France's hate of America started shortly after America liberated it post WWII
hank
we elected Jerry Lewis as President.
They, the French hate us...have always hated us...
we should have left France in German hands.
It is a pity that so many of our 19 year old boys died
liberating them.
hank
.................................
A. Dulcimer
>The only way France would like our president is if
>
>we elected Jerry Lewis as President.
>
>They, the French hate us...have always hated us...
Yes, especially when they were busy helping us break away from
England.
>
>we should have left France in German hands.
>
spoken like a true idiot
>It is a pity that so many of our 19 year old boys died
>
>liberating them.
It's a pity that you weren't one of them bigot
>
>hank
>.................................
-----
"The only truly new ideas [the right] has come up with
in the last twenty years are:(1) supply side economics, which is a way of redistributing
the wealth upward toward those who already have more than
they know what to do with, and; (2) creationism, which is a parallel idea for redistributing
ignorance out from its fundamentalist strongholds to those
who know more than they need to.
-Barbara Ehrenreich
Sid9
I didn't find that at all true when I visited France.
Though I don't speak French, the people were
consistently friendly, courteous, grateful and very helpful.
Like more than half of American voters, the French people cannot stomach
Bush,jr
GW *AWOL* Chimpzilla
> The only way France would like our president is if
>
> we elected Jerry Lewis as President.
The only way France would be like us is if they elected Jerry Lewis. I used to
laugh a lot at AWOL Bush -- until people started dying. We gotta get rid of
that asshole.
>
> They, the French hate us...have always hated us...
>
> we should have left France in German hands.
>
> It is a pity that so many of our 19 year old boys died
>
> liberating them.
>
> hank
> .................................
--
"There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas -- that says, fool
me once, shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again."
http://www.diymedia.net/audio/mp3/tdntb-bushwack2.mp3
Relaxification
> hank wrote:
> > The only way France would like our president is if
> >
> > we elected Jerry Lewis as President.
> >
> > They, the French hate us...have always hated us...
> >
> > we should have left France in German hands.
> >
> > It is a pity that so many of our 19 year old boys died
> >
> > liberating them.
> >
> > hank
> > .................................
>
Such depth of insight. Such wit. Are you a professional political analyist?
Robert R.
France doesn't hate America. I base this opinion on being an American
who lived and worked in France for a year.
Robert R.
hank
> On 24 Aug 2004 07:04:55 -0700, rightw...@hotmail.com (hank) wrote:
>
> >The only way France would like our president is if
> >
> >we elected Jerry Lewis as President.
> >
> >They, the French hate us...have always hated us...
>
> Yes, especially when they were busy helping us break away from
> England.
>
>
> >
> >we should have left France in German hands.
> >
>
> spoken like a true idiot
>
> >It is a pity that so many of our 19 year old boys died
> >
> >liberating them.
>
>
> It's a pity that you weren't one of them bigot
>
I cant wait for school to start so we can get rid of
your sorry black ass.
love
hank
..........................................
hank
...........................
You didnt notice because to notice you would have
to have a brain....
So whatever you experence...is the truth?
hank
....................................................
Nightwing
They hated us so much that in 1783 they sailed 3000 miles across the
Atlantic baled out Washington by driving the British out of America and
became the first nation to recognize us as an independent nation -all for
the express purpose of hating us.
As for those GI's that died. I am pretty sure that they are much more
disgusted that ignorance and hatred as come home to roost in the USA by
uneducated morons such as yourself who have never bothered to see the world.
After it was fighting such bigotry that they gave up their lives for.
Maybe you should think about that before spouting your hate...
Nightwing
"Robert R." <rober...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d6295449.04082...@posting.google.com...
MrPepper11
> hank wrote:
>
> > The only way France would like our president is if
> >
> > we elected Jerry Lewis as President.
>
> The only way France would be like us is if they elected Jerry Lewis. I used to
> laugh a lot at AWOL Bush -- until people started dying. We gotta get rid of
> that asshole.
N. Korea calls Bush "human trash"
24 August 2004
SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea has hurled invective at U.S. President
George W. Bush for a second day, calling him a political idiot and
human trash, and has said six-party talks on Pyongyang's nuclear
ambitions appear doomed.
A day earlier, a Foreign Ministry spokesman for the isolated communist
state described Bush as a tyrannical imbecile who put Adolf Hitler in
the shade and said Pyongyang could see no justification to negotiate
with his administration...
Bush had "hurled malignant slanders and calumnies" against the
leadership in Pyongyang, the North's official KCNA news agency said in
a statement on Tuesday, referring to campaign comments made earlier
this month that Pyongyang should be required to disarm.
"It is the greatest tragedy for the U.S. that Bush, a political idiot
and human trash, still remains in the presidential office of the
world's only superpower, styling himself an emperor of the world,"
KCNA said.
"Had Bush have even an iota of elementary reason, morality and ability
to judge reality as a human being, he would have not dared defile the
political system of his dialogue partner so malignantly.
Washington has already rejected Monday's comments as inappropriate...
David Galehouse
"hank" <rightw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:52d5a174.04082...@posting.google.com...
Hank questioning someone's (anyone's) intelligence? You're a real pant load,
crank! Thanks for the chuckle!
Wexford
Nothing like the retort of a rightard to loosen things up. I spent a
month in France a few years ago. The French were friendlier to
strangers than the people of Boston, New York, Philadelphia and Los
Angeles. Their subways and streets are cleaner. Their food tastes
better (because it's not all chain restaurants), and their country
side is prettier than the rural areas of the United States.
Wexford
User
--
I wish that death to mankind comes so quickly that mankind will not have
time to destroy natures potential for future evolution.
- Pentti Linkola
Music writing:
http://www.anus.com/zine/music/
Political beliefs:
http://www.blackplague.org/holocaust/
http://www.panix.com/~clays/Una/
Philosophy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas
http://tinyurl.com/6l2nk
http://www.anus.com/zine/philosophy/nihilism.html
Maze:
http://www.anus.com/etc/prozakhistan/autoexec.htm
We forfeit three-fourths of ourselves in order to be like other people.
- Arthur Schopenhauer
"GW *AWOL* Chimpzilla" <patriot-...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eTLWc.52052$Fg5.30382@attbi_s53...
hank
If, Sir...you were able to read...you would note that
I said "after WWII"
you dolt.
love
hank
...................................
hank
Then why dont you move there......and join the
unwashed French...we know you hate America.
hank
..............................................
Wm. B. Yeats
Do the math, Hank. WWII ended in 1945, it is now 2004. This is after
WWII. And the French do not hate Americans - only the boors (as our
current Prez) who feels that it's America's destiny to rule the world.
Include in the above the American tourists in their wing-tips, shorts,
and black socks who can be found in the Louvre daily. I've been to
France on many occasions and have never had a problem with the French
save one head waiter who backed way off when I chastised him for his
rudeness in his mother tongue.
WB Yeats
Relaxification
> > Though I don't speak French, the people were
> > consistently friendly, courteous, grateful and very helpful.
> >
> > Like more than half of American voters, the French people cannot stomach
> > Bush,jr
>
> ...........................
> You didnt notice because to notice you would have
>
> to have a brain....
>
> So whatever you experence...is the truth?
>
>
> hank
> ....................................................
Where have you visited in France, Hank? How's your French?
I agree with the poster. I've always enjoyed my stays in France.
It's a wonderful country.
Sid9
I have three personal incidents in France.
First...We were changing trains in the Paris Subway and did not know where
we needed to go in a major hub.
I stopped a woman and showed her the name of the train I was looking for.
She understood we were Americans. She turned from her own destination and
led us the right train platform.
Second....Looking for and address in Paris we walked past a police station.
I ask the officer posted at the door for help. He said he spoke no English
but he would get his sargent. The sargent came out and gave us directions in
English.
Third... On road marked with the turrets of WWII American tanks
memorializing the path taken by American armor we stopped at a restaurant.
The local residents made their gratitude for American participayion in their
liberation very clear.
Each interaction with citizen of France was marked by courtesy and
friendliness.
The French don't dislike Americans.
It's the arrogance of George Bush that
the French and most of the rest of the world dislikes.
Igpay Ipublicanrey
Ah, but Jerry Lewis would have been a superior president
to the little shithead we have now.
--
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful.
And so are we..
Our enemies never stop thinking about ways to harm our country and our
people.
And neither do we.."
-George W. Bush, August 5, 2002
Igpay Ipublicanrey
Why don't you move to Germany of the late 30's, Hankie?
A little right wing nazi shithead like you would be
comfortable there.
hank
The French are a vile dirty nasty race....they killed each other
during WWII....some helping the Germans......killing their own...
they loath soap and toothpaste...and you sir...
by association...seem to fit right in...as you say in your
own words....viv la America.
love
hank
..................................................
Relaxification
> > > >
> > > > we elected Jerry Lewis as President.
> > > >
> > > > They, the French hate us...have always hated us...
> > > >
> > > > we should have left France in German hands.
> > > >
> > > > It is a pity that so many of our 19 year old boys died
> > > >
> > > > liberating them.
> > > >
> > > > hank
> > > > .................................
> > >
> > > France doesn't hate America. I base this opinion on being an American
> > > who lived and worked in France for a year.
> > >
> > > Robert R.
> .................................
> If, Sir...you were able to read...you would note that
>
> I said "after WWII"
>
> you dolt.
>
> love
> hank
> ...................................
Actually, Hank, you didn't say that. You said, "They, the French hate
us...have always hated us."
Unless I missed it.
Also, I imagine Robert R was there after WWII.
And you seem to hate the French. So why does it bother you that they,
as you put it, hate us? Are you the only guy, or are we the only
country, who gets to hate people?
Je trouve que vous etes tres, tres stupide. Et vous avez des
problemes avec la logique, je pense.
Igpay Ipublicanrey
Hank exhibits a broad spectrum of ignorance and hatred. Like O'Reilly
and much of the modern right wing, he doesn't know shit about
France and the French.
Most of the world joins the French in their disdain for Geroge W. Bush
and his administration, including the majority of Americans.
Wm. B. Yeats
Gee, thanks for the compliment. The French are not a race, idiot.
They're a nationality. And I'm sure they're extremely pleased about
your misconception of them - it keeps you out of their country and in
your double-wide.
WB Yeats
Vive la Belle France
hank
I wish it were a double wide sometimes.....my house taxes are almost five
grand...
hank
.........................................
hank
And ,,,if you check..most of the world is either socialist...
or communist........you dolt...
Who gives a flying F what they think...
except perhaps the democratic socialist party....
hank
.............................
Topaz
America needs to do.
Here are some quotes from a German pamphlet titled "Why the Aryan
Law?":
"In 1793 the famous philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte, author of
"Speeches to the German Nation," wrote a pamphlet titled "A
Contribution to Correcting Judgments about the French Revolution." It
contained the following significant sentence:
"In nearly all the nations of Europe, a powerful, hostile government
is growing, and is at war with all the others, and sometimes oppresses
the people in dreadful ways: It is Jewry!"
The French Revolution, with its "ideas for the improvement of
humanity" thundered past, and in the noise the people who had believed
in world brotherhood entirely missed this serious warning. What Fichte
warned the word about then has today become fact in nearly all the
nations of the world. The Jewish people, once only tolerated, knew how
to raise a hue and cry about discrimination and persecution, winning
the sympathy of the world for the "poor Jews." They increasingly
infiltrated deep within our national organism, growing to have power
over every single area of our national life. The old saga, the "Edda,"
observes that one blocks a river at its source. The failure to do that
was the great mistake of the German people. Thank God, it is not too
late. Our Fuehrer Adolf Hitler recognized the importance of the
problem for Germany's rebirth, and outlined its solution in his
program.
Martin Luther wrote this of the Jews in his book "The Jews and their
Lies": "They hold we Christians captive in our own land. They have
seized our goods by their cursed usury, they mock and insult us
because we work. They are our lords, and we and our goods belong to
them." If in the coming days the Jewish race is driven out of the
non-Jewish world, it will have at least this consolation: It has made
clear to them for all time the value of maintaining the purity of race
and blood in clear, understandable and unforgettable ways.
