend the Liberal Social Scientist motions to a couple of burly men in dark uniforms, who proceed to remove you from the stage and into a back room, where you are roughed up enough to keep you quiet for a while. Then the Liberal Social Scientist enters the room and gives you a little lecture:
"My friend, my friend, you have so much to learn and to unlearn here in the New World Order. I can't have you doing foolish things and wrecking our well-laid plans. But you have drive and energy that we may be able to use someday, once you learn the rules. So I will be happy to explain what we are doing in, ah, a bit more detail. Have you caught your breath enough to ask me some questions?"
"Ah, well, I see you're in no condition to speak at the moment. Here's my handkerchief, wipe that horrid blood away. I hope you've learned your lesson and your place. I think I can anticipate your questions anyway.
"Look out that window on your left, and you'll see our construction crews putting the finishing touches on our latest building project. You see they're not working in wood or brick. Because they're not building a headquarters for the Bird Benevolent Society. No indeed, they're working in wire mesh, building a great dome, just one of many great wire mesh domes we are building, within which will be the United Birds itself. We've found that the poor birds don't know what's good for them, and are constantly trying to find a way to fly away from us, so we're building these new homes for them, where our great social experiment can take place. Oh, it's true, some have called them cages, but we prefer to call them planned housing projects. And of course, there are many birds outside the domes still living in the old ways, but soon we will have enough of the United Birds in our peace-keeping forces trained to attack their fellows who refuse to submit to our beneficent rule, and I can confidently predict that within a few years the United Birds will encompass all birds and there will simply be no place to fly to that isn't already under our central administration. Then we can go on to the final stage of our glorious plan.
"Oh, and I almost forgot your final impertinent question. You wanted to know what we got out of it, what our personal motivation was for this plan for social change among the birds. I seem to recall you even questioned our right to call ourselves "bird lovers." Well we are bird lovers of a kind. We want a world of peaceful birds, just as we said. Peaceful and docile. We want a world of well-educated birds, just as we promise. Educated by us to do what we want them to do. We want a world of birds which has forgotten their own separate and traditional ways, since those old ways might get in the way of our plans and might form the basis of loyalty and cohesion among some birds. We don't want that. We want their loyalty to be only to us, only to the United Birds."
And at this point he turns to face you directly, with his hooked nose only an inch in front of yours, and he concludes his little lecture "Then it will be much easier for us to practice our love of birds. We did it all for the love of birds!" And as he leers menacingly into your face you can detect the smell of raw flesh on his breath, and you can see on his throbbing lower lip a thick drop of blood in which is suspended a tiny white feather.
These "Bird Lovers" Say They Love You, Too
I have little to add to this fable of the Liberal Social Scientist and the Bird Benevolent Society, except to say that the same kind of people who claim here to be bird lovers also say they're just overflowing with love for you, too.
And if you can't see through their nonsense about "world government" and "world law" and "peace-keeping forces" and "racial diversity" and the "democratic community of nations" and all the rest of it, then you and your family are nothing but food on the tables of your rulers, and you will deserve exactly what you get.
Until our visit again next week at this same time and station, this is Kevin Alfred Strom saying do right and fear no one.
Offline -EOF
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,656
Re: So, what's wrong with the Jews?
The State of the Race
Radical change and new leadership are needed
if White families intend to survive the dark times just ahead.
American Dissident Voices broadcast
for the week of August 14 - August 20, 2005
listen to the broadcast (mp3)
download the broadcast (mp3)
real audio download
Whites can do many things now to ensure the survival of White communities, White values, and White genes in the centuries ahead. But we'd better get our act together soon.
by Kevin Alfred Strom (pictured)
ALL OVER AMERICA, newspapers, magazines, and broadcast networks are saying that American Dissident Voices was right. They're saying that William Pierce and National Vanguard were right. No, they're not coming out and mentioning us by name -- though they should.
What they are doing is acknowledging the rapidly-declining state of the White race in America. They're crowing about the new non-White majorities in Texas and five other states. They're delighted to tell us that Whites will be an aging and shrinking minority in America by 2050. These are exactly the things that William Pierce, Revilo Oliver, and National Vanguard have been warning us about for years.
The Jews and other multiracialists scrapped our old immigration laws in 1965 -- which favored White people -- and replaced them with a series of increasingly disastrous mockeries of law that 1) opened the floodgates to the Third World invasion and 2) repeatedly gave amnesty to millions of criminal invaders from Mexico, rewarding them and rewarding their equally-criminal employers while punishing and impoverishing White Americans who lost jobs and saw social services deteriorate or evaporate as the Brown tide advanced across our land. (And now Bush wants another huge amnesty, effectively declaring that the invasion has succeeded and will go unpunished.)
When they opened those floodgates, we were repeatedly promised by the Jewish media and the bought politicians that there would be no significant demographic change in America. This was in 1965, when America was over 90 per cent. White! Now that they've wrought their genocidal work to the point they believe it's irreversible, they're shamelessly admitting that they were liars and that the racialists were right -- though they never give credit where credit is due.
In once-proud Texas, the state of the Alamo, and the state that joined the Union as a free and independent White republic, non-Whites now account for more than half the population, according to a statement issued by the Census Bureau last Thursday. The same situation exists in Hawaii, California, and the District of Columbia. The Bureau tells us that five other states are now poised to cross that line as well: "Maryland, Mississippi, Georgia, New York and Arizona are next in line with minority populations of about 40 percent."
But let me tell you something. Those states and others may have crossed that line already. If you look at the Census Bureau's own figures, you'll see that the racial categories include "non-Hispanic Whites," "Hispanics," Blacks, Asians, Amerindians, and Pacific Islanders. That's it. Guess what that means. It means that Jews are counted as White, including the millions upon millions of them in places like California, Florida, and New York. It means that Muslims, practically all of them non-White Arabs and the other North Africans, central Asians, and Middle Easterners -- including the burgeoning millions in Illinois and Michigan -- who now make up an even larger and far more fecund minority than do Jews, are also counted as White in the Census Bureau's statistics.
[ http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/...on/005514.html ]
Furthermore, the Census Bureau accepts self-identification for those who are counted as White, which means that not only the non-White Muslims, but a large number of mixed-race Mestizos, also get counted as White. An article in the China Daily quotes a former Census Bureau director, Martha Riche, as admitting that most 'Hispanics' in the US, misidentify themselves as White when asked on forms or by census-takers:
"Prior census data show that most Hispanics choose white as their race. Riche said that could be a sign that future generations of U.S.-born Latinos would select white... rather than Hispanic as their background as they move further from the generation that first immigrated to the United States." Do these misidentifications get factored into the 2050 prediction and the current data? Riche doesn't say.
[ http://tinyurl.com/78xel ]
Another factor which leads me to believe that Whites are really a smaller percentage of the population than the Census Bureau admits is that Blacks are undercounted -- a fact which the Blacks themselves are eager to point out, claiming that they should get even more benefits and taxpayer money, since there are so many more of them than cannot be counted. There are many Blacks with no fixed residence, and so many Blacks are unwilling to be counted because they fear any interaction with the authorities, being wanted or involved in illegal activities which, they fear, may lead to arrest if they provide any information to census-takers.
The same situation exists in an even more acute form for the Mestizo invaders, most of whom are here blatantly illegally and who therefore would doubtlessly be severely undercounted by any practical method, but whose in-your-face presence is increasingly obvious. In many parts of the U.S., even rural areas -- where only a decade ago Whites were overwhelmingly the majority -- Mestizos now make up a huge percentage of the population and totally dominate the schools and maternity wards. All you aging baby boomers, particularly you childless ones, go there and see for yourself!
[ http://www.facts.com/2001213270.htm ]
So when the Census Bureau states that "Non-Hispanic whites now make up two-thirds of the nation's total population... but that proportion will dip to one-half by 2050," I believe that the current two-thirds figure must be reduced by more than 10 per cent. of the total and that the time horizon before Whites are swamped into minority status is on the order of ten or fifteen years, not 45. That means that millions more White men, women, and children -- especially working and middle class Whites who cannot afford to secure themselves in gated communities -- will be living in Third World conditions in just the next few years.
According to Steven H. Murdock, the state demographer of Texas, "...The white population is growing very slowly, while other racial and ethnic groups are growing quite rapidly. ...In some sense, Texas is a preview of what the nation will become in the long run. Our future in Texas is increasingly tied to our minority populations." Interestingly, he admitted that "If their education and skills continue to lag, we will be less competitive in the global economy." I've got news for Mr. Murdock: Not only are they going to continue to lag, but as incompetent Affirmative Action employees and bizarre Reconquista and Afrocentrist types rise in the educational establishment alongside the already-entrenched multiracialists and Jewish supremacists, the education level of Texas and the rest of post-American America is going to decline to banana republic levels (and the safety of our children is going to plummet to the level of Mexico City or Port-au-Prince, a crime for which no punishment is too severe).
Mr. Murdock stated that immigration -- mostly illegal, though he didn't say so -- accounted for half of the recent increase in Texas's non-White population, while half was due to high non-White birth rates: "Hispanic women, who are having children at a rate of 3 per woman, had a significantly higher fertility rate than blacks, with an average of 2.3, and non-Hispanic whites, with an average of 1.9."
Murdock also admitted this was not just happening in urban areas -- he said that so-called Hispanics account for "much of the population growth in rural counties."
