The Jewish segment of Christiane Amanpour's God's Warriors is doubtless the best and most refreshing comment about what's going on in Israel ever to appear on American television. The take-home message—the one that will be lurking around in the back of the minds of viewers long after watching it—is the image of fanatical Jews. There are repeated images of religious Jews referring to the West Bank and Jerusalem as promised to Jews in Genesis and advocating that Arabs either move or be expelled. There are Jewish activists bent on destroying the Al-Aqsa Mosque built at the site of the ancient Jewish temple and plotting to kill Palestinian schoolchildren; Jewish settlers being hauled out of the Sinai, Gaza, and various West Bank outposts by the Israeli army; Baruch Goldstein's massacre of praying Palestinians; masses of Jews expressing hatred toward Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin because of his endorsement of the Oslo peace process; the assassination of Rabin by Yigal Amir, a Jewish fanatic inspired by Goldstein; Ariel Sharon, "the Godfather of the Settlements," visiting the Al-Aqsa Mosque and fomenting the Second Intifada.
There is a particularly striking segment on Jewish woman from New York who moved to Israel because "I was never fully American. I was Jewish." As a child, she learned Hebrew before she learned English, and her summers were spent at Zionist youth camps. She now recruits financial support for the settlements from Christian Zionists in America. The Christian congregation sings songs in Hebrew, and the Israeli and American flags are juxtaposed..
In America we tend to think that Jews are "just like us. After all, Israel is the "only democracy in the Middle East" and a "staunch American ally." We have been led to think of Judaism as one of the three mainstream American religions. ("Have you heard the one where a priest, a minister, and a rabbi go into a bar? ...") When most Americans think of Jews, they think of the the friendly doctor who lives in the neighborhood, the brilliant scientist at the university, or the liberal social activist on behalf of the downtrodden.
But the Jews in God's Jewish Warriors often don't look like us at all. They are often religious Jews with long braided hair, beards, and names like Dvir and Dov. (New York State Assemblyman and West Bank settler Dov Hikind is depicted contributing some of his campaign funds to the settlements.) Many of the men use tefillin and wear yarmulkes, and they rock back and forth when they pray. The women often cover their hair and wear long gowns resembling a mild version of the Muslim purdah.
Judaism's Middle Eastern roots are on display, and there is nothing Western about it at all. These people don't seem very democratic, and they seem massively ethnocentric. They live in a completely Jewish world where their every thought and perception seem colored by their Jewish identity. Theirs is an apartheid world separated by high concrete walls from their Palestinian neighbors, where even tiny settlements are necessarily protected by the Israeli army. And at a time when Americans are constantly being encouraged by Jewish organizations like the ADL to be ever more tolerant of all kinds of diversity, these people are anything but tolerant. Calls for expropriation and expulsion of the Palestinians are commonplace among them. Israel has created a classic Middle Eastern segmentary society in which different groups live in an ingroup/outgroup world, completely isolated from each other. (Click here for a discussion of contrasts between Middle Eastern and Western societies.)
Not surprisingly, pro-Israel activist groups in the U.S. are not pleased. The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) calls it "CNN's Abomination." Depictions of influential Jews who are obviously "not like us" are likely to trigger feelings of estrangement and alienation in most Americans—a natural consequence of our evolved psychology. CAMERA's main complaint is that there is too much focus on extremists rather than on more typical Jews. But as Amanpour notes at the beginning, "in the last 40 years [God's Jewish warriors] have changed the history of the Middle East." The question is not how representative these Jews are of American Jews or even Israeli Jews. The question is how much influence they have had. As I have argued, the settlement movement is the vanguard of Judaism, and Jews who actively oppose this state of affairs are eventually marginalized. If Jewish history shows anything, it's that the radicals eventually come to dominate the Jewish community.
The result is a full-fledged campaign by Jewish organizations against CNN. In an article titled "CNN Comes Under Unprecedented Attack," the Forward reports that members of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations "have asked CNN to avoid rerunning the show before concerns about factual errors and bias are addressed and corrected. It is also requesting that the network invest similar resources to produce a new program that would "rectify the bias and inappropriate context.” “We are aware of some advertisers that have already distanced themselves from 'God’s Jewish Warriors,'" ... “It was recommended that all advertisers be contacted to express concern at their association with this offensive program." "
Amanpour does an excellent job showing how the organized Jewish community in America, and especially AIPAC, has rallied to the defense of the settlements in defiance of international law and every president since Jimmy Carter. Missing is a depiction of the internal politics of American Jews in which Jewish voices who oppose support for Jewish radicals are rendered powerless. But this is an incredibly brave and informed presentation of the radical vanguard of the Jewish community that is having such a huge impact on the Middle East and, via its effects on US foreign policy, the entire world.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Hey White man, Like being genocided by parasites posing as victims?
My Struggle
By Eustace Mullins
My life will be judged worthwhile to the extent that it is of use to others. For this reason, I wish to tell of the things which have happened to me in my struggle against the forces of darkness. It is my hope that others will be forewarned of what to expect in this fight. During the past thirty years of this struggle, many of the great patriots who gave me, instinctively, their valuable guidance and inspiration, were themselves, heavily immobilized by the machinations of the international Jewish power. Yet, they always continued their work as much as possible. To the end of their lives, they never swerved from the responsibility which had been laid on them by their knowledge of the truth. Each of the patriots who guided me, among them, Ezra Pound, Col. Eugene Sanctuary, George Sylvester Viereck and Mrs. Lyrl Clark Van Hyning, had been born with natural gifts. Throughout their lives, they used these gifts for the benefit of others. Very few Americans know of the persecution which these patriots endured throughout their lives. Yet, during the years I knew them and worked with them, this persecution was mentioned, if at all, only in passing and without regret. They considered their personal losses unimportant compared to the sufferings of the Gentile people who have been enslaved by the Jews. Similarly, it might seem idle carping for me to mention the murder of my parents by government agents as stroked of the Jews revenge against me for my work, when we consider that sixty-six million Christians have been killed in Russian concentration camps since 1917, murdered by the Jewish Communists who built and operated these camps. These millions lie nameless and unmourned. But they were no less and no more, the victims of the Jews than my parents and many other Americans whose sacrifices have gone unrecorded and unheeded by those who are next on the lists. No one who has been martyred by the Jews should remain unknown. And no one who has been martyred by the Jews will remain unavenged.
I became the object of the Jews hatred by events which moved in a straight line. Successively, I became the protégé of George Stimpson, the most respected journalist in Washington, who founded the National Press, Ezra Pound, the world most famous poet, and H. L. Hunt, the worlds richest man. Of the three, only Ezra Pound fought the Jews openly. And he suffered grievously, spending thirteen years in a hideous urine soaked madhouse in Washington D.C. George Stimpson passed on to me many of the secrets of Washington, including the fact that Felix Frankfurter founded the Harold Ware Cell of Communists and the nature of the Jewish control over J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI. H.L. Hunt fought valiantly to preserve the values of Christian civilization. But was unable to deploy his money effectively in a battle which was outside of his experience.
I visited Ezra Pound in the cell in which he was held as a political prisoner and which he aptly termed ‘the hellhole.’ I met George Sylvester Viereck in New York after he had served six years and lost his health, in a Federal Penitentiary. He had been falsely convicted of not registering properly as a foreign agent. In fact, his attorney had filled out all the required forms, and the case was thrown out of court on two occasions. However, Franklin D. Roosevelt had sworn to get Viereck, and he had the Department of Justice indict him a third time. A newly selected judge refused to allow testimony which would have acquitted Vierect. During the trial, his son, George Sylvester Viereck II, was killed in the U.S. Army landing at Anzio, a disastrous slaughter of American youths presided over by our famed Jew loving General Mark Clark. Roosevelt ordered the Army to withhold announcement of the boy’s death, fearing that it would bring about sympathy for Viereck. As a result, while the trial dragged on, his wife’s letters to their son were returned marked ‘Deceased.’ Frantic with worry, his wife tried to find out what had happened. She suffered a complete nervous breakdown when the boy’s death was finally announced, after many weeks of denial by Army officials. Viereck showed me a letter from Roosevelt, written in 1938, on White House stationery, asking of the German government, Viereck was then the most influential German-American in the United States. He replied to Roosevelt that he could not do this. And Roosevelt vowed to put him in prison. Which he did, hiring an ADL agent to swear that Viereck had offered him money to blow up a bridge. To anyone who knew the mild mannered, professional writer, the testimony was preposterous. Yet, Viereck went to prison for the duration of the war. When I knew him, he was living in a small room, penniless, and supported by the generosity of a nephew.
In 1942, when I joined the United States Army Air Force, I had no thought that thirty-six years later, I would still be engaged in a life-or-death struggle with a tenacious and relentless enemy. I regarded World War II as an unavoidable hiatus in my chosen career as an artist and writer. The war would be over in a couple of years, and I would resume the writing of books which I had already begun. I had no personal desire to ‘slap the Jap,’ or ‘stun the Hun,’ or any of the ‘Tin Pan Alley’ slogans which the Jews had conjured up to herd the Gentile cattle to the slaughter. Like many of my fellow soldiers, I sensed that the enemy was not really overseas, but was more likely entrenched here on the home front. But also like my fellow soldiers, I knew there was little I could do about it. Almost a year later, I read some material which gave me enlightenment.
Although it seems unbelievable now, during the height of World War II, there was more widespread dissemination of patriotic material on the Jewish conspiracy than there is today. Many dedicated patriots turned out small papers which printed the hard facts. They had long since learned how to survive the daily harassment by FBI agents, ADL agents, and hordes of other ‘home front’ guardians. They were frequently denounced by the paid press. And after reading one of these hysterical attacks, I sent Gerald L. K. Smith twenty-five dollars for some material. This was a large sum at that time, as my pay was only fifty dollars a month.
By return mail, I received a large box containing several hundred copies of ‘The Cross and the Flag.’ The first writing I had ever encountered on the Jewish problem. It contained many revelations. I realized at once that this was not the type of material to be quoted in the usual barracks discussions. Several soldiers had commented that there were informers in the barracks. Although I did not then make the connection, there was to be found in almost every barracks, a particularly obnoxious Jew, usually with a Brooklyn accent. It never occurred to me that these Jews were being as obnoxious as possible in order to goad the other soldiers into making an anti-Semitic remark. Nor did it occur to me that these Brooklyn Jews often had college degrees. At that time, everyone with college background was ordered to try out for the Officer Candidate School. I did not realize that these Brooklyn Jews remained with the enlisted men for surreptitious reasons. This type of political supervision of the troops is axiomatic in Communist strategy. It was meticulously observed in the American Armed Forces during World War II. In combat zones, officers and enlisted men who had previously voiced doubts about the wisdom of Roosevelt’s crusade to save Communism, were shot in the back by these same intelligence agents who had followed them into the front lines. While General Eisenhower was cosily tucked away with his British Secret Service ‘Chauffeur’, Kay Summersby, the real decisions were made by his Liaison Officer, Captain Warburg of the Kuhn, Loeb Banking house. In the Soviet Zone, the elimination of those soldiers who were not convinced Communism was so basic a part of their war operations that even during the darkest days of the war, Stalin still refused to slacken one iota the absolute direction of front line strategy by hard-line commissars. Realizing this, Hitler ordered his troops to execute on the spot any commissar captured in the war zone, in order to paralyze the Soviet operations.
The Communist control over the United States Army surfaced during World War II with the selection of General George C. Marshall as Chief of Staff. As Senator Joseph McCarthy later pointed out, Marshall was under Communist Party discipline at all times. This did not interfere with his direction of our war effort, since the goals of the Washington Marxists were the same, the total defeat of the German anti-Communist forces. In the Korean and Vietnam wars, Communists direction of our Armed Forces remained unchanged, even though we were then fighting against ‘Communist’ forces. When General Douglas McArthur tried to oppose this Communist betrayal of our men, he was fired by David Niles, the Jewish Communist who was President Truman’s ‘Aide.’
The Communist recognized that final political control always resided in the military. In Moscow and in Washington, every officer is absolutely responsive to the current ideological line, regardless of any military consideration. This was recently demonstrated when every officer on active duty was ordered to support the giveaway of the Panama Canal, while many retired officers openly opposed it. The most stringent measures are carried out to ensure that no officer is able to form a group to discuss and possibly take action against the high treason of his superiors. When Commander George Lincoln Rockwell surfaced at the Pentagon, there was consternation throughout the high command. At the least sign of any independence or patriotic speech from any officer, the Jewish controlled media immediately raises a hue and cry about ‘Fascism’ and the offender is quickly neutralized.
After receiving the supply of Smith’s magazine, I distributed them in the day rooms to see who would read them. The next day, I toured the day rooms to see if anyone was reading them, and perhaps, to strike up a conversation. Every issue had disappeared. Not once did I see a copy while I remained on the base. Apparently, I had been followed, and the papers picked up as fast as I had left them. During my remaining years of military service, I encountered no one with strong political views. My own opinions were those of any young man of the period, hardly committed to any strong ideology. After the war, I enrolled at Washington and Lee University, intending to study law. After two years, I decided I should go to art school, and enrolled at the Institute of Contemporary Arts in Washington, D.C. The school had the usual mongrel types in its student body and a number of ardent Communists on the staff. But it attracted many of the leading writers as speakers. Like others among the ten million veterans, my main concern was in getting on with my career, and I had little concern with politics.
Over night my lack of concern changed. One of the teachers at the Institute had been visiting Ezra Pound. He suggested I accompany him one afternoon, an offer which rather disturbed me. I thought it unlikely that the man who had edited T. S. Eliot and Ernest Hemingway would be interested in talking to me. But I went along. The moment I entered the gloom of the insane ward, my former complaisance vanished, never to return. I suddenly realized that a great writer had been punished by being confined in a madhouse, solely for his political views. In an instant, Pound filled the ideological gap in my life. Never again would I remain silent in the face of injustice.
Pound apparently considered me a kindred spirit, and offered to give me ‘my own day.’ That is, an afternoon to visit him alone each week. I accepted. And by the time the next week rolled around, he was waiting for me with food, assignments for research, and errands to run. Shortly afterwards, he brought up the Federal Reserve System, which I had never heard of. From that day, my work was cut out for me. His concern for his country had been aptly expressed by Charles Dickens in his American Notes, written a century earlier:
“I do fear that the heaviest blow ever dealt at liberty, will be dealt by this country, in the failure of its example to the earth.”
The loss of liberty in America, which is occurring before our eyes, means the autocracy will be enthroned throughout the world, and that the freedom which was ours at our birth will never be known by future generations. Olga Ivinskaya, a Russian writer, writes of her years in a Soviet prison camp:
“Sanagian (a fellow inmate) had put down the story of her life in her awkward, uneven handwriting. She came from a working class family and her father—long since dead—had taken part in the Revolution in 1917, for this she heaped curses on his memory.”
In the usual hogwash about aristocrats, we never stop to think that it was the working people of Russia, not aristocrats, who were enslaved by the Communist Revolution. Similarly, in this country, it is the Jewish intellectuals, bankers, and industrialists who are in the forefront of the battle to enslave all Americans and take away their freedom forever. Should we allow this, future generations in the concentration camps will begin their days not with prayers, but with curses on our memory.
I soon began to visit Ezra Pound every day, a routine which I kept up for three years. During this time, I was thoroughly grounded in every aspect of the International Communist conspiracy. Pound said to me:
“I am telling you things I didn’t know until I was fifty. You are twenty-five, which means you are getting an extra twenty-five years to do something about it.”
When I went to New York, bankers on Wall Street told me:– “I was here during the crash, but I didn’t know what was going on until I read your book.” I explained that I had had the benefit of Pound’s experience, and his access to much information in Europe which had already been banned in the United States.
To support myself while writing the history of the Federal Reserve System, I obtained a job at the Library of Congress as a stack attendant. This was the same job J. Edgar Hoover had held for several years while he completed his law studies at George Washington University night school. A few weeks later, because I had done advanced photographic studies at the Institute, I was promoted to the Photography Department. In the next several months, I received two more promotions, as I had studied with one of the finest Japanese photographers. During these months, I was able to see Pound only on weekends, and he suggested I send some of my writings to ‘The Social Creditor,’ a small weekly published in England. I sent them some articles, which they printed, sending me enthusiastic comments. On day, while going into the National Press Club for my daily luncheon with George Stimpson, a man was handing out copies of ‘Common Sense’ at the front door. I showed it to Pound, an issue containing the Hermann Goering Testament. He suggested I send them articles, and they printed some excerpts from the Federal Reserve research.
One afternoon, a Jew came to the Library of Congress, asking for me. I was called out of the darkroom to see a Jew who was a caricature out of ‘Der Sturmer.’ He immediately began to cross question me, saying he had been sent from ‘Common Sense,’ and he asked, ‘Who is giving you your material? Where is this information coming from?’ Now wishing to involve Pound, who always faced the possibility of having his daily visitors turned away and being held incommunicado, I explained that I was doing research at the Library of Congress. It was obvious that he didn’t believe me. A gawky small town boy could hardly be privy to the machinations of the worlds most powerful and secretive bankers.