National Socialist racial legislation has reduced the influence of
Jewry in all professions, and above all excluded them from the leading
offices of the nation. That is an important step in the relationship
between Germans and Jews, but one cannot ignore the fact that we have
not yet fully eliminated the influence of the Jewish foreign body in
German national life. It is not a question of German-Jewish
coexistence, rather of making as great as possible a separation
between blood and blood.
Three things are involved here:
A knowledge of the basic principles of National Socialist racial
thinking,
An understanding of the growth and expansion of Jewry,
The dominant sociological position of Jewry, to show how it dominated
the German people economically, intellectually and politically..."
"In discussing the Jewish Question, even today one encounters
resistance and misunderstandings, especially in intellectual circles.
This can only be explained by the intellectual education of the
political past. This is especially evident when one discusses the
fundamental issues.
Whenever a new thought arises in the world and calls people to
practical action, the old world resists because it feels its
foundations threatened. Its old standpoint has ruled for decades, and
it looks uncomprehendingly at a new idea that does not fit into the
accustomed patterns of thinking. That is natural. When the new idea
and worldview are truly revolutionary, they are on a different level
of human thought and feeling, and there can be no compromise. Its
realization depends on people who support it, and who are ready to
fight to transform the life of the individual and of the nation in
every way..."
"In the long run, no idea is better suited to guarantee peace between
nations than National Socialist racial thinking, which calls for the
furtherance and maintenance of one's own race and one's own people,
and supports similar efforts on the part of other nations..."
"The new Germany that views its own race and ethnicity positively must
therefore distinguish within its territory between one race and
another, between one people and another. Mixing of blood harms both
sides. Race is an issue for every people if they are to live according
to their nature. The German people is not so arrogant as to believe
that is is the chosen people. The familiar quotation from Geibel, "The
world should enjoy German ways," should be understood in the context
of the dreams of world betterment of those past days.
The National Socialist racial viewpoint has clear consequences for the
relationship between Germans and Jews. People have often said that
National Socialism's approach to the racial question is purely
negative and destructive, and that its essential characteristic is
radical anti-Semitism. One must grant that we made the Jewish question
clearer than anyone else, and taught an entire generation that had
been taught to see all people the same to recognize the importance of
the Jewish question not only for our people, but for the entire world.
Our treatment of the Jewish problem in the years before we took power
must be seen as the political education of the German people, which
had lost its racial instincts to a dangerous degree.
The question took on its own nature in Germany, Many citizens had
their eyes opened, and the simultaneous appeal to all the heroic and
manly virtues of the German man resulted in a racial selection of
political fighters who today stand at the head of the new state.
Formerly, the Jewish question, as seen by the state, was a matter of
complete equality and the unhindered immigration of Jews from the
East. This is the best proof of how racial feeling and consciousness
had been lost. Our tone was not purely negative or the simple
rejection of others, rather the emphasis was on the positive values of
our own people. This does require noting that Jewry through its
Marxist class struggle leadership role and its international financial
measures aimed at Germany supported every kind of anti-national action
in the cultural and political fields. Jewry should not complain if its
anti-German activities, which have no counterpart in any other
country, call forth from the people the defensive reaction of
anti-Semitism.
The starting point of the discussion is the scientific fact that the
Jew is different than the German. This is neither arrogant nor
boastful, it simply is the way things are. For us, the Jewish question
is a question between two peoples. Its characteristics are determined
by the racially determined differences between the two, and through
the unusual sociological and numerical development of Jewry in the
course of its history, developments that are particularly evident in
the last decades through a constantly growing process of foreign
infiltration that has reached an intolerable level for the German
people.
More than once over its history, the German people has absorbed
foreign elements, but they were racially identical or similar
population groups, as for example was the case with the Huguenots.
With the Jews, things are fundamentally different. They are seen
everywhere as foreigners, and see themselves that way as well. Walter
Rathenau said it most clearly as early as 1897: "How strange! In the
middle of German life there is a separate, foreign tribe that stands
out in every way with its hot-tempered behavior. An Asiatic horde has
settled on the sands of Mark Brandenburg." Einstein said something in
1931: "I have to laugh when I hear the phrase 'German citizen of the
Jewish faith.' These citizens first of all want nothing to do with my
poor Eastern European brothers, and second do not want to be sons of
my (Jewish) people, but only members of the Jewish cultural community.
Is that honest? Can a non-Jew respect such people? I am not a German
citizen. I am a Jew, and am happy to belong to the Jewish people."
The most remarkable thing about Jewry is that it has not disappeared
over the millennia, even though it lacks its own territory and
language. Even more remarkable is that it lacks the main
characteristic of a minority population, its own pockets of settlement
to which it could if necessary retreat. Only time will tell if
Palestine will someday fill this gap. That question is made more
difficult by the fact that the Arabs maintain their claim on
Palestine. Whatever the twists of history, the Jew has always remained
the same, whether as a grain speculator in ancient Rome or as a bank
or stock exchange potentate in the modern era. They were always able
to control the wealth of whole nations. Nations and peoples once their
contemporaries have vanished, leaving only words and crumbled
monuments behind; only the Jew remains. In ancient days we see him
carrying on his business in the trading centers of the Mediterranean.
In the Middle Ages he provided money for German nobles and free
cities. Today he rules the banks and stock exchanges of the whole
world, forcing the nations under the yoke of financial capitalism. The
power of this people of 15 million rests on these international
relations. This is how they seem to fulfill the commandment of Jehovah
- the world domination of the chosen people.
The secret of the Jewish people, which has enabled them to survive
through all of history's twists and turns, is that it has always
recognized the laws of blood, even anchoring them in the laws of its
religion. The consciousness of blood and family that believing Jews
have has been stronger than all the other forces of history, giving us
a unique example of a people without its own land and language, which
still meets the criteria for being a people, and which has outlasted
many other peoples.
This historic manifestation of Jewry, which is unique, brings to the
fore the question of the relationship between the host and guest
peoples. It has been answered in differing ways throughout history,
depending on the worldview and thinking then predominant.
Since the Jews were dispersed they have been held together by the laws
of their religion and their faith that they were the chosen people.
Until the middle of the 18th Century, Germans and Jews lived apart
from each other. The Jews had no opportunity to become involved in the
religious of political-intellectual life of their host people. On the
other hand, they could practice their own customs without
interference. They had their own religion and their own laws. During
the Middle Ages, the Ghetto was the way Jewry could maintain itself in
the midst of other peoples and fulfill its Jewish duties, which grew
out of its race, origins and laws. The values and ideals of other
peoples were not affected. This separation was only possible because
the views of the host people were as strong as those of the Jews.
According to the writer Grau: "There was no racial defilement or
baptism, no attempt to join a nation that one could never be a member
of, and no attempt to intellectually silence the host people." In the
Ghetto of the Middle Ages, the Jew developed his nature and
characteristics, which were later to become significant, while
maintaining the community of blood and race. The latter is
particularly important, since the strict physical separation between
the host and guest peoples maintained the foreign nature that we daily
see so clearly, now that the barriers between have long since fallen.
Even in the Middle Ages, the most important thing was not the
difference between the Christian and Mosaic faiths. Rather, there was
on the one hand the natural sense that the Jew was of a foreign race,
and on the other hand the strict law of blood which demanded a clear
separation if the Jews were to fulfill Jehovah's mission, which had
guided them from the beginning. Just this has always been kept in the
background by historians, who present the Ghetto as a tolerated asylum
for Jewish martyrs persecuted on account of their faith. There is a
gap to be filled here. The task of historians writing from our new
viewpoint will be to examine the portrait of the Ghetto of the Middle
Ages to discover its importance for the development of Jewry and the
relationship between the guest and host peoples. Even the Jewish side
is demanding that. O. Karbach criticizes historical writing because it
"in significant ways conceals the historical fact that the Jews in the
centuries before their emancipation possessed a legal standing that
was better than the greater part of the rest of the population, namely
complete or partial agricultural freedom. (Ordnung in der Judenfrage,
edited by E. Czermak, Reinhold, Vienna, 1933).
The barriers between Germans and Jews fell as a result of the
Enlightenment and the French Revolution. The path to Jewish world
domination would take a different direction than pious, observant Jews
had expected. Emancipation made it possible to build Jewish dominance
through secular means. With the disappearance of racial consciousness,
only religious differences seemed to remain. It seemed at the time
unjust to give someone a preferred position only because of his
religious beliefs, which are an entirely personal matter. At the time,
this was tied to a belief in human equality and freedom. It was
revolutionary. It shattered the church dogmas that had ruled for
centuries and was the foundation of liberal thinking during the last
two hundred years. The new goal was humanity itself, and nothing stood
in the way of racial mixing. Some had the quiet hope that assimilation
would mean the absorption of Jewry. Jewry itself, however, was more
than willing to use the opportunities of religious assimilation, which
opened the path to all important positions, even to political
leadership. As H. Heine said, "baptism was the ticket to European
culture." Gradually, an intermixing with the German people developed,
particularly in its cultural elite. Foreign blood infiltrated to a
degree that we realize only today now that the "Law to Reestablish a
Professional Bureaucracy" has exposed numerous sources of foreign
blood. This process has greatly accelerated during the last fourteen
years.
Today the age of raceless thinking is being displaced by the ideals of
human variability. Values are rooted in origin and territory, and each
group has a historic mission based on its own unique and eternal
values. Such new racial thinking will of course secure the opposition
of those who either through faith or reason still believe in the unity
of humanity in culture, social order and organization. The Jews will
naturally oppose any discussion of race, since the denial of any
significant differences between people is the foundation of his
infiltration of Western European society. The Jew finds any mention of
the racial question as an attack on his current existence. His leading
role in every anti-national area is characteristic of his mimicry, and
is necessary for his continued existence. That explains the phrase
"German citizen of the Jewish faith."
The recognition that the Jew is of a foreign and different race along
with the reawakening of German racial consciousness must necessarily
lead to a change in the relations between Germans and Jews.
There is one point to keep in mind before examining the statistics.
Only those people who claimed to be Jews and were members of the
Mosaic faith were counted as Jews, not those who for internal or
external reasons belonged to another religion, or those who claimed to
be dissident Jews and therefore did not belong to the standard groups.
This is regrettable for our purposes, since we are interested not in
the influence of those who still claimed the Jewish religion, rather
those who belonged to the Jewish race! That includes all Jews, whether
of the Mosaic faith or baptized Christians. That is just what the
supporters of the Talmud and the Old Testament always said. They
complained that the state opened all offices to those "without
character," to "Christmas Jews," even admitting them to the officer
corps! The statistics given here must therefore be increased
significantly. The Jews are a race, and baptism does not in any way
change the foreign characteristics that are hostile to the German
people..."
Of course, the intellectual atmosphere that enabled the Jew to
infiltrate the German body politic quickly led the Jew himself to see
that conditions for his advancement were favorable, and that the way
to the top was open. He also realized what the population statistics
meant, indeed they were particularly clear to him, since 2/3 of his
kind lived in the big cities, the centers of the liberal worldview..."
"Nothing shows the differences between our people and the Jews more
clearly than their likes and dislikes for certain occupations. In some
occupations, particularly those that are most important for the nation
as a whole, the foreign influence on German life has reached an
intolerable extent not seen elsewhere in Europe. The preference for
certain occupations also gives us an interesting insight into the
spiritual nature of Jewry.
The following figures show how much critical occupations in Germany
have been infiltrated.
112,188 Jews, or 58.8%, far more than half, are employed in the area
of "commerce and transportation, including restaurants and taverns,"
but only 17.11% (3,248,145) of the population as a whole. In the area
of "industry and craft work, including mining and construction,"
19,318 Jews (25.85%) were employed, including 31.82% of foreigners.
For the population as a whole, the figure was 40.94% (7,771,799).
The figures in the field of "public administration, the judiciary, the
army and navy, churches, legal professionals and the independent
professions." 11,324 Jews were employed there, or 5.94% , over against
921,048 (4.85%) in the general population..."
In 1925, 0.81% of Jews were active as civil servants and the army and
navy, as opposed to 2.3% of the general population. In the church,
religious occupations, the legal system and the other independent
professions, the Jewish percentage is 4.3% as opposed to 2% of the
general population. This shows that the Jews are over-represented when
compared to the general population, particularly in the independent
professions.