The Census report tells us that: "In the four-year interval from the last census, in April 2000, to July 2004... the total population of the United States grew 4.3 percent, to 293.7 million, and the black population increased by 5.7 percent, to 39.2 million. But, it said, the Asian population increased 16.2 percent, to 14 million, and the Hispanic population rose 17 percent, to 41.3 million.... In the same four-year period, the bureau said, the non-Hispanic white population grew 1.1 percent, to 197.8 million." I think I've shown you sufficient reason to believe that the supposed 1.1 per cent. growth for Whites is really fictitious and that the true figure for Whites is a loss. And even using their skewed figures, Census Bureau forecasters call for a loss in the number of White people in the near future. That means that the White birth rate of 1.9 children per White woman -- already admittedly below replacement levels -- is really lower, too.
What does all this mean for our lives and our children's lives?
Cecilia Muñoz, a vice president of a Mestizo racial advocacy group called the National Council of La Raza, which literally means "The National Council of the Race" warned us fairly bluntly when she said that "the political strength of Latinos takes a while to catch up with our demographic strength, in part because one-third of the Latino population is under the age of 18 and many Hispanics are not citizens." What this means is that soon the "political strength of Latinos" (and other invaders) will catch up to their demographic strength. We will be living under the political rule of people for whom representative government has always been a joke and corruption and brutality are the order of the day. Eventually, anti-White thugs with vengeance on their minds will totally control the military, courts, and police, and will have their greasy thumbs on the nuclear button.
The exact outcome is hard to predict, as is the degree to which the Jewish supremacists will still be able to exercise their power in such a scenario, since chaos and inability to enforce the ever-multiplying laws will increasingly become a factor.
But the Jewish supremacists -- who set the process of the Browning of America in motion several decades ago -- will have achieved some of their goals. Many millions of Whites will have been aborted or never conceived, thousands will perish in the 90-day War for Israel that may become a 90-year war, and millions of White families will be impoverished as their jobs and their birthright are taken from them by globalism and multiracialism. Huge numbers of White men and women and children will be victimized and marginalized as the country goes Brown and anti-White discrimination openly becomes the norm.
And, perhaps most significantly of all, representative government will be taken away from us. One Jewish supremacist candidly admitted that this is one of their goals. Professor Earl Raab of Brandeis University's Institute for Jewish Advocacy gleefully stated:
"The Census Bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American citizens. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan [read: pro-White] party will be able to prevail in this country. We [meaning his fellow Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to ethnic bigotry for about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible...."
In plain language, Professor Raab is boasting that he and his fellow Jews have changed the immigration laws -- and prevented the government from enforcing what immigration laws we still have -- in order to make the American population more heterogeneous, or, to use the more familiar term, more diverse. (What they don't tell you, of course, is that massive racial and ethnic mixing within nations will actually destroy races and reduce human biodiversity, about which the Jewish supremacists care not at all.) When Raab says that a "Nazi-Aryan party" can never prevail, what he means is that a party that represents the interests of White people can never be elected in the new America that he and his fellow Jews have been creating.
Their goal is to make Whites a minority in their own country so that the Whites can never combine against the Jews and regain control of their own destiny. You can read more of Professor Raab's sinister scheming in a book called Alien Nation, by Peter Brimelow.
Professor Raab and his fellow Jewish supremacists aim not only at eliminating the White majority in the country as a whole, but also at polluting and corrupting every White area inside the country, so there will be no one capable of organizing any electoral opposition to multiracialism. If Whites are half or less of the population, even if you convince all the Whites to support a pro-White party, it still cannot be elected into power. Checkmate -- or so they think.
The time for Whites to organize is now. Today, not tomorrow. We need to build structures of information dissemination, business and employment, economic power, lobbying and political influence, and self-defense now. Not next week. In some areas where we still have a huge majority, a political party can be part of that organizing. Even if we can't get a candidate elected right now, our campaigns will do a lot to secure our right to get our issues before our people and build name recognition for our organization. National Vanguard members are doing that right now with the White People's Party in Nevada.
[ http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=5517 ]
We need to grow the racially conscious White community. We need to organize that community. We need to get rich, self-sustaining, and influential. Even as a minority, with our abilities as a people this is an attainable goal. We need to grow National Vanguard from the thousands of members and supporters level to the hundreds of thousands of members and supporters level -- before tyranny and chaos reach unstoppable levels.
We also need to turn things around for our race before Asia asserts herself. This is something I've spoken to you about before about on this program, but it is a looming problem and it bears repeating. Asia, particularly China, is bursting at the seams with human beings not of our race. Already they are overflowing onto the Pacific coast of North America, from California to Canada in a quiet but accelerating invasion -- so much so that the city of Vancouver is now routinely referred to as Hongcouver. And as Russia is economically prostrated by its Jewish oligarchs and pushed around by U.S.-based neocons and Jewish supremacists -- the eastern territories of Russia are being infiltrated by Asians, threatening a serious blow to White geopolitical power and yet another serious reduction in White living space. (And, as we all know, the rest of Europe suffers from an invasion of Middle Easterners and South Asians.)
Asian writer Henry Liu (a pen name) put it well, if a bit theatrically, when he said:
Sobering thoughts for Whites who think in terms of centuries instead of weekly paychecks or quarterly profit statements. And Asians -- thanks to our Jewish- and capitalist-engineered "free trade" policies -- now hold huge quantities of U.S. dollars and debt instruments. This means that not only do they have the biomass to swamp us, but they also have the little green slips of paper that we foolishly accept as money these days to buy whatever they want as they march across our continent -- including our businesses, our land itself, and our politicians who can only be distinguished from prostitutes by the fact that prostitutes don't wear three-piece suits. (And prostitutes have a higher morality -- most of them wouldn't think of sending young people to die in the desert, for example.)
I hope that my speech on the State of the Race today has helped you see the world the way it really is. I hope it has inspired you to act. We must work every day of our lives to help our fellow Whites see the world in racial terms -- and organize so we can survive and prosper in the hard times ahead. Please join -- or, if you cannot join, financially support -- National Vanguard to the very best of your ability. Together we will build a better world for our people.
* * *
Join National Vanguard today. For further information on National Vanguard, write to Post Office Box 5145, Charlottesville VA 22905, or visit http://www.nationalvanguard.org/ and click on the "join" link at the top of the page. We appreciate your support.
Until next week, this is Kevin Alfred Strom reminding you to keep on thinking free.
Source: National Vanguard Printed from National Vanguard
( http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=5653 )
National Vanguard Box 5145 Charlottesville VA 22905 USA
Last edited by Dave Cooper; 02-01-2006 at 12:02 AM.
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,368
Re: So, what's wrong with the Jews?
Jewish Hypocrisy in Israel. Racism against the "Lemba" (black Jews)
VIDEOS about the Jews
Ducks and Hens
Understanding Anti-Semitism: Why Do Some People Dislike Jews?
[HMT link]
Jews and the Iraq War
[NV link]
[FS88 link]
What Famous Men Said About the Jews
[NV link]
[SG link]
Judea Declares War: A Critical Look at WWII
[SG link]
[HMT link]
Rep. Paul Findley Dares to Speak Out: A 22-Year Veteran Congressman Exposes Israel's Lobby
[HMT link]
Zionist War Crimes: The Case for Prosecution
[HMT link]
[SG link]
Offline -EOF
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,656
By Dr. William PierceAmerican Dissident Voices Broadcast of May 27, 2000
A number of noteworthy things have happened during the past few days. For example, the situation on our southern border, on which I commented last week, has continued to worsen. The Clinton government continues to regard the problem there as a rancher problem rather than as an invasion by illegal immigrants.
Privately the Clintonistas are irritated that White ranchers in Arizona have been interfering with the invasion, and that one of them, Roger Barnett, who owns a 22,000-acre cattle ranch near Douglas, Arizona, on the Mexican border, has arrested more than 3,000 illegal immigrants during the past two years and called attention to the government's willful failure to protect the border. The Clintonistas -- and by that term I mean all of those people, both inside the government and out, whose policies are supported by Bill Clinton and his government and who in turn approve of the government -- the Clintonistas want the invasion to continue, and they don't want anyone interfering with it. They also don't want anyone calling attention to it, because that might rouse public opposition to the invasion. The American public, or at least a substantial portion of the public might not believe the Clinton government's assertion that it is doing everything it can to protect our borders, but somehow just can't keep the mestizos from invading the United States. They've been hoping for the past two years that either Roger Barnett would be killed by some of the mestizos he was arresting or would kill a mestizo and could then be charged with murder and gotten out of the way. But Mr. Barnett is both a competent and a careful man, and he continues to be a thorn in the side of the Clintonistas.
So the Clintonistas now have taken the public position that they are concerned about "human rights" violations by vigilantes such as Barnett. They want to shift the public's perception from mass invasion to individual Mexicans who are being harassed by Barnett and other ranchers. That's just the sort of thing to distract the soccer moms and others who were captivated by the Elian Gonzales soap opera. In the hands of the Clintonista spin doctors the mestizo invasion has become a "human rights" problem. Bill Clinton's Jewish Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, met with Mexico's Foreign Minister Rosario Green -- oy, veh!, did I say Green? That doesn't sound like a Mexican name, does it? Madeleine Albright met with Rosario Green last week to plan a joint strategy against the vigilantes who are arresting the illegal aliens. They issued a joint statement on May 18 condemning the American ranchers. They are considering asking the United Nations to post UN observers along the border to watch for "human rights" violations. In addition Rosario Green announced that she has hired lawyers in Washington to sue the ranchers on behalf of the illegal aliens. -- quote -- "The government of Mexico will use all of the legal and political resources at its disposal to guarantee that any violation of the rights and dignity of Mexicans is investigated and, if applicable, penalized," Green said. And Attorney General Janet Reno -- that's our attorney general, not Mexico's -- Janet Reno has pledged to help in gathering evidence to prosecute the ranchers.
