Muslims cannot be Western citizens
simple_...@yahoo.com
In the United States a foreigner who becomes naturalized has to
declare, on oath, “that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure
all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state,
or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or
citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of
the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and
domestic.” A declaration of this kind, of not a solemn oath of
allegiance, is expected from naturalized citizens in most European
countries.
For a Muslim to declare all of the above in good faith, and especially
that he accepts an “infidel,” i.e. non-Muslim document or law as the
source of his highest loyalty, is an act of apostasy par excellence,
punishable by death under the Islamic law. The sharia, to a Muslim, is
not an addition to the “secular” legal code with which it coexists; it
is the only true code, the only basis of obligation. To be legitimate,
all political power therefore must rest exclusively with those who
enjoy Allah’s authority on the basis of his revealed will - and for as
long as they remain infidel, both Europe and America are illegitimate.
So how can a self-avowedly devout Muslim take the oath, and expect the
rest of us to believe that it was done in good faith? Because he is
practicing taqiyya, the art of elaborate lying that was inaugurated by
Muhammad to help destabilize and undermine non-Muslim communities
almost ripe for a touch of Jihad. (Or else because he is not devout
enough and confused, but in that case there is the ever-present danger
that at some point he will rediscover his roots.)...
Western leaders did not agonize over communism’s “true” nature during
the Berlin air lift in 1949, or in Korea in 1950, but acted
effectively to contain it by whatever means necessary. Yes, back then
we had a legion of Moscow’s apologists, character witnesses, moles and
fellow-travelers, assuring us that the Comrades want nothing but
social justice at home and peaceful coexistence abroad. They held
tenured chairs at prestigious universities and dominated all smart
salons, from London and Paris to New York. They explained away and
justified the inconsistencies and horrifyingly violent implications of
the source texts of Marx and Lenin. They explained away and justified
the appalling fruits: the bloodbath of the Revolution, the genocidal
great famine, the show trials and purges, the killing of millions of
innocents in the Gulag, the pact with Hitler, the works.
Today their spiritual heirs in politics, the academy and the media
establishment act as Islam’s apologists, character witnesses and
fellow travelers. They flatly deny or else explain away, with
identical scholastic sophistry and moral depravity, the dark and
violent implications of the source texts, the Kuran and the Hadith,
the deeply unnerving career of Muhammad, and centuries of conquests,
wars, slaughters, subjugation, decline without fall, spiritual and
material misery, and murderous fanaticism...
The refusal of theWestern elite class to protect their nations from
jihadist infiltration is the biggest betrayal in history. It is rooted
in the mindset that breeds the claim that “force is not an answer” to
terrorism, that profiling is bad and open borders are good, that
“true” Islam is peaceful and the West is wicked. The upholders of such
claims belong to the culture that has lost its bond with nature,
history, and the supporting community. In the meantime, thanks to
them, the quiet onslaught continues unabated, across the Straits of
Gibraltar, through JFK and O’Hare, Heathrow and Schiphol. Far from
enhancing diversity, it threatens to impose a numbing sameness and
eradicate the identity of target-populations, to demolish their
special character and uniqueness...
The elite class, rootless, arrogant, cynically manipulative, has every
intention of continuing to “fight” the war on terrorism without naming
the enemy, without revealing his beliefs, without unmasking his
intentions, without offending his accomplices, without expelling his
fifth columnists, and without ever daring to win.
It is up to the millions of normal Europeans and their American
cousins to stop the madness. The traitor class wants them to share its
death wish, to self-annihilate as people with a historical memory and
a cultural identity, and to make room for the post-human, monistic
Utopia spearheaded by the jihadist fifth column.
This crime can and must be stopped. The founders of the United States
overthrew the colonial government for offenses far lighter than those
of which the traitor class is guilty.
Robin T Cox
> The elite class, rootless, arrogant, cynically manipulative, has every
> intention of continuing to “fight” the war on terrorism without naming
> the enemy, without revealing his beliefs, without unmasking his
> intentions, without offending his accomplices, without expelling his
> fifth columnists, and without ever daring to win.
This, of course, assumes that in this 'war on terror' they know who 'the
enemy' is. In fact, of course, they find 'the enemy' very hard, if not
impossible, to define.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080512/
NATION/505177395/1002
http://tinyurl.com/6hqg7w
This is because the 'war on terror' itself is a fiction designed to
permit the Bush administration and their supporters to ignore the rule of
law and do what the hell they like.
--
Facts are sacred ... but comment is free
Doug
news:8aiWj.2875$DZ6....@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> On Tue, 13 May 2008 07:50:12 -0700, simple_...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> The elite class, rootless, arrogant, cynically manipulative, has every
>> intention of continuing to "fight" the war on terrorism without naming
>> the enemy, without revealing his beliefs, without unmasking his
>> intentions, without offending his accomplices, without expelling his
>> fifth columnists, and without ever daring to win.
>
> This, of course, assumes that in this 'war on terror' they know who 'the
> enemy' is. In fact, of course, they find 'the enemy' very hard, if not
> impossible, to define.
>
The enemy is Islam -- all of it, foolio.
> http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080512/
> NATION/505177395/1002
> http://tinyurl.com/6hqg7w
>
> This is because the 'war on terror' itself is a fiction designed to
> permit the Bush administration and their supporters to ignore the rule of
> law and do what the hell they like.
>
Yeah, if you want to facilitate the Islamonazification of the UK I guess
you'd buy into this kinda bullshit.
Topaz
The West is the White race.
The goal of America is to destroy the White race. The
multi-culture and pluralism they push is only at the expense of
Whites. No one is trying to push multi-culture in China or Japan or
anyplace but on the Whites. And they promote racial intermarriage.
If things continue as they are the White race is doomed.
And who is doing all of this? It is the USA government and the
media, in other words the Jews.
Many Whites are traitors. They support the USA government and their
own destruction. We should look for allies. And anyone who wants to
remove the Jews from power is our ally. In the past the Japanese were
our allies. Today it is the Muslims.
Osama bin Laden
September 24th statement published in Pakistan
"I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We
are against the system, which makes other nations slaves of the United
States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic
freedom. This system is totally in control of the American Jews, whose
first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is simply that the
American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced
to live according to the principles and laws laid by them. So, the
punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it
is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the
U.S. is not uttering a single word."
http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com
American Patriot
> The West is the White race.
>
> The goal of America is to destroy the White race.
The White Supremacists will go down again, just like they
did with Hitler. Topaz, you're on the wrong side again, like
your comrades were over 60 years ago, you'll never learn.
Stuck on stupied, eh.
Topaz
THE ENEMIES of White people around the world have a pathological
love affair with the term 'White supremacist' whenever they report
on or describe White people who act in a collective manner, no
matter how benign, on behalf of their own group interests..
However, the same people who decry 'White supremacism' seem to have a
difficult time describing the actions of non-Whites acting on behalf
of their group interests, often violently, as supremacists of any
kind.
And never mind the fact that most so-called White supremacists
simply work to promote separate living space and political
independence from Jewish or other non-White influence.
All right then, I have a question for you about this 'White
supremacism': where is it? Where is this so-called White
supremacism? Have you seen it?
Far too many White people in America and around the world are
race-mixing and aborting themselves out of existence. Our
politicians are allowing record Third World immigration into our
White ancestral homelands. Our White corporate 'free traders' and
White globalists continue to impoverish us as they send our jobs
overseas, and our White politicians send our White soldiers to die
in a senseless war in Iraq for Israel, soldiers who will never sire
another generation of their own kind.
]
Does that sound like 'White supremacism'?
We continue to allow the media masters to produce their filth,
surpassing each other in obscenity as they abuse our people in print
and on screen. Does that sound like White supremacy?
Ubiquitous misinformation in the media and in the schools has made
too many of us ashamed of our nature and our traditions; our
accomplishments, we are told, belong to the entire world. Even most
Whites-who know they're being lied to-are still too scared to
organize for our common good, because Jewish supremacists such as
the Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center, their
allies in the media, and their lapdog politicians attack any who
try to stand up to them; even as Jews and other non-Whites are
encouraged, even paid, to organize.
How "supreme" is that, my friends?
If you recall, the recent demonstrations of Mestizo invaders across
America bore a simple message: 'We claim your land! We claim your
jobs! We want your women! We demand your future! If you don't hand
us America, then you are racist pigs!'
Where was the massive so-called White supremacist backlash to these
invaders? Where was the White resistance to this clear and present
danger to our posterity? With the exception of the street activism
of National Vanguard members and supporters and a few other stalwart
patriots, I didn't see it. Did you?