The percentage of the Jewish population in government positions may
seem less than that of the general population, but the difference is
not as great as the figures first suggest. The most recent figures,
not yet entirely complete, suggest that a not insignificant number of
them are baptized Jews or dissidents formerly of the Jewish faith who
denied their Jewishness to gain an official position.
4.35% of Jews are employed in the medical and health care system,
including welfare, and 2.0% of foreign Jews. The figure for the
general population is 1.88%. The Jewish percentage is thus 2 1/2 times
as high as that of the general population.
In summary, Jewish occupational patterns differ from those of the rest
of the population. Jewry seems to have an aversion to agricultural
work, industrial labor and crafts. They are greatly over-represented
in commerce and transportation, including the entire banking system.
They are also over-represented in the independent professions and the
health care system. These figures alone demonstrate a clear difference
between the native German population and alien Jewry.
Very similar conditions prevail in all Western European nations and
also in North America, since Jews have spread throughout the world in
areas with growing industry and in cities that are centers of economic
and financial power. It is not true, as is often claimed, that the Jew
was systematically forced into commerce by the laws of the various
nations; rather, commerce particularly suits the Jew's nature. This is
supported by Dr. Arthur Ruppin, a scholar respected by the Jews. He
writes in his book The Jews of the Present (2nd edition, Cologne and
Leipzig, 1911, p. 45):
"Thanks to their significant commercial gifts (!), the Jews soon
enjoyed great success in commerce and industry. For 2000 years they
have seemed predestined to work in commerce. It is false to claim, as
some do, that Jews became merchants primarily because the Christians
denied them other occupations during the Middle Ages. The Jews did not
become merchants in Europe, rather they entered the profession in
growing numbers ever since the Babylonian Captivity in Syria, Egypt
and Babylon [because they dislike labor and prefer to have others work
for them! The Editor]. In Palestine until the dispersion they did live
primarily by agriculture. In the Diaspora, there was hardly anywhere
that the Jews lived by agriculture. The Middle Ages did not make them
into merchants. It only affirmed legally that which history had
already established. It is after all the rule that economic laws
generally do not create new conditions, but only legalize and regulate
that which already exists. The law would never have limited the Jews
to commerce in Europe if they had not already immigrated primarily as
merchants..."
Nearly all national economists agree that the Jews owe their role as
merchants not to chance, but to their excellent abilities as
merchants. As W. Sombart wrote: "The Jewish race is by nature the
incarnation of the capitalism-mercantile spirit." (Der moderne
Kapitalismus, Vol. 2, p. 349. Leipzig, 1902). Many others agree..."
"Similarly differences in the relative proportion of Jews by the
self-employed are evident in the medical field, which employs 0.5% of
the general population but 2.8% of the Jews, nearly six times as many.
Similar statistics are found in the cultural area (theater, film,
radio, education, teaching, etc.). The 0.4% of the general population
are employed there, 2.6% of the Jews, also about six times as many.
In the area of public administration and the judiciary, the percentage
of Jews in high positions is 2.0%, over against 1.3% of the general
population, nearly twice as high. The significance of these figures
becomes clear that when one realizes that the 2.3% of professional
Jews in public administration and the judiciary are in a branch where
the Jewish percentage of employees is only 0.81%. That means that the
Jews are especially represented in the important positions that
influence the whole government and leading branches of the economy.."
"The statistics may be interesting. The Jewish workers included 11,406
in industry, 2,220 in commerce and transportation, and 726 in
agriculture.
The following figures show most clearly the different social structure
of Jewry in Prussia over against the general population, and reveal
clearly Jewry's leading role in public life:.."
"On 19 May 1933 Reich Chancellor Adolf Hitler gave an interview to
Bernard Ridder, an American journalist for the New York State
Newspaper. Discussing the Jewish Question in Germany, he said: "Should
I allow thousands of German-blooded people to be destroyed so that the
Jews can live and work in luxury while millions starve, falling victim
to Bolshevism out of desperation?"
Can the justice of his words be doubted when one recalls that,
according to the Prussian census of 16 June 1925 6.9% of all
independent pharmacists, 17.9% of all independent physicians, 4.8% of
all independent artists, 27% of all independent attorneys, 4.6% of
editors, 11% of theater directors, 7.5% of actors, and 14.8% of all
independent dentists were Jews! And these huge figures when the Jews
were only 1% of the population! Is that anything other than a
Jewdification of our entire cultural system?! And what would these
figures look like if one had had the ability to include baptized Jews
and dissidents?..."
"Berlin is the Jewish metropolis in Germany. The process of
Jewdification is considerably further along. That is understandable,
since one is in the immediate vicinity of the protective arms of
democracy and social democracy, where developments can occur
unhindered. Thus in Berlin on 16 June 1925 32.2% of the pharmacists
were Jews, as were 49.9% of the physicians, 7.5 of the graphic
artists, 50.2% of the attorneys, 8.5% of the editors, 14.2% of the
directors and theater heads, 12.3% of the actors and 37.5% of the
dentists.
These figures cry out for legal limitations on Jewry, and it is
surprising that former governments did not take the appropriate action
to tell the Jews "this far and no further."
The Jewish influence gave the rest of the world an entirely false
impression of the nature of the German people. Inside the Reich, they
poisoned the soul of the people, and all social and political
relationships. Until the national uprising, the leaders of the
National Socialist movement were persecuted, defamed and suppressed by
a system that was a willing tool in the hands of a foreign and
different race. The national revolution freed the German people from
this foreign influence, which had also dominated and ruined the German
press and public life in significant ways.
He who wants to understand the German revolution of 1933 must
understand that it had this goal: 'Germany must be governed by Germans
for Germans.' The central idea of the National Socialist revolution
was the longing of the German people to once more be master in every
area of its own life. As a great, confident people, we demand only
this of the other peoples: that they permit us, as their equals, to
govern ourselves as we wish and find our own way to happiness (Reich
Minister of the Interior Dr. Frick)..."
"The Jewdification of our colleges and universities over the years has
reached almost frightening proportions. We begin with a publication
from 1931. Karl Hoppmann, in his volume "On the State of Jewdification
in the Academic professions" found the following figures:
1. University of Berlin:
Medical faculty . . . . over 50%
Philosophical faculty . . . . 25%
2. University of Göttingen, 32% of the professors were Jewish:
Legal Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47.0%
Medical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.0%
Philosophical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40.0%
Mathematics and Natural Sciences . . . 23.0%
3. University of Breslau
Legal Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30.0%
Medical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.0%
Philosophical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.0%
4. University of Frankfurt (Main)
Legal Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55.0%
Philosophical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.0%
Mathematics and Natural Sciences . . . 28.0%
Medical faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.0%
Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.0%
Jewry has a dominating role on the stock exchange. The board of the
Berlin stock exchange is almost exclusively Jewish. In the various
committees, the percentage of the Jewish race is sometimes many times
as high as the Aryan. The committees include:
That means that 117 or 147 members are Jews, or nearly 80%.
The extent of the Jewdification of German theater and film is evident
from 1931 figures. Of 234 theater directors, 118 (50.4%) were Jews, 92
(39.3%) were non-Jewish.
Berlin led in this area as well, with 23 of 29 theater directors (80%)
Jewish.
The situation in film is similar. The Viennese Catholic periodical
"Schönere Zukunft," which certainly cannot be accused of
anti-Semitism, wrote the following in its 3 February 1929 issue:
"The percentage of Jewry in today's film industry is so high, at least
by us in Germany, that there is only a tiny part left for Christian
firms."
Jewry has long sought political influence as well. This formerly
happened in covert ways, mostly through direct or indirect control of
money matters. Nearly every noble once had his financial Jew. Since
1848, the birth of political parties in Germany, Jewry has openly
sought to become a political power. The Jew Marx was the founder of
Marxist doctrine, the Jew Lassalle was the founder of the Social
Democratic Party. The founders of the Independent Social Democratic
Party of Germany were the Jews Bernstein, Haase, Kautsky, Hilferding,
Cohn, Davidsohn, Simon, Rosenfeld, Eisner, Levi, etc. Carl Liebknecht
and Rosa Luxemberg were the leaders of the Communist Party, and
recently the Jews Rosenfeld and Seydewitz founded the Socialist
Workers Party. Jews sat in the press offices and the various editorial
offices of party newspapers, and above all in the various
parliamentary factions..."
"We think it necessary to mention that the Communist wave that
threatened to destroy Germany politically, economically and
intellectually can primarily be traced back to Jewry.
Is it any wonder that the Jew is arrogant? The greater the Jewish
influence the more secure they feel, and the more ominously and
clearly their character and goals becomes clear: Pride, intolerance
and superiority on the one hand, a drive for world domination on the
other. Several pointed Jewish statements are examples:
Hochmut: The familiar "Dorfgeschichte"-Auerbach says: "We Jews are the
most intelligent race." "We are the chosen ones," says Dr. Berhard
Cohn (Jüdisch-Politische Streitfragen, 20, 22). He continues: "We may
carry our head high and demand particular respect. We must not only be
treated equally, but better. We deserve the particular respect of
other peoples."
Rabbi Dr. Rulf wrote a book ("Aruchas bar-Ammni," Israel's Healing,
Frankfurt a. M. 1883) in which he says: "The Jewish people is a
blessing for all peoples. The blessing has followed on the heels of
the Jews. A whole world lives from the Jews, who feed everyone, and
everywhere spread wealth and pleasure, comfort and prosperity. Only
the commerce of the Jews creates value. Work alone does not do that.
Half of the world's population would starve without the Jews."
The Jew Dr. Duschak wrote: "The world could not exist without the
Jews." The well-known Jew Sacher-Masoch explained the hatred of
anti-Semites against the Jews in this way: It is the same hatred a
Negro feels against the whites because of their superiority.
That the Jews even went so far as to suggest to Bismark that he make
the Jewish Day of Atonement a national holiday is certainly no sign of
modesty.
Intolerance: The Jew Klausner (Society, edited by Conrad, Volume 12)
wrote: "Anti-Semitism and criminality are nearly the same thing. There
are criminals who were not anti-Semites, but no anti-Semites who were
not criminals."
The work by Dr. E. Fuchs. "The Future of the Jews," (Berlin,
Philo-Verlag, 1924) judges our greatest historians, Hartmann and
Treitschke, who see the Jews as our misfortune: "Men blinded by
prejudice and hatred. Small, tiny men."
World Domination: The Jewish attorney Maurthner in Vienna said back in
the 1880's: "It is not just a matter of fighting anti-Semitism. We
want to oppose it with Jewish domination!"
They made the attempt. If the German people had not recovered their
senses at the last moment, and if they had not had a Fuehrer and
Chancellor named Adolf Hitler who recognized the danger and woke the
German people, we would have fallen into slavery. As we have already
noted, the Jew has always known how to rouse sympathy when things were
rough for him. Consider this report from the meeting of the PEN Club
in Ragusa at the end of May of last year: "Schalom Asch in his keynote
address noted that the suffering of the Jews in Germany had aroused
the sympathy of the entire world. Only the German government remained
untouched. He claimed the Jews has given Germany its deepest thoughts,
its most beautiful songs, its greatest poets, artists and
philosophers. Today one had crucified them in Germany and covered them
with their own blood." Mr. Schalom Asch began crying in the midst of
these outrageous lies. He spoke in the hope that his words would be
heard for the sake of justice and humanity throughout the world.
The Jew Asch cries! The German people are not moved. They want no
torture or persecution, but also no unjustified sympathy, only
justice! Remember always the worlds of Field Marshall Moltke: "The Jew
is a state within the state." Remember also the works of our great
historian Mommsen: "In antiquity too the Jew was the ferment of
cosmopolitanism and national decomposition." And remember Goethe: "The
Israelites have never done much; they possess few virtues, and most of
the deficiencies of other peoples!"
The Racial Question has an important role in the laws of other
nations, though other peoples and races are affected than in the
German Reich. It is in no way new or unusual that the German Reich is
active in this area. Contrary to opinions that surface here and there,
our laws are in no way directed against the Jewish religion, its
practice, or the freedom of the Jewish faith.