You have to pinch yourself to be sure you're not dreaming when Alice in Wonderland statements of this sort come from Washington and are reported with a straight face by the media. The unfortunate fact is that Albright and Reno are officials of our government, and they are conspiring with an official of a foreign government to prosecute U.S. citizens for protecting their property against the depredations of foreign criminals. And Mexicans who cross our border illegally are criminals, plain and simple, despite the preference of the media and the Clinton government for the euphemism "undocumented migrants." So we have these female Clinton gangsters getting together in Washington with the female foreign minister of Mexico not to address the problem of mestizos from Mexico invading our country and trespassing on the property of U.S. citizens, but instead to figure out what to do about American ranchers violating the supposed "human rights" and "dignity" of illegal aliens. Albright and Reno and the other Clintonistas aren't concerned in the least about American sovereignty or the rights of U.S. citizens; that's too much a male thing. They're concerned only about keeping the flow of illegals coming and not hurting their feelings by making them feel unwelcome. As crazy as it sounds, that is what is happening. And soon we may have a United Nations "peackeeping" force on the border to shoot any American who tries to stop a mestizo from exercising his "human rights" by coming across the border.
Well, that's pretty bad, but I'll tell you something that's even worse, and that is the substantial element among ordinary citizens who don't see anything wrong with the invasion or with the government's way of dealing with it. Last week a patriotic Arizona resident who is fed up with the Clinton government's refusal to stop the flood of illegal immigrants put up a billboard in Cochise county, where Roger Barnett lives. He urged other residents to telephone their congressmen and complain about the invasion. The state's biggest newspaper, the Arizona Republic, immediately published a statement by a trendy businessman in Bisbee, also in Cochise county, condemning the billboard as divisive and racist. There seems to be a big enough supply of such businessmen and preachers and bureaucrats around so that the media always can find one to make a statement of the sort they want.
Two weeks ago two illegal mestizos came up to the of home an American who lives in Brackettville, Texas, near the Mexican border. The area has been plagued by illegals breaking into homes, stealing everything not nailed down, and assaulting residents. The American homeowner, 74-year-old Samuel Blackwood, shot one of the illegals, who died. Blackwood was arrested and charged with murder. And I assure you, the local businessmen, politicians, preachers, and media people will see to it that he gets a judicial lynching, so that no one can suspect that they are racists. They'll behave just the way the establishment people in Jasper, Texas, did after three drunken rednecks dragged a Black behind their truck two years ago. A local judge, Herb Senne, commented on what he considered Blackwood's overreaction to the two illegals who came to his house, and I quote: "Nobody likes to have their property stolen, but you just learn to adjust to it." -- end quote -- Really, that's an exact quote of what the judge said last week to a reporter for the Houston Chronicle: "You just learn to adjust to it." Don't try to defend yourself or your property. That's racist. That's male. Just adjust to having your property stolen. Just adjust to the trespassing. Just adjust to the invasion of your country by illegal mestizos. That's the safe, feminine thing to do. That's the Politically Correct thing to do.
That's the sort of reaction you might expect in New York City or in Washington, DC. But television has spread the sickness everywhere. There are people who dance to the media tune even in those areas most heavily impacted by the invasion. And that's what I really want to talk about today: not about the invasion of our country by mestizos, but about the reaction of our people to the invasion -- and to many other things which are being done to us. The question is: do we blame the Clinton government for the disaster which has befallen our country, or do we blame ourselves? After all, we elected this government -- twice. Even if we didn't vote for the piece of filth in the White House, we did nothing to stop him from what he is doing.
You know, the great bulk of our people always have lacked both judgment and principles. Most Americans have about as much moral sense as a brass doorknob. And I'm talking about your neighbors and colleagues and friends and relatives -- and mine. They have an instinct for conforming; for doing and saying what they think is expected of them; for adapting -- or as Judge Herb Senne of Brackettville, Texas, would put it -- for adjusting. And as I said, that's the way it's always been. We've always depended on a rather small minority to decide what is right and what is wrong, what is honorable and what is not, as well as what will benefit our race in the long run and what will not. When we had wise and good and honorable men as leaders, and when we followed their lead, our people prospered. If 225 years ago we'd had the sort of leaders we have today, Patrick Henry and Thomas Paine would have been locked up and forced to undergo sensitivity training, and we would have adjusted to King George's way of doing things. Well, on the bright side, at least, Bill Clinton wouldn't be in the White House, because there would be no White House.
So again: should we blame ourselves for being nothing but a worthless herd of lemmings, a herd which for the last few generations has failed to produce even a small minority of loyal and responsible leaders to show us the way? Or if the leaders were there and are there, should we blame ourselves for failing to heed them? Or should we look elsewhere for the cause of our disaster?
In trying to answer this very important question, let us note first that self-criticism often is a very beneficial thing. Only by recognizing our mistakes and shortcomings and studying them, analyzing them, can we hope for progress. The person who is unable to criticize himself or recognize his own faults -- the person who cannot blame himself for anything, but always blames others for his mistakes or failures -- will never be ale to improve himself, because he cannot even admit the need for improvement. He always will be a loser and a failure. But above all, we must be objective in analyzing our problems. We must not be afraid to put the blame where it belongs because of some artificial taboo. Perhaps we are entirely to blame for our difficulties. On the other hand, perhaps someone else should share the blame for what has happened to us. If that is the case, let us not be afraid to say so. Our objective is to survive, and we must go wherever that objective leads us.
Having said that, I also should tell you that I believe that there is little to be gained by lambasting ourselves for being a herd of lemmings. There is little to be gained by bewailing human nature. We can change human nature only very slowly -- and with great caution -- over the course of generations. For now we must accept what we are and try to make the best of it. And if we think about the matter very carefully perhaps we will decide even that Mother Nature didn't really make a mistake in designing us as a race 98 per cent of whom are lemmings. That has its advantages as well as its dangers. It allows us to work together for a common purpose, for example, instead of having everyone running off in a separate direction.
So let's ask our question this way: Why have we not had good leadership during this century? Why have we followed crooks and liars with no regard for the welfare of our people, crooks and liars and charlatans who have led us into every sort of vice and degeneracy and false path and now are rushing us headlong down the slope to racial extinction? Why? What went wrong? Did natural flaws develop in our society, in the system by which we have governed ourselves, or has some external enemy laid us low? Is our society suffering from faulty design or from termites?
A quick answer is: both. Our society has design flaws which we must endeavor to correct, and it also has termites, which we must exterminate. To understand this answer and to elaborate on it, just look around. Look at other things which are happening to us besides the mestizo invasion and the government's refusal to stop that invasion. And when we think about what is happening, let us not focus entirely on what our people are doing which they shouldn't be doing; let us remember that most of our people do only what they are told to do, only what they are manipulated into doing, and so let us direct our inquiry primarily into who is manipulating them and how and why.
That, of course, is a very big inquiry. If you've been listening to my broadcasts for a while, you know that most of them have dealt with one aspect or another of this inquiry. Today we'll only have time for one aspect besides the immigration situation, and that's racial mixing. It's useful to look at that, because it leads us quickly to the heart of the termite problem -- because, you see, immediately behind the racemixing problem is the promotion of racemixing by the controlled media: the deliberate encouragement of racial mixing by Hollywood and Madison Avenue.
Whenever you study public behavior, whenever you study fashions and trends, you quickly realize that the basic principle is "monkey see, monkey do." If you want to encourage a certain trend, a certain fashion, a certain type of public behavior, you don't try to reason with the public. You don't lecture the public. Instead you present to the public as many images as you can of the sort of behavior you want to encourage, and the lemming instinct will do the rest. Have you seen some of the advertisements put out for an Italian clothing manufacturer under the name "United Colors of Benetton"? Their favorite theme is racial mixing between Whites and Blacks: a little redheaded, blue-eyed White girl holding a Black infant, a Black baby in diapers kissing a White baby, and so on. They started on that theme a couple of years ago, and they are pushing it more and more boldly. Well, the clothing company is Italian, but their advertising agency , Saatchi & Saatchi, based in London, is entirely Jewish from top to bottom.
The same urge to depict scenes of racial mixing is rampant among advertising agencies on this side of the Atlantic. The Jews of Madison Avenue love to use models of indeterminate race for the advertisements they design: quadroons and octoroons and various Eurasian blends. And they seem to have a rule that whenever there is a group scene, there must be Blacks in it. It's gotten to the point where the lemmings feel uncomfortable if they see an advertisement which shows an all-White scene. If they see an advertisement with a group of White children playing together, or a scene in an all-White classroom, the lemmings wonder where the Black child is that is practically obligatory these days for advertisements featuring children. And it's not just advertising. Every reporter with a camera covering a news story or a feature for a slick magazine is on the lookout for a Black in the crowd when he composes his shots -- and if he is lucky enough to be able to focus on an interracial couple, he knows that he will get bonus points from his boss. The idea is to remind the readers over and over and over again that we live in a multi-racial society, and, oh, isn't it wonderful! The idea is to make Blacks and other non-Whites seem like part of White society and to make racial mixing seem not only normal but trendy, fashionable. Even National Geographic Magazine has climbed onto the media bandwagon. Look at the photographs on pages 7 and 14 of the current June issue.