So, where were all the White people during these Mestizo
demonstrations? Well, my guess is they were figuring out how they're
going to pay their next tax bill; working longer hours for less and
less inflation-reduced take-home pay; shopping at yet another new
Wal-Mart for the only kind of goods many can afford, Chinese junk;
watching ball games; attending yet another anti-White motion
picture, and so on. Some are blind, happily embracing their lives as
the new peons in a multiracial America, while others know something
is wrong, but haven't yet figured it out. Some know exactly what is
happening, but are afraid to say anything, falsely believing they
are all alone in their beliefs.
Fear is the dominant note in this funeral march.
Kevin Strom said: "Everywhere our borders have been opened and the
new elite teaches our children that intermarriage is good and
desirable. Everywhere the new elite teaches our children that to
defend our genetic heritage is the very definition of evil. The end
result, if trends continue, will be genocide."
There is no fortress against this persistent onslaught. There are no
mighty gates on the horizon swinging open to offer us sanctuary. The
Other is in every city, every county, every town, every hamlet now.
The Opponent continues to work overtime to convince us all that
White racial consciousness is "evil," because they know that we are
the only real obstacle to their malevolent plans for a global
plantation. They are the real supremacists. Not us.
History has set a task for us. It is to dispel the fog of fear that
immobilizes the sleeping White giant of our people. It is to change
the now-dominant note of fear to one of determination. It is to turn
that funeral march into a march of triumph.
National Vanguard. Our time has come and our time is now.
I'm Frank Roman. Thank you for listening and I shall speak with you
again.
American Patriot (Kcajyer)
> THE ENEMIES of White people around the world have a pathological
> love affair with the term 'White supremacist'
*I* certainly don't "have a pathological love affair with the term
"white supemacist",
and I am not "an enemy of White people"; my family is white.
Topaz, I have a question for you: Why do you pal up with the
jihadists who want the down fall of the USofA? Heck, those
jihadist from Iran, Iraq, ect look like Mexicans!
> And never mind the fact that most so-called White supremacists
> simply work to promote separate living space and political
> independence from Jewish or other non-White influence
So why cosy up with the jihadists given that you cherish your
"White" skin so much? Ghee, you won't have any skin left after
they're through with you!
> All right then, I have a question for you about this 'White
> supremacism': where is it? Where is this so-called White
> supremacism? Have you seen it?
Yes, i've seen it up close and personal. I've been asked to "join
the White Supremacist movement".
Topaz
<kcaj...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>*I* certainly don't "have a pathological love affair with the term
>"white supemacist",
Why then do you call people white supremacist when they insist they
are not.
>and I am not "an enemy of White people"; my family is white.
>
>Topaz, I have a question for you: Why do you pal up with the
>jihadists who want the down fall of the USofA? Heck, those
>jihadist from Iran, Iraq, ect look like Mexicans!
The West is the White race.
The goal of America is to destroy the White race. The
multi-culture and pluralism they push is only at the expense of
Whites. No one is trying to push multi-culture in China or Japan or
anyplace but on the Whites. And they promote racial intermarriage.
If things continue as they are the White race is doomed.
And who is doing all of this? It is the USA government and the
media, in other words the Jews.
Many Whites are traitors. They support the USA government and their
own destruction. We should look for allies. And anyone who wants to
remove the Jews from power is our ally. In the past the Japanese were
our allies. Today it is the Muslims.
Osama bin Laden
September 24th statement published in Pakistan
"I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We
are against the system, which makes other nations slaves of the United
States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic
freedom. This system is totally in control of the American Jews, whose
first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is simply that the
American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced
to live according to the principles and laws laid by them. So, the
punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it
is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the
U.S. is not uttering a single word."
>
>So why cosy up with the jihadists given that you cherish your
>"White" skin so much? Ghee, you won't have any skin left after
>they're through with you!
Jews are destroying the White race. And Jews want us to fight Arabs
for them. We should have a White nation and Arabs should have a
Muslim nation. We should be friends. We are both against the Jews.
>
>Yes, i've seen it up close and personal. I've been asked to "join
>the White Supremacist movement".
No White Nationalist would say that. We don't parrot what the Jewish
controlled media says. It was probably really a Jew talking to you,
or an idiot.
Doug
albino black man?
"Topaz" <mars...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0tck24lsefhsaitq9...@4ax.com...
American Patriot
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 18:43:47 -0700 (PDT), "American Patriot (Kcajyer)"
>
> >*I* certainly don't "have a pathological love affair with the term
> >"white supemacist",
>
> Why then do you call people white supremacist when they insist they
> are not.
>
> >and I am not "an enemy of White people"; my family is white.
>
> >Topaz, I have a question for you: Why do you pal up with the
> >jihadists who want the down fall of the USofA? Heck, those
> >jihadist from Iran, Iraq, ect look like Mexicans!
>
> The West is the White race.
>
> The goal of America is to destroy the White race. The
> multi-culture and pluralism they push is only at the expense of
> Whites. No one is trying to push multi-culture in China or Japan or
> anyplace but on the Whites. And they promote racial intermarriage.
> If things continue as they are the White race is doomed.
>
> And who is doing all of this? It is the USA government and the
> media, in other words the Jews.
>
> Many Whites are traitors. They support the USA government
Right, we do support the USA
> and their
> own destruction. We should look for allies. And anyone who wants to
> remove the Jews from power is our ally. In the past the Japanese were
> our allies. Today it is the Muslims.
Who do you consider "our allies"? Yours, not mine btw.
>
> Osama bin La."
>
>
>
> >So why cosy up with the jihadists given that you cherish your
> >"White" skin so much? Ghee, you won't have any skin left after
> >they're through with you!
>
> Jews are destroying the White race.
Jews look like the country they come from; being Jewish
is a religion. In Spain Jews look Spanish; in Germany they
look German, ect.
You're really stuck on stupied "Topaz".
> And Jews want us to fight Arabs
> for them.
Topaz, you fail to look at the entire picture and go back through
history. Europe-Spain; after the near conquest of the Spanish
penninsula, It took the Spaniards 700 years to expell the
jihadists. Did the "Jews want us to fight Arabs for them", then??
=No
> We should have a White nation and Arabs should have a
> Muslim nation.
I agree that "Arabs should have a Muslim nation", in Saudie Arabia.
> We should be friends.
Topaz, you're being used. Look at Sweden and the past forty years for
starters.
> We are both against the Jews.
Looks like you're both against the USofA as well, you have
posted so. Do you have any illegals held up at your apartment?
>
>
>
> >Yes, i've seen it up close and personal. I've been asked to "join
> >the White Supremacist movement".
>
> No White Nationalist would say that.
They didn't say it like that, they were from the "White
Supremacist movement".
> We don't parrot what the Jewish
> controlled media says. It was probably really a Jew talking to you,
> or an idiot.
They were White Supremacists, and they made my White skin crawl.
Frightening that there are people like that.
American Patriot
> remove the Jews from power is our ally.
> In the past the Japanese were
> our allies.
Topaz, obviously you consider yourself a "neoNazi", and
you refer to the alliance between Nazi Germany
and the Japanese during WWII.
Those two countries were our enemies at the time,
today they are allies.
> Today it is the Muslims.
How do you and Bin Laden communicate for
your "alliance"?
Doug
"American Patriot" <Kcaj...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2f55934a-c9ad-4f8b...@l17g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
mark...@digiverse.net
<simple_langu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> source:http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2008/05/counterjihad-vienna-2008.html
>
> In the United States a foreigner who becomes naturalized has to
> declare, on oath, “that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure
> all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state,
> or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or
> citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of
> the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and
> domestic.” A declaration of this kind, of not a solemn oath of
> allegiance, is expected from naturalized citizens in most European
> countries.
So that excludes all Jews right from the start since they proclaim
their true homeland to be Israel.
[snip rest of hatemongering.]
Doug
<mark...@digiverse.net> wrote in message
news:dbfbe01b-1a00-476b...@27g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
parr...@yahoo.com
Is it ignorance or dishonesty that leads you to make these false,
bigotted statements?
>
> [snip rest of hatemongering.]
So you could replace it with your own..
Topaz
<Kcaj...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Right, we do support the USA
Why support it's government?
>Who do you consider "our allies"? Yours, not mine btw.
The Japanese in the 40's. The Arabs today.
>
>Jews look like the country they come from; being Jewish
>is a religion. In Spain Jews look Spanish; in Germany they
>look German, ect.
Jews are an ethnic group. They are not just a religion. If a Jew
becomes a Christian or an atheist he still says he is a Jew. Most of
the Jews in the Jew country are atheist. They say that a Jew is anyone
that has a Jewish mother. Therefore it is a hereditary thing.