The German Reich has done nothing but introduce constitutional
legislation to provide the kind of civil service necessary to
guarantee the secure administration of the Reich. The laws do not
render it impossible for a citizen of a foreign state to become a
civil servant. Indeed, if he is appointed to such a position, he
receives full citizenship in the Reich. German civil servants should
however be of Aryan descent. The so-called Aryan Law requires that
each civil servant be of German blood. Since the vast majority of
non-Aryan civil servants were Jews, the first guidelines to the law
paid particular attention to those who were members of the Jewish
race. But we did not simply throw out the non-Aryan civil servants,
but retired them with honor and a pension. The people's state could
hardly proceed in a more legal and mild manner. Germany did not want
to attack Jewry wildly, rather only deal with its results, is clear
from the fact that the Law of 7 April 1933 left untouched all
non-Aryan civil servants who had been appointed before 1 August 1914,
and by the fact that the private sphere not affected. Some complain
that the law extends to half and quarter Aryans. The answer is that
the foreign influence in the civil service had grown to such a
dangerous extent that it was almost impossible for young Germans to
enter these professions." (Reich Minister of the Interior Dr.
Frick..."
www.spearhead-uk.com http://www.natvan.com
http://www.altermedia.info http://www.RealNews247.com
Igpay Ipublicanrey
A piece of human shit like YOU has a house, Hankie?
hank
But if one could wave a magic wand and remove all
jews from America....America would then not be able
to function as they control medicine, banking, the stock exchange,
law, most CEO's in industries, the media including TV movies radio
film.
You have to leave them in place or face distruction.
Too late.
hank
................................................
Topaz
>But if one could wave a magic wand and remove all
>
>jews from America....America would then not be able
>
>to function as they control medicine, banking, the stock exchange,
Medicine is good, but the other two should be replaced.
The money system we have today is called the debt-money
system. It is corrupt and needs to be replaced. The only way money
comes into existance today is when it is borrowed. There is no freely
existing money supply, but only borrowed money that needs to be paid
back to bankers with interest. If all the money that was owed to
bankers was ever paid back there would be no money left in circulation
and this would be a great depression. What makes matters even worse is
that when money is created only the principle of the loan is created.
The money needed to pay the interest is never created. For this reason
it is impossible to pay back the principle plus the interest on all of
the loans that make up our money supply. The extra amount of money
needed to pay the interest was never created and does not exist.
The United States government borrows money from the Federal
Reserve Bank. This bank is not federal but owned by private
stockholders. Other banks also create the money in our money supply.
They are allowed to loan out much more money then they actually have.
Thus they create new money. No one else is allowed to create money,
only bankers have this privilege. All of our money is debt-money and
it is all owed back to bankers, plus the interest.
In the U.S.A. money is created by the Bureau of Engraving and
Printing which is a unit of the treasury, but the orders to print come
from the Federal Reserve Banks. The money is created for and owned by
the banks. And the Federal Reserve Banks are not Federal, in spite of
the name. Privately owned commercial banks own the stock of the
Federal Reserve Banks. The Federal Reserve Banks give the newly
created money to the government in exchange for government bonds. To
simplify: The United States does not make its own money. Bankers
create the money and loan it to the United States with an interest
charge.
The book War Cycles Peace Cycles puts it this way:
"If there is only $10 in existance, and you lend it to someone
under the condition that he repay $11, and if he agrees to this, he
has agreed to the impossible."
The book The Struggle forWorld Power put it this way:
"The Bank of England... was the first payment institution which
was legally empowered to issue state-authorized paper currency and ,
therefore, the Government itself became its debtor. Thus the State not
only renounced its monopoly on monetary emission, but also agreed to
borrow the privately-created money from the bankers...Not only the
thing being done, but even the very name was a deliberate fraud and
deception to conceal the essence of the deed. To create money out of
nothing is to make valid and effective claim on all goods and services
for no return, which is fraud and theft, made worse by the
circumstances that the money is lent out at interest...it follows that
those who have the power to 'create' out of nothing all the money in
each country and the whole world and lend it as stated, have total
power over all states, parties, firms, radio, press, individuals and
so on. Therefore the power of Parliment in general, and especially
with regard to money, is non-existant, and all the true sovereignty is
in the hands of those private individuals who issue all money"
>
>law, most CEO's in industries, the media including TV movies radio
>
>film.
>
>You have to leave them in place or face distruction.
>
>Too late.
>
Removing them from controlling the media is the most important thing
we could do.
"Imagine if Iraqi-American supporters of Saddam Hussein had control of
the
American media. Suppose they controlled the national television
networks and
were a majority of the owners, producers, and writers of television
entertainment and news. TV is an irresistible power that reaches into
every
American home - the primary source by which most Americans learn about
the
world. Consider the dangers of that enormous power dominated by a
tightly
knit, Iraqi, Muslim minority that supported the Hussein regime.
If the non-television media were still free, they undoubtedly would
treat
Iraqi media domination as a great danger to America. Every non-Iraqi
source
of media would proclaim that such control threatens our freedoms.
Congress
would likely draft legislation to break up the Iraqi stranglehold on
television. Patriots would remind Americans that if we were not free
to
obtain unbiased news, documentaries, and programming, democracy could
not
work. The power of TV controlled by one point of view would erode the
foundation of all our freedoms: the freedom of speech. Pundits would
be
outraged that non-Americans, people with allegiance to a foreign
power, had
control over the American mind.
Taking the analogy further, imagine if the rest of the media were also
in
Iraqi hands. Suppose that the three major news magazines, Time,
Newsweek,
and U.S. News and World Report were run by Iraqis, that the three most
influential American newspapers, The New York Times, The Wall Street
Journal, and The Washington Post - as well as a majority of the
remaining
major newspapers and magazines - were controlled by Iraqis. Imagine
that
Muslim Iraqis dominated the Hollywood movie industry as well as book
publishing and even book distribution. Picture the Iraqis as also
holding
immense wealth in business and banking, as thoroughly entrenched in
entertainment and Hollywood, academia, the judiciary, and the
government. On
top of all this, suppose that supporters of Saddam Hussein had the
most
powerful lobby in Washington and were responsible for the bulk of the
fundraising of both the Democratic and Republican parties. Suppose a
dedicated Iraqi was head of the National Security Council at the White
House. Would such a situation be dangerous for America?
If Americans awoke one morning and found Arabic names scrawled all
over
their TV and movie credits, on their magazine and newspaper mastheads
and in
the pages of their books, millions would say, "We've been taken over!"
Viewers would suspect the motives of everything they see on television
and
read in newspapers, magazines, and books. They would be especially
wary of
information about issues related to Iraqis, Saddam Hussein, Islam, and
the
Middle East conflict. In very short order, many Americans would cry
out in
the fashion of Howard Beale: "I am mad as hell, and I am not going to
take
it anymore!""
David Duke
Transition Zone
I see no one else doing it.
steve
> Only republicans like to target whole groups for condemnation.
>
> I see no one else doing it.
Very funny.
Wexford
Hank, you don't know a goddamn thing about me. I loved my country
enough to spend three years in Vietnam, and then to serve it in the
Department of Defense for another 25 years. That doesn't mean I'm
blind to its faults or the depressing fact that American culture
produces too many ignorant right-wings louts, like you.
Wexford
hank
.............................
So what...I served also...along with many many others...
You are out of line....most of America sees France for what it
it...American haters....
Take off the love blinders......and wake up buddy.
Screw the french.
sgt. hank
.............................................
Igpay Ipublicanrey
Spoken like the true little NAZI asshole you are, Hankie!
If we could "wave a magic wand", eh?
You racist little cocksucker, someone should cut your
raisins off.
Igpay Ipublicanrey
Yeh, let's ignore the world and favor our goddam stupid
excuse for a 'president' and his New Gestapo Republican
Party!
Fuck you, Hankie, you are a pathetic little racist turd
and someone needs to pop your little pus-filled ass.
Igpay Ipublicanrey
> Only republicans like to target whole groups for condemnation.
>
> I see no one else doing it.
Anyone not falling in lockstep behind our new Little Fuhrer
GW Bush is a target.
Republicans are PIGS.
emmanuel
news:52d5a174.04082...@posting.google.com:
Just like most of America saw WMD in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad
and east, west, south and north somewhat ?
for what it
>
> it...American haters....
>
Well ... let see ...
Who was after Ahmed Ressam years before you arrested him by pure luck,
with 50 kg of plastic in Seattle, and later helped US prosecutors to make
their case against him ? Was that France or Poland ?
Weeks before 9/11, who warned you that some Middle Eastern guys, learning
to fly airliners but not to land or take off, were islamists, connected
with OBL and probably trained in Al-Qaida camps ?
Was that France or Micronesia ?
Following the attack on USS Cole, who rescued your boys ? Who sent
immediatly a medical C-160, evacuated injured US sailors and saved the
most criticaly wounded in an hospital in Djibouti ?
Was that France or Israel ?
So ... if we are such American haters, next time you need informations
about terrorists, you call Poland or Micronesia. And next time you need
assistance and medevac for your wounded soldiers, you call Israel. Good
luck Sgt.
Topaz
http://www.natvan.com
"The Jews were very influential in Germany after the First World
War. They were strongly entrenched in the legal profession, in
banking,
in advertising and merchandising, in show business, in organized vice,
in publishing and other media. They were trying hard to change the
spirit of Germany. They were pushing modernism in art, music, and
literature. They were pushing for "diversity" and "tolerance." They
were
ridiculing German tradition and culture and morality and the German
sense of personal honor, trying hard to make young Germans believe
that
it was "cool" to be rootless and cosmopolitan. They were promoting the
same culture of lies that they have been promoting here.
That was the so-called "Weimar" period, because right after the First
World War some important government business, including the
ratification
of a new German constitution, took place in the city of Weimar. The
Jews
loved the Weimar period, but it was, in fact, the most degenerate
period
in Germany's history. The Jews, of course, didn't think of it as
degenerate. They thought of it as "modern" and "progressive" and
"cool."
Really, it was a very Jewish period, where lying was considered a
virtue. The Jews were riding high. Many books have been written by
Jews
in America about Weimar Germany, all praising it to the skies and
looking back on it with nostalgia. Even without the so-called
"Holocaust," they never have forgiven the Nazis for bringing an end to
the Weimar period.
There was a Hollywood film made 30 years ago, in 1972, about Weimar
Germany. The film was called Cabaret, and it starred Liza Minelli. It
depicted Berlin night life, with all its degeneracy, including the
flourishing of homosexuality, and also depicted the fight between the
communists and the Jews and the other proponents of modernism on the
one
hand and the Nazis on the other hand. The Hollywood filmmakers, of
course, were solidly on the side of the degenerates and portrayed the
Nazis as the bad guys, but this film is another example of the Jews
outsmarting themselves. The Jews who made the film saw everything from
their viewpoint, through their own eyes, and the degenerate Gentiles
under their spell also saw things from the Jewish viewpoint, but the
Jews apparently didn't stop to think -- or didn't care -- that a
normal,
healthy White person would view things differently. Check it out for
yourself. Cabaret is still available in video stores.
The point I am making is this: In the 1920s, after the First World
War,
the Jews were trying to do to Germany what they began doing to America
after the Second World War, in the 1960s. Many Germans, the healthiest
elements in Germany, resisted the Jews' efforts, just as many
Americans
have resisted the Jews' efforts in America. In Germany the Jews were a
bit premature. Although they had much of the media under their
control,
they didn't control all of the media. They tried to move too fast. The
healthiest Germans resisted and beat them.
In America, in the 1960s, the Jews had almost total media control
before
they began their big push, and they proceeded more carefully. In
America
they are winning. The culture of lies has prevailed in America. It's
still possible for Americans to win, but it's going to be a lot
tougher
this time. We'd better get started. The first step is to regain at
least
partial control of our media, so that we can begin contradicting the
lies. This American Dissident Voices broadcast is a part of that first
step."
Topaz
wrote:
>Only republicans like to target whole groups for condemnation.
>
>I see no one else doing it.
Some groups should be targeted.