Even the advertising on boxes of breakfast cereal directed at children has the same, poisonous message. Not only does the advertising depict Black and White children together, it depicts White children dressing and behaving like Blacks: backward baseball caps, baggy shorts, Black jive talk, and adult Black rappers or basketball players as role models. The idea behind this advertising is not to sell more breakfast cereal to Blacks; it is to make White children feel that it is cool to be Black, that it is cool to be a part of the hip-hop culture, that it is cool to have a lot of Black friends, that it is cool to be a wigger.
And you know, this interracial advertising has not merely followed changes in our society; the advertising has led the changes. Traditionally the purpose of advertising is to persuade the public to buy a product. The advertiser seeks to make the customer not only want the product but to feel comfortable with it, to trust the manufacturer, and for this reason the advertiser seeks to avoid taboos, to avoid angering or alienating the customer. With the interracial advertising that certainly hasn't been the case. The advertisers have been on a crusade. The purpose has not been just to sell products. It has been to change the ideas and attitudes of the White public. They have proceeded with a certain amount of caution, of course, but it is clear that the product they have been trying to sell is not just breakfast cereal or Calvin Klein blue jeans, but racial mixing between Whites and Blacks.
And the reason they're trying to sell it is exactly the same reason they don't want Roger Barnett interfering with the flood of mestizos pouring into White America from Brown Mexico. Do you understand that? It's really very important. It is the key to understanding everything else that is happening today. The Jewish advertisers on Madison Avenue have exactly the same purpose as the Jews in the Clinton government -- Jews like Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and the head of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, Doris Meissner -- who're trying to keep the illegal aliens coming into the country.
If you have even the slightest doubt that this is a deliberate, Jewish policy aimed at corrupting and destroying our people, then look at what the Jews in Hollywood are doing with the new films they are producing. I mentioned the film Black and White in my broadcast three weeks ago. You really should see it. Then you will have no doubt what the termites are up to. And I hardly need to tell you that the Jewish campaign is working. Arizona and Texas and California are becoming darker, more alien. White kids are behaving more like Blacks. White women are bedding down with Blacks and producing little mongrels in greater numbers than ever before. Monkey see, monkey do.
Yes, we do have a termite problem, and we do need to get an exterminator on the job soon. And we also have a problem with flaws in our society and in our government, flaws which gave the termites the opening they needed to get in and begin gnawing away at America and our people. When the exterminator has done his necessary work and we begin rebuilding our society, we need to fix those flaws so that we'll never again have a termite problem.
Offline -EOF
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,656
Re: So, what's wrong with the Jews?
The New World Order
by Dr. William Pierce
Free Speech - April 1999 - Volume V, Number 4
Today let's talk about the New World Order. We've talked about it before, and we'll be talking a lot more about it in the future. I always used to feel a little funny about using that term. It sounds like the sort of terminology right-wing cranks use. And I think many people don't believe it's real. They think it's a concept invented by right-wing cranks who are paranoid about the United Nations. Even when I was being interviewed by the Voice of Iran last week, and I mentioned the New World Order, the interviewer in Teheran asked me what that is, as if it were something he had never heard of before.
Well, during the past few days it has become much easier to talk about the New World Order without having to worry about being considered a right-wing crank. That's because the whole Clinton gang has begun talking openly about it. Which is to say, the whole New World Order gang has come out of the closet.
Earlier this month Susan Estrich spoke her mind on Clinton's war against Serbia. Susan Estrich, remember, is the militant radical feminist lawyer -- a Jewess, of course -- who is a bosom pal of the Clintons and was under consideration for a cabinet post not so long ago. She's now a law professor at the University of Southern California and a big-shot Democratic Party activist. Estrich is ecstatic about the war. She just loves it. It is, she said:
". . . the first war of the 21st century: a conflict not about communism, but about race and ethnicity, being waged by committee, against a madman who is not himself a direct threat to the countries waging war against him. . . . [T]he President is committed, and the country is behind him. The number of Americans willing to take the war to the next step - committing ground forces - has in fact been increasing steadily. It speaks well for the future."
You know, that's really breathtaking. This radical-feminist Jewess loves this war because, first, it isn't against communists but is against people who are concerned about ethnicity; second, it is being waged by a committee -- feminists believe that everything should be done by a committee; and third, it is a war being waged by countries who have not been threatened in any way by the country they are attacking. In other words, it is not a war to defend America but solely to force a sovereign nation to change its internal policy to suit the tastes of Susan Estrich and company: to force Serbia to stop trying to establish ethnic homogeneity but instead to embrace multiculturalism. One gets the impression that this Jewess also would approve of a war against, say, Saudi Arabia to force that country to establish coed bathrooms in all public buildings.
She says that American public support for escalating the war against Serbia by sending in ground forces has been increasing steadily, and that makes her feel good about the future. This Jewess also felt good about Clinton's popularity polls during his impeachment. Basically, what she feels good about is the fact that her kinsmen in the media now have a majority of the American electorate whom they are able to manipulate in any way they choose. Just keep the ball games on TV -- and the "entitlement" checks in the mail -- and they'll cheer for the folks signing the checks and broadcasting the ball games. Just keep their refrigerators full of beer and they will give thumbs up to a President who has been publicly exposed as a perjuror, a rapist, a degenerate, a draft-dodger, a traitor, a money-launderer, and a cokehead. They really don't care. Start a war somewhere which they can watch on TV, and they'll support that too, if Tom Brokaw and Dan Rather and Peter Jennings and the rest tell them to. When they get bored with watching the smart bombs blow up apartment houses and passenger trains and our fighter planes shoot up refugee columns, they'll cheer the sending in of ground troops so they'll have something more exciting to watch on their television screens.
Despite the fact that Miss Estrich is not a public official, her views are worth noting. First, she is a member of the Clinton crowd; she shares their values and opinions. Second, she is typical of the arrogant, noisy campus Jews who during the 1960s were trashing deans' offices and demanding all sorts of Politically Correct changes at American universities. They also were burning ROTC buildings in protest against the Vietnam war. That was a war against communists; remember? A bad war. These Jews have grown up and taken over most of our influential public institutions.
But what Estrich is saying is echoed by all the rest of the Jews and their collaborators. America's highest paid professional "Holocaust survivor," Elie Wiesel, showed up at the White House on April 12 to cheer the bombing of Serbia and announce his support for sending in ground troops. Ironically, Wiesel is the recipient of a Nobel Peace Prize -- but then so were Henry Kissinger and the late Israeli warlord Menachem Begin. That's what Nobel Peace Prizes are all about these days.
Probably the most important public figure to declare for the New World Order is Britain's Tony Blair, the tag-along, wannabee Clintonista that British patriots sneeringly refer to as "Bambi." In an essay in the April 19 issue of Newsweek magazine Blair declares:
"This is a conflict we are fighting not for territory but for values, for a new internationalism where the brutal repression of whole ethnic groups will no longer be tolerated, for a world where those responsible for such crimes have nowhere to hide."
That's interesting. The key words here are: "We are not fighting for territory" -- and he might also have added, "We are not fighting to defend ourselves or our national interests" -- "but we are fighting for a new internationalism," Blair said.
And of course, "a new internationalism" is simply his way of saying "a New World Order." And that really is a radical departure from the past, when America and Britain went to war to defend what they considered their national interests, not to impose "a new internationalism" on some other country which just wanted to be left alone. It's good for America's soldiers to understand that the reason they're deliberately bombing civilian targets in Belgrade, shooting up passenger trains, and so on -- and occasionally even risking their own lives -- is to impose "a new internationalism" on the Serbs. To people like Estrich and Blair and Clinton, having armed forces for the purpose of national defense is old fashioned, an outmoded, 20th-century concept. The really trendy thing now -- the 21st-century thing -- is to use your armed forces to impose the will of the New World Order on countries too small to hit back.
"Bambi" also said in the April 19 Newsweek that the Serb policy of ethnic cleansing must not only be stopped but also "reversed." Which really ties in with the insistence of the whole New World Order crowd that no ethnically clean countries will be tolerated in the 21st century. Only "multicultural" countries will be permitted.
General Wesley Clark, the Clinton gang's political general in charge of NATO and of the current effort to impose "a new internationalism" on the Serbs using cruise missiles, said it as plainly as anyone. Just a few days ago General Clark enunciated the general philosophy of the New World Order and the specific motivation for the assault on Yugoslavia when he told a CNN reporter:
"There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That's a 19th-century idea, and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states."
You know, the specific phrasing may be new, but the attitude, the mindset, behind it is quite old. We could subtract a thousand years from General Clark's statement, taking us back to the time just before the Crusades, and it would read something like this: "There is no place in modern Europe for pagans or heretics. Paganism is a ninth-century idea, and we are trying to transition into the 11th century, and we are going to do it with Christian states." A little later one could simply replace "pagan" and "Christian" with "Protestant" and "Catholic," respectively -- or vice versa. That mindset prevailed during Europe's numerous religious wars up until the middle of the 17th century, a cruel and bloody 650 years during which Europeans slaughtered not only Turks and Arabs but also each other in their "conflicts for values," as Bambi would have put it.