A team of FBI agents was now sent to the Library of Congress to question everyone who had worked with me. Senator Herbert Lehman, of the Lehman Brothers Banking house, and National Chairman of the Anti-Defamation League, had sent a demand to Luther Evans, Librarian of Congress, that I be fired because of an article I had written for the Social Creditor. The demand, written on ADL stationery, had been drawn up by the ADL operator, Edelstein, and signed by Lehman without reading it, as he accepted anything which Edelstein brought to him. The article exposed the fact that one Katz, Marshall Plan Administrator, presided over the most of the Marshall Plan material to Communist countries, instead of sending it to the non-Communist countries for which Congress had designated it. To honor Marshall for his service to the Communist countries and their cause, the plan to continue aid to the Communist countries surreptitiously had been drawn up and named for him. At the end of World War II, Lend Lease Aid to Russia and other Communist countries ended. Dean Acheson, Secretary of State, an unregistered agent for nine Communist countries through his law firm of Covington, Burling, and Acheson, (one of whose partners was Donald Hiss, brother to Alger Hiss) had tried to force a four billion loan to the new Communist regime of Poland. When Patriots in Congress turned this down, the Marshall Plan was formulated. Ostensibly earmarked for Greece, Italy, and other non-Communist countries, most of the Marshall Plan material was either distributed directly to Communist organizers in those countries, who used the aid as the basis for building up the Communist Party, or trans-shipped directly through those countries to Yugoslavia, and on to Poland and Russia. It was Tito’s attempt to keep much of this material, particularly heavy trucks, which caused the break between him and Stalin. However, neither of them dared to publicly argue the point, as it would have exposed the fact that Marshall Plan Aid was going to the Communists.
Although I as yet knew nothing of the ADL order that I be fired, I had had a previous contact with Senator Lehman. Pound had noticed an advertisement in the Washington Post that Lehman would be speaking at Howard University on behalf of ‘home rule,’ a plan to wrest control of the District of Columbia from a group of White businessmen and turn it over to the Negroes. Howard University was the Communist training school for Ralph Bunche and many other Negro Marxists. Through the dogged influence of Eleanor Roosevelt, it was the only college in the United States whose entire budget was provided by the Federal Government. Pound mentioned that Lehman, a typical Jewish degenerate, had a nervous tic, and suggested it would be amusing to see it in action.
When Dave Horton and I arrived at the Howard University auditorium, we found a group of Negroes, eight or ten, the entire audience for the August Senator. Rather put out by the poor attendance, Lehman, a short squat ole clothes dealer type, made a short speech about home rule and opened the floor to questions. Immediately, Horton and I were on our feet. “Would Lehman Brothers consider the District of Columbia a safe investment?”—asked Horton. “Will you support Alger Hiss as the first mayor of Washington?”—I asked. Lehman, a rather stupid Jew, was completely bewildered by our questions. We continued to fire questions at him, as his aides, two young city College Jews, shook their fists at us. The famed Lehman tic now made its appearance. It was not merely a tic of the eye, the entire left side of his face was twitching steadily and violently. The audience of Negroes was glaring at us, muttering, ‘Shame,’ as Lehman’s aides rushed him away.
I LATER LEARNED THAT IN THE FOYER OF THE LEHMAN MANSION IN NEW YORK, A SPLENDID FOURTEENTH CENTURY STATUE OF THE VIRGIN MARY, LOOTED FROM ONE OF THE GREAT CATHEDRALS OF EUROPE, STOOD NEAR THE DOOR. FOR THE TITILLATION OF VISITORS, A CIGARETTE WAS PLACED DANGLING FROM HER MOUTH.
A few days after our Howard University evening, I was handed a letter of dismissal from the Library of Congress. The FBI interrogations had turned up nothing which could be used against me, and had caused considerable angry comment among the employees. The letter stated I was being dismissed because I had written an article for the Social Creditor. I was given the option of making a personal appeal to the Librarian, which I did. In Evans office, he asked me, ‘Did you write this article?’
‘Yes,’ I replied. ‘Can you show me one false statement in it?’
‘I’m not competent to do that.’ said Evans. ‘This is not out of my hands. Your dismissal stands.’
‘But I am not a member of any political group.’ I protested. ‘I’ve never voted in my life. You have many staff members who are activist members of militant racial organizations. You have two staff members who do nothing but go through the stacks writing numbers bets all day. Why am I being singled out?’
Evans, who never once looked at me in the eye, jerked open the bottom drawer of his desk, where I glimpsed a half empty bottle of Country Gentleman bourbon. He looked longingly at it, turned to me, and said, ‘Well, that’s all.’
I later learned from a fellow employee at API, that the actual mechanism of my dismissal was handled through Jacob Blaustein, president of the American Oil Company, and a member of the board of API. Also, serving as president of the American Jewish Committee, whose agent ‘Charles Smith’ ran the day to day operations at Common Cause. He had only to say ‘Fire him,’ and it was done. For some months, Lyrl Clark Van Hyning, publisher of ‘Women’s Voice,’ had been featuring my articles, among them ‘Close the Public Schools’ and ‘Satan vs. Christ.’ The publisher obliterated my name as author on the ‘Satan vs. Christ’ article, and distributed many thousands of reprints through Common Sense. Some of his subscribers had learned of my plight, even tho he refused to tell them about it, and not knowing where to get in touch with me, had sent him checks made out to me. Not one of these was ever forwarded to me. I hitchhiked to Chicago, and got a job writing for a hotel trad paper ‘Institutions Magazine.’ This turned out to be the only job I ever held from which the FBI did not have me fired. After a few months there, I was offered a much better paying job with the Chicago Motor Club, the ‘Middle Western Affiliate’ of the American Automobile Association, and I resigned from ‘Institutions.’ Some years later, forgetting about the Institutions position, I told an audience at my alma mater, Washington and Lee University, that the FBI had fired me from every job I had ever held.
At the Chicago Motor Club, I became editor of Motor News, with a circulation of 250,000. During the next two years, I willingly took on additional duties as editor of the ‘Industrial Editors News Service,’ public relations counselor, and special events organizer. I had been at the club two years and one week with a drawer full of memoranda from my superior, James E. Bulger, praising my work, and thanking me for my new programs, when one sultry August afternoon, two well dressed men strode by Bulger’s secretary, and went into his office and closed the door. His secretary who was a close friend, turned to me and said, ‘I wonder what that’s all about?—– ‘I never saw them before.’ I replied.
The men stayed with Bulger for about an hour, and I could hear them arguing with him, but their voices were kept low. Finally, he buzzed for his secretary. She went in, and came back out immediately, and handed me a folded note. I opened it and read, ‘You are allowed five minutes to get your things and get out of the office.’—– ‘What’s going on?’—she asked me. I saw the tears were streaming down her fact. I showed her the note. ‘I know what’s in it,’ she said, ‘but what’s going on? Mr. Bulger is sick, we’ve got to help him—those men–.’ She turned and ran to the restroom.
I put some personal memoranda into an envelope and left the office. That evening, Bulger’s secretary called me at home. She told me that the two men were FBI agents and that when they demanded I be fired, Bulger flatly refused. This was understandable as I was doing the work of four people. They then threatened him for nearly an hour. He had had five heart attacks in the past several years, and he began to writhe with pain. He begged them to let him call his doctor. ‘Certainly,’ said one of the, ‘as soon as you fire Mullins.’ He then wrote the note. After I left the office, the FBI agents accompanied Bulger to the doctor, and then took him to his home, after warning him not to tell me or to give me my job back.
Being fired from the Chicago Motor Club was the greatest shock of my life. Certainly this was the goal of the FBI harassment. At the age of thirty-five, I had been one of the most active public relations counselors in Chicago, lunching at the best restaurants with the city’s leading executives. Now I was on the street with no prospects. Even so, I supposed that with my contacts, I would be able to get another public relations job. In the next few weeks, I was surprised that after each interview, I heard nothing more about a job. Friends at the Motor Club then told me that because of pressure from the Club’s Jewish members, Bulger was telling everyone who inquired about references that I was a notorious criminal who was wanted in several states. He never put this into writing, giving out the slander on the phone, after instructions from the Jew who was the Club’s legal counsel. Since I was fired from the Chicago Motor Club in August, 1958, I have never again been able to get a professional job.
After several weeks, I realized it as unlikely that I would get any work in Chicago. I began work on a book about Friedrich Nietzsche, and while doing research at the Newberry Library, I found a great deal of material on Ezra Pound’s career. I wrote him suggesting that I do his biography. He immediately replied that he had been waiting for me to do this, and that I was to be his only authorized biographer. I then asked Henry Regnery if he could give me an advance on this book. He replied that he could not (he owned the largest window shade factory in the world, a bank, and other holdings, worth eighty million dollars.) But he suggested that H. L. Hunt needed someone to edit a book. I called Hunt and he agreed to pay me a hundred dollars a week. I said that I couldn’t live on that, in fact, I was living on thirty-five dollars a week—–and he said that I could live in his home. At that time, Hunt’s income was ten million dollars a week, and he had accumulated a fortune of three billion dollars.
I arrived at Hunt’s home in Dallas with one battered suitcase and an old Plymouth, purchased a year before for one hundred dollars, with the entire front end smashed in. We immediately established complete rapport, as he had lived for years out of a suitcase, traveling in the back-country picking up the oil leases which were the basis of his fortune. I resided in their guest room, which had always bee occupied by Senator Joseph McCarthy when he came to Dallas, and Hunt and I settled down to work on the book ‘Alpaca.’ After several months of intensive work, it was completed, and I became restless. By this time, Hunt has installed me in an office next to his own, and whenever someone called him, he would say, ‘Why don’t you check with Mullins on that?’ I realized he was only using me for a buffer, but it was a flattering situation for a penniless writer to be referred to as the confidential assistant of the world’s richest man. However, I remained a penniless writer, and he remained the world’s richest man. I began to realize I should be getting back to work on the Pound biography, and one afternoon, I told him I had to return to Chicago. He was completely surprised, and I saw that he was hurt and disappointed by my decision. Nevertheless, I have always thought of him with affection and admiration, and he seemed well disposed toward me on later occasions when I talked to him in Dallas and in New York.
Although I knew nothing of it at the time, my association with H. L. Hunt had driven the Jews into a furious campaign of ‘harassment’ against my parents. The conspirators were terrified that he might finance my publications or a political organization, although at the time, I had nothing to which he might donate money. I knew that my father had had a serious coronary attack in 1956, but I was not told until years later that the attack had been brought on by a series of vicious interrogations by Army Counter Intelligence Corps agents. My mother later told me they were determined to make him reveal the names of persons financially supporting my travels and writings. Since no one had ever given me a cent, there was nothing he could tell them, but they refused to believe him. Knowing he had Wednesday afternoons off from the store in which he worked, two agents waited for him in his car. They forced him into the car, drove him to the top of a nearby mountain, and interrogated him for several hours, telling him they were going to throw him off the mountain. At one point, he tried to escape from the car. They knocked him unconscious, drove him back to the store, and left him in the parked car. He finally came to, and drove home. The next day, he had a severe coronary attack, from which he never completely recovered.
My parents did not dare tell me these details, out of a desire to protect me, as they knew I would kill someone for these atrocities. Nevertheless, I knew they had been interrogated and I wrote to the Secretary of Defense. I received an answer, admitting that he had been interrogated, and giving the names of the two men who had interrogated him. Some weeks later, I tried to contact these men in Washington. I was told they had been sent on a mission to Guam, and that the plane had crashed with all aboard being killed. The letter with the men’s names has since disappeared from my files.
While I was with H. L. Hunt in Dallas, the FBI began to visit my parents. Their telephone was tapped, and they received harassing telephone calls during the night. The harassment and brutality of this campaign was intended solely to provoke me into some drastic action. I come from mountain people, and we never forget an injury, even if it takes fifty years to wreak our revenge. My temper remained under control only because my parents refused to let me know what was happening to them, and the ADL-FBI provocation failed. Their campaign was intensified, and one evening in 1961, my father, whose heart conditions had steadily gotten worse during this harassment, received a telephone call from a known FBI provocateur, ‘We’ve just sent out a national alert to pick ‘him’ up.’
My father dropped the phone, ‘they finally got Clarence’ he said, as he collapsed. He was taken to the hospital where he died of massive heart failure. More than three years went by before my mother told me what had happened. Of course, there had never been an alert, as I have never been arrested by anyone.
In ‘My Life in Christ,’ I openly accused Lyndon Johnson, who was then President, of murdering my father, although he had only been acting for Herbert Lehman, who then supported his Presidential ambitions. The only response was that during Johnson’s Presidency, every copy of this book that I mailed out—-was destroyed by the Post Office,—until I began insuring each copy.
(continued next issue)
My Struggle, published in Christian Vanguard, June, July and August 1978
By Eustace Mullins
My life will be judged worthwhile to the extent that it is of use to others. For this reason, I wish to tell of the things which have happened to me in my struggle against the forces of darkness. It is my hope that others will be forewarned of what to expect in this fight. During the past thirty years of this struggle, many of the great patriots who gave me, instinctively, their valuable guidance and inspiration, were themselves, heavily immobilized by the machinations of the international Jewish power. Yet, they always continued their work as much as possible. To the end of their lives, they never swerved from the responsibility which had been laid on them by their knowledge of the truth. Each of the patriots who guided me, among them, Ezra Pound, Col. Eugene Sanctuary, George Sylvester Viereck and Mrs. Lyrl Clark Van Hyning, had been born with natural gifts. Throughout their lives, they used these gifts for the benefit of others. Very few Americans know of the persecution which these patriots endured throughout their lives. Yet, during the years I knew them and worked with them, this persecution was mentioned, if at all, only in passing and without regret. They considered their personal losses unimportant compared to the sufferings of the Gentile people who have been enslaved by the Jews. Similarly, it might seem idle carping for me to mention the murder of my parents by government agents as stroked of the Jews revenge against me for my work, when we consider that sixty-six million Christians have been killed in Russian concentration camps since 1917, murdered by the Jewish Communists who built and operated these camps. These millions lie nameless and unmourned. But they were no less and no more, the victims of the Jews than my parents and many other Americans whose sacrifices have gone unrecorded and unheeded by those who are next on the lists. No one who has been martyred by the Jews should remain unknown. And no one who has been martyred by the Jews will remain unavenged.
I became the object of the Jews hatred by events which moved in a straight line. Successively, I became the protégé of George Stimpson, the most respected journalist in Washington, who founded the National Press, Ezra Pound, the world most famous poet, and H. L. Hunt, the worlds richest man. Of the three, only Ezra Pound fought the Jews openly. And he suffered grievously, spending thirteen years in a hideous urine soaked madhouse in Washington D.C. George Stimpson passed on to me many of the secrets of Washington, including the fact that Felix Frankfurter founded the Harold Ware Cell of Communists and the nature of the Jewish control over J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI. H.L. Hunt fought valiantly to preserve the values of Christian civilization. But was unable to deploy his money effectively in a battle which was outside of his experience.
I visited Ezra Pound in the cell in which he was held as a political prisoner and which he aptly termed ‘the hellhole.’ I met George Sylvester Viereck in New York after he had served six years and lost his health, in a Federal Penitentiary. He had been falsely convicted of not registering properly as a foreign agent. In fact, his attorney had filled out all the required forms, and the case was thrown out of court on two occasions. However, Franklin D. Roosevelt had sworn to get Viereck, and he had the Department of Justice indict him a third time. A newly selected judge refused to allow testimony which would have acquitted Vierect. During the trial, his son, George Sylvester Viereck II, was killed in the U.S. Army landing at Anzio, a disastrous slaughter of American youths presided over by our famed Jew loving General Mark Clark. Roosevelt ordered the Army to withhold announcement of the boy’s death, fearing that it would bring about sympathy for Viereck. As a result, while the trial dragged on, his wife’s letters to their son were returned marked ‘Deceased.’ Frantic with worry, his wife tried to find out what had happened. She suffered a complete nervous breakdown when the boy’s death was finally announced, after many weeks of denial by Army officials. Viereck showed me a letter from Roosevelt, written in 1938, on White House stationery, asking of the German government, Viereck was then the most influential German-American in the United States. He replied to Roosevelt that he could not do this. And Roosevelt vowed to put him in prison. Which he did, hiring an ADL agent to swear that Viereck had offered him money to blow up a bridge. To anyone who knew the mild mannered, professional writer, the testimony was preposterous. Yet, Viereck went to prison for the duration of the war. When I knew him, he was living in a small room, penniless, and supported by the generosity of a nephew.