We are for having a nation of White people. Jews would be White enough
to join us if it weren't for other important factors. One factor is
that they don't want our race to live. They want to be the only
Caucasians to survive on the earth.
The Jews have their own Jew country, but they demand multi-culture and
pluralism for us. Their leaders agree with something Hitler wrote:
"A State which, in an epoch of racial adulteration, devotes itself to
the duty of preserving the best elements of its racial stock must one
day become ruler of the Earth."
Jews are enemies of White civilization. Here are some quotes
from a very pro-Jewish book that was first published in 1925. The book
is "Stranger than Fiction" by Lewis Browne.
"But save for such exceptions, the Jews who led or participated
in the heroic efforts to remold the world of the last century, were
neither Reform or Orthodox. Indeed, they were often not professing
Jews at all.
"For instance, there was Heinrich Heine and Ludwig Borne, both
unfaltering champions of freedom. And even more conspicuously, there
was Karl Marx, one of the great prophetic geniuses of modern times.
"Jewish historians rarely mention the name of this man, Karl
Marx, though in his life and spirit he was far truer to the mission of
Israel than most of those who were forever talking of it. He was born
in Germany in 1818, and belonged to an old rabbinic family. He was not
himself reared as a Jew, however, but while still a child was baptized
a Christian by his father. Yet the rebel soul of the Jew flamed in him
throughout his days, for he was always a 'troubler' in Europe."
"Then, of course, there are Ludwig Borne and Heinrich Heine, two
men who by their merciless wit and sarcasm became leaders among the
revolutionary writers. Karl Marx, Ferdinand Lassalle, Johann Jacoby,
Gabriel Riesser, Adolphe Cremieux, Signora Nathan- all these of Jewish
lineage played important roles in the struggle that went throughout
Europe in this period. Wherever the war for human liberty was being
waged, whether in France, Germany, Austria, Hungary, or Italy, there
the Jew was to be found. It was little wonder that the enemies of
social progress, the monarchists and the Churchmen, came to speak of
the whole liberal movement as nothing but a Jewish plot."
"The Jews had become the money lenders of Europe for quite
evident reasons. The Church sternly forbade all Christians to engage
in the pursuit...
"So the Jews became the money lenders of Europe. They developed
a great shrewdness and cunning in the one and only field of
opportunity left open to them. And with their shrewdness and cunning
they developed a certain cruelty and greed. That was natural. The
world was cruel to them, so when the chance was theirs, they were
cruel in return..."
Topaz
<Kcaj...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Topaz, obviously you consider yourself a "neoNazi"
There are no people who call themselves "neoNazi", though I do agree
with National Socialism.
>, and
>you refer to the alliance between Nazi Germany
>and the Japanese during WWII.
>
>Those two countries were our enemies at the time,
They were the Jews enemies. They were allies to the White race.
>today they are allies.
"They turned Germany into a permanent slave of the Jews after World
War II.
We can't criticize the Jews. We can't examine the REAL historic
background
of the so-called Holocaust. And we are forced to read
Jewish-controlled newspapers, we must watch Jewish-controlled TV shows
and we must pay, pay and pay them, this will never end.
Remember, whenever a German tries some kind of critic, he's branded a
nazi. Whenever a German hits someone not-German, he's branded a nazi.
Whenever we are proud of our nation, we're nazis. And being branded a
nazi means to be an outcast, even a criminal. A "swastika" is
forbidden.
Showing nazi symbols can mean prison. If you have doubts about the
"Holocaust", you will go to prison. Freedom of Speech? Not at all.
Exactly this will happen to Iran if Israel and the US ever invade the
country.
You will NEVER be free again. You'll be slaves forever.
Don't let it happen. Hitler was so right about the Jews. They are the
most treacherous race on this planet. There is a reason nobody likes
them, except their "host", the USA."
Horst Wessel
>
>How do you and Bin Laden communicate for
>your "alliance"?
I'm not aware of Bin Laden communicating with White Nationalists.
But the president of Iran has met with David Duke.
Topaz
Kevin MacDonald's The Culture of Critique
Reviewed by Stanley Hornbeck
In The Culture of Critique, Kevin MacDonald advances a carefully
researched but extremely controversial thesis: that certain 20th
century intellectual movements -- largely established and led by Jews
-- have changed European societies in fundamental ways and destroyed
the confidence of Western man. He claims that these movements were
designed, consciously or unconsciously, to advance Jewish interests
even though they were presented to non-Jews as universalistic and even
utopian. He concludes that the increasing dominance of these ideas has
had profound political and social consequences that benefited Jews but
caused great harm to gentile societies. This analysis, which he makes
with considerable force, is an unusual indictment of a people
generally
thought to be more sinned against than sinning.
The Culture of Critique is the final title in Prof. MacDonald's
massive, three-volume study of Jews and their role in history. The two
previous volumes are A People That Shall Dwell Alone and Separation
and
its Discontents, published by Praeger in 1994 and 1998. The series is
written from a sociobiological perspective that views Judaism as a
unique survival strategy that helps Jews compete with other ethnic
groups. Prof. MacDonald, who is a psychologist at the University of
California at Long Beach, explains this perspective in the first
volume, which describes Jews as having a very powerful sense of
uniqueness that has kept them socially and genetically separate from
other peoples. The second volume traces the history of Jewish-gentile
relations, and finds the causes of anti-Semitism primarily in the
almost invariable commercial and intellectual dominance of gentile
societies by Jews and in their refusal to assimilate. The Culture of
Critique brings his analysis into the present century, with an account
of the Jewish role in the radical critique of traditional culture.
The intellectual movements Prof. MacDonald discusses in this volume
are
Marxism, Freudian psychoanalysis, the Frankfurt school of sociology,
and Boasian anthropology. Perhaps most relevant from a racial
perspective, he also traces the role of Jews in promoting
multi-culturalism and Third World immigration. Throughout his analysis
Prof. MacDonald reiterates his view that Jews have promoted these
movements as Jews and in the interests of Jews, though they have often
tried to give the impression that they had no distinctive interests of
their own. Therefore Prof. MacDonald's most profound charge against
Jews is not ethnocentrism but dishonesty -- that while claiming to be
working for the good of mankind they have often worked for their own
good and to the detriment of others. While attempting to promote the
brotherhood of man by dissolving the ethnic identification of
gentiles,
Jews have maintained precisely the kind of intense group solidarity
they decry as immoral in others.
Celebrating Diversity
Prof. MacDonald claims that one of the most consistent ways in which
Jews have advanced their interests has been to promote pluralism and
diversity -- but only for others. Ever since the 19th century, they
have led movements that tried to discredit the traditional foundations
of gentile society: patriotism, racial loyalty, the Christian basis
for
morality, social homogeneity, and sexual restraint. At the same time,
within their own communities, and with regard to the state of Israel,
they have often supported the very institutions they attack in gentile
society.
Why is this in the interests of Jews? Because the parochial group
loyalty characteristic of Jews attracts far less attention in a
society
that does not have a cohesive racial and cultural core. The Jewish
determination not to assimilate fully, which accounts for their
survival as a people for thousands for years -- even without a country
-- has invariably attracted unpleasant and even murderous scrutiny in
nations with well -defined national identities. In Prof. MacDonald's
view it is therefore in the interest of Jews to dilute and weaken the
identity of any people among whom they live. Jewish identity can
flower
in safety only when gentile identity is weak.
Prof. MacDonald quotes a remarkable passage from Charles Silberman:
"American Jews are committed to cultural tolerance because of their
belief -- one firmly rooted in history -- that Jews are safe only in a
society acceptant of a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well
as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups. It is this belief, for
example, not approval of homosexuality, that leads an overwhelming
majority of American Jews to endorse 'gay rights' and to take a
liberal
stance on most other so-called 'social' issues."
He is saying, in effect, that when Jews make the
diversity-is-our-strength argument it is in support of their real goal
of diluting a society's homogeneity so that Jews will feel safe. They
are couching a Jewish agenda in terms they think gentiles will accept.
Likewise, as the second part of the Silberman quotation suggests, Jews
may support deviant movements, not because they think it is good for
the country but because it is good for the Jews.
Prof. Silberman also provides an illuminating quote from a Jewish
economist who thought that republicans had more sensible economic
policies but who voted for the Democratic presidential candidate
anyway. His reason? "I'd rather live in a country governed by the
faces
I saw at the Democratic convention than those I saw at the Republican
convention." This man apparently distrusts white gentiles and voted
for
a racially mixed party even if its economic policies were wrong. What
is good for Jews appears to come before what is good for the country.