You know, my main theme is that this change in the reason for which we fight wars is not a good thing. It is not good to attack another country which has not harmed or threatened us in any way and begin killing its people in order to force them to run their country in accord with our beliefs -- assuming that the beliefs professed by the Clinton gang actually were our beliefs. That sort of ideological bigotry really smacks of the religious bigotry of the Middle Ages. But before we get into that, let us note that not even the Susan Estriches and Tony Blairs and Wesley Clarks really believe the ideological snake oil they're trying to sell to the public.
In his justification for the bombing of Belgrade and the killing of Serbs Tony Blair wrote in Newsweek:
"We need to enter a new millennium where dictators know that they cannot get away with ethnic cleansing or repress their peoples with impunity."
That's a crooked statement. Blair understands perfectly well that Slobodan Milosevic is no dictator repressing his people; he is the democratically elected leader of his people and has their strong support. And Blair also understands that the conflict between the government of Yugoslavia and the Albanians in Yugoslavia's Kosovo province arose in the first place because his good buddy Bill Clinton approved the covert arming and financing of the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army -- the KLA -- which aimed at driving out the Serbs and establishing an ethnically cleansed Albanian Kosovo.
But even if Bambi has conveniently forgotten these facts, he is not opposed to ethnic cleansing on principle. You can safely bet your bottom dollar that if Milosevic had not moved decisively and crushed the KLA, and the KLA were now doing to the Serbs what the Serbs are doing to the Albanians, Bambi would not be writing indignant essays about it for Newsweek magazine, and Madleine Albright would not be sending her cruise missiles against Tirana instead of against Belgrade. This New World Order gang, which makes such a pretense of being opposed to ethnic cleansing, has not lifted a finger to stop it in a dozen other parts of the world in the last few years. Israel's treatment of the Palestinians is the prime example of this, but many other examples also can be cited: Turkey's treatment of the Kurds, for example.
All of these New World Order "humanitarians" speak with forked tongues. The simple fact is that they have a plan for Yugoslavia, and for Serbia's mineral-rich Kosovo province in particular, and the Serbs don't want to go along. The New World Order gang want Kosovo under Albanian control, because Albanians will take orders from them, while the Serbs won't. That's what this war boils down to: making an example out of the Serbs because they're too independent and are in the way of a plan the New World Order gangsters have for rearranging Europe.
Now let's look, from a strictly American point of view, at what these gangsters are doing and what they are planning for the future. America's wars in the 21st century, they are telling us -- beginning, actually, with the war against Serbia now -- will not be wars to defend our territory or our vital interests but to force other countries to handle their internal affairs in accord with our ideas -- or more correctly, in accord with the ideas professed by people like Susan Estrich, General Wesley Clark, and Tony Blair.
Bill Clinton is a bit less forthright about this than the aforementioned gangsters: one of the reasons he has been giving us for the war against Serbia is that it is to protect American jobs by keeping Europe stable and prosperous so that it will remain a good market for American products. That explanation is, of course, sheer nonsense. The war against Yugoslavia is hardly doing anything to stabilize Europe, and Mr. Clinton, with his enthusiasm for Chinese imports, certainly isn't concerned about saving the jobs of American workers.
What the gangsters are doing is transforming America's armed forces from a national defense force to an enforcer for the New World Order. They are transforming American soldiers from defenders of the American people and the American nation to mercenaries in the service of the New World Order. And they're actually sending our armed forces out to bomb and kill under these new auspices. The Jewish radicals like Susan Estrich are all for it. The Jewish media bosses are all for it. The 1960s style leftists like Bill Clinton and Tony Blair who grew up chanting for Ho Chi Minh and trashing the dean's office are all for it. And the political careerists in the military, like General Wesley Clark, are willing to go along with it. The politicians in the Congress are willing to go along too, just as they are willing to go along with anything else the media bosses want.
But what about the American people? What about our Constitution? What about our traditions and our national interests? I realize that the Susan Estriches and Wesley Clarks and Bill Clintons of this world have only contempt for these 19th-century and even older things, but not all of us share their feelings. There are a lot of us who still believe that the affairs of our nation ought to be governed by law, not by whatever the Jewish media bosses and the aging campus radicals left over from the 1960s decide is fashionable for the 21st century.
The men who wrote our Constitution certainly understood that we might have to fight wars in order to defend our territory or our national interests. They had just come through a war against Britain themselves for the sake of securing our freedom and independence. And in the Constitution they provided for such possibilities in the future. But they certainly did not condone the United States sending its armed forces off to meddle in the internal affairs of other countries which were not harming or threatening us. Nor did they intend for our armed forces to be the plaything of the President or anyone else in our government, to be used for furthering some pet project of his overseas. They specifically reserved to the elected representatives of the people the power to wage war against another country.
Now, Mr. Clinton may want to quibble over the meaning of the word "war," just as he quibbled over the meaning of the word "is" during the great national embarrassment that he visited upon us so recently, but not one of America's Founding Fathers would call what we are doing in Yugoslavia now anything but "war." And they would consider it war waged in violation of the Constitution, since the House of Representatives has not authorized it.
I hope you don't mind my quibbling about these details, about these old-fashioned legalities. I mean, I realize that the same rabble which didn't want Clinton impeached are happy enough with his war now. And the way the Clinton crowd looks at it, whenever a majority is in favor of something, then it's all right to do it. It makes no difference how debased and irresponsible that majority is; as long as you're ahead in the polls, you're OK. And of course, this Clinton-favoring, bread-and-circuses majority couldn't care less about old-fashioned legalities. And I'm sorry to say, the gang in the Congress isn't much more responsible than the majority which still approves of Clinton and his war. Congressmen can count heads as well as the pollsters, and they aren't going to make much of a fuss about not having actually voted for war against Yugoslavia as long as the media bosses are for it and the rabble don't care.
I suppose the real question here is not whether Clinton's war is illegal or not. I mean, we've pretty well established the principle now that it's OK for the President to do illegal things, so long as his polls are up. The real question is, what are we old-fashioned, 19th- and 20th-century-style Americans going to do about the misappropriation of our country and our future by the New World Order gang? These people, these Estriches and Clarks and Clintons, have agreed among themselves that from now on they'll run the world and tell everybody else what to do, committee style, because we're moving into the 21st century and the rabble will back them. We're supposed to go along meekly and not make any trouble for them.
Well, I'll tell you right now, I'm not going to do that. I've always been a law-abiding person, but I'm not inclined to let this gang interpret our laws in their way and tell me that from now on everything is going to be different because the polls say it's OK for them to do whatever they want. From my viewpoint it's the Clinton gang who are the outlaws, the violators of our Constitution and of all of our old-fashioned legal and moral principles, and anything that we do to oppose them is legal and is morally justified. Anyone who goes along with them is a traitor, in the strict, old-fashioned sense of the word, and anyone who sits on his hands now and refuses to oppose the Clinton gang is not much better.
This trendy, new crowd, which likes to do everything with committees, really believes that all it takes to make anything legal and OK is a majority. I guess they call that democracy. When the majority is what it has become in the United States today, a better name is mobocracy. But really, it's much worse than mob rule. It is rule by a self-appointed elite of utterly evil and destructive people who have in their hands the tools for controlling and guiding the mob. They're pretty cocky now -- so cocky, in fact, that they're making statements of the sort I've quoted today. They're cocky because they believe that no one can take away from them their tools for controlling the mob, and that as time passes and America becomes darker and more degenerate, their grip on the mob will only become firmer. Our job is to prove them wrong. It's a big job, and we'd better get started.
Offline -EOF
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,656
Re: So, what's wrong with the Jews?
War Drums Sounding
by Kevin Alfred Strom
Free Speech - September 2002 - Volume VIII, Number IX
Ever since September 11, Jewish commentators and columnists have beaten their war drums for an all-out war against Iraq -- Kristol, Kagan, Krauthammer, Safire, Kondrake, Feder, Wattenberg, and many others -- all of them deceptively pretending to be neutral observers, pretending to place American interests before those of Israel. Mortimer Zuckerman takes the cake in this category by being not only a columnist for US News and World Report; but its owner as well, and the owner of the New York Daily News to boot. And Zuckerman also apparently feels there's no conflict of interest in his publications' coverage of the Middle East caused by his current tenure as the Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, an umbrella group of fifty-two national Jewish organizations, whose very name and structure reveal the enormity of Jewish power and influence.
Meanwhile, the cousins of the Jewish commentators and columnists are busy at work in Washington, seeking to shape U.S. foreign policy through their official and advisory positions in the Bush administration. Richard Perle, a Jew and Director of the Defense Policy Board, and a Director of the Jerusalem Post as well, would like us to attack Iraq now, as would Deputy Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz, a Jew who, during the Gulf War aroused the fury of our senior military officers who claimed, quite correctly, that Wolfowitz was overly sympathetic to Israel. 1
Perle and Wolfowitz are joined in their cabal by "our" Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Douglas Feith, a Jew who recently approved a plan to nuke Iraq if it moves against Israel, and Vice President Cheney's Jewish chief of staff, Lewis Libby, and Elliott Abrams, Bush's Jewish "National Security Director for Democracy, Human Rights and International Operations." And we can't forget Bush's Press Secretary and chief handler, Ari Fleischer, also a Jew. Imagine the uproar if as many media pundits and government officials were of Iraqi or Palestinian descent! Imagine the media outrage if even one major columnist or advisor was discovered to be a member of the National Alliance.