In 1942, when I joined the United States Army Air Force, I had no thought that thirty-six years later, I would still be engaged in a life-or-death struggle with a tenacious and relentless enemy. I regarded World War II as an unavoidable hiatus in my chosen career as an artist and writer. The war would be over in a couple of years, and I would resume the writing of books which I had already begun. I had no personal desire to ‘slap the Jap,’ or ‘stun the Hun,’ or any of the ‘Tin Pan Alley’ slogans which the Jews had conjured up to herd the Gentile cattle to the slaughter. Like many of my fellow soldiers, I sensed that the enemy was not really overseas, but was more likely entrenched here on the home front. But also like my fellow soldiers, I knew there was little I could do about it. Almost a year later, I read some material which gave me enlightenment.
Although it seems unbelievable now, during the height of World War II, there was more widespread dissemination of patriotic material on the Jewish conspiracy than there is today. Many dedicated patriots turned out small papers which printed the hard facts. They had long since learned how to survive the daily harassment by FBI agents, ADL agents, and hordes of other ‘home front’ guardians. They were frequently denounced by the paid press. And after reading one of these hysterical attacks, I sent Gerald L. K. Smith twenty-five dollars for some material. This was a large sum at that time, as my pay was only fifty dollars a month.
By return mail, I received a large box containing several hundred copies of ‘The Cross and the Flag.’ The first writing I had ever encountered on the Jewish problem. It contained many revelations. I realized at once that this was not the type of material to be quoted in the usual barracks discussions. Several soldiers had commented that there were informers in the barracks. Although I did not then make the connection, there was to be found in almost every barracks, a particularly obnoxious Jew, usually with a Brooklyn accent. It never occurred to me that these Jews were being as obnoxious as possible in order to goad the other soldiers into making an anti-Semitic remark. Nor did it occur to me that these Brooklyn Jews often had college degrees. At that time, everyone with college background was ordered to try out for the Officer Candidate School. I did not realize that these Brooklyn Jews remained with the enlisted men for surreptitious reasons. This type of political supervision of the troops is axiomatic in Communist strategy. It was meticulously observed in the American Armed Forces during World War II. In combat zones, officers and enlisted men who had previously voiced doubts about the wisdom of Roosevelt’s crusade to save Communism, were shot in the back by these same intelligence agents who had followed them into the front lines. While General Eisenhower was cosily tucked away with his British Secret Service ‘Chauffeur’, Kay Summersby, the real decisions were made by his Liaison Officer, Captain Warburg of the Kuhn, Loeb Banking house. In the Soviet Zone, the elimination of those soldiers who were not convinced Communism was so basic a part of their war operations that even during the darkest days of the war, Stalin still refused to slacken one iota the absolute direction of front line strategy by hard-line commissars. Realizing this, Hitler ordered his troops to execute on the spot any commissar captured in the war zone, in order to paralyze the Soviet operations.
The Communist control over the United States Army surfaced during World War II with the selection of General George C. Marshall as Chief of Staff. As Senator Joseph McCarthy later pointed out, Marshall was under Communist Party discipline at all times. This did not interfere with his direction of our war effort, since the goals of the Washington Marxists were the same, the total defeat of the German anti-Communist forces. In the Korean and Vietnam wars, Communists direction of our Armed Forces remained unchanged, even though we were then fighting against ‘Communist’ forces. When General Douglas McArthur tried to oppose this Communist betrayal of our men, he was fired by David Niles, the Jewish Communist who was President Truman’s ‘Aide.’
The Communist recognized that final political control always resided in the military. In Moscow and in Washington, every officer is absolutely responsive to the current ideological line, regardless of any military consideration. This was recently demonstrated when every officer on active duty was ordered to support the giveaway of the Panama Canal, while many retired officers openly opposed it. The most stringent measures are carried out to ensure that no officer is able to form a group to discuss and possibly take action against the high treason of his superiors. When Commander George Lincoln Rockwell surfaced at the Pentagon, there was consternation throughout the high command. At the least sign of any independence or patriotic speech from any officer, the Jewish controlled media immediately raises a hue and cry about ‘Fascism’ and the offender is quickly neutralized.
After receiving the supply of Smith’s magazine, I distributed them in the day rooms to see who would read them. The next day, I toured the day rooms to see if anyone was reading them, and perhaps, to strike up a conversation. Every issue had disappeared. Not once did I see a copy while I remained on the base. Apparently, I had been followed, and the papers picked up as fast as I had left them. During my remaining years of military service, I encountered no one with strong political views. My own opinions were those of any young man of the period, hardly committed to any strong ideology. After the war, I enrolled at Washington and Lee University, intending to study law. After two years, I decided I should go to art school, and enrolled at the Institute of Contemporary Arts in Washington, D.C. The school had the usual mongrel types in its student body and a number of ardent Communists on the staff. But it attracted many of the leading writers as speakers. Like others among the ten million veterans, my main concern was in getting on with my career, and I had little concern with politics.
Over night my lack of concern changed. One of the teachers at the Institute had been visiting Ezra Pound. He suggested I accompany him one afternoon, an offer which rather disturbed me. I thought it unlikely that the man who had edited T. S. Eliot and Ernest Hemingway would be interested in talking to me. But I went along. The moment I entered the gloom of the insane ward, my former complaisance vanished, never to return. I suddenly realized that a great writer had been punished by being confined in a madhouse, solely for his political views. In an instant, Pound filled the ideological gap in my life. Never again would I remain silent in the face of injustice.
Pound apparently considered me a kindred spirit, and offered to give me ‘my own day.’ That is, an afternoon to visit him alone each week. I accepted. And by the time the next week rolled around, he was waiting for me with food, assignments for research, and errands to run. Shortly afterwards, he brought up the Federal Reserve System, which I had never heard of. From that day, my work was cut out for me. His concern for his country had been aptly expressed by Charles Dickens in his American Notes, written a century earlier:
“I do fear that the heaviest blow ever dealt at liberty, will be dealt by this country, in the failure of its example to the earth.”
The loss of liberty in America, which is occurring before our eyes, means the autocracy will be enthroned throughout the world, and that the freedom which was ours at our birth will never be known by future generations. Olga Ivinskaya, a Russian writer, writes of her years in a Soviet prison camp:
“Sanagian (a fellow inmate) had put down the story of her life in her awkward, uneven handwriting. She came from a working class family and her father—long since dead—had taken part in the Revolution in 1917, for this she heaped curses on his memory.”
In the usual hogwash about aristocrats, we never stop to think that it was the working people of Russia, not aristocrats, who were enslaved by the Communist Revolution. Similarly, in this country, it is the Jewish intellectuals, bankers, and industrialists who are in the forefront of the battle to enslave all Americans and take away their freedom forever. Should we allow this, future generations in the concentration camps will begin their days not with prayers, but with curses on our memory.
I soon began to visit Ezra Pound every day, a routine which I kept up for three years. During this time, I was thoroughly grounded in every aspect of the International Communist conspiracy. Pound said to me:
“I am telling you things I didn’t know until I was fifty. You are twenty-five, which means you are getting an extra twenty-five years to do something about it.”
When I went to New York, bankers on Wall Street told me:– “I was here during the crash, but I didn’t know what was going on until I read your book.” I explained that I had had the benefit of Pound’s experience, and his access to much information in Europe which had already been banned in the United States.
To support myself while writing the history of the Federal Reserve System, I obtained a job at the Library of Congress as a stack attendant. This was the same job J. Edgar Hoover had held for several years while he completed his law studies at George Washington University night school. A few weeks later, because I had done advanced photographic studies at the Institute, I was promoted to the Photography Department. In the next several months, I received two more promotions, as I had studied with one of the finest Japanese photographers. During these months, I was able to see Pound only on weekends, and he suggested I send some of my writings to ‘The Social Creditor,’ a small weekly published in England. I sent them some articles, which they printed, sending me enthusiastic comments. On day, while going into the National Press Club for my daily luncheon with George Stimpson, a man was handing out copies of ‘Common Sense’ at the front door. I showed it to Pound, an issue containing the Hermann Goering Testament. He suggested I send them articles, and they printed some excerpts from the Federal Reserve research.
One afternoon, a Jew came to the Library of Congress, asking for me. I was called out of the darkroom to see a Jew who was a caricature out of ‘Der Sturmer.’ He immediately began to cross question me, saying he had been sent from ‘Common Sense,’ and he asked, ‘Who is giving you your material? Where is this information coming from?’ Now wishing to involve Pound, who always faced the possibility of having his daily visitors turned away and being held incommunicado, I explained that I was doing research at the Library of Congress. It was obvious that he didn’t believe me. A gawky small town boy could hardly be privy to the machinations of the worlds most powerful and secretive bankers.
A team of FBI agents was now sent to the Library of Congress to question everyone who had worked with me. Senator Herbert Lehman, of the Lehman Brothers Banking house, and National Chairman of the Anti-Defamation League, had sent a demand to Luther Evans, Librarian of Congress, that I be fired because of an article I had written for the Social Creditor. The demand, written on ADL stationery, had been drawn up by the ADL operator, Edelstein, and signed by Lehman without reading it, as he accepted anything which Edelstein brought to him. The article exposed the fact that one Katz, Marshall Plan Administrator, presided over the most of the Marshall Plan material to Communist countries, instead of sending it to the non-Communist countries for which Congress had designated it. To honor Marshall for his service to the Communist countries and their cause, the plan to continue aid to the Communist countries surreptitiously had been drawn up and named for him. At the end of World War II, Lend Lease Aid to Russia and other Communist countries ended. Dean Acheson, Secretary of State, an unregistered agent for nine Communist countries through his law firm of Covington, Burling, and Acheson, (one of whose partners was Donald Hiss, brother to Alger Hiss) had tried to force a four billion loan to the new Communist regime of Poland. When Patriots in Congress turned this down, the Marshall Plan was formulated. Ostensibly earmarked for Greece, Italy, and other non-Communist countries, most of the Marshall Plan material was either distributed directly to Communist organizers in those countries, who used the aid as the basis for building up the Communist Party, or trans-shipped directly through those countries to Yugoslavia, and on to Poland and Russia. It was Tito’s attempt to keep much of this material, particularly heavy trucks, which caused the break between him and Stalin. However, neither of them dared to publicly argue the point, as it would have exposed the fact that Marshall Plan Aid was going to the Communists.
Although I as yet knew nothing of the ADL order that I be fired, I had had a previous contact with Senator Lehman. Pound had noticed an advertisement in the Washington Post that Lehman would be speaking at Howard University on behalf of ‘home rule,’ a plan to wrest control of the District of Columbia from a group of White businessmen and turn it over to the Negroes. Howard University was the Communist training school for Ralph Bunche and many other Negro Marxists. Through the dogged influence of Eleanor Roosevelt, it was the only college in the United States whose entire budget was provided by the Federal Government. Pound mentioned that Lehman, a typical Jewish degenerate, had a nervous tic, and suggested it would be amusing to see it in action.
When Dave Horton and I arrived at the Howard University auditorium, we found a group of Negroes, eight or ten, the entire audience for the August Senator. Rather put out by the poor attendance, Lehman, a short squat ole clothes dealer type, made a short speech about home rule and opened the floor to questions. Immediately, Horton and I were on our feet. “Would Lehman Brothers consider the District of Columbia a safe investment?”—asked Horton. “Will you support Alger Hiss as the first mayor of Washington?”—I asked. Lehman, a rather stupid Jew, was completely bewildered by our questions. We continued to fire questions at him, as his aides, two young city College Jews, shook their fists at us. The famed Lehman tic now made its appearance. It was not merely a tic of the eye, the entire left side of his face was twitching steadily and violently. The audience of Negroes was glaring at us, muttering, ‘Shame,’ as Lehman’s aides rushed him away.
I LATER LEARNED THAT IN THE FOYER OF THE LEHMAN MANSION IN NEW YORK, A SPLENDID FOURTEENTH CENTURY STATUE OF THE VIRGIN MARY, LOOTED FROM ONE OF THE GREAT CATHEDRALS OF EUROPE, STOOD NEAR THE DOOR. FOR THE TITILLATION OF VISITORS, A CIGARETTE WAS PLACED DANGLING FROM HER MOUTH.
A few days after our Howard University evening, I was handed a letter of dismissal from the Library of Congress. The FBI interrogations had turned up nothing which could be used against me, and had caused considerable angry comment among the employees. The letter stated I was being dismissed because I had written an article for the Social Creditor. I was given the option of making a personal appeal to the Librarian, which I did. In Evans office, he asked me, ‘Did you write this article?’
‘Yes,’ I replied. ‘Can you show me one false statement in it?’
‘I’m not competent to do that.’ said Evans. ‘This is not out of my hands. Your dismissal stands.’
‘But I am not a member of any political group.’ I protested. ‘I’ve never voted in my life. You have many staff members who are activist members of militant racial organizations. You have two staff members who do nothing but go through the stacks writing numbers bets all day. Why am I being singled out?’
Evans, who never once looked at me in the eye, jerked open the bottom drawer of his desk, where I glimpsed a half empty bottle of Country Gentleman bourbon. He looked longingly at it, turned to me, and said, ‘Well, that’s all.’
I later learned from a fellow employee at API, that the actual mechanism of my dismissal was handled through Jacob Blaustein, president of the American Oil Company, and a member of the board of API. Also, serving as president of the American Jewish Committee, whose agent ‘Charles Smith’ ran the day to day operations at Common Cause. He had only to say ‘Fire him,’ and it was done. For some months, Lyrl Clark Van Hyning, publisher of ‘Women’s Voice,’ had been featuring my articles, among them ‘Close the Public Schools’ and ‘Satan vs. Christ.’ The publisher obliterated my name as author on the ‘Satan vs. Christ’ article, and distributed many thousands of reprints through Common Sense. Some of his subscribers had learned of my plight, even tho he refused to tell them about it, and not knowing where to get in touch with me, had sent him checks made out to me. Not one of these was ever forwarded to me. I hitchhiked to Chicago, and got a job writing for a hotel trad paper ‘Institutions Magazine.’ This turned out to be the only job I ever held from which the FBI did not have me fired. After a few months there, I was offered a much better paying job with the Chicago Motor Club, the ‘Middle Western Affiliate’ of the American Automobile Association, and I resigned from ‘Institutions.’ Some years later, forgetting about the Institutions position, I told an audience at my alma mater, Washington and Lee University, that the FBI had fired me from every job I had ever held.
At the Chicago Motor Club, I became editor of Motor News, with a circulation of 250,000. During the next two years, I willingly took on additional duties as editor of the ‘Industrial Editors News Service,’ public relations counselor, and special events organizer. I had been at the club two years and one week with a drawer full of memoranda from my superior, James E. Bulger, praising my work, and thanking me for my new programs, when one sultry August afternoon, two well dressed men strode by Bulger’s secretary, and went into his office and closed the door. His secretary who was a close friend, turned to me and said, ‘I wonder what that’s all about?—– ‘I never saw them before.’ I replied.
The men stayed with Bulger for about an hour, and I could hear them arguing with him, but their voices were kept low. Finally, he buzzed for his secretary. She went in, and came back out immediately, and handed me a folded note. I opened it and read, ‘You are allowed five minutes to get your things and get out of the office.’—– ‘What’s going on?’—she asked me. I saw the tears were streaming down her fact. I showed her the note. ‘I know what’s in it,’ she said, ‘but what’s going on? Mr. Bulger is sick, we’ve got to help him—those men–.’ She turned and ran to the restroom.
I put some personal memoranda into an envelope and left the office. That evening, Bulger’s secretary called me at home. She told me that the two men were FBI agents and that when they demanded I be fired, Bulger flatly refused. This was understandable as I was doing the work of four people. They then threatened him for nearly an hour. He had had five heart attacks in the past several years, and he began to writhe with pain. He begged them to let him call his doctor. ‘Certainly,’ said one of the, ‘as soon as you fire Mullins.’ He then wrote the note. After I left the office, the FBI agents accompanied Bulger to the doctor, and then took him to his home, after warning him not to tell me or to give me my job back.
Being fired from the Chicago Motor Club was the greatest shock of my life. Certainly this was the goal of the FBI harassment. At the age of thirty-five, I had been one of the most active public relations counselors in Chicago, lunching at the best restaurants with the city’s leading executives. Now I was on the street with no prospects. Even so, I supposed that with my contacts, I would be able to get another public relations job. In the next few weeks, I was surprised that after each interview, I heard nothing more about a job. Friends at the Motor Club then told me that because of pressure from the Club’s Jewish members, Bulger was telling everyone who inquired about references that I was a notorious criminal who was wanted in several states. He never put this into writing, giving out the slander on the phone, after instructions from the Jew who was the Club’s legal counsel. Since I was fired from the Chicago Motor Club in August, 1958, I have never again been able to get a professional job.