Earl Raab, former president of heavily Jewish Brandeis University
makes
the diversity argument in a slightly different way. Expressing his
satisfaction with the prediction that by the middle of the next
century
whites will become a minority, he writes, "We have tipped beyond the
point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this
country." He is apparently prepared to displace the people and culture
of the founding stock in order to prevent the theoretical rise of an
anti-Jewish regime. Prof. Raab appears to see whites mainly as
potential Nazis, and is willing to sacrifice their culture and
national
continuity in order to defuse an imagined threat to Jews. This passage
takes for granted the continued future existence of Jews as a distinct
community even as gentile whites decline in numbers and influence.
In the same passage, Prof. Raab continues by noting that, "[w]e [Jews]
have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for
about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the
heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it
irreversible..." -- just as it tends to make the ultimate displacement
of European culture also irreversible.
Prof. MacDonald traces the development of this diversity strategy to
several sources. It is widely recognized that the German-Jewish
immigrant Franz Boas (1858-1942) almost single-handedly established
the
current contours of anthropology, ridding it of all biological
explanations for differences in human culture or behavior. Prof.
MacDonald reports that he and his followers -- with the notable
exceptions of Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict -- were all Jews with
strong Jewish identities: "Jewish identification and the pursuit of
perceived Jewish interests, particularly in advocating an ideology of
cultural pluralism as a model for Western societies, has been the
'invisible subject' of American anthropology."
By 1915, Boas and his students controlled the American Anthropological
Association and by 1926 they headed every major American university
anthropology department. From this position of dominance they promoted
the idea that race and biology are trivial matters, and that
environment counts for everything. They completely recast anthropology
so as to provide intellectual support for open immigration,
integration, and miscegenation. They also laid the foundation for the
idea that because all races have the same potential, the failures of
non-whites must be blamed exclusively on white oppression. The
ultimate
conclusion of Boasian anthropology was that since environment accounts
for all human differences, every inequality in achievement can be
eliminated by changing the environment. This has been the
justification
for enormous and wasteful government intervention programs.
The entire "civil rights" movement can be seen as a natural
consequence
of the triumph of Boasian thinking. Since all races were equivalent,
separation was immoral. The color line also sharpened white
self-consciousness in ways that might make whites more aware of Jewish
parochialism. Thus it was, according to Prof. MacDonald, that Jews
almost single-handedly launched the desegregation movement. Without
the
leadership of Jews, the NAACP might never have been established, and
until 1975 every one of its presidents was a Jew. Prof. MacDonald
reports that in 1917, when the black separatist Marcus Garvey visited
NAACP headquarters, he saw so many white faces that he stormed out,
complaining that it was a white organization.
Prof. MacDonald concludes that the efforts of Jews were crucial to the
"civil rights" transformation of America. He quotes a lawyer for the
American Jewish Congress who claims that "many of these [civil rights]
laws were actually written in the offices of Jewish agencies by Jewish
staff people, introduced by Jewish legislators and pressured into
being
by Jewish voters."
While the Boas school was promoting integration and racial
equivalence,
it was also critical of, in Prof. MacDonald's words, "American culture
as overly homogeneous, hypocritical, emotionally and aesthetically
repressive (especially with regard to sexuality). Central to this
program was creating ethnographies of idyllic [Third-World] cultures
that were free of the negatively perceived traits that were attributed
to Western culture."
The Role of the anthropologist became one of criticizing everything
about Western society while glorifying everything primitive. Prof.
MacDonald notes that Boasian portrayals of non-Western peoples
deliberately ignored barbarism and cruelty or simply attributed it to
contamination from the West. He sees this as a deliberate attempt to
undermine the confidence of Western societies and to make them
permeable to Third World influences and people. Today, this view is
enshrined in the dogma that America must remain open to immigration
because immigrants bring spirit and energy that natives somehow lack.
Authoritarian Personalities
In order to open European-derived societies to the immigration that
would transform them, it was necessary to discredit racial solidarity
and commitment to tradition. Prof. MacDonald argues that this was the
basic purpose of a group of intellectuals known as the Frankfurt
School. What is properly known as the Institute of Social Research was
founded in Frankfurt, Germany, during the Weimar period by a Jewish
millionaire but was closed down by the Nazis shortly after they took
power. Most of its staff emigrated to the United States and the
institute reconstituted itself at UC Berkeley. The organization was
headed by Max Horkheimer, and its most influential members were T.W.
Adorno, Erich Fromm, and Herbert Marcuse, all of whom had strong
Jewish
identities. Horkheimer made no secret of the partisan nature of the
institute's activities: "Research would be able here to transform
itself directly into propaganda," he wrote. (Italics in the original)
Prof. MacDonald devotes many pages to an analysis of The Authoritarian
Personality, which was written by Adorno and appeared in 1950. It was
part of a series called Studies in Prejudice, produced by the
Frankfurt
school, which included titles like Anti-Semitism and Emotional
Disorder. The Authoritarian Personality, which was particularly
influential because, according to Prof. MacDonald, the American Jewish
Committee heavily funded its promotion and because Jewish academics
took up its message so enthusiastically.
The book's purpose is to make every group affiliation sound as if it
were a sign of mental disorder. Everything from patriotism to religion
to family -- and race -- loyalty are sign of a dangerous and defective
"authoritarian personality." Because drawing distinctions between
different groups is illegitimate, all group loyalties -- even close
family ties! -- are "prejudice." As Christopher Lasch has written, the
book leads to the conclusion that prejudice "could be eradicated only
by subjecting the American people to what amounted to collective
psychotherapy -- by treating them as inmates of an insane asylum."
But according to Prof. MacDonald it is precisely the kind of group
loyalty, respect for tradition, and consciousness of differences
central to Jewish identity that Horkheimer and Adorno described as
mental illness in gentiles. These writers adopted what eventually
became a favorite Soviet tactic against dissidents: Anyone whose
political views were different from theirs was insane. As Prof.
MacDonald explains, the Frankfurt school never criticized or even
described Jewish group identity -- only that of gentiles: "behavior
that is critical to Judaism as a successful group evolutionary
strategy
is conceptualized as pathological in gentiles."
For these Jewish intellectuals, anti-Semitism was also a sign of
mental
illness: They concluded that Christian self-denial and especially
sexual repression caused hatred of Jews. The Frankfurt school was
enthusiastic about psycho-analysis, according to which "Oedipal
ambivalence toward the father and anal-sadistic relations in early
childhood are the anti-Semite's irrevocable inheritance."
In addition to ridiculing patriotism and racial identity, the
Frankfurt
school glorified promiscuity and Bohemian poverty. Prof. MacDonald
sees
the school as a seminal influence: "Certainly many of the central
attitudes of the largely successful 1960s countercultural revolution
find expression in The Authoritarian Personality, including idealizing
rebellion against parents, low-investment sexual relationships, and
scorn for upward social mobility, social status, family pride, the
Christian religion, and patriotism."
Of the interest here, however, is the movement's success in branding
ancient loyalties to nation and race as mental illnesses. Although he
came later, the French-Jewish "deconstructionist" Jacques Derrida was
in the same tradition when he wrote:
"The idea behind deconstruction is to deconstruct the workings of
strong nation-states with powerful immigration policies, to
deconstruct
the rhetoric of nationalism, the politics of place, the metaphysics of
native land and native tongue... The idea is to disarm the bombs... of
identity that nation-states build to defend themselves against the
stranger, against Jews and Arabs and immigrants... "
As Prof. MacDonald puts it, "Viewed at its most abstract level, a
fundamental agenda is thus to influence the European-derived peoples
of
the United States to view concern about their own demographic and
cultural eclipse as irrational and as an indication of
psychopathology." Needless to say, this project has been successful;
anyone opposed to the displacement of whites is routinely treated as a
mentally unhinged "hate-monger," and whenever whites defend their
group
interests they are described as psychologically inadequate. The irony
has not escaped Prof. MacDonald: "The ideology that ethnocentrism was
a
form of psychopathology was promulgated by a group that over its long
history had arguably been the most ethnocentric group among all the
cultures of the world."
Immigration
Prof. MacDonald argues that it is entirely natural for Jews to promote
open immigration. It brings about the "diversity" Jews find comforting
and it keeps America open to persecuted co-religionists throughout the
world. He says Jews are the only group that has always fought for mass
immigration; a few European ethnic organizations have made sporadic
efforts to make it easier for their own people to come, but only Jews
have consistently promoted open borders for all comers. Moreover,
whatever disagreements they may have had on other issues, Jews of
every
political persuasion have favored high immigration.
This, too, goes back many years, and Prof. MacDonald traces in
considerable detail the sustained Jewish pro-immigration effort.
Israel
Zangwill, author of the eponymous 1908 play The Melting Pot, was of
the
view that "there is only one way to World Peace, and that is the
absolute abolition of passports, visas, frontiers, custom houses... "
He was nevertheless an ardent Zionist and disapproved of Jewish
intermarriage.