Having initiated the media barrage calling for a U.S. attack on Iraq, Jews are now trying to keep a low profile, fearful that the American people might finally connect the dots and realize that the Jews' reason for wanting war is not that they are concerned about the interests of New York fire-fighters or Pennsylvania coal-miners -- but that they are primarily concerned, as they always have been, about the future of Israel and World Jewry.
Fearing a Gentile backlash against their subversive activities, it is critical for the Jews that most Americans not perceive who is behind the constant agitation for another war against Iraq. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported last week that:
(S)ome analysts say that Jewish leaders keep a low profile out of concern that critics might say America is attacking Iraq to benefit Israel.2God forbid that anyone should dare reach such a conclusion! Jews are concerned not about whether attacking Saddam Hussein is good for America, but whether it is good for Israel. Forget that American blood and resources will be sacrificed. Forget that Jewish sabre-rattling will endanger the nation by making us the focus of Arab resentment. To the "Chosen," it doesn't really matter if thousands of additional Iraqi civilians are killed in an American attack. During the Gulf War, we bombarded Iraqi cities for two months, killing 80,000 innocent civilians.3 At least 333,000 children and elderly Iraqis, and perhaps three times that many, have died prematurely since the war began, thanks to the U.S.-sponsored blockade of medicine and food, and our destruction of Iraqi water purification plants. Madeleine Albright, the Jewish former Secretary of State, justified these cruel policies and coldly dismissed humanitarian concerns with the comment that "the price is worth it." 333,000 dead babies and old people, worth it. 80,000 dead: wives, husbands, and children. This is worth it. And all of this against a country that presents no threat to the United States! After all, Iraq is over 6,000 miles away, with no ballistic missiles that could reach us -- but, with missiles that could reach Tel Aviv. Since many Jews regard Israel as our "51st state," they have decided that we must launch a "preemptive war" against their enemy.
They have blood on their hands, up to their shoulders. Yet they pretend to be innocent lambs who have the best interests of America at heart.Jews do not lose sleep at night worrying if such an attack will turn virtually the entire Moslem world of over one billion people against America, and subject us to further attacks like those of September 11th. During the Second World War, there was a joke that, as the Gentiles marched off to war, the favorite song of the Jews was "Onward Christian Soldiers," and that may once again be the case if we attack Iraq. For one thing is certain -- the children of Wolfowitz and Perle and Krauthammer and their ilk will not be marching off in uniform, or coming home in body-bags, or with Purple Hearts.
The Jewish Telegraphic Agency article goes on to note the strategy of one influential Jewish leader, Morris Amitay, a pro-Israel activist and former executive director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, better known around Washington as AIPAC. He said:
Why should it be a Jewish or Israeli issue? We should stay as patriotic as the next guy, but not be out front.As for the Jewish motivation for instigating a US war against Iraq, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency article further says:
The Jewish community views an attack on Iraq as advantageous on several levels.... [A] regime change in Iraq would be in Israel's best interest. Iraq's production of weapons of mass destruction and apparent willingness to use them are a constant threat to Israel's security....The Jewish-owned New York Times said in a recent editorial4 that what is crucial is that Iraq be disarmed of all "unconventional weapons" -- the so-called "weapons of mass destruction." In other words, what the Times wants, but doesn't quite dare say, is a Middle East in which only one country has nuclear weapons -- Israel. This would give Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, known as the "Butcher of Beirut" for his bloody massacres of innocents going back decades and still happening today, the power to dominate the Arab world perpetually. It is Israel, and not Iraq nor other Arab nations that possesses the greatest Middle Eastern arsenal of over 450 nuclear weapons of mass destruction -- many of which were built during a time when Israel deceitfully disavowed any intention to build nuclear weapons.
Of course Israel's vast nuclear arsenal has evoked nary a peep of criticism from American bureaucrats, elected officials or political commentators.
According to American law, all aid to Israel would have to stop if it were proven that she had built nuclear weapons in violation of her agreements. All official Washington knows that Israel has done exactly that, but they keep silent to oblige Israel in getting more American money and more American blood.
They have blood on their hands, up to their shoulders. Yet they pretend to be innocent lambs who have the best interests of America at heart.It is also Israel, and not Iraq, that is in the process of manufacturing genocidal biological weapons capable of killing Iraqis while leaving Jews unharmed. On November 15, 1998, the Sunday Times of London reported that Israel was developing an "ethno-bomb." It is reported that Israeli scientists are trying to exploit medical advances by identifying a gene carried by some Arabs, and then creating a genetically-modified bacterium or virus. The deadly micro-organisms would attack only Arabs or other non-Jews, leaving Jews unscathed. Talk about genocide and "weapons of mass destruction"!
A senior Israeli intelligence official has admitted:
There is hardly a single known or unknown form of chemical or biological weapon ... which is not manufactured [in Israel].5The big threat in the Middle East is Israel, not Iraq. The only weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East are in Israel. Its 450 nuclear weapons6 are far more than it needs for deterrence. Israel has ballistic missiles and bombers capable of reaching Moscow. They are the world's fourth or fifth most powerful nuclear power, and Israel is the only Middle Eastern nation that adamantly refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Don't forget that from the 1950s the United States was training Israeli nuclear scientists and providing nuclear-related technology.7 It is clear that Israel has had no interest in peace except that which is dictated on its own terms. Israel is the primary destabilizing force driving the Middle East arms race and compelling the region's states to seek their own deterrents. George W. Bush talks about an "Axis of Evil," a term cooked up by David Frum, his Jewish speech-writer, but this absurd attempt at demonization represents a grotesque double-standard by which Iraq, Iran, and North Korea are condemned for developing nuclear weapons, while Israel -- the principal culprit -- is permitted to increase its nuclear and biological arsenal in blatant violation of American laws that ought to cut off all aid to the Jewish state. Even the Jewish writer Seymour Hersh has admitted:
...the size and sophistication of Israel's nuclear arsenal allows men such as Ariel Sharon to dream of redrawing the map of the Middle East aided by the implicit threat of nuclear force.8Thanks to Israeli expansionism and terrorism, and international Jewish agitation, a wide-scale nuclear conflict in the Middle East has now become a distinct possibility. It could be triggered by religious zealots, or by secular Zionist fanatics, or both. Such a war would be directed by Ariel Sharon, a war criminal whose record as a murderer stretches from the massacre of Palestinian civilians in 1953 to the massacres at Sabra and Shatila in 1982, to this year's massacre at Jenin, to this month's openly-admitted rocket attack on a civilian apartment complex.
They have blood on their hands, up to their shoulders. Yet they pretend to be innocent lambs who have the best interests of America at heart.How has the United States benefited from its love affair with Israel, after having deferred to its every whim for over half a century? Refusal to withdraw from Palestinian and Syrian territory, disregard for UN resolutions and U.S. requests, proliferation of nuclear weapons, aggression against its neighbors, damage to American relations with other Middle East countries, the deliberate bombing of the U.S.S. Liberty, and espionage against the U.S. by Jonathan Pollard and others. In fact, the Israeli Cabinet honored Pollard by declaring him an Israeli citizen in 1995, and he has been elevated to the status of a national hero there. Israel, the nation that is the largest recipient of American foreign and military aid in the world has reciprocated by placing spies in our government. Unfortunately, Pollard's case may be only the tip of the iceberg. Confirmation of recent Israeli spying on American soil was offered by the French newspaper Le Monde this past March and discussed by Dr. Pierce in prior American Dissident Voices broadcasts.
It is high time that Americans woke up and spoke out about what this one-sided relationship is costing us. Israel has worked against our interests on other occasions, too. In 1992, Israel illegally resold American military technology to China, and resold aerial refueling technology to Latin America.
Do you remember Mordechai Vanunu? He is the Israeli whistleblower who is finishing his twelfth year in captivity -- and the American news media continue to treat him as a non-person. On Sept. 30, 1986, Israel's government lured Vanunu to Rome, abducted him, and put him on a cargo ship back to Israel. At a secret trial, he faced charges of espionage and treason. A military court sentenced him to 18 years in prison. What was Vanunu's crime? He gave detailed information about Israel's secret arsenal of nuclear bombs to journalists at the Sunday Times of London.
After growing up in a Jewish family that emigrated to Israel from Morocco when he was a boy, Mordechai Vanunu became an employee at the Dimona nuclear plant in 1976. Nearly a decade later -- shortly before his employment ended at the remote nuclear facility -- he took photos of areas inside Dimona which had always been illegally hidden from international inspection. Using severance pay to travel abroad in 1986, Vanunu contacted the famous Insight investigative unit of Britain's Sunday Times.