After several weeks, I realized it as unlikely that I would get any work in Chicago. I began work on a book about Friedrich Nietzsche, and while doing research at the Newberry Library, I found a great deal of material on Ezra Pound’s career. I wrote him suggesting that I do his biography. He immediately replied that he had been waiting for me to do this, and that I was to be his only authorized biographer. I then asked Henry Regnery if he could give me an advance on this book. He replied that he could not (he owned the largest window shade factory in the world, a bank, and other holdings, worth eighty million dollars.) But he suggested that H. L. Hunt needed someone to edit a book. I called Hunt and he agreed to pay me a hundred dollars a week. I said that I couldn’t live on that, in fact, I was living on thirty-five dollars a week—–and he said that I could live in his home. At that time, Hunt’s income was ten million dollars a week, and he had accumulated a fortune of three billion dollars.
I arrived at Hunt’s home in Dallas with one battered suitcase and an old Plymouth, purchased a year before for one hundred dollars, with the entire front end smashed in. We immediately established complete rapport, as he had lived for years out of a suitcase, traveling in the back-country picking up the oil leases which were the basis of his fortune. I resided in their guest room, which had always bee occupied by Senator Joseph McCarthy when he came to Dallas, and Hunt and I settled down to work on the book ‘Alpaca.’ After several months of intensive work, it was completed, and I became restless. By this time, Hunt has installed me in an office next to his own, and whenever someone called him, he would say, ‘Why don’t you check with Mullins on that?’ I realized he was only using me for a buffer, but it was a flattering situation for a penniless writer to be referred to as the confidential assistant of the world’s richest man. However, I remained a penniless writer, and he remained the world’s richest man. I began to realize I should be getting back to work on the Pound biography, and one afternoon, I told him I had to return to Chicago. He was completely surprised, and I saw that he was hurt and disappointed by my decision. Nevertheless, I have always thought of him with affection and admiration, and he seemed well disposed toward me on later occasions when I talked to him in Dallas and in New York.
Although I knew nothing of it at the time, my association with H. L. Hunt had driven the Jews into a furious campaign of ‘harassment’ against my parents. The conspirators were terrified that he might finance my publications or a political organization, although at the time, I had nothing to which he might donate money. I knew that my father had had a serious coronary attack in 1956, but I was not told until years later that the attack had been brought on by a series of vicious interrogations by Army Counter Intelligence Corps agents. My mother later told me they were determined to make him reveal the names of persons financially supporting my travels and writings. Since no one had ever given me a cent, there was nothing he could tell them, but they refused to believe him. Knowing he had Wednesday afternoons off from the store in which he worked, two agents waited for him in his car. They forced him into the car, drove him to the top of a nearby mountain, and interrogated him for several hours, telling him they were going to throw him off the mountain. At one point, he tried to escape from the car. They knocked him unconscious, drove him back to the store, and left him in the parked car. He finally came to, and drove home. The next day, he had a severe coronary attack, from which he never completely recovered.
My parents did not dare tell me these details, out of a desire to protect me, as they knew I would kill someone for these atrocities. Nevertheless, I knew they had been interrogated and I wrote to the Secretary of Defense. I received an answer, admitting that he had been interrogated, and giving the names of the two men who had interrogated him. Some weeks later, I tried to contact these men in Washington. I was told they had been sent on a mission to Guam, and that the plane had crashed with all aboard being killed. The letter with the men’s names has since disappeared from my files.
While I was with H. L. Hunt in Dallas, the FBI began to visit my parents. Their telephone was tapped, and they received harassing telephone calls during the night. The harassment and brutality of this campaign was intended solely to provoke me into some drastic action. I come from mountain people, and we never forget an injury, even if it takes fifty years to wreak our revenge. My temper remained under control only because my parents refused to let me know what was happening to them, and the ADL-FBI provocation failed. Their campaign was intensified, and one evening in 1961, my father, whose heart conditions had steadily gotten worse during this harassment, received a telephone call from a known FBI provocateur, ‘We’ve just sent out a national alert to pick ‘him’ up.’
My father dropped the phone, ‘they finally got Clarence’ he said, as he collapsed. He was taken to the hospital where he died of massive heart failure. More than three years went by before my mother told me what had happened. Of course, there had never been an alert, as I have never been arrested by anyone.
In ‘My Life in Christ,’ I openly accused Lyndon Johnson, who was then President, of murdering my father, although he had only been acting for Herbert Lehman, who then supported his Presidential ambitions. The only response was that during Johnson’s Presidency, every copy of this book that I mailed out—-was destroyed by the Post Office,—until I began insuring each copy.
(continued next issue)
My Struggle, published in Christian Vanguard, June, July and August 1978
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Real Men Fight The Jews
By Patrick Grimm
It’s time to clear up a few misunderstandings with the Jewish fiends who only come around to threaten and debase this space. These little totalitarians wish to shut down anyone who has anything less than praise for their easily confirmed criminal enterprises. Sorry, but that is not going to happen for you, and even if it did, my work and my words are not going anywhere. Like a penny, good, bad or neutral, they will always turn up somewhere.
But let me be frank. If you wish to accost me with name-calling, at least be more politely formal about it. Don’t call me an “anti-Semite”, a word that to you only means anyone who doesn’t appreciate what you are doing to wreck our foundations and who exposes your little fibs about Israel, the Jewish religion and the entire shoddily constructed anti-intellectual framework of the Holohaux you moan about like incessant babies. No, Jewish provocateurs, I will not genuflect before you, will not bend the knee when I hear the word “Jews” in hushed tones that I would liken to a monastery dedicated to the religion of Taken-With-Thyself-ness. As Edgar Steele famously said “THAT’S MR. ANTI-SEMITE TO YOU!” and I would second his sentiments.
The truth of the matter is though, “anti-Semite” is not really the proper terminology for me. For the fact remains, most Jews are not “Semites” and many non-Jews are. A lot of the Palestinians are “Semitic” but you have no qualms about indiscriminately slaughtering them, gunning down their children in cold blood and desecrating their graves, and then having your apparatchiks in the US help procure alms to pay for the whole atrocity that you call a country while thousands of Gentiles die for your proxyish little adventures in the desert sand, which I’m sure gets quite a chuckle of anti-Gentile disdain in the Knesset. You are almost flummoxed that the Goyim could be so stupid and short-sighted on your account, and I couldn’t agree with you more.
No, you little Jewish totalitarians--the ones who bitch and infantilely demand that this blog be stricken from the internet because it refuses to worship you--I am not “anti-Semitic” at all. The best way to describe me would be to call me “anti-Jewish”, a phrase far more narrow and exacting and accurate, as well as provocative and gosh, just plain fun too because it gets you fuming and swearing in Yiddish! I don’t have a big personal problem with “Semites” but I do have a huge personal problem with all of the Jews--some of them even blue-eyed and blonde, or red-headed and green-eyed--who are jack hammering away at our foundations. Perhaps some tepid folks are afraid to say it, but America has a Jewish, an organized Jewish problem of almost incalculable proportions. And I am fully aware that some in this movement would think it unseemly, perhaps even obscenely unseemly, to talk this way.
Oh, some will cry “All Jews are not part of the Jewish supremacism/Jewish extremist/Jewish criminality/Jewish enter your complaint here problem! It’s just their ‘evil Jewish leadership’!” But this argument is tired. If all Jews do not give moral or financial support to what the most visible and the most irascibly censorious and sinister among the Jewish powerbrokers are doing, let them step forward and say so. Let them “come out from among them and be separate” so as not to be victimized by the worldwide Gentile backlash which inevitably will come (it always has) if this behavior is not curtailed. Let even a small organization of righteous Jews stand up and decry, not just the crimes of Israel, for this is no longer sufficient, but the crimes and dirty-dealing of the entire Jewish establishment which is even now itching to collapse Western Civilization and has already stolen free speech guarantees from most of Europe.
Are there ANY JEWS who will speak out against these things? Will ANY JEWS lend their influence, their finances and their acumen to the cause of freedom and justice? Will ANY JEWS ANYWHERE do more than just wag their fingers at the Zionist anti-humanitarian pockmark for its state terrorism, and instead lend their tongues to wag against the Jewish open borders agenda, the Jewish hard-core and child pornography agenda, the Jewish anti-white agenda, the mostly Jewish globalist agenda, the disproportionate Jewish white sex slave agenda, the Jewish ADL, JDL, AJC, ACLU agenda, the Jewish anti-gun and anti-Second Amendment agenda, the overwhelmingly Jewish drug trafficking agenda coming out of Israel, the Jewish organized crime agenda, the Jewish media black-out of black crime agenda, the Jewish Hollywood slandering of Christianity agenda, the Jewish religious Orthodox hatred of Gentiles agenda and all the rest? Will ANY JEWS unequivocally and without excuses, subterfuge and double-talk CONDEMN ALL OF THESE JEWISH AGENDAS?
I’m sorry, but my “Benefit of the Doubt” is broken. So I will do exactly what John “Birdman” Bryant tried on his famous website. I will ask any Jews who are reading my words and who agree that what Big Jewry and all its financial backers are doing is wrong, to condemn all of these dastardly deeds right here on this blogspot. There should be no excuses, no “well the Gentiles let us do it” which to our eternal discredit is true, but is not a good enough excuse to wipe away the sins of the Jewish community.
Day by day, the silence is deafening from the Jews in America. More and more of our citizens are slowly beginning to believe (and not without good reason) that Jewish influence and Jewish power have only brought us disaster. I may be incorrect, but the time may come when silence = complicity. If there are good Jews waiting, perhaps frightened and even horrified by the hideous strength accrued and easily utilized by their scruple-free brethren, let them identify themselves, separate themselves and exonerate themselves from the hatred that is being piled up against them by the activities of the Jews running the show at the top, those Jews who couldn’t buy a conscience, even if someone offered one to them wholesale. This is the only good faith gesture that many Gentiles would require of Jews, just to ease our minds. And so I extend the olive branch to you now.
But until I can look out upon the parched landscape of American politics and spy at least more Jews than I can count on one hand standing against Big Jewry, I will label myself, not “anti-Semitic”, but anti-Jewish. And no Jewish scientific discoveries, brainy inventions and Nobel Peace prize lists, all of them quoted and brandished like absolvents, will make a dime’s worth of difference to me or to anyone else who is aware of the facts.
It’s time to clear up a few misunderstandings with the Jewish fiends who only come around to threaten and debase this space. These little totalitarians wish to shut down anyone who has anything less than praise for their easily confirmed criminal enterprises. Sorry, but that is not going to happen for you, and even if it did, my work and my words are not going anywhere. Like a penny, good, bad or neutral, they will always turn up somewhere.
But let me be frank. If you wish to accost me with name-calling, at least be more politely formal about it. Don’t call me an “anti-Semite”, a word that to you only means anyone who doesn’t appreciate what you are doing to wreck our foundations and who exposes your little fibs about Israel, the Jewish religion and the entire shoddily constructed anti-intellectual framework of the Holohaux you moan about like incessant babies. No, Jewish provocateurs, I will not genuflect before you, will not bend the knee when I hear the word “Jews” in hushed tones that I would liken to a monastery dedicated to the religion of Taken-With-Thyself-ness. As Edgar Steele famously said “THAT’S MR. ANTI-SEMITE TO YOU!” and I would second his sentiments.
The truth of the matter is though, “anti-Semite” is not really the proper terminology for me. For the fact remains, most Jews are not “Semites” and many non-Jews are. A lot of the Palestinians are “Semitic” but you have no qualms about indiscriminately slaughtering them, gunning down their children in cold blood and desecrating their graves, and then having your apparatchiks in the US help procure alms to pay for the whole atrocity that you call a country while thousands of Gentiles die for your proxyish little adventures in the desert sand, which I’m sure gets quite a chuckle of anti-Gentile disdain in the Knesset. You are almost flummoxed that the Goyim could be so stupid and short-sighted on your account, and I couldn’t agree with you more.
No, you little Jewish totalitarians--the ones who bitch and infantilely demand that this blog be stricken from the internet because it refuses to worship you--I am not “anti-Semitic” at all. The best way to describe me would be to call me “anti-Jewish”, a phrase far more narrow and exacting and accurate, as well as provocative and gosh, just plain fun too because it gets you fuming and swearing in Yiddish! I don’t have a big personal problem with “Semites” but I do have a huge personal problem with all of the Jews--some of them even blue-eyed and blonde, or red-headed and green-eyed--who are jack hammering away at our foundations. Perhaps some tepid folks are afraid to say it, but America has a Jewish, an organized Jewish problem of almost incalculable proportions. And I am fully aware that some in this movement would think it unseemly, perhaps even obscenely unseemly, to talk this way.
Oh, some will cry “All Jews are not part of the Jewish supremacism/Jewish extremist/Jewish criminality/Jewish enter your complaint here problem! It’s just their ‘evil Jewish leadership’!” But this argument is tired. If all Jews do not give moral or financial support to what the most visible and the most irascibly censorious and sinister among the Jewish powerbrokers are doing, let them step forward and say so. Let them “come out from among them and be separate” so as not to be victimized by the worldwide Gentile backlash which inevitably will come (it always has) if this behavior is not curtailed. Let even a small organization of righteous Jews stand up and decry, not just the crimes of Israel, for this is no longer sufficient, but the crimes and dirty-dealing of the entire Jewish establishment which is even now itching to collapse Western Civilization and has already stolen free speech guarantees from most of Europe.
Are there ANY JEWS who will speak out against these things? Will ANY JEWS lend their influence, their finances and their acumen to the cause of freedom and justice? Will ANY JEWS ANYWHERE do more than just wag their fingers at the Zionist anti-humanitarian pockmark for its state terrorism, and instead lend their tongues to wag against the Jewish open borders agenda, the Jewish hard-core and child pornography agenda, the Jewish anti-white agenda, the mostly Jewish globalist agenda, the disproportionate Jewish white sex slave agenda, the Jewish ADL, JDL, AJC, ACLU agenda, the Jewish anti-gun and anti-Second Amendment agenda, the overwhelmingly Jewish drug trafficking agenda coming out of Israel, the Jewish organized crime agenda, the Jewish media black-out of black crime agenda, the Jewish Hollywood slandering of Christianity agenda, the Jewish religious Orthodox hatred of Gentiles agenda and all the rest? Will ANY JEWS unequivocally and without excuses, subterfuge and double-talk CONDEMN ALL OF THESE JEWISH AGENDAS?
I’m sorry, but my “Benefit of the Doubt” is broken. So I will do exactly what John “Birdman” Bryant tried on his famous website. I will ask any Jews who are reading my words and who agree that what Big Jewry and all its financial backers are doing is wrong, to condemn all of these dastardly deeds right here on this blogspot. There should be no excuses, no “well the Gentiles let us do it” which to our eternal discredit is true, but is not a good enough excuse to wipe away the sins of the Jewish community.
Day by day, the silence is deafening from the Jews in America. More and more of our citizens are slowly beginning to believe (and not without good reason) that Jewish influence and Jewish power have only brought us disaster. I may be incorrect, but the time may come when silence = complicity. If there are good Jews waiting, perhaps frightened and even horrified by the hideous strength accrued and easily utilized by their scruple-free brethren, let them identify themselves, separate themselves and exonerate themselves from the hatred that is being piled up against them by the activities of the Jews running the show at the top, those Jews who couldn’t buy a conscience, even if someone offered one to them wholesale. This is the only good faith gesture that many Gentiles would require of Jews, just to ease our minds. And so I extend the olive branch to you now.
But until I can look out upon the parched landscape of American politics and spy at least more Jews than I can count on one hand standing against Big Jewry, I will label myself, not “anti-Semitic”, but anti-Jewish. And no Jewish scientific discoveries, brainy inventions and Nobel Peace prize lists, all of them quoted and brandished like absolvents, will make a dime’s worth of difference to me or to anyone else who is aware of the facts.
Sunday, July 8, 2007
White American Native: Weep for what we have lost
From hearth--stone.blogspot.com
Do you remember what America used to be like? I do:
Men had not yet been emasculated through government school and media sensitivity training. A young family started off able to buy a home because the government didn’t extort half of a man’s income (the only thing they paid the Fed was in postage stamps) and the family wasn’t competing with waves of illegal immigrants who pack two to five families into a two-bedroom house.
Mothers didn’t work outside the home in those days—they were mothers. Mommy was always there to fix scraped knees and hot meals. Parents felt safe to let their children play outside (men took the responsibility of keeping their neighborhoods safe). Communities were close in those days. Everybody knew each other and attended church together. Grandma and Grandpa lived in the back house and the Cousins lived around the corner.
Folks tended their gardens in the morning, worked at their trades through the day, read the bible at supper and sat on the porch talking of all of it into the evening. The family always prayed together at bedtime. Saturday morning was for hunting or fishing and Saturday evening was for entertaining friends and family; women busied themselves with the preparation of food (in which they took much pride) and men folk talked (between gulps of bourbon and puffs of the pipe) of theology, history and the neighborhood. Sunday was a day of rest which always started with church. Sunday evenings were usually a family affair.
People left their doors unlocked and it was safe to walk down the narrow streets. It was a different world. It was a better world.