During the American revolution there must have been some British
people who thought America should be independant. Does this mean the
British were not the enemies of Americans? You can say the same about
any war or conflict. In any country there are those who don't agree
with the countries leaders.But that doesn't mean there is no war or no
group that is the enemy.
The real war is not with another country but another race, namely
the Jews. Jews are the cause of all the attacks on White civilization.
The little Jews may be pawns in the game. But they are pawns from the
other side of the board, not our side. Little Jews follow their
leaders and are enemies. Jews think it would be a fine thing if the
White race were destroyed. But they want Whites to give them billons
of dollars so they can have their own country.
Jews were behind Communism and feminism and political correctness.
They are the problem. They are the ones who rule America and control
the media. They are not just the reason America is always in the
Middle East. They are the reason everything is for women and
minorities and against the White man. Here is one example:
The Origins of Political Correctness
An Accuracy in Academia Address by Bill Lind
Variations of this speech have been delivered to various AIA
conferences including the 2000 Consevative University at American
University
Where does all this stuff that you've heard about this morning - the
victim feminism, the gay rights movement, the invented statistics, the
rewritten history, the lies, the demands, all the rest of it - where
does it come from? For the first time in our history, Americans have
to be fearful of what they say, of what they write, and of what they
think. They have to be afraid of using the wrong word, a word
denounced as offensive or insensitive, or racist, sexist, or
homophobic.
We have seen other countries, particularly in this century, where this
has been the case. And we have always regarded them with a mixture of
pity, and to be truthful, some amusement, because it has struck us as
so strange that people would allow a situation to develop where they
would be afraid of what words they used. But we now have this
situation in this country. We have it primarily on college campuses,
but it is spreading throughout the whole society. Were does it come
from? What is it?
We call it "Political Correctness." The name originated as something
of a joke, literally in a comic strip, and we tend still to think of
it as only half-serious. In fact, it's deadly serious. It is the great
disease of our century, the disease that has left tens of millions of
people dead in Europe, in Russia, in China, indeed around the world.
It is the disease of ideology. PC is not funny. PC is deadly serious.
If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we
quickly find out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural
Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms.
It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the hippies and
the peace movement, but back to World War I. If we compare the basic
tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels
are very obvious.
First of all, both are totalitarian ideologies. The totalitarian
nature of Political Correctness is revealed nowhere more clearly than
on college campuses, many of which at this point are small ivy covered
North Koreas, where the student or faculty member who dares to cross
any of the lines set up by the gender feminist or the homosexual-
rights activists, or the local black or Hispanic group, or any of the
other sainted "victims" groups that PC revolves around, quickly find
themselves in judicial trouble. Within the small legal system of the
college, they face formal charges - some star-chamber proceeding - and
punishment. That is a little look into the future that Political
Correctness intends for the nation as a whole.
Indeed, all ideologies are totalitarian because the essence of an
ideology (I would note that conservatism correctly understood is not
an ideology) is to take some philosophy and say on the basis of this
philosophy certain things must be true - such as the whole of the
history of our culture is the history of the oppression of women.
Since reality contradicts that, reality must be forbidden. It must
become forbidden to acknowledge the reality of our history. People
must be forced to live a lie, and since people are naturally reluctant
to live a lie, they naturally use their ears and eyes to look out and
say, "Wait a minute. This isn't true. I can see it isn't true," the
power of the state must be put behind the demand to live a lie. That
is why ideology invariably creates a totalitarian state.
Second, the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness, like economic
Marxism, has a single factor explanation of history. Economic Marxism
says that all of history is determined by ownership of means of
production. Cultural Marxism, or Political Correctness, says that all
history is determined by power, by which groups defined in terms of
race, sex, etc., have power over which other groups. Nothing else
matters. All literature, indeed, is about that. Everything in the past
is about that one thing.
Third, just as in classical economic Marxism certain groups, i.e.
workers and peasants, are a priori good, and other groups, i.e., the
bourgeoisie and capital owners, are evil. In the cultural Marxism of
Political Correctness certain groups are good - feminist women, (only
feminist women, non-feminist women are deemed not to exist) blacks,
Hispanics, homosexuals. These groups are determined to be "victims,"
and therefore automatically good regardless of what any of them do.
Similarly, white males are determined automatically to be evil,
thereby becoming the equivalent of the bourgeoisie in economic
Marxism.
Fourth, both economic and cultural Marxism rely on expropriation. When
the classical Marxists, the communists, took over a country like
Russia, they expropriated the bourgeoisie, they took away their
property. Similarly, when the cultural Marxists take over a university
campus, they expropriate through things like quotas for admissions.
When a white student with superior qualifications is denied admittance
to a college in favor of a black or Hispanic who isn't as well
qualified, the white student is expropriated. And indeed, affirmative
action, in our whole society today, is a system of expropriation.
White owned companies don't get a contract because the contract is
reserved for a company owned by, say, Hispanics or women. So
expropriation is a principle tool for both forms of Marxism....
In 1923 in Germany, a think-tank is established that takes on the role
of translating Marxism from economic into cultural terms, that creates
Political Correctness as we know it today, and essentially it has
created the basis for it by the end of the 1930s. This comes about
because the very wealthy young son of a millionaire German trader by
the name of Felix Weil has become a Marxist and has lots of money to
spend. He is disturbed by the divisions among the Marxists, so he
sponsors something called the First Marxist Work Week, where he brings
Lukacs and many of the key German thinkers together for a week,
working on the differences of Marxism.
And he says, "What we need is a think-tank." Washington is full of
think tanks and we think of them as very modern. In fact they go back
quite a ways. He endows an institute, associated with Frankfurt
University, established in 1923, that was originally supposed to be
known as the Institute for Marxism. But the people behind it decided
at the beginning that it was not to their advantage to be openly
identified as Marxist. The last thing Political Correctness wants is
for people to figure out it's a form of Marxism. So instead they
decide to name it the Institute for Social Research.
Weil is very clear about his goals. In 1971, he wrote to Martin Jay
the author of a principle book on the Frankfurt School, as the
Institute for Social Research soon becomes known informally, and he
said, "I wanted the institute to become known, perhaps famous, due to
its contributions to Marxism." Well, he was successful. The first
director of the Institute, Carl Grunberg, an Austrian economist,
concluded his opening address, according to Martin Jay, "by clearly
stating his personal allegiance to Marxism as a scientific
methodology." Marxism, he said, would be the ruling principle at the
Institute, and that never changed...
The stuff we've been hearing about this morning - the radical
feminism, the women's studies departments, the gay studies
departments, the black studies departments - all these things are
branches of Critical Theory. What the Frankfurt School essentially
does is draw on both Marx and Freud in the 1930s to create this theory
called Critical Theory. The term is ingenious because you're tempted
to ask, "What is the theory?" The theory is to criticize. The theory
is that the way to bring down Western culture and the capitalist order
is not to lay down an alternative. They explicitly refuse to do that.
They say it can't be done, that we can't imagine what a free society
would look like (their definition of a free society). As long as we're
living under repression - the repression of a capitalistic economic
order which creates (in their theory) the Freudian condition, the
conditions that Freud describes in individuals of repression - we
can't even imagine it. What Critical Theory is about is simply
criticizing. It calls for the most destructive criticism possible, in
every possible way, designed to bring the current order down. And, of
course, when we hear from the feminists that the whole of society is
just out to get women and so on, that kind of criticism is a
derivative of Critical Theory. It is all coming from the 1930s, not
the 1960s.
Other key members who join up around this time are Theodore Adorno,
and, most importantly, Erich Fromm and Herbert Marcuse. Fromm and
Marcuse introduce an element which is central to Political
Correctness, and that's the sexual element. And particularly Marcuse,
who in his own writings calls for a society of "polymorphous
perversity," that is his definition of the future of the world that
they want to create. Marcuse in particular by the 1930s is writing
some very extreme stuff on the need for sexual liberation, but this
runs through the whole Institute. So do most of the themes we see in
Political Correctness, again in the early 30s. In Fromm's view,
masculinity and femininity were not reflections of `essential' sexual
differences, as the Romantics had thought. They were derived instead
from differences in life functions, which were in part socially
determined." Sex is a construct; sexual differences are a construct...
How does all of this stuff flood in here? How does it flood into our
universities, and indeed into our lives today? The members of the
Frankfurt School are Marxist, they are also, to a man, Jewish. In 1933
the Nazis came to power in Germany, and not surprisingly they shut
down the Institute for Social Research. And its members fled. They
fled to New York City, and the Institute was reestablished there in
1933 with help from Columbia University. And the members of the
Institute, gradually through the 1930s, though many of them remained
writing in German, shift their focus from Critical Theory about German
society, destructive criticism about every aspect of that society, to
Critical Theory directed toward American society. There is another
very important transition when the war comes. Some of them go to work
for the government, including Herbert Marcuse, who became a key figure
in the OSS (the predecessor to the CIA), and some, including
Horkheimer and Adorno, move to Hollywood.
These origins of Political Correctness would probably not mean too
much to us today except for two subsequent events. The first was the
student rebellion in the mid-1960s, which was driven largely by
resistance to the draft and the Vietnam War. But the student rebels
needed theory of some sort. They couldn't just get out there and say,
"Hell no we won't go," they had to have some theoretical explanation
behind it. Very few of them were interested in wading through Das
Kapital. Classical, economic Marxism is not light, and most of the
radicals of the 60s were not deep. Fortunately for them, and
unfortunately for our country today, and not just in the university,
Herbert Marcuse remained in America when the Frankfurt School
relocated back to Frankfurt after the war. And whereas Mr. Adorno in
Germany is appalled by the student rebellion when it breaks out there
- when the student rebels come into Adorno's classroom, he calls the
police and has them arrested - Herbert Marcuse, who remained here, saw
the 60s student rebellion as the great chance. He saw the opportunity
to take the work of the Frankfurt School and make it the theory of the
New Left in the United States.
One of Marcuse's books was the key book. It virtually became the bible
of the SDS and the student rebels of the 60s. That book was Eros and
Civilization. Marcuse argues that under a capitalistic order (he
downplays the Marxism very strongly here, it is subtitled, A
Philosophical Inquiry into Freud, but the framework is Marxist),
repression is the essence of that order and that gives us the person
Freud describes - the person with all the hang-ups, the neuroses,
because his sexual instincts are repressed. We can envision a future,
if we can only destroy this existing oppressive order, in which we
liberate eros, we liberate libido, in which we have a world of
"polymorphous perversity," in which you can "do you own thing." And by
the way, in that world there will no longer be work, only play. What a
wonderful message for the radicals of the mid-60s! They're students,
they're baby-boomers, and they've grown up never having to worry about
anything except eventually having to get a job. And here is a guy
writing in a way they can easily follow. He doesn't require them to
read a lot of heavy Marxism and tells them everything they want to
hear which is essentially, "Do your own thing," "If it feels good do
it," and "You never have to go to work." By the way, Marcuse is also
the man who creates the phrase, "Make love, not war." Coming back to
the situation people face on campus, Marcuse defines "liberating
tolerance" as intolerance for anything coming from the Right and
tolerance for anything coming from the Left. Marcuse joined the
Frankfurt School, in 1932 (if I remember right). So, all of this goes
back to the 1930s.
In conclusion, America today is in the throes of the greatest and
direst transformation in its history. We are becoming an ideological
state, a country with an official state ideology enforced by the power
of the state. In "hate crimes" we now have people serving jail
sentences for political thoughts. And the Congress is now moving to
expand that category ever further. Affirmative action is part of it.
The terror against anyone who dissents from Political Correctness on
campus is part of it. It's exactly what we have seen happen in Russia,
in Germany, in Italy, in China, and now it's coming here. And we don't
recognize it because we call it Political Correctness and laugh it
off. My message today is that it's not funny, it's here, it's growing
and it will eventually destroy, as it seeks to destroy, everything
that we have ever defined as our freedom and our culture.
<http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Others/Others-PC-Origins-Tony.htm>
kcc
> On 28 Aug 2004 19:56:06 -0700, mog...@hotmail.com (Transition Zone)
> wrote:
>
> >Only republicans like to target whole groups for condemnation.
> >
> >I see no one else doing it.
>
> Some groups should be targeted.