Although the statue of liberty, properly known as Liberty Enlightening
the World, was a gift to the United States from France as a tribute to
American political traditions, the sonnet by the Jewish Emma Lazarus
helped change it into a symbol of immigration. Affixed to the base of
the statue several decades after its construction, the poem welcomes
to
America "huddled masses yearning to breath free/The wretched refuse of
your teeming shore."
Prof. MacDonald has discovered that implausible arguments about
diversity being a quintessentially American strength have been made by
Jews for a long time. He reports that in 1948 the American Jewish
Committee was urging Congress to believe that "Americanism is the
spirit behind the welcome that America has traditionally extended to
people of all races, all religions, all nationalities." Of course,
there had never been such a tradition. In 1952, the American Jewish
Congress argued in hearings on immigration that "our national
experience has confirmed beyond a doubt that our very strength lies in
the diversity of our peoples." This, too, was at a time when U.S.
immigration law was still explicitly designed to maintain a white
majority.
It is often said that when the old immigration policy was scrapped in
1965, scarcely anyone knew, and no one predicted, that the new law
would change the racial makeup of the country. Prof. MacDonald
disputes
this, arguing that this had been the objective of Jewish groups from
the beginning.
Prof. MacDonald finds that Jews have been the foremost advocates of
immigration in England, France, and Canada, and that Jewish groups
were
the most vocal opponents of independence for Quebec. Australian Jews
led the effort to dismantle the "white Australia" policy, one reason
for which was cited in an editorial in the Australian Jewish Democrat:
"The strengthening of multi-cultural or diverse Australia is also our
most effective insurance policy against anti-Semitism. The day
Australia has a Chinese Australian Governor General I would feel more
confident of my freedom to live as a Jewish Australian." Like Earl
Raab
writing about the United States, this Australian Jew is prepared to
sacrifice the traditional culture, people, and identity of Australia
to
specifically Jewish interests. It would not be surprising if such an
openly expressed objective did not have the opposite effect from the
intended, and increase anti-Jewish sentiment.
Jews and the Left
It is well known that Jews have been traditionally associated with the
left, and Prof. MacDonald investigates this connection in some detail.
Historically it was understandable that Jews should support movements
that advocated overthrowing the existing order. After emancipation,
Jews met resistance from gentile elites who did not want to lose
ground
to competitors, and outsiders easily become revolutionaries. However,
in Prof. MacDonald's view, Jewish commitment to leftist causes has
often been motivated by the hope that communism, especially, would be
a
tool for combating anti-Semitism, and by expectation that universalist
social solutions would be yet another way to dissolve gentile
loyalties
that might exclude Jews. The appeal of univeralist ideologies is tied
to the implicit understanding that Jewish particularism will be
exempt:
"At the extreme, acceptance of a universalist ideology by gentiles
would result in gentiles not perceiving Jews as in a different social
category at all, while nonetheless Jews would be able to maintain a
strong personal identity as Jews."
Prof. MacDonald argues that Jews had specifically Jewish reasons for
supporting the Bolshevik revolution. Czarist Russia was notorious for
its anti-Semitic policies and, during its early years, the Soviet
Union
seemed to be the promised land for Jews: it ended state anti-Semitism,
tried to eradicate Christianity, opened opportunities to individual
Jews, and preached a "classless" society in which Jewishness would
presumably attract no negative attention. Moreover, since Marxism
taught that all conflict was economic rather than ethnic, many Jews
believed it heralded the end of anti-Semitism.
Prof. MacDonald emphasizes that although Jewish Communists preached
both atheism and the solidarity of the world's working people, they
took pains to preserve a distinct, secular Jewish identity. He reports
that Lenin himself (who had one Jewish grandparent) approved the
continuation of an explicitly Jewish identity under Communism, and in
1946 the Communist Party of the United States voted a resolution also
supporting Jewish peoplehood in Communist countries. Thus, although
Communism was supposed to be without borders or religion, Jews were
confident that it would make a place for their own group identity. He
writes that despite the official view that all men were to be
brothers,
"very few Jews lost their Jewish identity during the entire soviet
era."
Jewish Communists sometimes betrayed remarkable particularism. Prof.
MacDonald quotes Charles Pappoport, the French Communist leader: "The
Jewish people [are] the bearer of all the great ideas of unity and
human community in history... The disappearance of the Jewish people
would signify the death of humankind, the final transformation of man
into a wild beast." This seems to attribute to Jews an elite position
incompatible with "unity and human community."
Prof. MacDonald argues that many Jews began to fall away from
Communism
only after Stalin showed himself to be anti-Semitic. And just as Jews
had been the leading revolutionaries in anti-Semitic pre-Revolutionary
Russia, Jews became the leading dissidents in an anti-Semitic Soviet
Union. A similar pattern can be found in the imposed Communist
governments of Eastern Europe, which were largely dominated by Jews.
The majority of the leaders of the Polish Communist Party, for
example,
spoke better Yiddish than Polish, and they too maintained a strong
Jewish identity. After the fall of Communism many stopped being Polish
and emigrated to Israel.
Prof. MacDonald writes that in Bela Kun's short-lived 1919 Communist
government of Hungary, 95 percent of the leaders were Jews, and that
at
the time of the 1956 uprising Communism was so closely associated with
Jews that the rioting had almost the flavor of a pogrom. He argues
that
in the United States as well, the hard core among Communists and
members of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) was mainly Jewish.
Here, too, a revolutionary, atheist, and universalist world-view was
fully compatible with strong identification as Jews. Prof. MacDonald
quotes from a study of American leftists:
"Many Communists, for example, state that they could never have
married
a spouse who was not a leftist. When Jews were asked if they could
have
married Gentiles, many hesitated, surprised by the question, and found
it difficult to answer. Upon reflection, many concluded that they had
always taken marriage to someone Jewish for granted." Their commitment
as Jews was even more fundamental and unexamined than their commitment
to the left.
Prof. MacDonald reports that many American Jews also abandoned
Communism as it became increasingly anti-Semitic. For a large number,
the Soviet Union's severing of diplomatic ties with Israel during the
1967 war was the last straw. A former SDS activist no doubt spoke for
many when he explained, "If I must choose between the Jewish cause and
a 'progressive' anti-Israel SDS, I shall choose the Jewish cause. If
barricades are erected, I will fight as a Jew." According to Prof.
MacDonald, American neoconservatism can also be described as a surface
shift in external politics that leaves the more fundamental commitment
to Jewish identity unchanged. Thus, former leftists abandoned an
ideology that had turned against Israel and refashioned American
conservatism into a different movement, the one unshakable theme of
which was support for Israel. Neoconservatives also support high
levels
of immigration and were active in excluding white racial
identification
from the "respectable" right.
Objections
There are many possible objections to Prof. MacDonald's thesis. The
first is that it is largely built on the assumption that Jews are
dishonest. It is always risky to assume one understands the motives of
others better than they do themselves. Jews have traditionally thought
of themselves as a benevolent presence, even as a "light unto the
nations" or a "chosen people." This is echoed today in the Jewish self
image as champions of the excluded and the oppressed. Most of the time
what passes for "social justice" has the effect of undermining the
traditions and loyalties of gentile society, but are Jews deliberately
undermining these things rather than righting what they perceive to be
wrongs?
Prof. MacDonald concedes that many Jews are sincere in their support
for liberal causes, but then escalates his indictment by arguing that
"the best deceivers are those who deceive themselves." In other words,
many Jews who are actually working for Jewish interests have first
convinced themselves otherwise. A Jew who mainly wants America to
become less white may also have convinced himself that America
benefits
from a multitude of cultures. Having convinced himself he can more
effectively convince others.
Many Jews, Prof. MacDonald argues, are not even conscious of the
extent
to which their Jewishness is central to their identities or their
political views. He quotes Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel on his
surprise
at how passionately he embraced the Israeli side during the 1967 war:
"I had not known how Jewish I was." This is an arresting statement
from
a man who was thought to be perhaps the greatest Jewish spiritual
leader of his time. And whether or not it affects their politics, Jews
certainly appear to have a very vivid sense of peoplehood. Prof.
MacDonald quotes theologian Eugene Borowitz as saying,"most Jews claim
to be equipped with an interpersonal friend-or-foe sensing device that
enables them to detect the presence of another Jew, despite heavy
camouflage." Always to think in terms of "friends or foe" is no
insignificant matter.
Prof. MacDonald is therefore skeptical of Jewish disavowals: "Surface
declarations of a lack of Jewish identity may be highly misleading."