Though I’ve only witnessed America as it was in the smallest glimpses, my Grandfather grew up in that world and greatly mourned its passing. By the time he died he was a relic of a bygone age and he knew it. America had become something foreign and wholly unrecognizable to him. He told me many times how no one in his day would have believed it if you’d told them of what was to come. He said, “They’d ‘a thought you were a sandwich short ‘a picnic.” They simply could not have imagined that America would purposely discard her past, breaking with all things of constancy— religion, land, history and heritage. The idea of our own government taking part in the purposeful eradication of our White Christian people seemed too much like fictional ranting of the pulp and dime novel writers.
The nature of this societal dismantling is so holistic that even those in the church are largely blind to the fact that they’ve traded in nearly all their civics and social theory of their forbearers for a new social orthodoxy. All the old heroes of American history are now considered the villains. History is now itself regarded as racist and religiously bigoted not just because it was written by White Christians but also because most of it is about White Christian nations and peoples, as they were not only the writers but also the primary players in most of recorded history. But to say that is also racist. So world history is now being strained and filtered through the multicultural paradigm of the new age—any reassertion of the old Christian view of history is hypocritically labeled “Revisionism”.
The truth is officially banned. The tolerance-cult will not tolerate truth and virtue as defined by God. Those who utter such sentiments are heretics before the new humanist prelates. As such, they oft suffer the heretic’s fate—ostracism, disenfranchisement, imprisonment and in some instances…death.
The peoples with whom we are being systemically replaced have no love of our heroes and history. They don’t visit the historic sites of America, save for those that relate to the ‘civil rights’ [sic] movement. They don’t watch documentaries about the great American colonies unless the focus is on the fictions of Aboriginal genocide and the slave trade—wholly for the purposes of vilification. They don’t open books about high medieval architecture under any circumstances. They see the manifold blessings wrought by God through ruddy hands to be nothing but a memorial to the collective evils of Paternalism, Chauvinism and Racism. These they understand to be the warp and woof of Christendom. They call good evil and evil good.
Even in the church, other peoples don’t bother themselves, as Whites do, with any theological nuance. Their expression of the Christian religion appears in its highest form as nearly indistinguishable from a séance or a congregation of demoniacs. They rarely, if ever, attain to any semblance of orthodoxy (possible exception noted for certain Asian groups). Even the most theologically conservative Blacks consider the jugernaughts of the faith such as Luther, Calvin and the Puritans to have been monsters. They unabashedly proclaim the Communist machinations of the civil rights movement to be the zenith of Christian history. Theirs’ is not a difference of politics, but an inversion of Christian Cosmology en toto.
Though they may not all hate Anglos and Anglo-Christian culture, they are in the best cases, indifferent to such things because they have their own cultures and their own heroes. The best of them really couldn’t care less about our cultural heritage. America is not, in their opinion, a place to be preserved; rather, it is to be remade into something that it never before resembled. To the sea of invaders who now overtake us America is good so long as it is nothing like it was intended by its founders to be—a White Christian Libertarian society. America is good so long as it isn’t allowed to be American. Similarly, Europe is good so long as it is never again European.
The systematic dissociation from White American history is so comprehensive that the average high school social studies text allocates a chapter to Martin Luther King Jr. but affords George Washington no more than a paragraph (in which he is denounced as a racist)! And we are even told that the standard American history texts are now being written by Mexican professors inorder to impart a more “culturally sensitive” view of the American conquest of the Southwest. That translates to blatant assertion that Whites “stole” Mexican land and now consequently owe all the fruit of our people’s toil to the displaced Aborigines. Other schools have simply eliminated history as a subject altogether.
The erasure of our civilization is also seen in the academic black-listing and expungement of all literature written by Whites. They’ve replaced the high prose of Shakespeare with the yarns of urban jive “poets”. Melville, Wordsworth, Hawthorne, Kipling—all replaced by the diaries of Che Guevara, Anne Frank and various Negro dissidents.
Hispanics, Blacks, Jews and Muslims are individually and collectively promoted to be the cultural, social, ethical, sexual and racial superiors to European Man. They regularly speak of “killing all Whites” and are applauded by secular priests for such “acts of courage”. And though we Whites still pay all the taxes, uphold the remaining vestiges of law and order, and fund all the charities, we are universally forbade from expressing any racial, cultural or religious solidarity with other Whites or even with European American heritage in general. Mass cries for White genocide are considered ‘courageous’ but Whites who dare to raise objection to their own liquidation are ‘filthy Bigots’.
As we now recede from history, we may soon pass from all memory— a people unlamented. When we pass into the night no one will care about all those things that our people found so important because those things are now and ever have been far from the thoughts and affections of those who now eclipse us in number. We were a hated majority despite our unique benevolence toward ‘the other’ but we’ve since become the despised minority as ‘the others’ surge in population. This trend has been exponential and will likely continue until the one remaining White Christian Male breathes his last.
I yet hope against hope but the Demographers are unanimous on the issue—European Man, as a race, will be extinguished in the next two centuries. Nothing short of a miracle will reverse the current path on which the White Man has embarked. Western Civilization hangs by a thread—Europe, the people of Japheth—they carry with them the seed and the seedbed of Christendom. The Orthodox Christian Faith is a uniquely European phenomenon and absent that blessed heritage it seems that the world will slide precipitously toward the base proclivities of the stygian jungle. God forbid.
May He preserve in our posterity a remnant for His namesake.
Saturday, July 7, 2007
In The Name of All things Sacred. Make the treason STOP.
Immigrants become citizens
Posted: Friday, Jul 6th, 2007
BY: ROGER SIDEMAN [suspected kike]
Guadalupe Flores waves an American flag Thursday after taking an oath during an American citizenship ceremony for 180 people in Castroville.
CASTROVILLE — More than 180 new Americans were sworn in Thursday in a citizenship ceremony, part of a surge in the number of legal immigrants seeking to become U.S. citizens.
Two factors are driving the nationwide surge this year, said Doug Keegan, an immigration attorney and program director for the Immigration Project in Watsonville: imminent increases in fees to process naturalization applications and new feelings of insecurity among immigrants.
“Everyone’s expecting a big rush,” he said. “We’re seeing three to four times the normal number of applications.”
There’s an uneasiness even among legal immigrants, especially Latinos, since federal immigration officers arrested 107 people in September for immigration violations in Watsonville, Santa Cruz and Hollister, Keegan said. In a nationwide sweep, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has made more than 20,000 arrests since last year.
For many legal immigrants, Keegan said, anxiety about their futures in the United States turned into action after an announcement on Jan. 31 by Citizenship and Immigration Services that it would increase application fees.
Under the new fees, which take effect on July 30, it will cost $675 to become a naturalized citizen, up from $400.
“Most immigrant families in the Pajaro Valley don’t have the ability to shell out $700 for something whose (immediate) benefit is more psychological,” Keegan said.
In a typical year, Keegan’s office sees 200 applications. So far this year, roughly 350 people, more than triple the normal amount, have already applied.
After a tedious documentation process of months, and in some cases, years, people from 27 countries took their oaths together Thursday in front of the Castroville library.
Monterey County Supervisor Lou Calcagno, the son of Italian immigrants, said during his remarks that the ceremony was a milestone, marking the first major event held at the new library, which opened its doors in September.
Newly minted American citizen Maribel Cuervo left Mexico City nearly 19 years ago, wanted to become a citizen, but simply procrastinated, she said. Cuervo, a Watsonville resident, had already found a good job as a health educator with a local nonprofit and she volunteered on the county arts commission.
“I think it’s important to contribute to the community in some way, said Cuervo, 43, over a hot dog lunch.
As her hyphenated name suggests, Danguole Berulyte-McHargue, another new citizen, is straddling the line between two cultures: the one belonging at first to her U.S.-born husband, and that of her native Lithuania.
“I decided to become a citizen in order to have a full life". [ and steal the white man's future -ed]
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
Sunday, July 1, 2007
Monday, June 25, 2007
Watsonville, BEFORE AND AFTER
AVERAGE CITIZEN BEFORE JEW TAKEOVER OF THE 1960s:
AVERAGE CITIZEN AFTER JEW TAKEOVER OF THE 1960s:
AVERAGE CITIZEN AFTER JEW TAKEOVER OF THE 1960s:
Why is it only called colonialism when Westerners practice it.
Africa for Africans, Asia for Asians, White Countries for Everybody
The White Riddle ←UTube Link
"Liberals and respectable conservatives say there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.”
“The Netherlands and Belgium are more crowded than Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.”
“Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.”
“What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?”
“How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?”
“And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?”
“But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.”
"They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white."
"Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white."
The White Riddle ←UTube Link
"Liberals and respectable conservatives say there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.”
“The Netherlands and Belgium are more crowded than Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.”
“Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.”
“What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?”
“How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?”
“And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?”
“But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.”
"They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white."
"Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white."
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
WAKE THE HELL UP AMERICA
From the The Hermit
June 8, 2007
Several of your leaders, such as Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul, are speaking out loudly and forcefully against the illegal immigration which is destroying the country. But there is a problem. Despite the forceful language being employed, the real issue is being ducked. The issue is not illegal immigration. The issue is race. Yes, let us use the horrid word. The issue is whether or not these United States shall remain a white country.
Were every illegal immigrant given a green card tomorrow the fundamental issue would remain: White America or La Raza America?
There is an uncanny similarity between the language of the preservation of slavery one hundred fifty years ago and the language of immigration restriction today. The South tried to hide the preservation of slavery behind universal language of “states rights”.
Whites today try to hide the preservation of white civilization behind universal language of illegal immigration. It is time to stop hiding. The men who wrote the Constitution were unabashed white supremacists. They enslaved blacks, they conquered Mexicans and they exterminated Indians. They were proud of it. Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and John C. Calhoun wrote unequivocally of the superiority of whites to all the aforementioned groups. Not one American of the 18th, 19th or early 20th centuries envisioned America as anything other than a free white land. The claim that America should be a “melting pot” of diverse races was, and is., a lie.
Just who is responsible for that lie we shall examine later.
Americans need have no fear of the charge of racism. Racism imply means: White America preserved for whites. That is as it should be. The Mexicans and other Third World races pouring into America are complete racists. They openly proclaim themselves the true “native Americans” and arrogantly announce that they shall drive American whites back to Europe. They openly boast of their agenda and proclaim it to the skies. The media ignore this Third World racism and denounce white racism instead.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Who decided that your land, White America. should be converted into a Third World cesspool? Some of you may blame it on the “liberal media”.Others may blame it on corporations seeking cheap labor. Still others may blame it on corrupt politicians seeking votes. All of these explanations have partial value. But all of them fail the ultimate test. None of them, either taken together or individually,can explain the intense, unremitting slege hammer drive to destroy these United States as a white nation. The people who push this movement do not give a damn what the white population thinks. They did not give a damn what the white population thought when they crammed forced bussing and racial integration down the throat of the country in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Nor is this movement limited to these United States. It exists internationally. South Africa and Rhodesia were destroyed as white countries-with consequences now known to eveyone.
What is this international power which seeks to over run these United States and to make its borders and national soverignty meaningless? This power is easily identifiable. It is the same power which created communism in Russia in 1917. It is the same power which created a great League of Nations in Paris in 1919. It is the same power which drove 700,000 Arabs out of Palestine in 1948-and which sends over one hundred fifty thousand American soldiers to occupy Iraq today. It is the power of the Jews.
Where is the proof of this assertion? The proof is in the history of the immigration laws of these United States. The drive for immigration restriction in America began with the arrival in America of hundreds of thousands of Marxist Jews from Czarist Russia in the 1880’s. These aliens were “UnAmerican”-and the immigration law of 1924 was designed to keep them out. That law deliberately favored the Northern Europeans who had made the country great. The American Jewish Committee and Mr. Louis Marshall screamed-and have screamed ever since. When the 1924 law came up for renewal in 1951, the American Jewish Committee and the American Jewish Congress once again screamed that Nordic racists were trying to discriminate against an oppressed world in general-and Jewish communist refugees in particular. Senator Pat McCarran of Nevada, whose name appeared on the 1952 bill which eventually passed, would have none of it. America would remain a white, Anglo-Saxon land until 1965, when Senator Charles Schurmer and Representative Elizabeth Holtzman succeeded where Senator Jacob Javits and Representative Emmanuel Celler had failed. The Immigration Act of 1965 overthrew the white, Nordic structure of American society and told the Third World: “Come on in”.
Some of you, ladies and gentlemen, may ask: Why would Jews wish to overthrow the United States as a white nation? What have they to gain? To answer this question one must know something of Jewish history. Jews have been expelled from one European nation after another throughout the centuries. In Germany, the population under Adolf Hitler turned against them with deadly force in retaliation for the Jewish communist revolutions post World War One. Jews in America wield tremendous political and economic power. They most definitely have not been using that power to benefit the whites. The Jews know that if American whites ever catch on to what Jews have been doing, then a white nationalist reaction against Jewish power, as in Hitler’s Germany, could occur. It is precisely to prevent that eventuality that Jews have worked unceasingly to shatter the white racial back bone of America. If whites become fragmented and isolated in Third World America, Jewish power can rule unopposed.
It should be obvious to you, ladies and gentlemen, that as America has declined as a white nation, Jewish power has grown ever greater. That correlation is not mere happenstance. It is cause and effect. Some of you, ladies and gentlemen, may be offended by the hard truth. You may regard it as an unwarrated attack on personal friends of the Jewish faith. So be it. Political realities cannot be altered by personal relationships. The hard fact is that America is being destroyed as a white land because the interests of one particular group require that it be so. That group is the Jews. Both logic and the hard facts support the conclusion. Some of you shall be scared off by the Jewish angle. But unless, ladies and gentlemen, you understand why you are being flooded with the Third World, you will not be able to evict them from your land. You will be stymied at every attempt. And then, you will flail about aimlessly, attacking all the scape goats for all the wrong reasons. American whites are in a war for racial survival. The Third World immigrants are the army of the enemy but the Jews are the generals and the suppliers of that army. To destroy the enemy at the gates is essential, but to destroy the enemy within the gates is also essential. For unless that enemy is eliminated, permanently and for all time, the enemy without shall return, again and again.
To be continued…
June 8, 2007
Several of your leaders, such as Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul, are speaking out loudly and forcefully against the illegal immigration which is destroying the country. But there is a problem. Despite the forceful language being employed, the real issue is being ducked. The issue is not illegal immigration. The issue is race. Yes, let us use the horrid word. The issue is whether or not these United States shall remain a white country.
Were every illegal immigrant given a green card tomorrow the fundamental issue would remain: White America or La Raza America?
There is an uncanny similarity between the language of the preservation of slavery one hundred fifty years ago and the language of immigration restriction today. The South tried to hide the preservation of slavery behind universal language of “states rights”.
Whites today try to hide the preservation of white civilization behind universal language of illegal immigration. It is time to stop hiding. The men who wrote the Constitution were unabashed white supremacists. They enslaved blacks, they conquered Mexicans and they exterminated Indians. They were proud of it. Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and John C. Calhoun wrote unequivocally of the superiority of whites to all the aforementioned groups. Not one American of the 18th, 19th or early 20th centuries envisioned America as anything other than a free white land. The claim that America should be a “melting pot” of diverse races was, and is., a lie.
Just who is responsible for that lie we shall examine later.
Americans need have no fear of the charge of racism. Racism imply means: White America preserved for whites. That is as it should be. The Mexicans and other Third World races pouring into America are complete racists. They openly proclaim themselves the true “native Americans” and arrogantly announce that they shall drive American whites back to Europe. They openly boast of their agenda and proclaim it to the skies. The media ignore this Third World racism and denounce white racism instead.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Who decided that your land, White America. should be converted into a Third World cesspool? Some of you may blame it on the “liberal media”.Others may blame it on corporations seeking cheap labor. Still others may blame it on corrupt politicians seeking votes. All of these explanations have partial value. But all of them fail the ultimate test. None of them, either taken together or individually,can explain the intense, unremitting slege hammer drive to destroy these United States as a white nation. The people who push this movement do not give a damn what the white population thinks. They did not give a damn what the white population thought when they crammed forced bussing and racial integration down the throat of the country in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Nor is this movement limited to these United States. It exists internationally. South Africa and Rhodesia were destroyed as white countries-with consequences now known to eveyone.
What is this international power which seeks to over run these United States and to make its borders and national soverignty meaningless? This power is easily identifiable. It is the same power which created communism in Russia in 1917. It is the same power which created a great League of Nations in Paris in 1919. It is the same power which drove 700,000 Arabs out of Palestine in 1948-and which sends over one hundred fifty thousand American soldiers to occupy Iraq today. It is the power of the Jews.