>
> During the American revolution there must have been some British
> people who thought America should be independant. Does this mean the
> British were not the enemies of Americans? You can say the same about
> any war or conflict. In any country there are those who don't agree
> with the countries leaders.But that doesn't mean there is no war or no
> group that is the enemy.
>
> The real war is not with another country but another race, namely
> the Jews. Jews are the cause of all the attacks on White civilization.
> The little Jews may be pawns in the game. But they are pawns from the
> other side of the board, not our side. Little Jews follow their
> leaders and are enemies. Jews think it would be a fine thing if the
> White race were destroyed. But they want Whites to give them billons
> of dollars so they can have their own country.
and nefaarious,why are havn't you been picked off yet,Think about it.
Jews were behind Communism and feminism and political correctness.
> They are the problem. They are the ones who rule America and control
> the media. They are not just the reason America is always in the
> Middle East. They are the reason everything is for women and
> minorities and against the White man. Here is one example:
You idiot, communism was anti-religion,you can't have it both ways!
> The Origins of Political Correctness
> An Accuracy in Academia Address by Bill Lind
Political correctness is meant to protect those who are
vulnerable,including white minorities and white women.
> Variations of this speech have been delivered to various AIA
> conferences including the 2000 Consevative University at American
> University
>
> Where does all this stuff that you've heard about this morning - the
> victim feminism, the gay rights movement, the invented statistics, the
> rewritten history, the lies, the demands, all the rest of it - where
> does it come from? For the first time in our history, Americans have
> to be fearful of what they say, of what they write, and of what they
> think. They have to be afraid of using the wrong word, a word
> denounced as offensive or insensitive, or racist, sexist, or
> homophobic.
You should be afraid very afraid.
> We have seen other countries, particularly in this century, where this
> has been the case. And we have always regarded them with a mixture of
> pity, and to be truthful, some amusement, because it has struck us as
> so strange that people would allow a situation to develop where they
> would be afraid of what words they used. But we now have this
> situation in this country. We have it primarily on college campuses,
> but it is spreading throughout the whole society. Were does it come
> from? What is it?
> We call it "Political Correctness." The name originated as something
> of a joke, literally in a comic strip, and we tend still to think of
> it as only half-serious. In fact, it's deadly serious. It is the great
> disease of our century, the disease that has left tens of millions of
> people dead in Europe, in Russia, in China, indeed around the world.
> It is the disease of ideology. PC is not funny. PC is deadly serious.
Lghten up .
> If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we
> quickly find out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural
> Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms.
> It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the hippies and
> the peace movement, but back to World War I. If we compare the basic
> tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels
> are very obvious.
Good night ,your too far gone for me to say more,except that you're a
true coward terrified of seventy five percent of the population of
this world.I almost feel sory for you,almost.
Katherine
hank
There you go again...with your little dirty homosexual
dreams....you little pervert...
Well ...keep dreaming about my butt.....butt boy...
if it keeps ya happy....
hank
...........................
Topaz
Exposing the Real Racists
Edgar Johnston, PhD. reviews an important new book
Jewish Supremacism by David Duke. Published by Free Speech Press, 2003
----------------------------------------------------------
More than 500,000 copies of 'Jewish Supremacism' have been
sold worldwide. It is even sold within the Russian
Duma (parliament).
----------------------------------------------------------
In 1905, a new book was catalogued in the British Library. Its title
was The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, and it claimed to be
the secret minutes of Jewish elitists who planned to dominate the
world. Most authorities now view The Protocols of Zion as an elaborate
forgery concocted by agents of the Russian Czar.
Over the last century since the book's release, thousands of other
books have been written on what is called the 'Jewish Question'. The
vast majority of them defend the Jewish people from the forces of
'Anti-Semitism', yet still the best selling book on the Jews since
1905 has been The Protocols, which has been published in most of the
world's languages. According to prominent Jewish leaders in Russia,
the popularity of 'The Protocols' has now been eclipsed by a new book
titled Jewish Supremacism. Unlike The Protocols, this book is no
forgery, for its author is proud of his work. He is the controversial
American politician David Duke, a former member of the Louisiana House
of Representatives.
Jewish leaders are extremely fearful of this book. I can illustrate
the cause of their concern by giving an example of David Duke's
technique in exposing what he calls Jewish supremacism.
If any prominent political person in the Western World publicly
announced that Jews are frequently disloyal to nations where they live
and that they view Gentiles as racially inferior, he would face
excoriation as an 'anti-Semite'. Probably, he would be driven from
office. Duke has no need to make such claims, for he simply quotes
very prominent and powerful Jews who make his point for him.
FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH
In the first few pages of Jewish Supremacism, Duke quotes Dr. Richard
Steinlight, a former head of National Affairs for the largest Jewish
organisation in the United States. Here is the quotation taken from a
2001 magazine article written by Dr. Steinlight:-
'I'll confess it at least, like thousands of other typical kids of my
generation I was reared as a Jewish nationalist, even a quasi-
separatist. Every summer for two months of ten formative years... I
attended Jewish summer camp. There, each morning, I saluted a foreign
flag, dressed in a uniform reflecting its colours, sang a foreign
national anthem, learned a foreign language... and was taught the
superiority of my people to the 'Gentiles' who oppressed us.
'We were taught to view non-Jews as... people less sensitive,
intelligent and moral than ourselves.'
This method of quoting major Jewish figures and sources is used
hundreds of times in Duke's book to advance his thesis that there is a
powerful Jewish supremacist element in Judaism and Zionism that
threatens not only the freedom of the Palestinian people but all
nations, including the United States.
Duke also uses direct quotes from the Talmud and other major Jewish
sources, such as the Jewish Encyclopedia to expose a long-standing
cadre of hateful, anti-Gentile Jewish supremacists. Shocking quotes
are displayed from major Jewish magazines that boast of a Jewish
supremacy over the media and politics of the United States. He finds
disturbing and hateful words from Jewish leaders, such as Ariel
Sharon, which openly support genocide, and he reveals quotations from
Israeli leaders who equate Zionism and Nazism. Of course, he also
cites many prominent Gentiles of historical and contemporary times,
but the Jewish quotations and sources have the greatest power.
Frankly, they are so convincing that Jewish leaders have sought to get
the book banned in many nations.
Interestingly, Jewish Supremacism was published first in Russia, the
same nation that gave birth to The Protocols of Zion. In 2000 it
quickly became a best seller throughout the entirety of the former
Eastern bloc. It even sells briskly in the corridors of the Russian
Duma (Parliament) and has prompted Levinsky, Goldman and other leading
Jews to seek its ban under old Soviet laws forbidding 'anti-Semitism'.
In the Autumn of 2000, Levinsky and others filed a formal complaint to
the Russian Prosecutor General and asked for the book to be classified
as anti-Semitic and thus illegal. After a year of close examination
(they painstakingly verified all 669 of the documentations), the
Russian Government shocked the Jewish community by officially
declaring that the book is not anti-Semitic. Jewish members of the
Duma then introduced new legislation aimed at outlawing 'Jewish
Supremacism', but it failed by a few votes.
Since then, the book has been sold in thousands of street corners
across the breadth of the Russian Federation and has now topped an
incredible 500,000 in print.
Translated into most of the Eastern European languages, the book has
won Duke many academic awards for its scholarship, including an
honorary Doctorate awarded by President's University, the second
largest university in the nation of Ukraine.
Subsequently the university itself published a best-selling Ukrainian
edition. In May of 2003, Free Speech Press published the English
version of Jewish Supremacism, accompanied by a storm of interest and
controversy. Jewish leaders are horrified that it is well on its way
to becoming the best-read book in the world on Zionism.
SMEARS BACKFIRED
Although Zionist organisations have tried to use Duke's media
characterisation as a 'white supremacist' to discredit his book, so
far their exploitation of his early-life involvement in a KKK group
has only backfired by making the book and its author more newsworthy.
Attacks by the ADL and other pro-Zionist groups have led to
sensationalist news coverage, causing even greater interest and
confounding those who desperately wanted Duke's book to die a quiet
death.
David Duke decries the label of white supremacist and says that while
he certainly desires the preservation of his own heritage he seeks no
supremacy over others. He maintains that those who scream most
hatefully against him are themselves guilty of the most extreme and
powerful supremacism on earth: Jewish supremacism.
When Duke lectured in some Persian Gulf nations last year, Zionist
leaders attempted to undercut his support by allegations of 'racism'.
Those organised efforts had little affect on the overflow, mixed-race
audiences that cheered almost his every word. As a former university
professor and a writer who has lectured occasionally on behalf of the
people of Palestine, I approached David Duke's book out of a curiosity
elicited by the intense Zionist efforts to suppress it. Actually, I
had readily accepted the negative portrayals of him I had read in the
Jewish press, but I wanted to see what all the commotion was about.
Why were they so anxious to ban this book and slander its author? To
my great surprise I discovered a most amazing book!
David Duke stated that he had set out with the ambitious goal of
writing the most powerful expose of Zionism ever put into print. With
extreme scepticism of his ability to accomplish such a lofty goal, I
began to read. Three days later, as I turned the last page, I knew
that he had accomplished more than he dreamed. Rather than just
assembling his facts in a dry textbook fashion, David Duke presents
his thesis in the first person. It is the personal narrative of a
thoughtful and enlightened young man who is sympathetic to Zionism,
but is awakened to its supremacist core that not only threatens the
Palestinians but his own beloved European-Americans as well. I could
not find even a trace of hatred, intemperance or true anti-Semitism in
this book. However, by extensive quoting of important Jewish leaders
and Zionist source materials, Duke exposes a deep well of Jewish
supremacist hatred against Gentiles. He points out that one is
unfairly labelled an 'anti-Semite' simply for exposing the hateful
pronouncements of Jewish supremacists.
ABSOLVES SOME JEWS
The book is clearly not anti-Semitic. Duke goes at length to point out
that not all Jews are supremacists, and that the supremacists not only
endanger the Gentile world but threaten innocent Jews by exposing them
to an inevitably hostile Gentile reaction. The book is in fact
dedicated to the late Dr. Israel Shahak, a Holocaust survivor and
Israeli peace activist whose life was dedicated to saving both Jews
and Gentiles from the dangers of 'Jewish supremacism'. David Duke
cleverly turns the term 'anti-Semitic' on its head by quoting
columnist Joseph Sobran's remark that the 'anti-Semite' is no longer
someone who dislikes Jews; he is now simply a person whom the Jews
don't like.
Jewish Supremacism begins with David Duke's first great epiphany on
the Jewish question: his learning that the Russian Revolution wasn't
Russian but overwhelmingly Jewish. Using powerful documentary
evidence, he shows that the Bolshevik Revolution was actually financed
and led by Jews who had their own agenda against the Czar. He quotes
from familiar and impeccable sources such as Winston Churchill, the
dispatches of the American ambassador to Russia, the chief of British
Intelligence and copious Jewish sources. For instance, he quotes a
report from the National Archives of the United States showing that of
the 384 members of the first Bolshevik government, there were more
than 300 Jews and only 13 ethnic Russians.
How could such an enormous fact of history be hidden? Duke asks. His
rhetorical question is answered throughout the rest of this book by
giving the clear evidence of the tremendous power exercised by Jewish
supremacists in government, media and the academic establishment. Not
only has the pre-eminent Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution and
its Gulags been quietly suppressed, but also even the very existence
of Jewish supremacism has been kept from public awareness. One can
freely discuss the evils of white supremacism, but if one dares to
expose Jewish supremacism, one will assuredly be labelled an 'anti-
Semite', the ultimate term of opprobrium in modern society. In very
effective arguments, Duke points out that one is not called 'anti-
Christian' for exposing the excesses of the Inquisition or 'anti-
Muslim' for opposing the intolerance of some extremist Moslem sects.
But dare simply to quote the hateful statements of important leaders
of Judaism and Zionism, and in many countries one could well wind up
in prison for 'hate speech'.
One of the fascinating themes to which David Duke repeatedly turns is
the easily documented Jewish supremacist strategy of fostering extreme
chauvinism among their own people while at the same time working to
break down the group loyalty of the Gentiles among whom they live.