He
notes that Jewish publications write about the power and influence of
American Jews in language Jews would immediately denounce as
"anti-Semitic" if used by gentiles. He agrees with Joseph Sobran, who
has said "they want to be Jews among themselves but resent being seen
as Jews by Gentiles. They want to pursue their own distinct interests
while pretending that they have no such interests ... "
Prof. MacDonald argues that the success of Jewish-led intellectual
movements has been possible only because their Jewish character was
hidden. If multi-culturalism or mass immigration or The Authoritarian
Personality had been promoted by Orthodox Jews in black coats the
Jewish element would have been clear. Prof. MacDonald writes that in
fact, "the Jewish political agenda was not an aspect of the theory and
the theories themselves had no overt Jewish content. Gentile
intellectuals approaching these theories were therefore unlikely to
view them as aspects of Jewish-gentile cultural competition or as an
aspect of a specifically Jewish political agenda." Prof. MacDonald
also
claims that Jews have often tried to conceal the Jewish character of
an
intellectual movement by recruiting token gentiles for visible
positions as spokesmen. He writes that this tactic was so common in
the
American Communist Party that gentiles often saw through it and
resigned.
But how can motives ever be completely known? Prof. MacDonald sets a
difficult test: "The best evidence that individuals have really ceased
to have a Jewish identity is if they choose a political option that
they perceive as clearly not in the interest of Jews as a group. In
the
absence of a clearly perceived conflict with Jewish interests, it
remains possible that different political choices among ethnic Jews
are
only differences in tactics for how best to achieve Jewish interests."
This standard may seem unduly harsh -- until it is applied to white
gentiles. Third-World immigration, affirmative action,
anti-discrimination laws, and forced integration are clearly not in
the
interests of whites, yet many whites embrace them, thus demonstrating
how completely they have abandoned their racial identity.
Finally, Prof. MacDonald raises the disturbing possibility that some
Jews, because of centuries of conflict with gentiles, actively hate
gentile society and consciously wish to destroy it: "a fundamental
motivation of Jewish intellectuals involved in social criticism has
simply been hatred of the gentile-dominated power structure perceived
as anti-Semitic." He describes the 19th century German-Jewish poet
Heinrich Heine as "using his skill, reputation and popularity to
undermine the intellectual confidence of the established order."
In defense of this highly provocative view, Prof. MacDonald quotes
Benjamin Disraeli on the effects of centuries of Jewish-gentile
relations on Jews: "They may have become so odious and so hostile to
mankind as to merit for their present conduct, no matter how
occasioned, the obloquy and ill-treatment of the communities in which
they dwell and with which they are scarcely permitted to mingle."
Apart from any questions of motives, however, is the question of
numbers. Jews are a tiny minority in the United States and within that
minority there is disagreement even on matters that clearly affect
Jews. How can Jews possibly be responsible for dramatic changes in the
intellectual landscape? In Prof. MacDonald's view, the explanation
lies
in the intelligence, energy, dedication, and cohesiveness of Jews. He
attributes a great deal to the average IQ of Jews -- at 115, a full
standard deviation above the white gentile average -- and to "their
hard work and dedication, their desire to make a mark on the world,
and
their desire to rise in the world, engage in personal promotion, and
achieve public acclaim... " He also believes Jews have worked together
unfailingly on any question they consider necessary for survival:
"Intellectual activity is like any other human endeavor: Cohesive
groups outcompete individual strategies." He notes that there has
never
been a time when large numbers of white Americans favored non-white
immigration; it was a cohesive, determined minority that beat down the
disorganized resistance of the majority.
Prof. MacDonald believes that because of the effectiveness of some
Jews, it was not even necessary that most Jews actively support
anti-majoritarian movements, but that Jewish activity was still
decisive. As he puts it, "Jewish-dominated intellectual movements were
a critical factor (necessary condition) for the triumph of the
intellectual left in late twentieth-century Western societies." This,
of course, can never be tested, but there can be no doubt that
American
Jews have had a disproportionate effect on the American intellect.
Prof. MacDonald quotes Walter Kerr, writing in 1968, to the effect
that
"what has happened since World War II is that the American sensibility
has become part Jewish, perhaps as much Jewish as it is anything
else... The literate American mind has come in some measure to think
Jewishly."
Aside from the question of whether Prof. MacDonald is right is the
further question of what difference it makes if he is right. If
correct, his thesis certainly sheds light on the rapidity with which
whites lost their will. Just a few decades ago whites were a confident
race, proud of their achievements, convinced of their fitness to
dominate the globe. Today they are a declining, apologetic people,
ashamed of their history and not sure even of their claim to lands
they
have occupied for centuries. It is very rare for fundamental concepts
to be stood on their heads in the course of just a generation or two,
as has happened with thinking about race. Such speed suggests there
has
been something more than natural change.
Topaz
>Do you consider Arabs to be "white"?
No.
> What about an
>albino black man?
>
No.
Just because they can't be citizens in our nation doesn't make them
enemies:
Tribu Ka advocated the separation of the races and a return to Africa
for black people
Kemi Seba, founder of a French black radical and anti-Semitic group
calling itself "Tribu Ka", has been arrested Thursday night by French
police in Chartes, in central France, for making racist comments and
rebellion against policemen.
The 25-year-old man, who was due Friday to appear before a court with
two other people, founded in Paris Tribu Ka in late 2004.
The group was banned in July 2006 by the French government and its
website was later shut down after its members descended on a Paris
Jewish quarter, wielding baseball bats and shouting anti-Semitic
slogans.
More than 20 members of the group walked up and down crowded Rue des
Rosiers, performing Nazi salutes, looking for a fight with the
neighborhood's Jews, threatening and intimidating them.
Kemi Seba's personal website was closed because, the judge said at the
time, "it was marked with the hatred of Jews on every page". The
website referred repeatedly to the "Zionist AIDS".
American Patriot (Kcajyer)
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 18:42:24 -0700 (PDT), American Patriot
>
> >Right, we do support the USA
>
> Why support it's government?
>
> >Who do you consider "our allies"? Yours, not mine btw.
>
> The Japanese in the 40's. The Arabs today.
Were you a Nazi German in the 40s or helping them out
from the U.S.=(a traitor) ?
>
>
>
>
>
> We are for having a nation of White people.
Topaz, have you asked your "friends" the jihadists for a
slice of their land; I'm sure they will welcome you with open arms.
After you ask them, come back and report what happens.
Oh, forgot dead men don't talk.
> Jews would be White enough
> to join us if it weren't for other important factors. One factor is
> that they don't want our race to live. They want to be the only
> Caucasians to survive on the earth.
That's a stupied statement, even for you Topaz. You must be able
to read everyones mind. lol.
mark...@digiverse.net
>
> <markz...@digiverse.net> wrote in message
> Name one Jew who has stated the above.
http://www.onejerusalem.com/2007/11/20/israels-true-patriot/
So you don't think Israel is the true homeland of jews?
(Watch him try to change the subject !)
Topaz
<kcaj...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Were you a Nazi German in the 40s
I wasn't alive then.
>or helping them out
>from the U.S.=(a traitor) ?
Those who sided with the US were traitors to the White race.
>
>Topaz, have you asked your "friends" the jihadists for a
>slice of their land; I'm sure they will welcome you with open arms.
>After you ask them, come back and report what happens.
>Oh, forgot dead men don't talk.
No. But the Jews are our real enemies.
"All countries which have been the homelands of European-derived
peoples are under attack from the same place. The attack is not from
all sides; it is only one group that is orchestrating this attack.
The goal of the recent change in immigration policies is to dilute the
White race in all these countries by importing millions of third world
minorities. These minorities are used to create diversion and
conflict, which is the atmosphere that the Jewish mafia thrives in.
Jews control our media, our universities, our finances, and they use
their enormous ill-gotten gains to bribe or intimidate or sue into
submission anyone that opposes them.
We have only ourselves to blame, as we are the nations that turned on
Germany for trying to fight off their Jewish oppressors. Now it is
becoming obvious even to the most blind that the Jews have us all by
the throats and they intend to destroy western civilization from
within. Immigration is just one of their weapons.
They use political correctness and the pretense of minority rights to
punish anyone who speaks out against this illegal subversion of our
governments. The Muslim problem is no more than a reaction to the
support of Israel from England, the USA, and other Western nations.
The Muslims know what the Jews are and who can blame them for fighting
in any way they can.
The real terrorists have become our own governments which are being
controlled by the Jewish race. They are a race/nation/religion and
they work together as a group, while Whites are individuals.
Individuals cannot stand against organized crime. As long as we are
so afraid of being called a racist to even talk about this subject, we
will remain enslaved and it will just get worse.