Where is the proof of this assertion? The proof is in the history of the immigration laws of these United States. The drive for immigration restriction in America began with the arrival in America of hundreds of thousands of Marxist Jews from Czarist Russia in the 1880’s. These aliens were “UnAmerican”-and the immigration law of 1924 was designed to keep them out. That law deliberately favored the Northern Europeans who had made the country great. The American Jewish Committee and Mr. Louis Marshall screamed-and have screamed ever since. When the 1924 law came up for renewal in 1951, the American Jewish Committee and the American Jewish Congress once again screamed that Nordic racists were trying to discriminate against an oppressed world in general-and Jewish communist refugees in particular. Senator Pat McCarran of Nevada, whose name appeared on the 1952 bill which eventually passed, would have none of it. America would remain a white, Anglo-Saxon land until 1965, when Senator Charles Schurmer and Representative Elizabeth Holtzman succeeded where Senator Jacob Javits and Representative Emmanuel Celler had failed. The Immigration Act of 1965 overthrew the white, Nordic structure of American society and told the Third World: “Come on in”.
Some of you, ladies and gentlemen, may ask: Why would Jews wish to overthrow the United States as a white nation? What have they to gain? To answer this question one must know something of Jewish history. Jews have been expelled from one European nation after another throughout the centuries. In Germany, the population under Adolf Hitler turned against them with deadly force in retaliation for the Jewish communist revolutions post World War One. Jews in America wield tremendous political and economic power. They most definitely have not been using that power to benefit the whites. The Jews know that if American whites ever catch on to what Jews have been doing, then a white nationalist reaction against Jewish power, as in Hitler’s Germany, could occur. It is precisely to prevent that eventuality that Jews have worked unceasingly to shatter the white racial back bone of America. If whites become fragmented and isolated in Third World America, Jewish power can rule unopposed.
It should be obvious to you, ladies and gentlemen, that as America has declined as a white nation, Jewish power has grown ever greater. That correlation is not mere happenstance. It is cause and effect. Some of you, ladies and gentlemen, may be offended by the hard truth. You may regard it as an unwarrated attack on personal friends of the Jewish faith. So be it. Political realities cannot be altered by personal relationships. The hard fact is that America is being destroyed as a white land because the interests of one particular group require that it be so. That group is the Jews. Both logic and the hard facts support the conclusion. Some of you shall be scared off by the Jewish angle. But unless, ladies and gentlemen, you understand why you are being flooded with the Third World, you will not be able to evict them from your land. You will be stymied at every attempt. And then, you will flail about aimlessly, attacking all the scape goats for all the wrong reasons. American whites are in a war for racial survival. The Third World immigrants are the army of the enemy but the Jews are the generals and the suppliers of that army. To destroy the enemy at the gates is essential, but to destroy the enemy within the gates is also essential. For unless that enemy is eliminated, permanently and for all time, the enemy without shall return, again and again.
To be continued…
Monday, June 4, 2007
Who stole our culture? Hint: The answer ain't Kosher.
Editor's note: This column is an excerpt from Dr. Ted Baehr and Pat Boone's new book "The Culture-wise Family: Upholding Christian Values in a Mass Media World." In the book, entertainment expert Dr. Ted Baehr and legendary musician Pat Boone urge people to make wise choices for themselves and their families so they can protect their children from toxic messages in the culture.
The following is Chapter 10, written by historian Williams S. Lind.
By William S. Lind
Sometime during the last half-century, someone stole our culture. Just 50 years ago, in the 1950s, America was a great place. It was safe. It was decent. Children got good educations in the public schools. Even blue-collar fathers brought home middle-class incomes, so moms could stay home with the kids. Television shows reflected sound, traditional values.
Where did it all go? How did that America become the sleazy, decadent place we live in today – so different that those who grew up prior to the '60s feel like it's a foreign country? Did it just "happen"?
It didn't just "happen." In fact, a deliberate agenda was followed to steal our culture and leave a new and very different one in its place. The story of how and why is one of the most important parts of our nation's history – and it is a story almost no one knows. The people behind it wanted it that way.
What happened, in short, is that America's traditional culture, which had grown up over generations from our Western, Judeo-Christian roots, was swept aside by an ideology. We know that ideology best as "political correctness" or "multi-culturalism." It really is cultural Marxism, Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms in an effort that goes back not to the 1960s, but to World War I. Incredible as it may seem, just as the old economic Marxism of the Soviet Union has faded away, a new cultural Marxism has become the ruling ideology of America's elites. The No. 1 goal of that cultural Marxism, since its creation, has been the destruction of Western culture and the Christian religion.
(Column continues below)
To understand anything, we have to know its history. To understand who stole our culture, we need to take a look at the history of "political correctness."
Early Marxist theory
Before World War I, Marxist theory said that if Europe ever erupted in war, the working classes in every European country would rise in revolt, overthrow their governments and create a new Communist Europe. But when war broke out in the summer of 1914, that didn't happen. Instead, the workers in every European country lined up by the millions to fight their country's enemies. Finally, in 1917, a Communist revolution did occur, in Russia. But attempts to spread that revolution to other countries failed because the workers did not support it.
After World War I ended in 1918, Marxist theorists had to ask themselves the question: What went wrong? As good Marxists, they could not admit Marxist theory had been incorrect. Instead, two leading Marxist intellectuals, Antonio Gramsci in Italy and Georg Lukacs in Hungary (Lukacs was considered the most brilliant Marxist thinker since Marx himself) independently came up with the same answer. They said that Western culture and the Christian religion had so blinded the working class to its true, Marxist class interests, that a Communist revolution was impossible in the West, until both could be destroyed. That objective, established as cultural Marxism's goal right at the beginning, has never changed.
A new strategy
Gramsci famously laid out a strategy for destroying Christianity and Western culture, one that has proven all too successful. Instead of calling for a Communist revolution up front, as in Russia, he said Marxists in the West should take political power last, after a "long march through the institutions" – the schools, the media, even the churches, every institution that could influence the culture. That "long march through the institutions" is what America has experienced, especially since the 1960s. Fortunately, Mussolini recognized the danger Gramsci posed and jailed him. His influence remained small until the 1960s, when his works, especially the "Prison Notebooks," were rediscovered.
Georg Lukacs proved more influential. In 1918, he became deputy commissar for culture in the short-lived Bela Kun Bolshevik regime in Hungary. There, asking, "Who will save us from Western civilization?" he instituted what he called "cultural terrorism." One of its main components was introducing sex education into Hungarian schools. Lukacs realized that if he could destroy the country's traditional sexual morals, he would have taken a giant step toward destroying its traditional culture and Christian faith.
Far from rallying to Lukacs' "cultural terrorism," the Hungarian working class was so outraged by it that when Romania invaded Hungary, the workers would not fight for the Bela Kun government, and it fell. Lukacs disappeared, but not for long. In 1923, he turned up at a "Marxist Study Week" in Germany, a program sponsored by a young Marxist named Felix Weil who had inherited millions. Weil and the others who attended that study week were fascinated by Lukacs' cultural perspective on Marxism.
The Frankfurt School
Weil responded by using some of his money to set up a new think tank at Frankfurt University in Frankfurt, Germany. Originally it was to be called the "Institute for Marxism." But the cultural Marxists realized they could be far more effective if they concealed their real nature and objectives. They convinced Weil to give the new institute a neutral-sounding name, the "Institute for Social Research." Soon known simply as the "Frankfurt School," the Institute for Social Research would become the place where political correctness, as we now know it, was developed. The basic answer to the question "Who stole our culture?" is the cultural Marxists of the Frankfurt School.
At first, the Institute worked mainly on conventional Marxist issues such as the labor movement. But in 1930, that changed dramatically. That year, the Institute was taken over by a new director, a brilliant young Marxist intellectual named Max Horkheimer. Horkheimer had been strongly influenced by Georg Lukacs. He immediately set to work to turn the Frankfurt School into the place where Lukacs' pioneering work on cultural Marxism could be developed further into a full-blown ideology.
To that end, he brought some new members into the Frankfurt School. Perhaps the most important was Theodor Adorno, who would become Horkheimer's most creative collaborator. Other new members included two psychologists, Eric Fromm and Wilhelm Reich, who were noted promoters of feminism and matriarchy, and a young graduate student named Herbert Marcuse.
Advances in cultural Marxism
With the help of this new blood, Horkheimer made three major advances in the development of cultural Marxism. First, he broke with Marx's view that culture was merely part of society's "superstructure," which was determined by economic factors. He said that on the contrary, culture was an independent and very important factor in shaping a society.
Second, again contrary to Marx, he announced that in the future, the working class would not be the agent of revolution. He left open the question of who would play that role – a question Marcuse answered in the 1950s.
Third, Horkheimer and the other Frankfurt School members decided that the key to destroying Western culture was to cross Marx with Freud. They argued that just as workers were oppressed under capitalism, so under Western culture, everyone lived in a constant state of psychological repression. "Liberating" everyone from that repression became one of cultural Marxism's main goals. Even more important, they realized that psychology offered them a far more powerful tool than philosophy for destroying Western culture: psychological conditioning.
Today, when Hollywood's cultural Marxists want to "normalize" something like homosexuality (thus "liberating" us from "repression"), they put on television show after television show where the only normal-seeming white male is a homosexual. That is how psychological conditioning works; people absorb the lessons the cultural Marxists want them to learn without even knowing they are being taught.
The Frankfurt School was well on the way to creating political correctness. Then suddenly, fate intervened. In 1933, Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party came to power in Germany, where the Frankfurt School was located. Since the Frankfurt School was Marxist, and the Nazis hated Marxism, and since almost all its members were Jewish, it decided to leave Germany. In 1934, the Frankfurt School, including its leading members from Germany, was re-established in New York City with help from Columbia University. Soon, its focus shifted from destroying traditional Western culture in Germany to doing so in the United States. It would prove all too successful.
New developments
Taking advantage of American hospitality, the Frankfurt School soon resumed its intellectual work to create cultural Marxism. To its earlier achievements in Germany, it added these new developments.
Critical Theory
To serve its purpose of "negating" Western culture, the Frankfurt School developed a powerful tool it called "Critical Theory." What was the theory? The theory was to criticize. By subjecting every traditional institution, starting with family, to endless, unremitting criticism (the Frankfurt School was careful never to define what it was for, only what it was against), it hoped to bring them down. Critical Theory is the basis for the "studies" departments that now inhabit American colleges and universities. Not surprisingly, those departments are the home turf of academic political correctness.
Studies in prejudice
The Frankfurt School sought to define traditional attitudes on every issue as "prejudice" in a series of academic studies that culminated in Adorno's immensely influential book, "The Authoritarian Personality," published in 1950. They invented a bogus "F-scale" that purported to tie traditional beliefs on sexual morals, relations between men and women and questions touching on the family to support for fascism. Today, the favorite term the politically correct use for anyone who disagrees with them is "fascist."
Domination
The Frankfurt School again departed from orthodox Marxism, which argued that all of history was determined by who owned the means of production. Instead, they said history was determined by which groups, defined as men, women, races, religions, etc., had power or "dominance" over other groups. Certain groups, especially white males, were labeled "oppressors," while other groups were defined as "victims." Victims were automatically good, oppressors bad, just by what group they came from, regardless of individual behavior.
Though Marxists, the members of the Frankfurt School also drew from Nietzsche (someone else they admired for his defiance of traditional morals was the Marquis de Sade). They incorporated into their cultural Marxism what Nietzsche called the "transvaluation of all values." What that means, in plain English, is that all the old sins become virtues, and all the old virtues become sins. Homosexuality is a fine and good thing, but anyone who thinks men and women should have different social roles is an evil "fascist." That is what political correctness now teaches children in public schools all across America. (The Frankfurt School wrote about American public education. It said it did not matter if school children learned any skills or any facts. All that mattered was that they graduate from the schools with the right "attitudes" on certain questions.)
Media and entertainment
Led by Adorno, the Frankfurt School initially opposed the culture industry, which they thought "commodified" culture. Then, they started to listen to Walter Benjamin, a close friend of Horkheimer and Adorno, who argued that cultural Marxism could make powerful use of tools like radio, film and later television to psychologically condition the public. Benjamin's view prevailed, and Horkheimer and Adorno spent the World War II years in Hollywood. It is no accident that the entertainment industry is now cultural Marxism's most powerful weapon.
The growth of Marxism in the United States
After World War II and the defeat of the Nazis, Horkheimer, Adorno and most of the other members of the Frankfurt School returned to Germany, where the Institute re-established itself in Frankfurt with the help of the American occupation authorities. Cultural Marxism in time became the unofficial but all-pervasive ideology of the Federal Republic of Germany.
But hell had not forgotten the United States. Herbert Marcuse remained here, and he set about translating the very difficult academic writings of other members of the Frankfurt School into simpler terms Americans could easily grasp. His book "Eros and Civilization" used the Frankfurt School's crossing of Marx with Freud to argue that if we would only "liberate non-procreative eros" through "polymorphous perversity," we could create a new paradise where there would be only play and no work. "Eros and Civilization" became one of the main texts of the New Left in the 1960s.
Marcuse also widened the Frankfurt School's intellectual work. In the early 1930s, Horkheimer had left open the question of who would replace the working class as the agent of Marxist revolution. In the 1950s, Marcuse answered the question, saying it would be a coalition of students, blacks, feminist women and homosexuals – the core of the student rebellion of the 1960s, and the sacred "victims groups" of political correctness today. Marcuse further took one of political correctness's favorite words, "tolerance," and gave it a new meaning. He defined "liberating tolerance" as tolerance for all ideas and movements coming from the left, and intolerance for all ideas and movements coming from the right. When you hear the cultural Marxists today call for "tolerance," they mean Marcuse's "liberating tolerance" (just as when they call for "diversity," they mean uniformity of belief in their ideology).
The student rebellion of the 1960s, driven largely by opposition to the draft for the Vietnam War, gave Marcuse a historic opportunity. As perhaps its most famous "guru," he injected the Frankfurt School's cultural Marxism into the baby boom generation. Of course, they did not understand what it really was. As was true from the Institute's beginning, Marcuse and the few other people "in the know" did not advertise that political correctness and multi-culturalism were a form of Marxism. But the effect was devastating: a whole generation of Americans, especially the university-educated elite, absorbed cultural Marxism as their own, accepting a poisonous ideology that sought to destroy America's traditional culture and Christian faith. That generation, which runs every elite institution in America, now wages a ceaseless war on all traditional beliefs and institutions. They have largely won that war. Most of America's traditional culture lies in ruins.
A counter-strategy
Now you know who stole our culture. The question is, what are we, as Christians and as cultural conservatives, going to do about it?
We can choose between two strategies. The first is to try to retake the existing institutions – the public schools, the universities, the media, the entertainment industry and most of the mainline churches – from the cultural Marxists. They expect us to try to do that, they are ready for it, and we would find ourselves, with but small voice and few resources compared to theirs, making a frontal assault against prepared defensive positions. Any soldier can tell you what that almost always leads to: defeat.
There is another, more promising strategy. We can separate ourselves and our families from the institutions the cultural Marxists control and build new institutions for ourselves, institutions that reflect and will help us recover our traditional Western culture.
Several years ago, my colleague Paul Weyrich wrote an open letter to the conservative movement suggesting this strategy. While most other conservative (really Republican) leaders demurred, his letter resonated powerfully with grass-roots conservatives. Many of them are already part of a movement to secede from the corrupt, dominant culture and create parallel institutions: the homeschooling movement. Similar movements are beginning to offer sound alternatives in other aspects of life, including movements to promote small, often organic family farms and to develop community markets for those farms' products. If Brave New World's motto is "Think globally, act locally," ours should be "Think locally, act locally."
Thus, our strategy for undoing what cultural Marxism has done to America has a certain parallel to its own strategy, as Gramsci laid it out so long ago. Gramsci called for Marxists to undertake a "long march through the institutions." Our counter-strategy would be a long march to create our own institutions. It will not happen quickly, or easily. It will be the work of generations – as was theirs. They were patient, because they knew the "inevitable forces of history" were on their side. Can we not be equally patient, and persevering, knowing that the Maker of history is on ours?
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55833
The following is Chapter 10, written by historian Williams S. Lind.
By William S. Lind
Sometime during the last half-century, someone stole our culture. Just 50 years ago, in the 1950s, America was a great place. It was safe. It was decent. Children got good educations in the public schools. Even blue-collar fathers brought home middle-class incomes, so moms could stay home with the kids. Television shows reflected sound, traditional values.
Where did it all go? How did that America become the sleazy, decadent place we live in today – so different that those who grew up prior to the '60s feel like it's a foreign country? Did it just "happen"?
It didn't just "happen." In fact, a deliberate agenda was followed to steal our culture and leave a new and very different one in its place. The story of how and why is one of the most important parts of our nation's history – and it is a story almost no one knows. The people behind it wanted it that way.