Jewish leaders have long made clear that Jewish communities often have
agendas that conflict with their Gentile hosts. Duke describes the
struggle over those agendas as similar to the contest of two football
teams. One team cultivates an extreme group loyalty through a chronic
recital of Gentile persecution and an accompanying 'chosen-people'
supremacist vision. The other is instilled with guilt and the idea
that teamwork is immoral. The main Jewish holidays are dominated by
the recounting of Gentile persecutions, and the Holocaust has now
achieved almost a religious significance in Jewish life. Duke quotes
many Jewish leaders proclaiming Jewish superiority and the need for
the race to preserve its racial genotype. Even today, Israel will
grant instant citizenship to an atheist Jew from New York, but forbids
Palestinians who were born in Israel to return. Israel also forbids
marriages between Jews and Gentiles.
While Jewish supremacists have these supremacist policies for their
own people, they relentlessly work to break down the immigration laws
of other nations. While they preach multi-culturalism and diversity
for almost every other country in which they dwell, they themselves
support and expect Americans to support a Zionist State, dedicated
exclusively to the Jewish people, religion and culture.
INFLUENCE ON MEDIA AND GOVERNMENT
In chapters on Jewish influence over the American mass media and
government, Duke offers extensive documentation that exceeds almost
anyone's suspicions. Major Jewish sources are quoted which boast of
their takeover and control of Hollywood, the news media and the most
sensitive part of the Government of the United States. For instance,
Duke quotes a major Israeli newspaper bragging about the fact that
Jews loyal to Israel make up seven out of the eleven members of the
secretive and sensitive National Security Council (NSC). The article
goes on to assert that "America no longer has a government of Goyim"
(Gentiles). Duke also quotes many US presidents and high government
officials who have dared to speak out about the Jewish supremacy over
the establishment. After thoroughly documenting Jewish supremacy in
government and media, he shows how their media power is used to stifle
public knowledge and understanding of this critical issue. Any
legitimate criticism of Jewish Supremacism is labelled 'anti-
Semitism', and the Jewish supremacists almost exclusively define that
term.
In particularly interesting passages, Duke recounts how that when he
looked up the term 'anti-Semitism' in some popular encyclopaedias, he
found that the articles and recommended reading lists were authored
entirely by Jewish zealots! In every conflict with Gentiles, Jews are
always portrayed as completely innocent while Gentiles are portrayed
as totally evil. Duke suggests that the chronic portrayal of Gentiles
as inherently evil toward Jews is for Gentiles the equivalent of
'blood libel' for Jews.
Duke makes a compelling case that the nation of Israel is the doctrine
of Jewish supremacism put into action. In startling documentary
evidence from Israel, he shows that some of the early Zionist founders
of the country readily co-operated with Nazi Germany, praised Nazi
policies and claimed that their own ideology was similar. He also
quotes major Jewish figures in Israel who have had the courage to
condemn Israel's Nuremberg style racial laws, such as former Israeli
Supreme Court member Haim Cohen, thus:-
'The bitter irony of fate, which has led the same biological and
racist laws propagated by the Nazis and which inspired the infamous
Nuremberg laws to serve as a basis of Judaism within the state of
Israel.'
With these kinds of powerful quotes, it is no wonder that Zionists
around the world are extremely fearful of this book.
ON ISRAELI TERROR
Americans will find the last chapter on Israel of particular interest.
Duke unveils the long Israeli record of terrorism. He documents the
horrendous terror waged against the Palestinians; he also exposes
Israel's long record of terrorism and treachery against its greatest
benefactor, the United States! From major Jewish sources, he recounts
the Israeli terrorist attacks against America in the Lavon Affair, in
which Israeli agents set off bombs in American installations in Egypt
in a treacherous attempt to provoke America into war against that
nation. Duke presents copious evidence exposing the deliberate,
murderous Israeli attack on the USS Liberty in which 34 Americans were
killed and 172 grievously wounded. The terrible damage inflicted on
the United States by Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard is also recounted.
Jewish supremacy in the American media and government has suppressed
any outcry against Israel's treachery. The Jewish supremacists have
even been able to prevent a formal Congressional investigation into
the attack on the USS Liberty. Duke makes the powerful point that
billions of dollars of American aid continue to flow to Israel even
after its treacherous attacks. He writes that supplying this aid is
the moral equivalent of sending military aid to Japan after the attack
on Pearl Harbour.
Duke also shows how the Zionist domination of American foreign policy
led directly to America's 9/11 catastrophe and a whole new series of
foreign policy moves that are leading to disaster. This timely book
shows the Jewish supremacist power behind the Iraq War, the
manipulation of the President and the American people with false
information, and the horrendous damage the war has done to our economy
and even our security. Duke shows how the war is costing us hundreds
of billions of dollars, continues to spill the blood of our military
men and certainly increases world hatred and terrorism against
America.
In one of the most shocking chapters of his work, Duke reveals the
damning evidence of Israeli treachery in the 9/11 attacks. He shows
that a massive Israeli spy ring was uncovered and apprehended in the
months before and after the attacks, and that some of the Mossad
agents had actually monitored the hijackers, including the leader
Mohammed Atta (five Israeli agents lived on his street). Warning
messages of the impending attacks were sent to Israeli firms with
offices both in Israel and the World Trade Centre. A group of Mossad
agents was arrested on 9/11 after they were found to have been filming
and cheering the attacks while they occurred. After they had been held
for a few months, Zionist Michael Chertoff of the US Department of
Justice released all the members of the Israeli spy ring and allowed
them to return to Israel - out of the reach of Congressional 9/11
investigators.
It is impossible to give the reader more than a glance into the depth
and power of this incredible book. Practically every paragraph is a
revelation. There is so much more that I could write about: detailing
how the Holocaust has cynically been used as a Zionist tool in
heightening Jewish solidarity and deflating criticism of Zionism and
Israel; how Jewish supremacists have used immigration as a weapon of
conquest, not only in Palestine but in the Western World as well. I
was fascinated by Duke's expose of Sigmund Freud as a secret Jewish
supremacist who thought of himself as a Hannibal destroying the
foundations of the Christian church and the European family as
Hannibal had sacked Rome. I could go on and on, but I will leave these
discoveries to you when you read this amazing book.
After I completed the book, I wanted to find out if it had the same
affect on others as it had on me. I gave it to two long-time friends
at the university where I taught for 11 years. One has conservative
leanings; the other is decidedly liberal; and I would describe both of
them as sympathetic to Israel. Both were so fascinated that they could
hardly put the book down, and one became so engrossed that he missed
his regular two o'clock class. They both agreed that Duke's book is
one of the best-argued that they have ever read, and used the
identical term of 'amazing' to describe it. My conservative friend
commented that many quotations were so shocking that he began to check
out the references and found them all to be accurate. "Hell" he said,
"If only half the documents Duke cites are authentic, there is enough
evidence here to start a revolution."
kcc
David Duke is a former? member of the KU KLUX KLAN,you ignorant moron!
Katherine
Sam
voted for was Reagan. If you had told me four years ago that I'd be
voting for Bush, I'd have said you were crazy. And here I am, not only
voting for him, but angry at his critics.
You Bush bashers are a litmus test for decency. You go WAY TOO FAR!
Instead of facts, reason, and logic, you spout nothing but wild
name-calling and wild flights of the imagination that speculate on
Bush's inner thoughts, motives, and intents. Who do you think you are?
God, that you can read his mind? Well, fatheads, you can't read his
mind. You demonize him with extravagant name-calling, lies, cycnicism,
and distortions. You are captious and play Catch-22 with everything he
says and does. You deliberately misinterpret everything he says. And
you NEVER allow that anything he does is right or even just okay.
Newsflash: Decent people are repulsed by such unfairness. Your halo
doesn't cut it when nothing but hate-talk comes out your mouths. You
use them like assault weapons. Good people don't do that. Your
rhetoric is like that in Israel which lead to the assassination of
Rabin.
Your mouths go off so wildly that you trash your country right along
with your President. And you trash what our troops are doing right
along with your President. You do this just to get your bourgeois
pockets lined by the political party that promises you a handout. It's
not enough to trash your country at home, you have to come to an
international ng to trash it to the whole world. Traitor.
If you can't think of any legitimate criticism, if you can't discuss
politics civilly, shut up. On second thought, don't. Keep it up. That
vast mass of people who seldom vote just may turn up at the polls and
give Bush the election by a landslide -- all because of you.
Sam
Igpay Ipublicanrey <_> wrote in message news:<4131f771$1...@nntp.zianet.com>...
Topaz
Here are some quotes from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica
after the heading Ku Klux Klan:
"Ku Klux Klan, the name of an American secret association of Southern
whites united for self-protection and to oppose the Reconstruction
measures of the United States Congress"
"The various causes assigned for the origin and development of
this movement were: the absence of stable government in the South for
several years after the Civil War; the corrupt and tyrannical rule of
the alien, renegade and negro, and the belief that it was supported by
the Federal troops which controlled elections and legislative bodies;
the disfranchisement of whites; the spread of ideas of social and
political equality among the negroes; fear of negro insurrections; the
arming of negro militia and the disarming of whites; outrages upon
white women by black men"
"The constitutions and rituals of these secret orders have
declarations of principles, of which the following are characteristic:
to protect and succour the weak and unfortunate, especially the widows
and orphans of Confederate soldiers; to protect members of the white
race in life, honour and property from the encroachments of the
blacks"
"To control the negro the Klan played upon his superstitious
fears by having night patrols, parades and drills of silent horsemen
covered with white sheets, carrying skulls with coals of fire for
eyes"
"the Ku Klux movement went on until it accomplished its object by
giving protection to the whites, reducing the blacks to order,
replacing the whites in control of society and state, expelling the
worst of the carpet-baggers and scalawags, and nullifying those laws
of Congress which had resulted in placing the Southern whites under
the control of a party composed principally of ex-slaves."
Topaz
>Just to show where I am coming from... The ONLY Republican I ever
>voted for was Reagan. If you had told me four years ago that I'd be
>voting for Bush, I'd have said you were crazy. And here I am, not only
>voting for him, but angry at his critics.
>
by Kevin Alfred Strom
...The May 18th meeting of the
American Israel Public Affairs Committee (or AIPAC for short) in
Washington, DC... AIPAC is the most
influential lobby in Washington, and is totally focused on
maintaining and increasing American taxpayer support for Israel,
both financial and military, and in destroying all critics of
Israel or of Jewish supremacism...
When Bush ascended to the AIPAC podium, flanked by leading Jewish
supremacists on both sides, behind him was a huge new flag
design, probably 50 feet long, consisting of American stars and
stripes interspersed with huge Stars of David. Bush, interrupted
by wild applause and several standing ovations from the Zionist
audience which included Ariel Sharon, referred to the leading
Jewish supremacists on the platform by their first names:
"I'm honored to be here at AIPAC, thank you for such a warm
welcome. It's good to be with so many friends -- friends of mine
and friends of Israel. ...I want to thank Amy for her leadership.
I appreciate you taking time to serve a cause that -- in which
you believe deeply. I want to thank Bernice for her willingness
to serve, as well. I've known Howard for a long time. He's
effective. I want to thank the AIPAC board -- AIPAC board members
for their friendship and leadership. I'm honored to be in the
presence of my friend, the Ambassador from Israel, Danny Ayalon.
I appreciate you being here, Danny."
How cozy. The president went on in this vein for about forty
minutes, acting more like an Israeli cabinet minister than an
American president. He congratulated himself for his unwavering
support for Zionism, justified the horrible terror-war being
waged on Israel's behalf in Iraq, and engaged in some
saber-rattling against other Muslim states that don't want to
have a government supervised by Jews.
Bush also repeated the catch-phrase that has a hidden meaning to
Jewish supremacists, the phrase I've spoken about before on
American Dissident Voices -- "committed to the security of Israel
as a Jewish state," which is repeated almost word-for-word again
and again by Israel's sycophants and Capitol Hill puppets. and
which means much more than seems. [
http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=1282 ] The words 'as
a Jewish state' are crucial: they mean support for Israel as a
racial state for one people alone, something that the Jewish
power structure denies to every White nation -- yet White
politicians must express their "commitment" to Israel. Bush
stated:
"The United States is strongly committed, and I am strongly
committed, to the security of Israel as a vibrant Jewish state."