The newspaper reported:
During his extensive debriefing by our Insight team, he offered to give the paper his photographs and all his information for nothing, provided we did not publish his name, insisting his sole interest was in stopping nuclear proliferation in the Middle East.9However, the Sunday Times persuaded Vanunu to allow his name to be used. The paper agreed to pay him for the serialization of his story, or for a book. Peter Hounam, the main reporter on the story for the Sunday Times said:
My impression of the man was of someone who had a genuine desire to tell the world of something that was going on which he felt was genuinely wrong for Israel to do. He felt it was wrong that the Israeli public and parliament were not given any information about what was happening in Dimona.On Oct. 5, 1986, the Sunday Times broke the story under the front-page headline "REVEALED: THE SECRETS OF ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR ARSENAL." But by then, Vanunu was a prisoner of the Israeli government. That's how the world learned that he'd been kidnapped. From then on, when he was transported to court, the van windows were painted black. And it is still very dark for him. After a dozen years, much of them in isolation, he is still in prison.
Can you imagine what would have happened if another country in the Middle East -- say, Iraq or Iran -- kidnapped one of its citizens from Western Europe to retaliate for spilling the beans about its nuclear weaponry? That person would have become an instant media hero in the United States. But if you mention Mordechai Vanunu's name to an American, you're likely to get a blank stare. On this side of the Atlantic, he's a media phantom. The United States' media coverage of Vanunu has remained paltry: just a few scattered newspaper articles. The New York Times -- America's supposed "newspaper of record" -- has hardly mentioned Vanunu at all. That's quite a contrast to the situation in Britain, where coverage of Vanunu's case has been extensive and sustained. Recently, in the course of several months, mainstream British outlets have done at least forty-five major stories about Vanunu, according to Nexis. Sixteen of them appeared in the Sunday Times alone. Top politicians and journalists in Washington wag their fingers at India and Pakistan for joining the world's nuclear club without an invitation. But there is no such scolding of Israel, which receives U.S. aid at a rate of about $10 million a day, while maintaining a stockpile of hundreds of nuclear warheads.
If you wonder why this broadcast is virtually the only voice in the United States of America which dares to tell the truth on this vital issue, consider the fate of Mordechai Vanunu, for daring to tell the truth about Israel's weapons of mass destruction.
Speaking of the suppression of news that is unfavorable to Israel, have you heard about the case of former Israeli secret agent, Victor Ostrovsky? Although he fled to Canada after revealing the tactics of the Mossad (Israel's spy and assassination agency) in a book, he continued to be pursued by the allies of Israel there and in the United States.10 Ostrovsky has written:
The same people who presumably would praise someone from the CIA or the U.S. armed forces who exposed serious wrongdoing in those institutions were now hard at work to smother my criticisms of an intelligence agency for a foreign country that, to put it as charitably as possible, does not have America's best interests at heart.In 1995, an Israeli television executive called for Ostrovsky's assassination during a broadcast telephone interview with him. Those same "Americans" who call Ostrovsky a traitor to Israel for exposing the Mossad's tactics hail as a hero Jonathan Pollard, a traitor to the U.S. who spied on the American government for Israel.
The suppression of criticism of Israel continues. There is the case of the two Oneida, New York Daily Dispatch editors who were fired last September for daring to mention Israeli terrorism and Israel's acts of oppression in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is horrifying to think that in a land priding itself on free speech that simply pointing out Israel's crimes in the Middle East can cause the firing of two editors. But when you're dealing with the Jewish power structure you're not dealing with Americans, and you're not dealing with people who have any respect for freedom of speech. The Jews were even able to get the offending editorial removed from the newspaper's website, as Dr. Pierce told us in a recent broadcast.11 These high-handed tactics of intimidation and suppression combined with the virtual Jewish stranglehold on the U.S. news and entertainment industry help explain why most Americans are so easily misled on political issues where there is a vested Jewish interest and agenda.
Now, as our pro-Israeli President threatens Iraq, it becomes increasingly obvious that Israel would love to have thousands of U.S. troops permanently stationed nearby. Just as plans for an attack on Iraq seem to have originated from a mentality of "Oh, since we're already in Afghanistan, why not attack Iraq, too" what is to prevent the whining (but secretly smiling) Israeli-firsters in the media and government from convincing Bush and Congress to decide that since we're already in Iraq, we might as well pay a visit to Israel to help them decimate the Palestinians?
If we truly want peace in the Middle East and if we truly want to avoid the escalation of that regional conflict into a nuclear and biological catastrophe, we'd better wake up and learn how to deal with what the French ambassador to England so bluntly but aptly referred to as "that ****ty little country Israel" which places us "in danger of the Second World WarI." The French ambassador is not the only one who is waking up. All over Europe mainstream politicians and writers are speaking out against the Jewish disease of unmitigated aggression and genocide, against the Jewish-led bloodbath. Our kinfolk in Europe are learning the score. Isn't it about time that we joined them -- before it's too late?
1. New York Times, Dec. 23, 1991, p. A14
2. July 30, 2002
3. Giorno, Milan, Cape Cod Times, Aug. 3, 2002, p. A14
4. August 3, 2002
5. John Steinbach, "Nuke Nation: Israel's weapons of mass destruction," Covert Action, April-June 2001
6. Washington Post, March 11, 2001, B2
7. John Steinbach, Covert Action Quarterly, April - June 2001
8. quoted in Steinlight
9. Tim Weiner, "The Man Who Protects America from Terrorism," New York Times, Feb. 1, 1999, A3
10. The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (October/November 1997, pp 37, 84-85)
11. October 27, 2001
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,690
Re: So, what's wrong with the Jews?
This is a great thread! Wow!
Offline -EOF
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 11,656
The ADL: America's Greatest Enemy Part I
The ADL: America's Greatest Enemy
by Kevin Alfred Strom
American Dissident Voices Program of 29th May, 1993
[Emphasis added.]
Welcome to American Dissident Voices. I'm Kevin Alfred Strom.
Did you know that there is a secret espionage and "dirty tricks" agency operating with impunity in communities across the United States, spying and maintaining files on thousands of ordinary Americans, an organization which is not even a part of the U.S. government? Did you know that a former top official of this group has stated in sworn courtroom testimony that this organization is actually an agent of a foreign government, the government of Israel? Did you know that one of the biggest stories of this year, which has been downplayed by most, though not all, of the establishment media, is the discovery of thousands of stolen police intelligence documents and supposedly confidential government data on thousands of Americans in the files of this nefarious group?
This un-American and anti-American espionage agency for a foreign government, and international conspirator against our nation and our people's freedom is officially known as the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, or ADL for short. The ADL was founded in 1913 as an adjunct to the international Jewish fraternal order and secret society, the "B'nai B'rith," whose name, translated literally from Hebrew means "sons of the cut" - referring to circumcision - which is a figure of speech usually interpreted as meaning "Sons of the Covenant." While posing as a public-spirited "civil rights" group, they have been working for decades to disarm law-abiding Americans, to control our sources of news and other information, and enslave us under a totalitarian world government which many have come to call the "New World Order." They do this through overt and covert propaganda, the creation of humanitarian-sounding front groups secretly controlled by the ADL, by the conducting of brainwashing sessions called "sensitivity-training" for members of our police forces, by the production and introduction into the public schools of ADL propaganda as "textbooks" or "resource material for teachers," and by their cozy relationship with the controlled media, which routinely print and broadcast ADL propaganda releases as so-called "news." Now it is apparent that the section of the ADL that they call their "Fact-Finding" division has been engaging in illegal espionage against American citizens on a scale undreamt of by the KGB.
And, ladies and gentlemen, my friends - they've just been caught in the act. One of the top ADL spies in this country, Mr. Roy Bullock, a homosexual from San Francisco posing as an "art dealer" whose specialty was the infiltration of patriotic, Arab-American, and other organizations on behalf of the ADL, has been found to have in his possession illegally obtained data, stolen from police and other confidential government files; data that was also discovered in the files of the ADL itself when police recently raided ADL headquarters in San Francisco and Los Angeles.
We and other patriots have been telling you for many years that the ADL was the greatest enemy of American's freedom and independence - a far greater enemy than the KGB ever was. Now, at long last, a few brave and, as yet, lonely, journalists from the establishment media have broken their decades-long silence on this dangerous group, triggered by the police investigation of stolen files that led to Roy Bullock and the ADL. I often criticize the establishment media on this program, and I think they, in general, richly deserve the appellation "controlled media," as any reader of our research report, Who Rules America well knows. But let me now give credit where credit is due, especially to the reporters at the Los Angeles Times and ABC News, who put their careers on the line to report some of the grisly truth about an organization which acts as though it is untouchable and above the law.
This is a story that every American needs to hear. It may well be the most important story I've ever covered on American Dissident Voices.
Let's begin this amazing story with an article from the Los Angeles Times of 9th April, 1993, by Richard C. Paddock: "Dateline San Francisco: Police on Thursday served search warrants on the Anti-Defamation League here and in Los Angeles, seizing evidence of a nationwide intelligence network accused of keeping files on more than 950 political groups, newspapers, and labor unions and as many as 12,000 people.
"Describing the spy operations in great detail, San Francisco authorities simultaneously released voluminous documents telling how operatives of the Anti-Defamation League searched through trash and infiltrated organizations to gather intelligence an Arab-American, right-wing, and what they called "pinko" organizations....
"...Police allege that the organization maintains undercover operatives to gather political intelligence in at least seven cities, including Los Angeles and San Francisco.
"Groups that were the focus of the spy operation span the political spectrum, including such groups as the Ku Klux Klan, the White Aryan Resistance, Greenpeace, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the United Farm Workers, and the Jewish Defense League. Also on the list were Mills College, the board of directors of San Francisco public television station KQED, and the San Francisco Bay Guardian newspaper.