What happened, in short, is that America's traditional culture, which had grown up over generations from our Western, Judeo-Christian roots, was swept aside by an ideology. We know that ideology best as "political correctness" or "multi-culturalism." It really is cultural Marxism, Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms in an effort that goes back not to the 1960s, but to World War I. Incredible as it may seem, just as the old economic Marxism of the Soviet Union has faded away, a new cultural Marxism has become the ruling ideology of America's elites. The No. 1 goal of that cultural Marxism, since its creation, has been the destruction of Western culture and the Christian religion.
(Column continues below)
To understand anything, we have to know its history. To understand who stole our culture, we need to take a look at the history of "political correctness."
Early Marxist theory
Before World War I, Marxist theory said that if Europe ever erupted in war, the working classes in every European country would rise in revolt, overthrow their governments and create a new Communist Europe. But when war broke out in the summer of 1914, that didn't happen. Instead, the workers in every European country lined up by the millions to fight their country's enemies. Finally, in 1917, a Communist revolution did occur, in Russia. But attempts to spread that revolution to other countries failed because the workers did not support it.
After World War I ended in 1918, Marxist theorists had to ask themselves the question: What went wrong? As good Marxists, they could not admit Marxist theory had been incorrect. Instead, two leading Marxist intellectuals, Antonio Gramsci in Italy and Georg Lukacs in Hungary (Lukacs was considered the most brilliant Marxist thinker since Marx himself) independently came up with the same answer. They said that Western culture and the Christian religion had so blinded the working class to its true, Marxist class interests, that a Communist revolution was impossible in the West, until both could be destroyed. That objective, established as cultural Marxism's goal right at the beginning, has never changed.
A new strategy
Gramsci famously laid out a strategy for destroying Christianity and Western culture, one that has proven all too successful. Instead of calling for a Communist revolution up front, as in Russia, he said Marxists in the West should take political power last, after a "long march through the institutions" – the schools, the media, even the churches, every institution that could influence the culture. That "long march through the institutions" is what America has experienced, especially since the 1960s. Fortunately, Mussolini recognized the danger Gramsci posed and jailed him. His influence remained small until the 1960s, when his works, especially the "Prison Notebooks," were rediscovered.
Georg Lukacs proved more influential. In 1918, he became deputy commissar for culture in the short-lived Bela Kun Bolshevik regime in Hungary. There, asking, "Who will save us from Western civilization?" he instituted what he called "cultural terrorism." One of its main components was introducing sex education into Hungarian schools. Lukacs realized that if he could destroy the country's traditional sexual morals, he would have taken a giant step toward destroying its traditional culture and Christian faith.
Far from rallying to Lukacs' "cultural terrorism," the Hungarian working class was so outraged by it that when Romania invaded Hungary, the workers would not fight for the Bela Kun government, and it fell. Lukacs disappeared, but not for long. In 1923, he turned up at a "Marxist Study Week" in Germany, a program sponsored by a young Marxist named Felix Weil who had inherited millions. Weil and the others who attended that study week were fascinated by Lukacs' cultural perspective on Marxism.
The Frankfurt School
Weil responded by using some of his money to set up a new think tank at Frankfurt University in Frankfurt, Germany. Originally it was to be called the "Institute for Marxism." But the cultural Marxists realized they could be far more effective if they concealed their real nature and objectives. They convinced Weil to give the new institute a neutral-sounding name, the "Institute for Social Research." Soon known simply as the "Frankfurt School," the Institute for Social Research would become the place where political correctness, as we now know it, was developed. The basic answer to the question "Who stole our culture?" is the cultural Marxists of the Frankfurt School.
At first, the Institute worked mainly on conventional Marxist issues such as the labor movement. But in 1930, that changed dramatically. That year, the Institute was taken over by a new director, a brilliant young Marxist intellectual named Max Horkheimer. Horkheimer had been strongly influenced by Georg Lukacs. He immediately set to work to turn the Frankfurt School into the place where Lukacs' pioneering work on cultural Marxism could be developed further into a full-blown ideology.
To that end, he brought some new members into the Frankfurt School. Perhaps the most important was Theodor Adorno, who would become Horkheimer's most creative collaborator. Other new members included two psychologists, Eric Fromm and Wilhelm Reich, who were noted promoters of feminism and matriarchy, and a young graduate student named Herbert Marcuse.
Advances in cultural Marxism
With the help of this new blood, Horkheimer made three major advances in the development of cultural Marxism. First, he broke with Marx's view that culture was merely part of society's "superstructure," which was determined by economic factors. He said that on the contrary, culture was an independent and very important factor in shaping a society.
Second, again contrary to Marx, he announced that in the future, the working class would not be the agent of revolution. He left open the question of who would play that role – a question Marcuse answered in the 1950s.
Third, Horkheimer and the other Frankfurt School members decided that the key to destroying Western culture was to cross Marx with Freud. They argued that just as workers were oppressed under capitalism, so under Western culture, everyone lived in a constant state of psychological repression. "Liberating" everyone from that repression became one of cultural Marxism's main goals. Even more important, they realized that psychology offered them a far more powerful tool than philosophy for destroying Western culture: psychological conditioning.
Today, when Hollywood's cultural Marxists want to "normalize" something like homosexuality (thus "liberating" us from "repression"), they put on television show after television show where the only normal-seeming white male is a homosexual. That is how psychological conditioning works; people absorb the lessons the cultural Marxists want them to learn without even knowing they are being taught.
The Frankfurt School was well on the way to creating political correctness. Then suddenly, fate intervened. In 1933, Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party came to power in Germany, where the Frankfurt School was located. Since the Frankfurt School was Marxist, and the Nazis hated Marxism, and since almost all its members were Jewish, it decided to leave Germany. In 1934, the Frankfurt School, including its leading members from Germany, was re-established in New York City with help from Columbia University. Soon, its focus shifted from destroying traditional Western culture in Germany to doing so in the United States. It would prove all too successful.
New developments
Taking advantage of American hospitality, the Frankfurt School soon resumed its intellectual work to create cultural Marxism. To its earlier achievements in Germany, it added these new developments.
Critical Theory
To serve its purpose of "negating" Western culture, the Frankfurt School developed a powerful tool it called "Critical Theory." What was the theory? The theory was to criticize. By subjecting every traditional institution, starting with family, to endless, unremitting criticism (the Frankfurt School was careful never to define what it was for, only what it was against), it hoped to bring them down. Critical Theory is the basis for the "studies" departments that now inhabit American colleges and universities. Not surprisingly, those departments are the home turf of academic political correctness.
Studies in prejudice
The Frankfurt School sought to define traditional attitudes on every issue as "prejudice" in a series of academic studies that culminated in Adorno's immensely influential book, "The Authoritarian Personality," published in 1950. They invented a bogus "F-scale" that purported to tie traditional beliefs on sexual morals, relations between men and women and questions touching on the family to support for fascism. Today, the favorite term the politically correct use for anyone who disagrees with them is "fascist."
Domination
The Frankfurt School again departed from orthodox Marxism, which argued that all of history was determined by who owned the means of production. Instead, they said history was determined by which groups, defined as men, women, races, religions, etc., had power or "dominance" over other groups. Certain groups, especially white males, were labeled "oppressors," while other groups were defined as "victims." Victims were automatically good, oppressors bad, just by what group they came from, regardless of individual behavior.
Though Marxists, the members of the Frankfurt School also drew from Nietzsche (someone else they admired for his defiance of traditional morals was the Marquis de Sade). They incorporated into their cultural Marxism what Nietzsche called the "transvaluation of all values." What that means, in plain English, is that all the old sins become virtues, and all the old virtues become sins. Homosexuality is a fine and good thing, but anyone who thinks men and women should have different social roles is an evil "fascist." That is what political correctness now teaches children in public schools all across America. (The Frankfurt School wrote about American public education. It said it did not matter if school children learned any skills or any facts. All that mattered was that they graduate from the schools with the right "attitudes" on certain questions.)
Media and entertainment
Led by Adorno, the Frankfurt School initially opposed the culture industry, which they thought "commodified" culture. Then, they started to listen to Walter Benjamin, a close friend of Horkheimer and Adorno, who argued that cultural Marxism could make powerful use of tools like radio, film and later television to psychologically condition the public. Benjamin's view prevailed, and Horkheimer and Adorno spent the World War II years in Hollywood. It is no accident that the entertainment industry is now cultural Marxism's most powerful weapon.
The growth of Marxism in the United States
After World War II and the defeat of the Nazis, Horkheimer, Adorno and most of the other members of the Frankfurt School returned to Germany, where the Institute re-established itself in Frankfurt with the help of the American occupation authorities. Cultural Marxism in time became the unofficial but all-pervasive ideology of the Federal Republic of Germany.
But hell had not forgotten the United States. Herbert Marcuse remained here, and he set about translating the very difficult academic writings of other members of the Frankfurt School into simpler terms Americans could easily grasp. His book "Eros and Civilization" used the Frankfurt School's crossing of Marx with Freud to argue that if we would only "liberate non-procreative eros" through "polymorphous perversity," we could create a new paradise where there would be only play and no work. "Eros and Civilization" became one of the main texts of the New Left in the 1960s.
Marcuse also widened the Frankfurt School's intellectual work. In the early 1930s, Horkheimer had left open the question of who would replace the working class as the agent of Marxist revolution. In the 1950s, Marcuse answered the question, saying it would be a coalition of students, blacks, feminist women and homosexuals – the core of the student rebellion of the 1960s, and the sacred "victims groups" of political correctness today. Marcuse further took one of political correctness's favorite words, "tolerance," and gave it a new meaning. He defined "liberating tolerance" as tolerance for all ideas and movements coming from the left, and intolerance for all ideas and movements coming from the right. When you hear the cultural Marxists today call for "tolerance," they mean Marcuse's "liberating tolerance" (just as when they call for "diversity," they mean uniformity of belief in their ideology).
The student rebellion of the 1960s, driven largely by opposition to the draft for the Vietnam War, gave Marcuse a historic opportunity. As perhaps its most famous "guru," he injected the Frankfurt School's cultural Marxism into the baby boom generation. Of course, they did not understand what it really was. As was true from the Institute's beginning, Marcuse and the few other people "in the know" did not advertise that political correctness and multi-culturalism were a form of Marxism. But the effect was devastating: a whole generation of Americans, especially the university-educated elite, absorbed cultural Marxism as their own, accepting a poisonous ideology that sought to destroy America's traditional culture and Christian faith. That generation, which runs every elite institution in America, now wages a ceaseless war on all traditional beliefs and institutions. They have largely won that war. Most of America's traditional culture lies in ruins.
A counter-strategy
Now you know who stole our culture. The question is, what are we, as Christians and as cultural conservatives, going to do about it?
We can choose between two strategies. The first is to try to retake the existing institutions – the public schools, the universities, the media, the entertainment industry and most of the mainline churches – from the cultural Marxists. They expect us to try to do that, they are ready for it, and we would find ourselves, with but small voice and few resources compared to theirs, making a frontal assault against prepared defensive positions. Any soldier can tell you what that almost always leads to: defeat.
There is another, more promising strategy. We can separate ourselves and our families from the institutions the cultural Marxists control and build new institutions for ourselves, institutions that reflect and will help us recover our traditional Western culture.
Several years ago, my colleague Paul Weyrich wrote an open letter to the conservative movement suggesting this strategy. While most other conservative (really Republican) leaders demurred, his letter resonated powerfully with grass-roots conservatives. Many of them are already part of a movement to secede from the corrupt, dominant culture and create parallel institutions: the homeschooling movement. Similar movements are beginning to offer sound alternatives in other aspects of life, including movements to promote small, often organic family farms and to develop community markets for those farms' products. If Brave New World's motto is "Think globally, act locally," ours should be "Think locally, act locally."
Thus, our strategy for undoing what cultural Marxism has done to America has a certain parallel to its own strategy, as Gramsci laid it out so long ago. Gramsci called for Marxists to undertake a "long march through the institutions." Our counter-strategy would be a long march to create our own institutions. It will not happen quickly, or easily. It will be the work of generations – as was theirs. They were patient, because they knew the "inevitable forces of history" were on their side. Can we not be equally patient, and persevering, knowing that the Maker of history is on ours?
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55833
Sunday, May 6, 2007
The Racism and Anti-Semitism Word Games
By Steven Palese
When whites engage in favoritism toward other whites (and therefore discrimination against non-whites), it’s called “racism”. When other groups engage in favoritism, it’s called “ethnic solidarity”. When whites object to Jewish favoritism, it’s called “anti-semitism”. When you buy into these word games, it’s called being a useful idiot.
THE DUAL PERSECUTION STRATEGY
When Michael Eisner was appointed CEO of Disney, one of the five mega-media conglomerates (Disney has many media assets besides Mickey Mouse, such as ABC), within months he purged upper management to make way for fellow Jews. Had any victim objected to such Jewish favoritism, they would have been subject to neo-McCarthyite persecution for “anti-semitism”. These persecutions are led by Jewish organizations (such as the ADL) and consist of organized blacklists, intimidation and economic strangulation of dissidents. See the Walt-Mearsheimer report on the Israel Lobby for details regarding Neo-McCarthyite persecution methodology.
Michael Medved boasted: “The famous Disney organization, which was founded by Walt Disney, a gentile Midwesterner who allegedly harbored anti-semitic attitudes, now features Jewish personnel in nearly all its most powerful positions.”
(”Jews Run Hollywood. So What?,” Moment magazine, August 1996.)
The policy: When whites object to Jewish favoritism they face neo-McCarthyite persecution for “anti-semitism”.
Reverse the scenario. Suppose whites took over Disney, purged most Jews from upper management and replaced them with fellow whites. Would such an attempt by whites to compete on equal terms be tolerated?
When Michael Regan, an Assistant District Attorney expressed concern for white group interests, the mildest form of pro-white favoritism, he was immediately subject to neo-McCarthyite persecution for “racism”. As with “anti-semitism” witch hunts, these are led by Jewish organizations and involve neo-McCarthyite persecution methodology.
“Regan’s fate was sealed when the Washington Post published his observation, from an interview at the conference, that “you can see European Christian Americans are an endangered species.” Though there was nothing explicitly “anti-Semitic” in Regan’s comment, the Anti-Defamation League, America’s most feared and effective thought police, promptly attacked his reputation and his livelihood. In a letter to Regan’s superior, the ADL’s regional director for New York decreed: “Those kinds of comments are absolutely inappropriate for a public official to make,” and Regan was promptly out of a job.”
(http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol6no1/61-EditorsNote.pdf )
The policy: When whites engage in favoritism they face neo-McCarthyite persecution for “racism”.
The Dual Persecution Strategy is this policy of both persecuting whites who object to favoritism by others and persecuting whites who get uppity and try the same. This “favoritism for them, persecution for us” double standard creates a systemic competitive imbalance designed to prevent whites from competing on equal terms.
ETHNIC CLOSED SHOPS
An uneven playing field makes it easy for ethnic closed shops to squeeze whites out of any field. The long term consequence is what we see happening in vital organs of society such as media:
“Four of the largest five entertainment giants are now run or owned by Jews. Murdoch’s News Corp (at number four) is the only gentile holdout — however Rupert is as pro-Israel as any Jew, probably more so.”
(Los Angeles Jewish Times, ‘Yes, Virginia, Jews Do Control the Media,’ Oct. 29-Nov. 11, 1999 p. 14)
“Time-Warner, Disney, Viacom-CBS, News Corporation and Universal rule the entertainment world in a way that the old Hollywood studio chiefs only dreamed of. And, after all the deals and buyouts, four of the five are run by Jews. We’re back to where we started, bigger than ever.”
(Jewish Week, 9-17-99, 12)
“The greatest concentration of Jews, however, is at the producer level — and it is the producers who decide which stories will go on the air, and how long, and in what order, they will run. In 1982, before a shift in assignments, the executive producers of all three evening newscasts were Jews, as were the executive producers of CBS’s 60 Minutes and ABC’s 20/20. And Jews are almost equally prominent at the ’senior producer’ and ‘broadcast producer’ levels as well as in senior management. When Reuven Frank stepped down as president of NBC News in 1984, for example, he was replaced by Laurence Grossman, who left the presidency of PBS to take the position.”
(Charles Silberman, A Certain People. American Jews and Their Lives Today, Summit Books, 1985, p. 154)
If you buy into “racism” or “anti-semitism” word games, you’re consenting to the Dual Persecution Strategy. In doing so, you’re supporting an uneven playing field designed to dispossess whites and empower Jews and therefore, by extension, empower the Jewish lobby’s agenda. This includes advancing Zionism (Middle East wars), racial engineering (immigration, diversity and multiculturalism) and censorship (political correctness and “hate” speech laws).
This agenda is set by an interlocking network of over 300 national Jewish organizations and 4000 foundations with a combined annual budget of $6 billion. (http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/books-Preface.html ).
Although advancing Zionism is this network’s top priority, promoting mass immigration is a close second,
““Once you get past the Israel issue, it’s near the top of the list of priorities for a lot of groups,” said Haddar Susskind, Washington representative for the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA).