Already in the USA, it is Whites who are having trouble getting good
jobs. Jews run all media, most government, financing, and
universities. They use affirmative action and quotas to put
unqualified blacks and browns into many jobs, while they take all the
top jobs. Whites are squeezed from the top and the bottom.
Some Whites of course are still doing very well being politically
correct and serving the Jews. These race traitors are worse than the
Jews themselves. Without their cooperation the Jews would be easily
removed and could not control the world.
Look to your central banks. The Bank of England is not English! The
Jews have been in control of England since 1694, and they have
steadily increased their control until now they are strong enough to
force the English into slavery. That is where their control comes
from.
The Federal Reserve in the USA makes from 150 to 300 billion a year
and it is all tax-free. This is a privately owned bank that has
never been audited. It is unconstitutional and it now is the most
powerful branch of government and it is mostly owned by foreign Jewish
bankers. This is just the crack, as they use this money to get
control of Wall Street and most of the large corporations of the USA.
There is no place to run and there is no place to hide. We are the
prey and they are the predators and until you realize this you are
like the fawn in the land of the hyena. As long as we refuse to open
our eyes and our mouths, we will be little more than food for the Jews
and our children will be even weaker and fewer, until the great light
of our race is extinguished from the earth."
John David
ŻDougŚÇ
don't need anymore.
<mark...@digiverse.net> wrote in message
news:3f90346a-5b92-4cff...@l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
David Moss
@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com:
> It's their ONLY homeland assfuck. The muslim pigs have 20 homelands, they
> don't need anymore.
Islam is a religion, not an ethnic or racial group. As such there are
Muslims who can call pretty much any country you care to name their
homeland.
Or do you claim a person gives up their right to citizenship in a western
country if he or she decides Allah is the only God and Mohammed is his
greatest prophet?
If people can indeed lose their citizenship and homeland because of their
religious belief, how far does this phenomenon go? Do they lose it for
converting from Anglicanism to Catholicism or vice versa? What about from
Hinduism to Buddhism? Are Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists
still citizens? What if they convert to Atheism?
--
David Moss
Personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
Topaz
Tiptoeing around Our Problems
By Dr. William Pierce
"We've been talking about the very dangerous situation in the Middle
East recently, just because so much is happening there, and
undoubtedly we'll be talking about it much more in the future. For
that reason I want to make very clear what my motives and sympathies
are, lest I lead anyone astray and be thought a hypocrite for doing
so. First, regarding Palestine: although my sympathies definitely lie
with the Palestinians rather than with the Jews, it is not horror at
what the Jews are doing to the Palestinians that motivates me. What
motivates me is horror that my country is being used by the Jews in
their war against the Palestinians. If America were not involved at
all in the Middle East I still would sympathize with the Palestinians
and I would wish that they could be successful in driving the Jews
into the sea and annihilating the abomination that is Israel, but that
conflict between Jews and Palestinians would not be a major concern
for me. At least, my
concern there would be dwarfed by my concern for problems more
directly involving my own people in America and in Europe and in
southern Africa.
Even now, with money and weapons being supplied by America and used to
slaughter Palestinians, my concern is much less with monsters like
Ariel Sharon who are doing the slaughtering than it is with the filthy
creatures among my own people in America who are collaborating with
Jews here to keep the weapons and money flowing to Sharon -- and are
ready to do whatever else the Jews require of them here or abroad.
So when I tell you about Jews in occupied Palestine shooting
Palestinian children, and disapproval and anger are evident in my
voice, what I really am angry about is that the American people, my
people, are being used for this murderous activity. I am angry that
America's whole foreign policy has been perverted to serve Jewish
interests at the expense of American interests. I am angry that
America's political system has been perverted to ensure that we always
have so-called "leaders," whether Democrat or Republican, who are
dependent on the Jewish media or Jewish money or both for their
election and consequently will do the bidding of the Jews. I am angry
that our whole government is riddled with Jews -- Jews in our Defense
Department, Jews in our State
Department, Jews in our Immigration and Naturalization Service, Jews
in our Justice Department, Jews in the President's speech-writing
staff - who really set the policies of our government behind the
scenes, while the politicians are out front in the spotlight making
speeches and kissing babies - and doing as they're told by the Jews
behind the
scenes.
Did you know that it was a Jewish speechwriter, David Frum, who put
the phrase "axis of evil" in George Bush's mouth to justify America's
ongoing war against Israel's enemies? Did you know that a clique of
Jews in the Defense Department and among George Bush's foreign policy
advisers are the people actually running the so-called "war on terror"
in Afghanistan: a war that they intend to expand to Iraq and any other
Middle Eastern country that gets uppity, in order to make that part of
the world safe for Israel at American expense? Secretary of Defense
Donald Rumsfeld is a front man for his nominal subordinates, Deputy
Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Deputy Undersecretary of
Defense for Policy Douglas Feith; and George Bush's official foreign
policy adviser, Condoleezza Rice, helps him meet his Black quota for
the Cabinet, but it is the Jew Richard Perle, chairman of Bush's
Defense Policy Board, who gives him his foreign policy directives.
As I've said on more than one occasion, George Bush is a feckless
nincompoop who couldn't come up with a defense policy or a foreign
policy on his own if he had to -- which is why he's President. The
real policymakers behind the scenes certainly don't want a man in the
White House who has ideas of his own, because those ideas might
conflict with theirs.
And it is nothing but empty sophistry to make a distinction between
Jews in Israel, such as Ariel Sharon and Simon Peres, and the Jews in
Mr. Bush's administration formulating his policies or the Jews
controlling our mass media. They all are Jews, and that's what really
matters.
There are many knowledgeable Americans besides me who think that it's
not a good thing to have Jews using America to advance Israel's
interests at the expense of America's interests. They know how the
system works: how the Jews exert their control through money and media
and a well-entrenched network of Jewish operatives, such as Wolfowitz
and Feith and Perle. And many of these knowledgeable Americans also
understand how Jewish subterfuge and deceit work: they understand that
the Jews throw up a lot of smoke to conceal their control and make it
appear that they have much less influence than they actually do.
Despite this degree of understanding that many knowledgeable Americans
have, there seem to be very few who are willing or able to draw the
necessary conclusions. What I keep seeing are comments about the need
to get the so-called "peace process" going again in the Middle East,
and how there are hardline supporters of Israel who are obstructing
the "peace process" because they think that it will give too much to
the Palestinians or will compromise Israel's security, or whatever.
These knowledgeable Americans seem to believe that if we could just
get around the Jewish hardliners somehow -- if we could just
neutralize Jews such as Wolfowitz and Feith and Perle; if Ariel Sharon
could be replaced by a "moderate" Jewish prime minister -- then the
"peace process" could proceed, America could gradually reduce its
involvement in helping the Jews keep the Palestinians repressed, and
eventually Israel no longer would be using America, and everything
would be rosy. And so these knowledgeable Americans expend all of
their wit and energy in these trivial pursuits.
Listen! Do you know what the most hopeful aspect of the conflict
between Jews and Palestinians is now? It is the ongoing radicalization
of the Muslim masses throughout the whole Middle East. The
collaborator governments in Pakistan, in Egypt, in Saudi Arabia are
terrified of the reaction they see among their own people to what
Ariel Sharon is doing to the Palestinians. When Sharon's Jewish troops
shoot Palestinian children, Muslim mobs riot, and governments that now
collaborate with the United States quake. Ariel Sharon is the best
thing that has happened in the Middle East in the last 54 years.
The Palestinian tactic of suicide bombing is being denounced by every
politician and every media spokesman over here now. It's nothing but
terrorism, they all say. There's no justification at all for suicide
bombing, they tell us. Of course, whenever you hear that sort of
unanimity from the politicians and the media people you should be
suspicious. In fact, suicide bombing is the best tactic for the
Palestinians to use now, because it provokes the Jews to step up
reprisals. And the reprisals radicalize the masses in every country in
the Middle East. If just one of the collaborator governments falls,
the spines of all the rest will be stiffened, and the Bush government
will be far less likely to find collaborators for building its
so-called "coalition" to do the will of the Jews in the Middle East.
Suicide bombers now hardly put a dent in the population of five
million Jews in occupied Palestine, and Sharon's bloody reprisals
hardly put a dent in the overall Palestinian population. But if
conflict of this sort continues until just one collaborator government
is overthrown, that ultimately will be worth more than ten thousand
successful suicide
bombings in which only 20 or so Jews are killed each time. In the long
run there can be no real peace in the Middle East and no end to
America's shameful role there -- and no future for the Palestinian
people -- as long as there is an Israel. There seems to be a better
understanding of these things among knowledgeable Palestinians than
among knowledgeable Americans.