"People who were subjects of the spy operation included former Republican Representative Pete McCloskey, jailed political extremist Lyndon LaRouche and Los Angeles Times correspondent Scott Kraft, who is based in South Africa....
"...In addition to allegations of obtaining confidential information from police, the Anti-Defamation League could face a total of 48 felony counts for not properly reporting the employment of its chief West Coast spy, Roy Bullock, according to the affidavit filed to justify the search warrant.
"The Anti-Defamation League disguised payments to Bullock for more than 25 years by funnelling $550 a week to Beverly Hills attorney Bruce I. Hochman, who then paid Bullock, according to the documents released in San Francisco. Hochman, a former president of the Jewish Federation Council of Greater Los Angeles and one of the state's leading tax attorneys, will be out of the city until late next week and could not be reached for comment, his office said.
"Until 1990, Hochman, a former U.S. prosecutor, also was a member of a panel appointed by then-Senator Pete Wilson to secretly make initial recommendations on new federal judges in California. Hochman is a former regional president of the Anti-Defamation League....
"David Lehrer, executive director of the Los Angeles ADL office, said the organization has not violated the law....
"...But in an affidavit filed to obtain warrants for Thursday's searches, San Francisco police allege that 'ADL employees were apparently less than truthful' in providing information in an earlier search conducted without a warrant....
"...The police affidavit contends that Lehrer had sole control of a secret fund used to pay for [what the ADL calls] 'fact-finding operations.' Lehrer, according to the documents, signed checks from the account under the name 'L. Patterson.'...
"...League officials will not confirm or deny whether Bullock was an employee and have said they simply traded information with police departments about people who might be involved in hate crimes."
Let me add here that the category of crime called "hate crimes" was virtually invented by the ADL. The goal of the ADL in doing that is to criminalize any thought or action which impedes their program to turn America into a Third World province in a multicultural "world government." Under the Orwellian-sounding "hate crimes" laws, American citizens would receive different sentences for the same crime, depending on whether or not their thoughts are "Politically Correct" on issues relating to homosexuality, race, nationality, and politics; and ultimately, having certain "politically incorrect" opinions would become a crime in itself.
I continue with another article from the Los Angeles Times, 13th April, 1993, also by Richard C. Paddock:
"Dateline San Francisco: To the outside world, Roy Bullock was a small-time art dealer who operated from his house in the Castro District. In reality, he was an undercover spy who picked through garbage and amassed secret files for the Anti-Defamation league for nearly 40 years.
"His code name at the prominent Jewish organization was Cal, and he was so successful at infiltrating political groups that he was once chosen to head an Arab-American delegation that visited Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) in her Washington, D.C. office.
"For a time, 'Cal' tapped into the phone message system of White Aryan Resistance... ...From police sources, he obtained privileged, personal information on at least 1,394 people. And he met surreptitiously with agents of the South African government to trade his knowledge for crisp, new $100 bills.
"These are among the secrets that Bullock and David Gurvitz, a former Los Angeles-based [ADL] operative, divulged in extensive interviews with police and the FBI in a growing scandal over the nationwide intelligence network operated by the Anti-Defamation League....
"Transcripts of the interviews - among nearly 700 pages of documents released by San Francisco prosecutors last week - offer new details of the private spy operation that authorities allege crossed the line into illegal territory.
"At times, the intelligence activities took on a cloak-and-dagger air with laundered payments, shredded documents, hotel rendezvous with foreign agents and code names....
"On one occasion, Gurvitz recounts, he received a tip that a pro-Palestinian activist was about to board a plane bound for Haifa, Israel. Although the Anti-Defamation League publicly denies any ties to Israel, Gurvitz phoned an Israeli consular official to warn them. Shortly thereafter, another [Israeli government] official called Gurvitz back and debriefed him.
"The court papers also added to the mystery of Tom Gerard, a former CIA agent and San Francisco police officer accused of providing confidential material from police files to the Anti-Defamation League... ...Bullock said it was Gerard who sold official police intelligence. Bullock said he split about $16,000... evenly with Gerard, telling him at one point, "I may be gay, but I'm a straight arrow."...
"Gerard fled to the Philippines last fall after he was interviewed by the FBI, but left behind a briefcase in his police locker. Its contents included passports, driver's licenses, and identification cards in 10 different names; identification cards in his own name for four different embassies in Central America; and a collection of blank birth certificates, Army discharge papers, and official stationery from various agencies.
"Also in the briefcase were extensive information on death squads, a black hood, apparently for use in interrogations, and photos of blindfolded and chained men.
"Investigators suspect that Gerard and other police sources gave the ADL confidential driver's license or vehicle registration information on a vast number of people, including as many as 4,500 members of [just] one target group [of interest to the ADL], the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee.
"Each case of obtaining such data from a law enforcement officer could constitute a felony, San Francisco Police Inspector Ron Roth noted in an affidavit for a search warrant."
Thank you, Richard C. Paddock and the Los Angeles Times. Now, at least a few of the ADL's nefarious deeds are being exposed to the light of day! 4,500 felonies! And that's just the illegal ADL files from one small group that was on the ADL's enemies list! Evidence seized from ADL spy Roy Bullock's computer database indicate that the ADL was using him to compile data on individuals belonging to over 950 groups - and Bullock is just one ADL spy! This investigation has so far uncovered the merest tip of a gigantic iceberg of subversion and crime. Let us hope that those few honorable men left in our justice system in this country will hold to their guns and get to the bottom of this case, and prosecute those who are guilty, regardless of their prominence, wealth, or positions of influence in society.
Now we turn to an article in the New York Daily News for 9th April, 1993, by Mark Mooney:
"Police in San Francisco and Los Angeles yesterday seized documents from a prominent Jewish-American organization accused of amassing confidential information - sometimes illegally - on thousands of people in the United States.
"The alleged operation was directed from the New York City offices of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, ABC News reported last night.
"The ADL has long been one of the most respected civil rights organizations in the country, tracking hate crimes and exposing prejudice.
"But ABC said that for several decades the spying operation has snooped into the records and activities of more than 10,000 people in the United States, including many who simply opposed the policies of Israel and South Africa....
"The report identified the leader of the intelligence ring as Irwin Suall.
"Sources told the Daily News that Suall is one of about 15 people in the ADL's research department in Manhattan. Neither Suall or other ADL officials could be reached for comment.
"We're talking about the use of information from Department of Motor Vehicles files, other confidential files of state and local agencies, illegally furnished and illegally received by private agencies," San Francisco District Attorney Arlo Smith told ABC.
"Similar raids were carried out in Los Angeles and San Francisco in February.
"The report did not surprise militant Arab-Americans or militant Jews here.
"'They have been in this business for years, and I personally have been a target," said M. T. Mehdi, head of the Arab-American Relations Committee.
"From the days I was in San Francisco in the 1960s, I had a feeling that someone was looking over my activities.'"
Many questions remain to be answered in this investigation into the spying operations of the ADL. In my opinion, one of the main reasons that this story saw the light of day at all is that many Leftist and "Liberal" groups were targeted by the ADL for infiltration and so-called "fact-finding," in addition to the ADL's normal targets of patriots and nationalists on the Right. If the ADL had only violated the privacy and Constitutional rights of "Right-wingers," it is unlikely that the current scandal would have been allowed to emerge in the press. But since the Leftists and the "Liberals" form such a powerful part of the establishment in this country, and since they are obviously only imperfectly controlled by the forces behind the ADL, the screams of pain from the Left could not be ignored. And they were screams not only of pain, but of betrayal. After all, much of the Left considered the ADL to be their ally. Wasn't Irwin Suall, current top ADL spymaster, a former national secretary of the Socialist Party of America? Wasn't the ADL the leader in the fight to get self-defense weapons out of the hands of dangerous right-wing American farmers, homeowners, and senior citizens? Wasn't the ADL the chief organization engaged in brainwashing - er, I mean educating Americans to accept a multicultural, non-American, non-Western future?
What these Leftists failed and probably still fail to understand is that the forces behind the Anti-Defamation League go far beyond the terms "Left" or "Right." Though the ADL is undoubtedly a foreign agent on behalf of the government of Israel, it is also far more than that. It is nothing less than the organizational outcropping of a vast network of influence and control working ceaselessly to bring about the end to American freedom and sovereignty - and in fact, and end to the freedom and sovereignty of every nation - and to bring into existence a world government controlled by the forces behind the ADL. They work to infiltrate, manage, and control groups of all political, racial, ethnic, and social persuasions. Those that they cannot control they seek to destroy by perverting our legal system so that certain opinions become "thought crimes." They care nothing for socialism, communism, or capitalism. They have used all of these and more to advance their aims, and have quickly discarded them if they no longer suited their purposes.
Ladies and gentlemen, there is far more material on the ADL, its illegal and un-American activities, and the current scandal in which it is embroiled than I can possibly fit into this one program. With your indulgence, I am going to continue this fascinating story on next week's program.
You cannot understand the perilous situation of our nation - unless you understand the insidious agenda of the ADL. I'll continue this vital message next week - on American Dissident Voices.
[Click on the graphic at the top of this post
for a video series about the ADL.]
|Thread Tools
|Search this Thread
|Display Modes
Linear Mode
|Similar Threads
|Thread Starter
|Last Post
|What's wrong with the jews?
|General Questions and Comments
|What's wrong with jews?