Identical to the catch-phrase, with only the addition of the word
'vibrant.' Bush is not committed to America as an American state
-- in fact, he supports amnesty for illegal invaders.
All that is to be expected from Bush, considering his dependence
on Jewish favor, Jewish money, and Jewish media for his election.
But what I found most chilling about Bush's groveling speech
before his masters was this section, in which he makes reference
to a recent meeting of the so-called Organization for Security
and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which is working with American
and European governments to outlaw free speech by "monitoring"
and outlawing criticism of Jews [
http://www.natvan.com/pub/2003/053103.txt
http://www.natvan.com/pub/2003/062803.txt ]:
"The Jewish people have seen, over the years and over the
centuries, that hate prepares the way for violence. The refusal
to expose and confront intolerance can lead to crimes beyond
imagining. So we have a duty to expose and confront
anti-Semitism, wherever it is found. Some of you attended a very
important event in Berlin last month, the International
Conference on Anti-Semitism. You understand that anti-Semitism is
not a problem of the past; the hatred of Jews did not die in a
Berlin bunker. In its cruder forms, it can be found in some Arab
media, and this government will continue to call upon Arab
governments to end libels and incitements. Such hatred can also
take subtler forms. The demonization of Israel, the most extreme
anti-Zionist rhetoric can be a flimsy cover for anti-Semitism,
and contribute to an atmosphere of fear in which synagogues are
desecrated, people are slandered, folks are threatened. I will
continue to call upon our friends in Europe to renounce and fight
any sign of anti-Semitism in their midst."
[ http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/05/20040518-1.html
]
You'll notice two things here: 1) Bush is conflating negative
feelings about Jews, and 'rhetoric,' with actual violent acts and
a supposed 'atmosphere' that 'creates' them, thus setting the
stage for the legally-required 'monitoring' of all critics of
Jewish power and the criminalization of the free speech of these
critics, and 2) the redefinition of criticism of Israel or
Zionism, making them into just another form of so-called
"anti-Semitism," so they, too, can be 'monitored' and eventually
criminalized. Both of these are something that Jewish pressure
groups worldwide have been pushing hard for recently, and Bush
promised to give them exactly what they want.
Meanwhile, at yet another meeting, John Kerry, who is actually of
Jewish ancestry himself, tried to out-promise Bush with his
protestations of love for Zionism and hatred of any who would
criticize Jewish supremacism. At a meeting last month of the
crime-linked Jewish spying operation and pressure group, the
'Anti-Defamation League' (ADL) in Washington, Kerry said the
following:
"...what ADL stands for is what I would like to fight for. ...And
after last week's [OSCE] conference in Berlin, we celebrate 55
countries that came together who have pledged to intensify their
efforts to combat anti-Semitism and to spread tolerance. ...And
we still know that anti-Semitism, notwithstanding the meeting of
55 countries, has been growing, and demands global leadership in
order to stand up against it. ...Across the Atlantic we've seen a
new wave of anti-Semitism, masking as anti-Israel sentiment, and
it's creeping its way across Europe and the Middle East. ...The
people of Israel should also know that for the entire 20 years
that I have been in the United States Senate, I'm proud that my
commitment to a secure Jewish state has been unwavering; not even
by one vote or one letter or one resolution has it wavered. And
as president, I can guarantee you that that support and that
effort for our ally, a vibrant democracy, will continue. ...The
security of Israel is paramount."
[ http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/kerryadl.html ]
Ladies and gentlemen, you cannot have more than one paramount
value. If a certain thing is your highest value, that means that
all other things are of lesser or no value. Kerry says "The
security of Israel is paramount." Not the security of the United
States. Not the security of our children's future. Not the
security of Western civilization or its founding race. None of
these are paramount to Kerry, or for that matter Bush or any of
the bought politicians. The Jewish state alone is paramount. (In
one of those coincidences that is simply too funny to have been
made up, I note that Kerry's 'liaison with the Jewish community'
is a person named Jay Footlik.)
As for Ralph Nader, he himself, like Kerry, is not entirely White
(though he's not Jewish) and he cannot be expected to articulate
the interests of White Americans. He has approached Middle
Eastern issues with more objectivity than Kerry or Bush -- he
recently referred to Kerry as "part of the Washington puppet show
on the Israeli/Palestinian matter" -- and he would restrict some
of the worst abuses of the open-border maniacs for rational
economic reasons...
[ http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/kerry.html ]
And what of that OSCE conference on 'anti-Semitism' to which both
Kerry and Bush referred in such glowing terms? Attended by
representatives of 55 nations, many of them dependent on
US/Zionist favor for their economic survival, it marked the
agreement of those governments to 'root out' all criticism of
Jews, continue their efforts to criminalize such criticism, and
begin the most extensive internal surveillance and spying
operation ever known, to be directed against their own citizens
suspected of being aware of the issue of Jewish supremacism.
According to the New Jersey Jewish News, at the conference
"European governments acknowledged that much of the current
anti-Semitism revival hides behind criticism of Israel.
...Several congressional participants praised the work of the
conference, but warned that the meeting is only the first step in
combating a problem that continues to grow."
One of those US Congressmen attending the event was New Jersey's
Republican Representative Chris Smith, who said "When national
leaders fail to denounce anti-Semitic violence and slurs, the
void is not only demoralizing to the victims, but silence
actually enables the wrongdoing. Silence by elected officials in
particular conveys approval - or at least acquiescence - and can
contribute to a climate of fear and a sense of vulnerability.
...we hope the results of this conference will serve as a
blueprint for serious and hopefully bold action. Our words here
in Berlin, however, must be repeated at home with frequency,
passion, and tenacity and matched - and even exceeded - by
deeds."
Laszlo Kovacs, the foreign minister of Hungary, told the OSCE
meeting "There can be no tolerance of extremist hate speech. We
will not tolerate it in parliament, in meetings, on the streets,
squares or football stadiums." By "extremist hate speech" they
now mean criticism of Israel, Zionism, or Jewish power. They do
not mean and will not punish Jewish supremacists when they
declare their hatred of White people or others, nor will they
punish the Jewish funding and promotion of policies which are
leading directly to genocide of the European race.
Another attendee was Democratic Congressman from Maryland Ben
Cardin, who declared "We ended up with a document that
acknowledges the importance of national leadership in fighting
anti-Semitism, and which commits nations not just to gather
information about the problem but to take action based on that."
The article continues: "As a result, OSCE members will share
information on the spread of anti-Semitism and 'best practices'
for combating it. Member nations agreed to invest in educational
and law enforcement programs aimed at reducing hate crimes and to
appoint a roving OSCE envoy to help members 'develop specific
strategies.'"
Jewish spokesman Mark Levin said of the OSCE meeting "The bottom
line is that members states of the OSCE are now committed to
monitoring and hopefully implementing programs to counter
increasing anti-Semitism..." Levin also said that America must
also monitor and 'combat' critics of Jewish power: "It was clear
we have a lot to look at in our own backyard, including using
education, law enforcement, and the Internet to combat new forms
of hatred." With every questioner of Jewish policy now put in the
'anti-Semite' category if Jewish groups so declare, Levin and
Foxman are going to be very very busy in the near future.
[ http://www.njjewishnews.com/njjn.com/50604/wldadl.html ]
[ http://www.eubusiness.com/afp/040523124619.zfxkfwap ]
They may have to 'monitor' the halls of Congress. In the U.S.
Senate, Senator Ernest Hollings is about to retire -- and from
the secure position of never having to worry about reelection
again, Mr. Hollings has decided to come clean, at least
partially, on the nature of Jewish power in Washington. (By the
way, Hollings' designated successor has been chosen by the
Democratic Party: Inez Tenenbaum, the Democratic state education
superintendent. No more worries about South Carolina Senators
spilling the beans for a while, anyway. [
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/GuestColumns/printLondon20040525.shtml
] )
Hollings' remarks included the following: "They [the Israeli
military] are coming in there [Palestinian refugee camps] with
U.S. equipment, U.S. gun helicopters, U.S. tanks that are
bulldozing. That is our policy. That is the reason for 9/11. ...I
think, frankly, we have caused more terrorism than we have gotten
rid of. ...I can tell you no President takes office--I don't care
whether it is a Republican or a Democrat--that all of a sudden
AIPAC will tell him exactly what the policy is... I don't
apologize for this column. I want them to apologize to me for
talking about anti-Semitism. They are not getting by with it.
...Now we have killed almost 800, maimed for life thousands of
others. Are we going to just continue on?"
[ http://hollings.senate.gov/~hollings/statements/2004521A35.html
]
Good question, Senator Hollings. My question is: Why did it take
you dozens of years to tell us the truth about Jewish domination
of Washington? Other establishment figures have, perhaps
reluctantly and hesitantly, revealed the truth about who has led
us into the war: Middle East expert General Anthony Zinni has now
stated that the purpose of the war was Israel's security, and
that Jewish neocons -- naming Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz,
Lewis Libby, Richard Perle, and Elliot Abrams -- were the ones
pushing for war from the beginning.
[ http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13549 ]
In parallel with the OSCE efforts in Europe, Jewish efforts to
suppress criticism are right now on track to be made into law in
the US Congress: H.R.4230 is a bill to "To authorize the
establishment within the Department of State of an Office to
Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, to require inclusion in annual
Department of State reports of information concerning acts of
anti-Semitism around the world, and for other purposes."
The bill states that "It is the sense of Congress that-- (1) the
United States should continue to vigorously support efforts to
combat anti-Semitism worldwide through bilateral relationships
and interaction with international organizations such as the
Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE); (2)
the United States delegation to the OSCE conference in Berlin
should advocate for the appointment of a High Commissioner on
anti-Semitism; (3) the President should direct the United States
Ambassador to the United Nations to introduce in the most
appropriate forum in the United Nations a measure condemning
anti-Semitism; (4) the Secretary of State should establish a
permanent office in the Department of State to monitor and combat
anti-Semitism; and (5) the Department of State should thoroughly
document acts of anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic incitement that
occur around the world."
[ http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR04230:@@@P ]
It does indeed seem that there are meetings, meetings everywhere
-- in Berlin, in Washington, in the halls of Congress itself. For
the most part, these are meetings of liars and faceless
bureaucrats eager to accept Jewish money and keep their jobs by
doing what they are told.
Meanwhile, we're having some meetings of our own. Last month,
National Alliance members participated in the Institute for
Historical Review revisionist conference in Sacramento, which we
helped rescue from cowardice and Jewish censorship efforts. Just
one week earlier, we held the largest-ever National Alliance
Leadership Conference in the newly-constructed William Pierce
Memorial Hall in the beautiful mountains of West Virginia. And
just a few days ago, the New Orleans European-American Conference
gathered together Alliance members and supporters, members of
other groups, and individual activists from around the world to
meet in cooperation in setting lofty goals, putting in place a
'zero tolerance' policy on violence or lawlessness often
instigated by provocateurs, and distancing ourselves from
irresponsible elements by setting a high moral tone in our
efforts to secure a future for White children. The ideas in the
New Orleans Protocol, as it is called, are those that the
National Alliance has been promoting for years. The New Orleans
Protocol will have historic significance as we advance toward our
vision: a nation for White people, where the government is
responsible to us alone, where our interests -- and not the
interests of a foreign nation like Israel -- come first.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The text above is based on a broadcast of the American Dissident
Voices radio program sponsored by National Vanguard Books.
It is distributed by e-mail each Saturday to subscribers of
ADV-list.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
==> To subscribe send an e-mail message to:
adv-list...@NatVan.com
The subject of the message should be: Subscribe
Dan
French treated her with the utmost of respect and kindness (these two
sisters ARE babes, however) and were astonished at the American media
portrayal of them. The issue of the War came up and they had a variety of
opinions but you'd never recognize it as the same country that CBSNBCABC
portrays.
The American Left sided Media is simply NOT to be trusted. Ever.
"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c1ncj0dj8hmbcopqm...@4ax.com...
Igpay Ipublicanrey
We're going to get you a clear plastic belt buckle, Hankie
the Wankie, so you can see out when you have your head up
your ass - (as ALWAYS).
Get back to humping the mare. She misses you..