Shallow thinking and the pursuit of trivial goals is even worse among
knowledgeable Americans when it comes to domestic problems. They
really do not want to grasp these problems with both hands and deal
with them in a forthright way. Look, for example, at what uncontrolled
immigration has done and is doing to America. And what do
knowledgeable Americans propose to do about that? Very little, really.
They make much of the fact that several of the al-Qaeda hijackers who
carried out the September 11 attack were in the United States only
because of very lax immigration policies, and so that's a good reason
for tightening up the policies.
How about simply rounding up all illegal aliens immediately -- all 12
million of them -- and booting them and all of their offspring out of
the country without further ado?
Oh, no, no, no! We can't do that! Why not? Well, the media never would
stand for it. The media would be all over anyone who even proposed a
mass expulsion of illegal aliens. They would denounce any political
leader who tried to do that as a "racist" and a "neo-Nazi." And so
knowledgeable Americans, who understand the immigration disaster quite
well, continue tiptoeing around it, afraid to do or even say anything
really significant about it: terrified even to think about really
radical solutions that might actually end the problem. And it's the
same with the rest of our domestic problems. Lots of people understand
these problems and are worried about them, but they won't tackle them
in any
significant way. They let the Jews -- the Jewish media and Jewish
money and the entrenched Jewish network -- have their way, for all
practical purposes.
Why? Why are the Jews permitted to get away with all of their
destructive policies and activities without being challenged or
opposed in any significant way? Part of the reason is that the Jews
are very powerful, and therefore many people are afraid to cross them.
They're afraid of the sort of media reaction I just mentioned in
connection with immigration. Everyone understands that the Jews stick
together and will viciously attack anyone who opposes them. It's the
old story, so aptly expressed by the late-16th-century writer, Sir
John Harington. Harington wrote: "Treason doth never prosper: what's
the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason." Today the
Jewish power structure is
prospering, and none dare oppose it or even call it what it is. Well,
that's only part of the reason Jews are permitted to get away with so
much. There's more to it than that. There's a mystique the Jews have
built very carefully around themselves and nurtured diligently. It is
a mystique of piety and injured innocence. It is a mystique that says
to the Gentile world: "We are a gentle and inoffensive race, and
because of this everyone hates us. We're smart and we work hard and
achieve success, and because of this everyone hates us. We are a
highly moral and ethical race, and because of this everyone hates us.
We are a very talented race, with many gifted members, many geniuses,
and because of this everyone hates us. We are a very altruistic race,
a race of philanthropists who only want to make a better world for
everyone, and because of this everyone hates us."
Many simpletons among the lemmings simply accept these claims at face
value. Many knowledgeable people, however, who can see through these
claims to the real Jews hiding behind them, still hesitate to
challenge them. Part of the Jewish mystique is the so-called
"Holocaust." In its most simpleminded form the "Holocaust" story is
the claim that the
Germans hated the Jews for the reasons I just mentioned -- for their
gentleness and their success and their morality and their talent and
their altruism -- and because of this hatred roasted six million of
them during the Second World War in "gas ovens," to use one of the
Jews' favorite "Holocaust" phrases.
Actually, the "Holocaust" is a very powerful part of the Jewish
mystique. The Jews crafted the "Holocaust" story with great care and
great effort -- well, actually not with as much care as they might
have used: it's as full of holes as a Swiss cheese, but still it is
sufficient to make most people, even those who understand what Jews
are really like, hesitate to attack them. People don't want to be seen
as bullies. They don't want to be seen as so insensitive that they
would criticize the Jews, who already have suffered so much, poor
dears, at the hands of anti-Semites.
In several past broadcasts we've looked at a number of the lies and
exaggerations and distortions that make up the "Holocaust" story.
There are a number of good books available on the subject from the
sponsor of this broadcast, National Vanguard Books, including Norman
Finklestein's excellent book The Holocaust Industry, which I discussed
in an earlier broadcast. The point is that despite the lies, despite
the fact that many knowledgeable Americans are aware of the lies, the
"Holocaust" still serves its purpose for the Jews. People are afraid
of the image conjured up by the "Holocaust."
Perhaps it's that American life is too soft... Whatever the reason,
many otherwise knowledgeable and hardheaded Americans just can't
entertain the idea of rounding up the Jews and getting rid of them,
even when the situation is as urgent as it is in America today. And
really, in the long run that is the only way to solve the Jewish
problem.
The Germans understood that, back in the 1930s, and they had the
courage and the foresight to act on their understanding. Unlike
Americans today, they had an honest government concerned above all
with the survival, welfare, and progress of the German people, and
they began doing what was necessary, forcing the Jews to emigrate
wholesale from Germany beginning in 1933. And because of that the
Jewish propaganda machine has attacked the Germans so viciously, has
so blackened and demonized their image, that today even knowledgeable
people are afraid to be associated with that image. They are afraid to
say that the Germans were right, that the Germans were justified, and
that we need to do the same if we are to survive. So, as I said, the
"Holocaust" story, despite its
glaring discrepancies and lies, still serves as a shield for the Jews;
it still protects them from criticism.
Well, mostly. In parts of Europe not quite as poisoned by Jewish
propaganda as America is, the shield has slipped a bit. A large
British department store chain, Selfridges, has yielded to demands
from anti-Israel demonstrators and has removed from its shelves
products marked "Made in Israel." Last week the second largest
supermarket chain in Norway, Coop Norge -- which is to say, Norway
Coop, announced its decision to boycott all Israeli imports. That
decision was not the result of pressure from anti-Israel demonstrators
but was based on the feeling by Coop Norge management that it would be
immoral to continue supporting the Israeli economy by selling Israeli
imports under the
present circumstances. That is a step forward, though it is a long way
from what is needed.
The Jews, of course, immediately began waving their "Holocaust" story
around, and now, as the boycott movement catches hold in Scandinavia,
they are trying to portray themselves as injured innocents being
attacked once more by "anti-Semites." They are comparing the growing
Scandinavian boycott of Israeli products to the German boycott of
Jewish merchants in the late 1930s. Certainly, a boycott of Israeli
products is a good thing, and the fact that such a boycott is even
thinkable by big businessmen today is a sign that the Jewish mystique
-- and in particular the Jewish "Holocaust" story -- is becoming a bit
shopworn. It no longer has the hypnotic power that it once had -- at
least, in some parts of the world. And I suppose that we should be
happy about that. The unfortunate fact remains, however, that in
America the Jews still have their money and
their media and their entrenched network of bureaucrats, and even if
the "Holocaust" story has lost some of its charm in Europe, it still
keeps most knowledgeable Americans intimidated.
Knowledge isn't enough. Courage and boldness also are necessary.
Honesty and forthrightness are necessary also. Tiptoeing around the
critical issues of our time isn't enough. Tiny reforms in our
disastrous foreign policy and in our disastrous immigration policy and
in a dozen other disastrous policies aren't enough. We need to stop
apologizing to the people who are destroying us and go full bore at
destroying them instead.
Instead of being hypnotized by the "Holocaust" story we need to look
with clear eyes at why there was a need for action against the Jews in
Germany in the 1930s and 1940s. The Jews' claim today that the Germans
were suffering from collective insanity and had no reason for trying
to get the Jews off their backs is as phony as George Bush's claim
that
Osama bin Laden had no reason for attacking America on September 11.
Wherever Jews go they corrupt and destroy. That is their nature,
always and everywhere. Let us be thankful to the Palestinians who now
are making such terrible sacrifices to help the world see what the
Jews are like. And I suppose we also should be thankful to Ariel
Sharon for demonstrating so forthrightly to the world what Jews are
like.
Let us hope that the conflict between Jews and Palestinians
intensifies and lasts long enough to wake up many more of our people
around the world and fill them with disgust at America's continuing
support for the Jews. Let us hope that it lasts long enough to bring
about the overthrow of every collaborationist regime in the Muslim
world. Let us hope that it brings about an airtight oil embargo
against the United States and shuts off the lights in every shopping
mall and every sports stadium in America long enough for the lemmings
to become restless and begin asking questions. Let us hope that it
makes the efforts of every fool and every traitor who is striving for
a resumption of the so-called "peace process" so obviously futile that
these efforts no longer have the power to deceive anyone.
Ultimately, of course, we must not depend on the Palestinian suicide
bombers or on Ariel Sharon's murder squads to do for us what we should
be doing for ourselves. Ultimately we must stop tiptoeing and begin
marching boldly and forthrightly toward solving our own problems."
David Moss
news:2rv8449c1i1j3e6l3...@4ax.com:
> Tiptoeing around Our Problems
Tiptoe if you like, but you can't sneak neo-Nazi spam past experienced
netizens.