“It’s one issue where there’s mostly agreement between progressive grass-roots groups and the big national organizations,” said Mik Moore, director of policy for the Jewish Funds for Justice. “There is a real sense of common cause.””
(http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13852)
INTIMIDATION OF POLITICIANS AND MEDIA
The political process is also affected. James Abourezk, former US Senator from South Dakota, clearly describes how the “anti-semitism” side of the Dual Persecution Strategy keeps the US Congress in line:
“I can tell you from personal experience that, at least in the Congress, the support Israel has in that body is based completely on political fear–fear of defeat by anyone who does not do what Israel wants done. I can also tell you that very few members of Congress–at least when I served there–have any affection for Israel or for its Lobby. What they have is contempt, but it is silenced by fear of being found out exactly how they feel. I’ve heard too many cloakroom conversations in which members of the Senate will voice their bitter feelings about how they’re pushed around by the Lobby to think otherwise. In private one hears the dislike of Israel and the tactics of the Lobby, but not one of them is willing to risk the Lobby’s animosity by making their feelings public.”
(”Former Senator James Abourezk on Chomsky and the Israel Lobby in the US”, Al-Jazeerah, December 5, 2006.)
James Abourzek also makes clear that the “anti-semitism” side of the Dual Persecution Strategy is what holds those elements of the media not controlled through ownership or staffing in check:
“Secondly, the Lobby is quite clear in its efforts to suppress any congressional dissent from the policy of complete support for Israel which might hurt annual appropriations. Even one voice is attacked, as I was, on grounds that if Congress is completely silent on the issue, the press will have no one to quote, which effectively silences the press as well. Any journalists or editors who step out of line are quickly brought under control by well organized economic pressure against the newspaper caught sinning.”
(”Former Senator James Abourezk on Chomsky and the Israel Lobby in the US”, Al-Jazeerah, December 5, 2006.)
If you buy into “racism” or “anti-semitism” word games, you’re consenting to the Dual Persecution Strategy. In doing so, you’re supporting the Jewish lobby’s coordinated intimidation of politicians and media and therefore, by extension, you’re supporting the Jewish lobby’s agenda. This includes advancing Zionism, racial engineering and censorship.
COLLABORATORS AND USEFUL IDIOTS
Collaborators typically get a pay off for selling out. In apartheid South Africa, blacks who were against black group interests and favored white group interests (uncle Toms) were allowed into the black elite. In Judeo-America, whites who are against white group interests and favor minority group interests (collaborators) get to stay in the white elite. White elites who violate this adapted “Code of the Uncle Tom” are filtered out by the Dual Persecution Strategy.
Immigration is an issue that illustrates these contrasting white and minority group interests and the anomalous behavior of white elites. Majority opinion has been against immigration, legal or illegal, since polling began. (http://www.numbersusa.com/interests/publicoparchive.html ). Yet, decade after decade, immigration continues. What is blocking the democratic process?
A recent opinion poll shows that while almost 80% of the public is against mass immigration and 60% consider it a critical threat, only 14% of the opinion elite (members of Congress, the administration, leaders of church groups, business executives, union leaders, journalists, academics, and heads of major interest groups) share the public’s concern. (http://www.vdare.com/roberts/immigrationdictatorship.htm ).
Although collaborators are a minority, they are part of the elite. As opinion polls show, they are not powerful enough to convince the majority that racial engineering (immigration, diversity and multiculturalism) is good. But, being part of the elite, they are powerful enough to block the democratic process and force racial engineering on the public against its will.
Although collaborators agree that an African who wants to become a minority in his own country is either an “uncle Tom” or clinically insane, they themselves are not insane and do not consider themselves such. The vast majority collaborates out of fear of the Dual Persecution Strategy or out of career opportunism, not because they actually believe in Zionism, racial engineering or censorship.
In summary, if you buy into “racism” or “anti-semitism” word games, you’re supporting Zionism, racial engineering and censorship. If you’re white and not part of the opinion elite, you’re collaborating for nothing.
A useful idiot is someone who sells out for free.
When whites engage in favoritism toward other whites (and therefore discrimination against non-whites), it’s called “racism”. When other groups engage in favoritism, it’s called “ethnic solidarity”. When whites object to Jewish favoritism, it’s called “anti-semitism”. When you buy into these word games, it’s called being a useful idiot.
THE DUAL PERSECUTION STRATEGY
When Michael Eisner was appointed CEO of Disney, one of the five mega-media conglomerates (Disney has many media assets besides Mickey Mouse, such as ABC), within months he purged upper management to make way for fellow Jews. Had any victim objected to such Jewish favoritism, they would have been subject to neo-McCarthyite persecution for “anti-semitism”. These persecutions are led by Jewish organizations (such as the ADL) and consist of organized blacklists, intimidation and economic strangulation of dissidents. See the Walt-Mearsheimer report on the Israel Lobby for details regarding Neo-McCarthyite persecution methodology.
Michael Medved boasted: “The famous Disney organization, which was founded by Walt Disney, a gentile Midwesterner who allegedly harbored anti-semitic attitudes, now features Jewish personnel in nearly all its most powerful positions.”
(”Jews Run Hollywood. So What?,” Moment magazine, August 1996.)
The policy: When whites object to Jewish favoritism they face neo-McCarthyite persecution for “anti-semitism”.
Reverse the scenario. Suppose whites took over Disney, purged most Jews from upper management and replaced them with fellow whites. Would such an attempt by whites to compete on equal terms be tolerated?
When Michael Regan, an Assistant District Attorney expressed concern for white group interests, the mildest form of pro-white favoritism, he was immediately subject to neo-McCarthyite persecution for “racism”. As with “anti-semitism” witch hunts, these are led by Jewish organizations and involve neo-McCarthyite persecution methodology.
“Regan’s fate was sealed when the Washington Post published his observation, from an interview at the conference, that “you can see European Christian Americans are an endangered species.” Though there was nothing explicitly “anti-Semitic” in Regan’s comment, the Anti-Defamation League, America’s most feared and effective thought police, promptly attacked his reputation and his livelihood. In a letter to Regan’s superior, the ADL’s regional director for New York decreed: “Those kinds of comments are absolutely inappropriate for a public official to make,” and Regan was promptly out of a job.”
(http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol6no1/61-EditorsNote.pdf )
The policy: When whites engage in favoritism they face neo-McCarthyite persecution for “racism”.
The Dual Persecution Strategy is this policy of both persecuting whites who object to favoritism by others and persecuting whites who get uppity and try the same. This “favoritism for them, persecution for us” double standard creates a systemic competitive imbalance designed to prevent whites from competing on equal terms.
ETHNIC CLOSED SHOPS
An uneven playing field makes it easy for ethnic closed shops to squeeze whites out of any field. The long term consequence is what we see happening in vital organs of society such as media:
“Four of the largest five entertainment giants are now run or owned by Jews. Murdoch’s News Corp (at number four) is the only gentile holdout — however Rupert is as pro-Israel as any Jew, probably more so.”
(Los Angeles Jewish Times, ‘Yes, Virginia, Jews Do Control the Media,’ Oct. 29-Nov. 11, 1999 p. 14)
“Time-Warner, Disney, Viacom-CBS, News Corporation and Universal rule the entertainment world in a way that the old Hollywood studio chiefs only dreamed of. And, after all the deals and buyouts, four of the five are run by Jews. We’re back to where we started, bigger than ever.”
(Jewish Week, 9-17-99, 12)
“The greatest concentration of Jews, however, is at the producer level — and it is the producers who decide which stories will go on the air, and how long, and in what order, they will run. In 1982, before a shift in assignments, the executive producers of all three evening newscasts were Jews, as were the executive producers of CBS’s 60 Minutes and ABC’s 20/20. And Jews are almost equally prominent at the ’senior producer’ and ‘broadcast producer’ levels as well as in senior management. When Reuven Frank stepped down as president of NBC News in 1984, for example, he was replaced by Laurence Grossman, who left the presidency of PBS to take the position.”
(Charles Silberman, A Certain People. American Jews and Their Lives Today, Summit Books, 1985, p. 154)
If you buy into “racism” or “anti-semitism” word games, you’re consenting to the Dual Persecution Strategy. In doing so, you’re supporting an uneven playing field designed to dispossess whites and empower Jews and therefore, by extension, empower the Jewish lobby’s agenda. This includes advancing Zionism (Middle East wars), racial engineering (immigration, diversity and multiculturalism) and censorship (political correctness and “hate” speech laws).
This agenda is set by an interlocking network of over 300 national Jewish organizations and 4000 foundations with a combined annual budget of $6 billion. (http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/books-Preface.html ).
Although advancing Zionism is this network’s top priority, promoting mass immigration is a close second,
““Once you get past the Israel issue, it’s near the top of the list of priorities for a lot of groups,” said Haddar Susskind, Washington representative for the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA).
“It’s one issue where there’s mostly agreement between progressive grass-roots groups and the big national organizations,” said Mik Moore, director of policy for the Jewish Funds for Justice. “There is a real sense of common cause.””
(http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13852)
INTIMIDATION OF POLITICIANS AND MEDIA
The political process is also affected. James Abourezk, former US Senator from South Dakota, clearly describes how the “anti-semitism” side of the Dual Persecution Strategy keeps the US Congress in line:
“I can tell you from personal experience that, at least in the Congress, the support Israel has in that body is based completely on political fear–fear of defeat by anyone who does not do what Israel wants done. I can also tell you that very few members of Congress–at least when I served there–have any affection for Israel or for its Lobby. What they have is contempt, but it is silenced by fear of being found out exactly how they feel. I’ve heard too many cloakroom conversations in which members of the Senate will voice their bitter feelings about how they’re pushed around by the Lobby to think otherwise. In private one hears the dislike of Israel and the tactics of the Lobby, but not one of them is willing to risk the Lobby’s animosity by making their feelings public.”
(”Former Senator James Abourezk on Chomsky and the Israel Lobby in the US”, Al-Jazeerah, December 5, 2006.)
James Abourzek also makes clear that the “anti-semitism” side of the Dual Persecution Strategy is what holds those elements of the media not controlled through ownership or staffing in check:
“Secondly, the Lobby is quite clear in its efforts to suppress any congressional dissent from the policy of complete support for Israel which might hurt annual appropriations. Even one voice is attacked, as I was, on grounds that if Congress is completely silent on the issue, the press will have no one to quote, which effectively silences the press as well. Any journalists or editors who step out of line are quickly brought under control by well organized economic pressure against the newspaper caught sinning.”
(”Former Senator James Abourezk on Chomsky and the Israel Lobby in the US”, Al-Jazeerah, December 5, 2006.)
If you buy into “racism” or “anti-semitism” word games, you’re consenting to the Dual Persecution Strategy. In doing so, you’re supporting the Jewish lobby’s coordinated intimidation of politicians and media and therefore, by extension, you’re supporting the Jewish lobby’s agenda. This includes advancing Zionism, racial engineering and censorship.
COLLABORATORS AND USEFUL IDIOTS
Collaborators typically get a pay off for selling out. In apartheid South Africa, blacks who were against black group interests and favored white group interests (uncle Toms) were allowed into the black elite. In Judeo-America, whites who are against white group interests and favor minority group interests (collaborators) get to stay in the white elite. White elites who violate this adapted “Code of the Uncle Tom” are filtered out by the Dual Persecution Strategy.
Immigration is an issue that illustrates these contrasting white and minority group interests and the anomalous behavior of white elites. Majority opinion has been against immigration, legal or illegal, since polling began. (http://www.numbersusa.com/interests/publicoparchive.html ). Yet, decade after decade, immigration continues. What is blocking the democratic process?
A recent opinion poll shows that while almost 80% of the public is against mass immigration and 60% consider it a critical threat, only 14% of the opinion elite (members of Congress, the administration, leaders of church groups, business executives, union leaders, journalists, academics, and heads of major interest groups) share the public’s concern. (http://www.vdare.com/roberts/immigrationdictatorship.htm ).
Although collaborators are a minority, they are part of the elite. As opinion polls show, they are not powerful enough to convince the majority that racial engineering (immigration, diversity and multiculturalism) is good. But, being part of the elite, they are powerful enough to block the democratic process and force racial engineering on the public against its will.
Although collaborators agree that an African who wants to become a minority in his own country is either an “uncle Tom” or clinically insane, they themselves are not insane and do not consider themselves such. The vast majority collaborates out of fear of the Dual Persecution Strategy or out of career opportunism, not because they actually believe in Zionism, racial engineering or censorship.
In summary, if you buy into “racism” or “anti-semitism” word games, you’re supporting Zionism, racial engineering and censorship. If you’re white and not part of the opinion elite, you’re collaborating for nothing.
A useful idiot is someone who sells out for free.
Friday, April 27, 2007
What is anti-semitism, and from where does it originate?
Being Jewish means never having to say you’re sorry, or even answer your critics. It is noted that you never actually addressed any relevant points made. So, come on–tell us how there were not five dancing Jews filming and celebrating the attacks on WTC on 9/11. Tell us how you like to see people in jail for questioning your hoax of hoaxes.
Being Jewish also means thinking that you never have to explain or get to the reality of terms you’ve coined. “Holocaust,” “antisemitism,” these are words that Jews have made up in order to obscure reality.
“Holocaust” is supposed to name the “Systematic extermination of mainly Jews by the German Nazi regime during World War II.” It also happens to be the name of the single alleged historical event that is above questioning. Historians as well as the general public can make outrageous allegations and interpretations of history with not much more than a peep. However, mention that there was a swimming pool and an orchestra at Auchwitz, or that there are records of German soldiers being punished for mildly mistreating prisoners (far milder than what is allowed according to the U.C.M.J.), or that Eli Wiesel never mentioned gas chambers in his book on the “Holocaust,” or that the “soap and lampshades” slander has been quietly withdrawn, or that there was a “six million dead Jews” claim after World War I, or any number of the dozens of facts that show the “Holocaust” for what it is–another Jewish lie.
Those who genuine souls who seek truth need nothing more to pique their interest than the knowledge that, in the countries in question with regard to the “Holocaust,” it is literally against the law for researchers, scholars, and the general public to come to a differing conclusion than the one handed down by the management. Heretics of the “Holocaust” religion are in prison at this moment for saying that the Earth revolves around the Sun coming to a different conclusion about what exactly happened to Jews in Europe during World War II. Philosophers have always had a hard time saying anything conclusive about “truth,” but I think most would agree that truth never needs the force of law and violence behind it.
“Antisemitism.” This would come close to explaining my position if I hated Semites on the mere basis of them being Semitic. I have nothing against Semites, but yes, people (including myself) don’t like Jews! Indeed, I join an illustrious group of men such as Martin Luther, Henry Ford, Voltaire, and hundreds of others in my distaste not because Jews are Jews, but because of what Jews do, like here, here, here, here, and here.
We say “no.” We rebel against your intellectual tyranny and hatred by all means, and we will fight you for every inch. Rebellion is back, and like so many times before in history, the population is waking up to what you Jews are doing.
Being Jewish also means thinking that you never have to explain or get to the reality of terms you’ve coined. “Holocaust,” “antisemitism,” these are words that Jews have made up in order to obscure reality.
“Holocaust” is supposed to name the “Systematic extermination of mainly Jews by the German Nazi regime during World War II.” It also happens to be the name of the single alleged historical event that is above questioning. Historians as well as the general public can make outrageous allegations and interpretations of history with not much more than a peep. However, mention that there was a swimming pool and an orchestra at Auchwitz, or that there are records of German soldiers being punished for mildly mistreating prisoners (far milder than what is allowed according to the U.C.M.J.), or that Eli Wiesel never mentioned gas chambers in his book on the “Holocaust,” or that the “soap and lampshades” slander has been quietly withdrawn, or that there was a “six million dead Jews” claim after World War I, or any number of the dozens of facts that show the “Holocaust” for what it is–another Jewish lie.
Those who genuine souls who seek truth need nothing more to pique their interest than the knowledge that, in the countries in question with regard to the “Holocaust,” it is literally against the law for researchers, scholars, and the general public to come to a differing conclusion than the one handed down by the management. Heretics of the “Holocaust” religion are in prison at this moment for saying that the Earth revolves around the Sun coming to a different conclusion about what exactly happened to Jews in Europe during World War II. Philosophers have always had a hard time saying anything conclusive about “truth,” but I think most would agree that truth never needs the force of law and violence behind it.
“Antisemitism.” This would come close to explaining my position if I hated Semites on the mere basis of them being Semitic. I have nothing against Semites, but yes, people (including myself) don’t like Jews! Indeed, I join an illustrious group of men such as Martin Luther, Henry Ford, Voltaire, and hundreds of others in my distaste not because Jews are Jews, but because of what Jews do, like here, here, here, here, and here.
We say “no.” We rebel against your intellectual tyranny and hatred by all means, and we will fight you for every inch. Rebellion is back, and like so many times before in history, the population is waking up to what you Jews are doing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
